The enquirer (Richmond, Va.), 1807-12-04 00:00:00

phans, that must now look up to the benevolent and charitable, and improving your individual actions in behalf of their wretchedness and suffering. Were it possible for only ten gentlemen who daily meet at Lloyd's, to take a moment's glance into my house, offices, and cellars, alone, I am confident the object of my solicitations would be accomplished.
Yours, &c. "N. B. I have scrawled this over in a state of mind not the most enviable, and at a hazard when or how it is to be conveyed." October 2. We have remarked that several of our ships of war have been permitted, by licences we suppose from the Spanish Government, to proceed to Vera-Cruz, from whence they bring back Spanish Dollars. These dollars, the property of Spain, are brought to this country under certain regulations. The amount we suppose is drawn from Madrid, Holland, and other places. We should be glad to ask, whether this facility afforded to Spain of getting the produce of her American territories, which she could not get but for this facility, is not injurious to this country?
Instructions, we understand, have been sent out to India, to impose an additional duty of 10 per cent, on neutral vessels trading to all parts of that country within British jurisdiction. October 8. Last night we received Dutch papers to the 25th. Some of the articles they bring are interesting. An extract from the Monitor , of the 17th ult. furnishes the terms of the Armistice between the Turks and Russians. The provinces of Moldavia and Wallachia, the chief source of contention, are to be evacuated by both powers respectively. They will probably be erected into a Duchy, or State of some other denomination, under the guarantee of BOHAPARTS . It will make an admirable barrier against Russia. The Russian fleet is immediately to return home, which of course implies that the Dardanelles and Canal are to be open to it. It is not the Republic of the Seven Islands alone which the Emperor ALEXANDER has given up. He seems inclined to put France in possession of the whole of the Levant as well as the Adriatic.
October 8. From Copenhagen, Sept. 23. "The Danish ships have all brass guns on their poops, quarters and main decks. The stores in the arsenals are beyond calculation; it will take two months to get them on board; the piles of shot are immense. Exclusive of the stores shipped on board the transports, the men of war, both English and Danish, it is said, are loaded to the beams." "Fifteen sail of the line, besides frigates, are in the roads. The carpenters are pulling to pieces the ships on the stocks and shipping the timber. In a few days 150 vessels, with stores, (40 of them with sail cloth) will be under way for England. The whole convoy will exceed 300 sail."
October 10. On 9th Sept. the Danish King, Christian VII. issued new orders respecting English goods and persons detained. This was before he got the news of the surrender of his capital. By these orders, Englishmen throughout the Danish territories are to be detained, and English property, ships and goods, to be seized. All persons are to transmit an account of the debts due to English subjects—the whole of which is to be paid into the Danish treasury. All legal demands, however, by British subjects, consisting of capitals, annuities, rents and interest upon the Government State paper, are to be duly paid. All correspondence with England is to be prohibited, and letters coming from or going to England are to be seized and sent to the Danish officers.
From the Paris Monitor, Sept. 22. "Denmark had a land force sufficient to have repelled any attack from the English; and if it had not been for the false security with which they flattered themselves, and the unnecessary alarm they indulged as to the objects of the French, they might have had 40,000 men at Copenhagen, and Lord Cathcart would have met with a reception under its walls similar to that which the Duke of York met with at Dunkirk, in Holland, and in fact at every place upon the continent wherever the English have dared to set foot."
"Was it by taking the Danish fleet, and sitting fire to the capital, and thus violating the independence and impartiality of Denmark, that the English ministry or their general, thought to preserve its neutrality? In that case, we should be justified in forming an idea equally as unfavorable to their forcible as their justice. If they think to remain in Zealand, they ought to bring an army of 80,000 men together; and even then it would be of little significance." An article from Kiel would have us believe that the Danish government wished to destroy rather than surrender the fleet, and that it had actually transmitted orders to that effect, which we intercepted.
We are not able yet to state whether the report transmitted from Memel, of Bonaparte having sent a requisition to the court of Petersburg, that its ports against this country, be true or not. It is highly probable Romanzow, the Russian prime minister is understood to be decidedly hostile to this country. But the hostility of Romanzow is not participated by the rest of the Russian nobility, and the increasing unpopularity of the treaty of Tilsit, and of its offspring the armistice with Turkey, is understood to have greatly strengthened the English party. Prince Menzikoff has been charged with an important mission to this country, and the friends of England consider this as a favourable prognostic.
AMERICAN AFFAIRS, &c.
October 9. Mr. Monroe, the American minister had his final interview with Mr. Canning on Wednesday. His departure is in no respect connected with the dispute with America. The final answer of our government on that subject has already been sent out to Mr. Erskine.
The Monitor contains the treaty for an armistice between Russia and the Ottoman Porte, concluded under the mediation of France, and signed by the respective negotiators on the 24th August, at the Castle of Shloff.
The first article stipulates for the immediate cessation of hostilities. According to the 2d, Russia and the Porte, immediately after the signing of the armistice, are to send envoys to negotiate a treaty of peace, as soon as possible; and in case this should not take place, hostilities are not to be resumed before the 25th of March 1808.
The 2d article stipulates for the evacuation of Wallachia and Moldavia by the Russian and Turkish troops.
The 4th article relates to the evacuation of the island of Tenedos and all other places in the Archipelago in possession of the Russians.
The Russian ships of war are to return to their own ports, and leave the Dardanelles and the mouth of the Danube entirely free and open. By the 8th article, all the prisoners of war & the slaves of both belligerents are to be given up without ransom, the Mussulmen only excepted, who may choose to become Christians; the same is
to be understood of the Russians who may have become Mahometans. The ratifications were to be exchanged in the course of a week.
A report is current, that on the part of the English, an application has been made to the king of Sweden to deliver up his fleet, which is now rigging and getting ready for sea in Carlscrona, as a deposit to the English. On Langeland, as well as Frensen, several English seamen attempted to effect a landing, but were repulsed.
The Neapolitan papers inform us, that the king Ferdinand with all his family have departed from Sicily in an English frigate. To cover this flight from the inhabitants, it was given out that he was going to place himself at the head of an insurrection which had broken out at Naples.
Great apprehensions were entertained at Constantinople, that the British squadron at the mouth of the Dardanelles would attempt to force that passage.
It is stated with confidence, that his majesty's physicians have given it as their opinion, that in the present state of his complaint, "it would not be prudent to risk the operation of couching."
TRURO, (Eng.) Oct. 3. We lately stated, that several seamen of the American States' frigate Revenge , had offered to enlist with an officer of the British Royal Marines, now on the recruiting service in Truro, but that he had sent them back to the American commander, with a declaration that he could not countenance deserters. We should have been happy to state, that this honorable conduct on the part of a British officer had produced an equally honorable return from the American; but what will the American claimants upon national honor and political justice say, when we tell them, that captain Reed, of the United States Schooner Revenge —an officer, and a vessel rendered conspicuous by being the bearer of instructions from the American Executive to its Minister in London, on a dispute between the two countries, in which defection and the encouragement of deserters form so prominent a feature—that this captain Reed, so obliged and so flattered to honorable feeling, refused to give up one of his crew who had declared himself a deserter from a British Regiment! Yet such is the fact. It is a fact too, that several others of the crew of the Revenge , declared themselves British subjects; and that they were not claimed as such, and taken out of the ship, was owing to the delicacy and prudence of the British officer to whom they offered themselves, who, considering that the vessel was waiting the return of dispatches from the American Minister, would not furnish a pretence to the Americans that their vessel had suffered any detriment or delay, in her mission, by weakening her crew. Cornwall Gaz.
An evening paper contains the following paragraph:— "Last Saturday, one of the seamen belonging to the American Schooner Revenge , deserted, and entered for the navy, with captain Hills, the regulating officer at West Cowes. He states himself to be a native of Plymouth, and says he served several years in a ship from Newcastle."
Considering our differences with America, we think it very extraordinary that this regulating officer should, under any circumstances, enlist one of the crew of an American ship of war. Times.
PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 26.
Extracts of Letters, from respectable Commercial Houses in different parts of Europe, to their Correspondents in this City:—
"BORDEAUX, Sept. 19th, 1807. "The Cargo Washington cannot be admitted to an entry, because she touched the British shore, though the captors did not land any part of the cargo, and the papers are in the most regular order. Several Danish vessels now here, are in the same situation, and would run the risk to be taken by the English if they are forced out of the river. Captain Hidelius, is gone to Paris to petition, through the mediation of your Ambassador—if good sense prevails he will obtain leave to land his cargo, which is attended with proper documents to prove it does not originate from any British settlement."
"The same measures have been taken in Holland, and in the ports of Germany, where there are still French garrisons. Several vessels coming direct from England have been confiscated, both ships and cargoes; and those which had only put into a British port by force, or choice, have been obliged to go away. It is to be expected that the Ambassadors of the Neutral Powers will make representations, and that such orders will be recalled—for commerce, even below, was laboring under too great difficulties."
"No variation in the course of exports since our last, though we have no neutral vessels to ship them for the North of Europe."
[TRANSLATIONS.]
PARIS, September 18, 1807. The Minister of the Interior to Mr. Fouquet, merchant at Bordeaux.
I have received, Sir, the request, which you have addressed to me, in your own name, and that of other merchants of your city, the object of which was to obtain the admission of the American ship George Washington , which had been taken into Plymouth by an English ship of war.
Different reclamations of that nature having been submitted to the emperor, his majesty, confirming the dispositions of his decree of the 21st of Nov. 1806, has recently preferred its strict execution. It is impossible for me, Sir, after this decision, to grant your request; I therefore remit to you the piece, which was annexed to it—inviting you to communicate my answer to the merchants who, with you, had signed the memorial.
I salute you, (Signed) CRETET.
BALTIMORE, November 28.
We are authorized to say, that the Secretary of State has received a letter from Mr. R. Patterson, consul at Nantes, stating that a merchant of that city had just received information from high authority at Paris, that count Tottloff had arrived and had offered the mediation of Russia to effect a peace between France and Great Britain; that it was believed that such an offer would not have been made unless the emperor Alexander had previously known, that it would
be well received by both parties; and further, that Russia was determined against every act of hostility with Great Britain. It was believed at Paris, that Lord St. Helens was already appointed by his government, to proceed to that city.
It is a fact to be relied on, that Mr. Munroe had not, on the 17th of October, received any answer to his note of 7th September.— American.
NEW-YORK, Nov. 27.
All the letters from New Orleans, received at the Post Office yesterday, by mail, were opened! What does this mean?
SALEME, Nov. 20.
A friend at Marblehead has favoured us with a few French papers, brought by the Schooner Spring Bird , Capt. Tucker, from Nantes; from which we have made the following translations.
HAMBURGH, Sept. 28.
Since the Capitulation of Copenhagen, the uncertainty respecting the part which Denmark is to act, is greater than ever. The Prince of Ponte Corvo has had a long interview with Count Bernstorff, which it is presumed must have had a decisive result, though we know not what it is; only it appears that the French and Spanish troops will not wait for orders to enter Holstein, though there is nothing positive as yet on this subject. 3000 French, who were at Lubeck, have approached the little town of Eutin, in the duchy of Oldenburg, near the Danish frontiers. An aide-camp of the Prince of Ponte Corvo is said to have been at Kiel, with a mission to the Prince Royal.
VIENNA, Sept. 28.
The exchange of couriers between our court and those of Paris and Petersburg, are very frequent. We are assured it is to settle the general measures to be pursued against England, if the perfids in prolonging the maritime war. It is probable our court will adhere to those which shall be taken by common agreement against the eternal enemy of the Continent, whose merchandise and ships will then be excluded from all the countries of Europe.
HANOVER, Sept. 19.
The number of French troops remaining in this place becomes daily more considerable. The imperial guard is again cantoned in our environs. The provinces of Gottingen and Grubenhagen are to be separated from the former electorate of Hanover. All the acts relative to those provinces have been taken from the archives of Hanover, and sent to Cassel to be added to those of the new Kingdom of Westphalia.
BREMEN, Sept. 24.
We are assured that a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive, has been concluded between France and Denmark, and only wants the ratification of the respective sovereigns. It is also said, that 40,000 French troops, under the prince of P. C. are to enter the continental provinces of Denmark, and with the Danish army under their prince royal, attempt a grand expedition, the object of which will not be merely to drive the British from Copenhagen, & wrest from them their prey, in favour for it, but even, under certain circumstances, to penetrate to the extremities of Scandinavia, to tear from the British the only ally which remains to them upon the continent, and reunite against the common enemy those warlike nations who have been divided by their own means, and which, notwithstanding their loss of some ships, will always be the best nurseries for a continental marine. It is further said, that one of the articles of this treaty secures to the King of Denmark the powerful guarantee of the emperor of France for all his estates.
AUGSBURG, Sept. 23.
The English re-appeared in the Atlantic Gulf, and before the road of Venice, as soon as the Italian fleet, which had been cruising in the Gulf, had returned into port. The English squadron consists of 8 ships, some of which are large frigates, which sometimes approach within cannon shot of the ports of Chioggia. Their return again breaks off all intercourse between Venice and the neighboring ports.
The English are extremely exasperated, that the Russians have given up the Seven Isles to the French—and their admiral immediately ordered a blockade of their ports, and the capture of their ships.
QUIZ!
Private letters from England announce that there is now a hope of a reconciliation between the United States or America, in consequence Sir James Craig has failed with a squadron of one seventy-four, three frigates, and several transports with three regiments on board, destined to defend Nova Scotia and Canada against the attack of the Americans, who have already organized a militia of 100,000 men, and lined their coast with formidable batteries!!!
PALADELPHIA, Nov. 27.
Arrived ship Eliza Ann , Williams, from London. Sailed from Cowes the 14th of October, and left there the United States frigate Revenge , capt. Read, to sail next day for Brest. Off Falmouth, spoke the ship Union , Jacobs from Philadelphia, to Antwerp, detained and sent in by a British cruiser.
Capt. Williams informs, that it was understood at the time of his sailing, that Mr. Monroe would spend the winter in England.
PHILADELPHIA, November 28.
LATEST FROM EUROPE. Yesterday morning arrived Sch. Hazard , capt. Burton, from Bristol, (Eng.) which we left October 19, and has positively furnished us with London papers to the 14th, from which we have the following.
PETERSBURGH, August 29.
Prince Alexander de Kourakin, the Russian Ambassador at Vienna, who negotiated and signed the Treaty of Tilsit, has received from his sovereign a most splendid mark of his approbation and satisfaction. The Emperor Alexander has raised him to the first class; that is to say, to the rank of Field Marshal. There are few similar examples. Prince Kourakin has been for seven years Vice Chancellor of the Empire, and Minister for Foreign Affairs in Russia.
August 31.
Last Sunday there was a grand parade at which his Excellency M. General Savery assisted. It was remarked, that this Envoy always receives from his Majesty the most gracious reception. The unexpected attack of the English upon Copenhagen, has produced here an extraordinary sensation. There is but one cry of indignation against that violence, worthy of the ferocity of the most barbarous ages. The cause of the Danes is become that of all nations, which are equally interested in punishing an aggression made without motive, and without a previous declaration. The government have given the most strict orders to accelerate the preparations of defence in our ports, and the equipment of our fleets. A great number of our troops are repairing by forced marches to Cronstadt, and to Riga. His Majesty is going again to inspect the works in person. A great number of the opulent families of this capital are preparing to go to Paris, to pass the winter there.
VIENNA, Sept. 18.
The exchange of couriers between our court and those of Paris and Petersburg are very frequent. We are assured it is to settle the general measures to be pursued against England, if the perfids in prolonging the maritime war. It is probable our court will adhere to those which shall be taken by common agreement against the eternal enemy of the continent, whose merchandise and ships will then be excluded from all the countries of Europe.
FRANKFORT, Sept. 22.
Private letters from Paris announce that the political arrangements for Germany are far advanced. It seems that the territorial demarcation of every confederated State will be defini-
tively marked out in the fundamental statutes, and that Germany will be divided into two great sections, that of the South, and that of the North; the capital of the former will be Munich, and Dresden that of the latter. In each of these two towns will be established a grand tribunal, which will determine definitively upon all causes brought before them by the subjects of the respective sections. It is thought also that Frankfort will be the seat of a supreme court of judicature, which will be invested with prerogatives similar to that of Wetzlar.
September 26.
Letters from the Tyrol positively announce that in consequence of measures which have been concerted between France and Austria, the ports of Trieste and Fiume, are shut against the English.
MALTA.
All was well there on the 22d of August. They had heard of the intended evacuation of Corfu by the Russians; and it was reported both at Malta and Sicily, that, by a private article of the treaty of Tilsit, Russia is to receive in return the island of Malta—which this country will be required to give up on the conclusion of a peace.
One of the French Journals quotes from a Naples Newspaper a paragraph announcing that King Ferdinand and his whole family embarked in an English vessel, and left Sicily at the end of August.
We know not what degree of credit is due to this statement, but if we may credit a rumour in circulation this morning, it is probably correct. It is reported at the West end of the Town, that the British troops have, before this time evacuated Sicily—the French force preparing for the attack of that Island being too powerful to be resisted with any hopes of success. We cannot, however, ascertain on what authority the rumour rests.
It is rumoured that Sir John B. Warren will proceed in a few weeks to take upon him the command of the squadron on the American station, in the room of Admiral Berkeley.
The Ship Dispatch , Capt. Benners, arrived at Philadelphia, in 50 days from Leghorn; confirms the account of the occupation of Leghorn, by about 40,000 French troops—the embargo generally supposed to prevent information of their sudden arrival reaching Sicily—some of the officers mentioned that they expected a fleet from Toulon to embark for Sardinia, where they had been invited by the inhabitants—Every Englishman at Leghorn was favoured before the French Gen. and Consul, to give security for their persons when required—Embargo continued till 21st Sept. when the Dispatch failed by a special permit—all American property respected, and the American citizens, merchants and sailors treated civilly and in no manner molested—left pier about 20 sail of American vessels; the U. S. brig Hornet arrived the 20th Sept. from Malaga, via Marseilles, and Sicily, to sail for the Straights next day.
On the 20th Sept. boarded off Toulon by the B. frigate Sirius , treated very civilly; the informed capt. B. that the French fleet were safe in Toulon—Oct. 6. Off Cape Spartel, boarded by the British man of war brig Redwing , treated with uncommon civility; was informed that they had orders to escort through the Straights all American vessels bound to a B. port or settlement—in the same evening, treated politely by a British armed ship after enquiring her flag—offers from these repeated instances of uncommon civility, that orders must have been given to king's ships to alter their conduct towards the American flag (it was time enough in all conscience) as not one of those vessels ever looked at the protection of the crew when offered to them—Oct. 15. Spoke ship Thomas , 3 days from St. Ubes—reports that 30,000 French were daily expected in Portugal to shut the ports against the English, who had been ordered to quit that kingdom on or before the 14th Oct. the Portuguese getting ready all their ships of war, to embark the royal family and court for Brazil—a Portuguese frigate now near bent for England with dispatches, and daily expected back.
Domestic.
A gentleman who arrived at New-York, in the Packet from Halifax, N. S., on paper, that it is expected Admiral Borey's Squadron will winter at Halifax, instead of Bermuda.—That a marriage was expected shortly to take place between the eldest Miss Berkeley and Sir Thomas Hardy, capt. of the Triumph .—That a frigate was beating into Halifax as a Packet came out. That the President's message to congress had been critically analyzed at Halifax—the navy and army extracted nothing from it but war; but mercantile men thought it peaceable as possible.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 25.
It is with pleasure we announce to the public, that the MONUMENT to be erected to the memory of the officers of the Navy, who fell during the different attacks made by our squadron on the city of Tripoli, in 1804, has arrived at Boston, in the U. States frigate Constitution , and that it will shortly be landed at the Navy Yard at this place.
The expense of this beautiful piece of Sculpture, which, for grandeur of design, elegance of execution and size, far excels any thing of the kind ever seen on this side of the Atlantic, has been defrayed out of the slender means of the officers of the Navy.
We understand that the manager, capt. David Porter, intends, in behalf of his brother officers, to present to this city, only reserving to himself the privilege of choosing the spot where it is to stand, and that Mr. Lartigue has generously offered his services in putting it up.
To convey some idea of this Monument, we fabric a short though imperfect description. Its base is 16 feet square, and its height 23 feet. It is composed of the purest white marble of Carrara, with ornaments and inscriptions of gilt bronze. The pedestal is highly ornamented with inscriptions, representative of the actions, trophies of war, &c. &c. in Bas relief, and supports a Roturial column, surmounted by the arms of the United States. Fame standing on one side of the pedestal, with the palm and laurel, crowns an urn, which bears this inscription:
His Duceat Funerem in bello Rerum Cineris.
History, seated at the base, looking back recording these events. Mercury, the genius of Commerce, lamenting the death of his protector—a female Indian representing America with two children bearing the Fates explaining to them the events, and four large bronze lamps representing the flamma of immortality.
On the pedestal appears the following inscriptions in letters of gilt bronze: Erected to the memory of Captain Richard Somers, Lieutenants James Caldwell, James Decatur, Henry Wadsworth, Joseph Ipaah, and Midshipman John H. Dorsey, who fell in the different attacks that were made on the city of Tripoli, in the year of our Lord, 1804, and in the XXVIII year of the Independence of the U. States. A flame of glory inspired them, And fame has crowned their deeds. History records the events—the Children of Columbia admire, and Commerce laments their fall. A small tribute of respect to their memory, and admiration of their valor, so worthy of imitation, their Brother Officers have erected this monument. The monument has been imported in 51 large cases, and weighs above 15 tons. The figures are as large as life, and the whole will cost above 3000 dollars, which is to be raised at the following rates of subscription—Commanders 20 dollars, Wards Room Officers 10 dollars, and Officers of the rank of Midshipmen, &c. 5 dollars. The subscription, we understand, is
nearly completed; and from the known fair and generous of our officers we are confident it will soon be closed. Nat. Int.
The last National Intelligencer not having come to hand on Thursday night, we have determined to lay the following sketch from the Baltimore Federal Gazette , before our readers. It is not entirely defective; but the subject was too important not to give them some notice of it.—The debate itself is in the Nat. Int. and we shall commence its publication in our next paper. Ed. Eng.
By extraordinary exertion, we are enabled, with a short delay, to furnish the following interesting sketch. Fed. Gaz.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
From our Correspondent. Washington, Nov. 27. Proceedings this day.
Mr. F. Clay presented a memorial from sundry merchants and traders of the city of Philadelphia, praying, that the act prohibiting the importation of certain goods, wares and merchandise, passed the 11th April, 1806, may be repealed.
Mr. Clay moved that the memorial be referred to the committee of commerce and manufactures. Mr. Rowan hoped the petition would not be referred to any committee. He tho't it would be beneath the dignity of the house to give it any consideration. Had he been in congress at the time the law passed, he would have voted against it; but as it had passed, and as we had received a fresh insult from Great-Britain in the attack on the Chesapeake, he would not vote for its repeal.
Mr. F. Clay said, that as the petition was couched in decent language, and involved a question of great national importance, it could not be inconsistent either with the dignity or the justice of the house to refer it to the committee of commerce and manufactures. As to the non-importation law, whoever would examine it would find, that many of its provisions were very deficient, and in some cases totally nugatory. He pointed out some of its defects, and observed, that it contained so many absurdities, that he doubted whether it could ever go into operation.
Mr. Crowninshield said, that as to the non-importation law, it might be obscure in some parts, but there were more than a dozen articles, on which there could be no doubt at all. Under what circumstances was that law passed? We had for many years, which she had refused to satisfy; and this law had been passed to induce her to do us justice. Since that period she had committed the outrage on the Chesapeake. The blood of American citizens had freely flowed in that vessel. Great-Britain had known this for some months, and yet we had obtained no redress. He knew indeed that the law in question was suspended for a short time at present; but from the rumors which were afloat, and from what he knew of the disposition of Great-Britain, he entertained no hope that she would do us justice. He thought that we were sleeping at our posts. We knew that Great-Britain was making active preparations; that she was endeavoring to decry the Indians on our frontier; that she was arming her militia in Canada and Nova Scotia; and that she had besides, an immense navy. The late attack on Copenhagen had convinced us that she paid no regard to justice or the laws of nations. She had in that instance violated every principle of humanity. Could we expect better treatment than Denmark, a nation which had never injured her? Might not our cities be wrapt in flames, as well as Copenhagen? The petitioners state that they are alarmed at the demands of our government? What were those demands? Did they know them? He knew not, although a member of that House; and yet the petitioners are "alarmed" at them. Mr. C. then moved that the petition lie on the table.
Mr. Milner could not see any impropriety in referring the petition. He was acquainted with the characters who had signed it, and he knew them to be men of the highest respectability, men who would not lightly commit themselves. As to the non-importation law, he had always regarded it as a weak and feeble measure, calculated to produce no other effect than to irritate Great-Britain. He would rather have seen a law to prohibit all intercourse at once. He agreed with the gentleman last up, that we were sleeping at our posts; that our affairs with Great-Britain were in such a situation as to render it extremely doubtful whether they would be amicably settled; and that under these circumstances we ought not to be idle.
Mr. Allison moved that the petition be referred to a committee of the whole house.
Mr. Smith thought that referring this petition to the committee of the whole would be giving it too much importance. That there was a party in this country strongly prejudiced in favor of the British government, he never doubted for a moment, that this was a measure of that party, he was equally certain.
Mr. Bassett hoped the petition would be referred to a committee of the whole on the state of the Union; not out of respect for the petition, but out of respect for the nation. This would afford the house an opportunity of expressing their sentiments on the present interesting state of affairs. The house had been sitting some time, and not one word had been uttered on the subject; he wished this silence to be broken.
Mr. Chandler knew not who these petitioners were; he did not know but that they were British subjects residing among us; if he were certain that such was the fact, he would move to have the petition thrown under the table, without taking any further notice of it; but as he was not certain of it, he was willing to let it lie on the table.
Mr. F. Clay said, that with respect to the assertion of his colleague (Mr. Smith) he would merely remark, that there was a man's name signed to that petition, with whom he was immediately acquainted, who, he knew, did as much good for this country as his colleague, notwithstanding his situation. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Crowninshield) had made a long harangue on the subject of the non-importation law, and had said that it would not embarrass the merchants. But so extremely ridiculous was some of the provisions of that law, that it was doubtful whether a gold watch could be imported, on account of the glass being prohibited. He said he felt extremely hurt at the observations of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Smith) when he knew that the signers of the petition were native American citizens. But it seemed natural that a member of congress must speak on all subjects, whether he understood them or not.
Mr. Elliot spoke in favor of referring the petition, and against the insinuation of a British party. He said that he feared there might soon be two watch words established, to vote down any measure which might be disagreeable; and these were "confidence in the executive," and "British Party."
Mr. Nelson was opposed to referring the petition to any committee. He thought the house ought not to hesitate a moment about throwing under the table all applications for a repeal of

the law is questioned; particularly now, when we were, he said, on the eve of a war, and after the British government had boasted that we dared not put it in force, as we would consider it as a declaration of war.
Mr. Rice (Ten.) spoke against referring the petition. He observed, that when these colonies presented petitions to the British parliament for a redress of grievances they were thrown under the table. He thought that would be the most proper course on the present occasion.
Mr. Fitz contended, that the petition was disrespectful to the house, inasmuch as it conveyed a distrust of the measures taken by government. Several other members spoke on the subject, when
Mr. Randolph observed, that attempts had been made to denounce his friend from Penn. (Mr. J. Clay) - a man, he said, whom he would not disgrace by comparing, either in regard to talent or patriotism, with any of his denouncers. [Mr. Crowninshield rose to explain; but he was twice called to order by Mr. R.] He said that it was the inalienable right of the citizens of this country to present their petitions to this house; and a refusal to refer those petitions was a refusal to consider them. He never expected to hear the conduct of the corrupt and hiring majority of Lord North, brought forward to justify a similar conduct in that house. We had exercised the right of petitioning the British Parliament, and they had pursued the very conduct which was now recommended here; our petitions were treated with derision and contempt. If the prayer of the petitioners was improper, would it not be better to expose their errors in a masterly report from a committee, than to slam the door in their faces and affecting all the aims of an Asiatic sovereign, refuse to hear them? We were, he believed, on the eve of a war with G. B.; and we were treading in the very footsteps of the British ministry on the eve of the American war, and on the eve of the French war. Even the commanding genius of Mr. Fox, would not be listened to in the House of commons; he was obliged to go out; and what was the consequence? He was called by the unanimous voice of the nation to correct those very mischiefs to expose which he was refused a hearing when he first raised his voice against them. But it was said, that the language of the petitioners was disrespectful: What do they say? That they do not wish us to make any sacrifice of our national honor and independence. And what is the great bulk of our national honor and independence? Why, a miserable non-importation law!
The house, Mr. R. said, had now been in session five weeks; and, on the eve of a war, they were discussing whether we should import locks with brass nobs or locks with iron nobs: They were fitting there looking at one another, reading newspapers, writing letters, receiving bank checks, and counting their money; and the nation was precisely in the same situation as it was when the house first assembled. If we were to have a war with Great Britain, as he believed we were, it would become the house at the outset to conciliate those by whom that war was to be carried on - he meant by "those," the great body of the American people - and not the rich merchant more than the landholder, but not less. The house were beginning a war on the same principles as Mr. Pitt did his war with France; by prohibiting every man who dared to question one little of its motives. But he trusted if it began in the same way, it would not have a similar end.
Mr. Crowninshield hoped the house would do him the justice to believe that he did not wish to derogate from the character of his friend from Penns. (Mr. Clay); he had always entertained the highest esteem for that gentleman, and he always should. He had stated that the language of the petition was disrespectful, and he wished it to be on the table; but that was surely not rejecting it. He had since, however, discovered a sentiment in the petition which had escaped him before, and which confirmed him in his opinion of it. The petitioners say, that "they hope the peace of the country will not be endangered by an adherence to doubtful or unsettled principles." Was it an unsettled principle that a national vessel could not be searched? He thought not. He had always considered a national vessel as national territory, and that it should be maintained inviolate. He had formerly been of opinion that it would be better to pass a total non-importation law; but for the sake of conciliating Great Britain, he had voted for a partial non-importation.
Mr. Randolph said, that the gentleman from Mass. (Mr. C.) had grossly misunderstood him; he did not allude to that gentleman as denouncing his friend from Pennsylvania. (Mr. J. Clay) The denunciations had been heard by the house - not least they had been by him. (See above) But he had said that the gentleman had endeavored to make this a party question, he still thought it so, and his calling for the ayes and nays proved it. He would call the attention of the house to a period when men of different political sentiments held the reins of gov. petition after petition had been presented against the federal law, and yet they had always been received and heard, although he said, it was almost impossible to reach such a petition in respectful language. He contended, that the merchants did not allude to the rights of the words which the gentleman (Mr. Crowninshield) had quoted; but they said that doubts were entertained that our ship subjects had been connected with that. And had they not a right to doubt? He thought if the gentleman (Mr. Crowninshield) would exchange a few of his uncertainties for some of their doubts, he would not be a worse man or a less efficient politician. He believed it to be a novel thing in legislation, that because the house differed in opinion from a petitioner, the petition should be rejected.
The question was then taken on referring the petition to committee of the whole house and it was LOST, AYES 60 - NOES 20.
The petition was ordered to be on the table. This interesting discussion (of which the above is but a sketch) lasted about 8 hours. Mr. Randolph asked and obtained leave of absence for Mr. J. Clay, for the remainder of the session.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. WEDNESDAY, Nov. 25. The House went again into committee of the whole on the bill extending the right of suffrage in the Mississippi Territory, &c. The greater part of the day was occupied in discussing the principles of the bill. Mr. Biss offered a pro-viso declaring that the act should not take effect till the assent of the state of Georgia shall have been signified thereto. This proviso was negatived - Ayes 18 - Noes 63.
THURSDAY, Nov. 26. The House took up the bill for extending the right of suffrage in the Mississippi territory and for other purposes, when the proviso offered by Mr. Biss yesterday was, after a long and very interesting debate which went far into the principles of the bill, finally disagreed to, the ayes and nays being taken on it, 86 to 88; when the bill was ordered to a third reading to-morrow. Ayes 78. Messrs. Biss, Gwynne, Taylor, and J. Clay supported the proviso; and Messrs. Poindexter, Williams, Sloan, Key, Smith, Bacon, Lyon, Rhea, Culpeper, Milnor, and Johnson opposed it. (The details of the two preceding days in our next.)
The Enquirer. RICHMOND, DECEMBER 4.
FRENCH DECREES. At a moment, when every American nerve should be exerted for the defence of our rights against British encroachments, Federalists attempt to collect arguments from all quarters on the side of Great Britain. With what confidence, they demand, can the U. S. oppose the British encroachments, when they so firmly acquiesce in Bonaparte's blocking decree? As it is an important object to unite the nation against G. Britain, let us examine the principle assumed by these gentlemen.
Every nation has a right to pass such municipal laws as she pleases to adopt, whether for justice or for trade, for her own subjects or for foreigners, whether in the heart or on the borders of her empire; provided she respects the obligation of treaties. Has not France a right to make regulations for her own port? May she not exclude or admit any species of cargo or bottoms, as her policy or her caprice may dictate; provided she does it with a due regard to the rights of other nations as secured by treaty? Her blocking decree (as it has been called) is in reality nothing but a municipal regulation. The first article certainly declares G. Britain to be in a state of blockade; but as yet there is nothing in the acts or declarations of the government which manifest her resolution to interpret that article, according to the usual acceptance of the term "blockade." There is nothing in the context of the other articles manifesting such a spirit. Mons. Decret's letter (for himself) expressly disavows such a pretension. The decree itself as it has been executed, abjures it; and there is nothing in the supplemental decrees, lately published, that shows it to be the intention of France to give it a more formidable construction.
It is an acknowledged maxim that every nation is the best interpreter & judge of its own laws. Every nation is to be supposed to be the best acquainted with its own meaning. Every nation is to determine whether any particular decree is to pass as a mere municipal regulation, or a general statute affecting the law of nations; whether it is to operate within her own ports only, or to extend into the high seas. No neutral nation has the right to protest against the words or spirit of such a decree, so long as its construction and execution are strictly compatible with the laws of nations or the stipulations of treaty.
How then, we ask, does France herself interpret this decree? Does she construe it into a blockade of the British isles and dependencies? Does she stop, seize and confiscate every neutral vessel, that is bound to or from her enemy's ports? Neither her late supplemental decree of the 4th of Sept. nor the last interpretation of her marine courts, are in conformity with this idea. The George Washington, an American vessel, had touched at a British port and afterwards went to Bordeaux. A formal appeal was made to the minister of the Interior at Paris. Does he declare that the George Washington was to be confiscated, for having violated the decree of the 21st of Nov.? He does not. Mons. Crete, declares that his majesty had "confirmed the dispositions of his decree" and "recently prescribed its strict execution," and yet the only consequence of this decree is, that the George Washington is not to "obtain admission" into the port of Bordeaux. She is not to be confiscated for touching at a British port; but is merely to be excluded from a French port.
The supplemental decree of the 4th Sept. is in the same spirit. It merely confirms the 4th and 8th Articles of the decree of the 21st Nov. The 4th article determines, that no vessel shall be admitted into a French port, "which shall have stopped in England, or shall have been conducted thither." Is not this a municipal regulation? The article merely enforces the former, by exacting a penalty against those who shall "contravene this disposition" and "by a false declaration shall facilitate their having stopped in England." In this case, the vessel as well as cargo, are to be "seized and confiscated as English property." All laws must have a penalty; and this is the penalty attached to a violation of this law of France; and as well might Great Britain complain of our forfeiting her vessels, for smuggling, as we could complain of the French government executing a mere commercial regulation, which she had the right to make, and which enforces no more upon our own interests than on those of other neutrals.
France had no right to pass this decree, provided it violates the stipulations of her convention of 1800. But this is not the case. The articles of that convention which can be supposed to touch this point, are the 6th, 11th and 12th. The 6th; while it declares generally that "commerce between the parties shall be free," particularly stipulates, that "the vessels of the two nations, shall be treated in the respective ports as those of the nation the most favoured." The 11th Art. contains a stipulation of the very same sort with respect to the duties or imposts to be paid by the citizens of either nation "in the ports, havens, roads, countries, islands, cities & towns" of the other, or in passing from one port to another port in the same or another country. So that according to these two articles, the U. S. States have no cause of complaint against France, because they are by this decree placed on the same footing with the most favoured nation; this decree in reality making "no exceptions." As to the 12th article, it merely provides for the unlimited freedom of trade (contraband goods excepted) "from any port whatever, to any port, of the enemy of the other;" a case, which is evidently out of the terms of the decree; because this merely restricts the trade of the U. S. States, "from an enemy's port," - not to an enemy's port, - but to a French port.
The U. S. have therefore no adequate cause of complaint against France; nor has G. Britain any right to complain of our tacitly acquiescing in a regulation, which France had a right to enact. Let not G. Britain then assume the right of countervailing this decree, by declaring France herself in a state of blockade. We well know how unlicensed is the acceptance of this term in the English vocabulary. Let her not capture our vessels, on the high seas, when they are bound to or from any of the French ports. But if she be really determined to insist upon all her rights of retaliation, let her countervail the French decree according to its true spirit of interpretation. Let her declare to neutral nations, that no vessels which have touched at French ports, shall be admitted into her own; and that none shall be confiscated and sold, except "by a false declaration, they shall violate their having stopped" at France. This, and this only, is the right of retaliation, to which England is entitled. Such only is the
countervailing decree which she is authorised to enact. Let G. Britain confine her policy to her municipal regulations; without wandering into practical exursions into the laws of nations; and the U. S. will know how to submit without a murmur to her dispensations.
But who can believe that these are the considerations, which lay the hand of G. Britain? It is neither from any regard to the metaphysical maxim of morality, which apportions the degree of retaliation inflicted to the extent of injury sustained; nor from any conscientious scruples about the law of nations, which abhors the iniquitous system of blocking a whole country by a single dash of the pen; nor is it from any high regard for the commercial interests of this country; that she has not long ago assiduously framed a countervailing system in the widest embodiment of unbridled avarice. The secret of her forbearance towards our commerce lies nearer home. Her virtue is but the fruit of her own interests. For, like the rapacious robber, whose cupidity only yields to his cowardice, Great Britain merely shrinks from her meditated crime from an apprehension of the impending punishment.
This is precisely the reason, which is assigned by the English prints themselves. "The intention (say they) of a general blockade of the enemy's ports is now laid to be relinquished from an apprehension that it would injure the import of our manufactures into the continent." "Prohibiting all neutral trade, though it might not produce war with America, for it is clear that America will not venture to go to war with us, would greatly reduce the demand for those articles, which America purchases from us to sell to the continent." - And here by the way it may not be improper to notice one singular inconsistency that makes the practice of this virtuous nation. She prohibits neutral vessels from carrying the produce of her enemy's colonies to the mother country, because she lays it relieves her enemy from the pressure of war, by enabling them to smuggle the colonial produce into their own ports, which would be exposed to her capture in their own vessels. And yet G. Britain does not hesitate to relieve herself from the very same pressure, by employing the very same vessels to smuggle her own manufactures into the continent of Europe.
These are the true reasons, which have hitherto prevented a resort on her part to a countervailing system of the widest encroachment on our commerce. And yet to deep is the infatuation which guides her councils, or so confident is she of the tameness of our forbearance, or so romantic perhaps is the gallantry of her ministers, that she seems to be pursuing the very conduct towards ourselves, which may probably lead to a much severer conclusion. Should a war arise between us, all her anticipations of the consequences resulting from her meditated countervailing decree, will be more than fulfilled. She will at once lose all the benefits of the protection she derives from the American flag. It will no longer cover the introduction of her manufactures into France, or Holland, or any of the ports of Europe. A war will much more materially "injure the import of (her) manufactures into the continent;" it will much more considerably "reduce the demand for those articles which America purchases from (her) to sell to the continent."
This remark is of no little importance. We are not only the consumers, but the carriers of British manufactures. We not only take them on our own account, but we purchase from her "to sell to the continent." And this privilege is of infinite importance to her at the present time because there exists not in reality another neutral nation in the commercial world except the U. States. Denmark is at daggers draw with Great Britain. Sweden is at war with France. Russia is said to have laid an embargo on British vessels, and may be expected to proceed to greater extremities against her. Turkey but merely touches the commercial chain of Christendom. And as to Portugal, she has probably, before this time become no more than the passive victim of Bonaparte's will.
Therefore in the event of a war with this country, Great Britain will not only be cut off from the market of the U. S. but in a great degree of whatever remains to her of the market of Europe. And yet these injuries to her commerce and manufactures are not sufficient preventatives to her driving the U. S. into a war with her.
We propose, then, this plain question - What kind of a peace can we expect from a nation, whom the fear of losing the most lucrative branches of her commerce by a war is not sufficient to deter from plunging into the war? It is such a Peace, as is stamped on the very face of it with Piracy.
LETTER THE FIRST. TO JOHN RANDOLPH, Esq. MEMBER OF THE H. OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Sir - There are few individuals in this country, who have exhibited so singular and instructive a reversal of fortune, as that which distinguishes your political career. A few years past, you were the admired favorite of a grateful people; you are now no longer the object of their gratitude or admiration. The contrast, Sir, is much more productive of instruction than delight.
You were the favorite defender of the wisest administration, that had ever ruled over the destinies of a free people. You were the leader of the republican party in Congress, and the Chairman of the all-important committee of Ways and Means. Foreign ministers were taught to tremble at your opinion, and the most virtuous of your countrymen aspired to the honors of your friendship. Your praise was pronounced in the abuse of British missions, in the fears and hatred of the federal party, and in the love of the people. Your country anticipated the most useful fruits from the talents which you possessed and the energy with which you exerted them, and they even paid you in advance for services, which you have never performed. You were young and the excused your indiscretions, you were correct in your principles, and the presumed that your understanding was inspired by all the lights of wisdom. She knew that you were aspiring, but she generously trusted that your ambition was nothing but the honest enthusiasm of a bosom that ardently beat for her honor and her liberties.
Why, Sir, has this fair scene vanished? Why are the sentiments of your country changed about you? Whence is that unfortunate midwife, that has blasted their hopes and your own honors? Is it that people have ungratefully deserted you or that you have deserted the cause of the people? Why is it, that in the patriotic festivals of your country, your name no longer appears in the honorable calendar of her heroes and legends? Why have the republicans ceased to hold you up as their principal idol; and whence is it that your praises flow only from the lips of federalists or from the pens of the mercenary writers of Great Britain? Your influence with the administration is gone forever. They would not consent to purchase the benefit of your talents by the sacrifice of their own independence. Your voice in Congress has sunk into an empty vote. Those transcendent talents which once animated and moulded the measures of that assembly, have almost lost even the power of exciting admiration. The bee is robbed of its stinging and has nearly degenerated into an empty drone.
In vain, Sir, would you attempt to rest your consolation upon that ridiculous cant, so familiar to the economies of free governments; that the people are naturally sickened; that republics are ungrateful. In vain would you compare your fate to that of Aristides, and your exit from the republican party to the ostracism
of Athens. Your own deferment, Sir, would dispel this flattering illusion of your vanity. Your country has not yet condemned an Aristides, nor have they exiled you because you were 'the just.' But when they beheld you denouncing men in Congress as 'pages of the water-closet,' when you yourself have so often acted as the organ of communication between Congress and the administration; when they saw you attempting to hunt down men who were your equals in talents and your superiors in public service; when they beheld you coming forward as the unblushing apologist of British outrage, footing instead of supporting the just resentment of your country, abandoning our unfortunate seamen to their chains, instead of attempting to dissolve them; when they saw you reviling and opposing the very best administration which this or any other country has enjoyed; when they found themselves obliged to choose between Thomas Jefferson and John Randolph; it was impossible for them to hesitate for one moment about their election. They abandoned impetuous youth for deliberate age; the ungodged politician for an old whig of the revolution; the cool apologist of Great Britain for the firm defender of his country's rights.
You know the temper of our countrymen. Even you, Sir, will admit, that they have generously enough to admire the firmness of the conscientious representative, though he should not exactly follow in the wake of the Executive Vessel. But they must indeed be satisfied, that this is truly a conscientious opposition; that there is no taint of personal resentment or disappointed ambition mingling itself in his measures. However improper his spirit, they must feel that he is actuated by patriotic motives. They must feel too, that neither his passions are so impetuous, nor his love of himself so sordid above the interests of his country, as to hurry him beyond the bounds of a reasonable opposition, and to impel him to the establishment of an independent party.
I have no disposition to let myself pass as a public inquisitor of the motives of men. I neither could if I would, nor would if I could, dive into the secrets of the Chartered House. For the integrity of your private character, I feel no other sentiments than respect. The sphere of repulsion, in which you move, forbids me to love you. But, Sir, for the errors of your public conduct I am not able to afford you a solution. I should still have charity enough to believe, that your first opposition to the administration was the fruit of strong but erroneous impressions; that the spirit of Seditiousness which it, and that your disappointments and your impetuosity have brought it to maturity. But some of your opponents, who were at the scene of action, in 1805-6 are not so generous in absolving the motives of your conduct.
The world are not yet satisfied that you had not aspired to the honours of a foreign embassy, and that your friend, Mr. Clark, did not wait on the Secretary of State, as your charge d'affaires to demand and receive an appointment. The false rumour, that the Secretary of State most properly rejected this impertinent demand. For can even you, Sir, believe, that you were calculated for so important a trust? A diplomatist must possess all the virtues of Czar's picture of Scotland - cool and ardent, adventurous and persevering; & how, Sir, would your impetuosity of temper have been able to cope with the wiles of the crafty Talleyrand or the wit of a Canning? - It is in vain, project before it was defeated. There was perhaps no material difference between your knowing of the proposition before it was made and after it was rejected. The resentment which you may be supposed to have felt towards the Secretary, might have enough to stamp you as an enemy, when success might have preserved you as a friend.
Yet whatever may have been the causes, the consequences are so glaring as to defy concealment. I know that there still some charitable christians who trust in the resurrection of your principles. There are others too of doubtful faith, neither infidels nor christians, neither wholly yours, nor wholly the administration's, a species of political monsters, who loves to breathe in all the elements, who pretend to loathe the scruples of their consciences by vainly flattering themselves that you will one day or other retrace the steps of the Prodigal. But, Sir, you well know that they are egregiously mistaken. Your personal interest with the President is suspended. You know that instead of soothing the divisions of party, you have seized every new opportunity for aggression. Narrow indeed is the isthmus, which connects you with your former party; and vehement is the impulse which is every moment washing it away.
As to the errors of the principles which you have advocated, it is unnecessary to enter into a critical investigation. I propose to offer a very curious view of the policy, which you have recommended with regard to G. Britain. The present is a crisis, Sir, when your conduct & principles on this important point, should appear before the tribunal of the public.
PHOCION. Extract of a letter from a Member of Congress to a Gentleman in this city, dated, Washington, Nov. 23, 1807.
"By the mail of last evening, dispatches were received by the British Minister at this place. They contain among other papers, a copy of the answer of Mr. Canning to Col. Monroe's letter of the 7th of September. - The answer is dated on the 22nd of September. I have not seen it, but a general outline of the contents has been given me by a friend. "It asserts the right of Great Britain to claim and take British seamen in all places - Declares that this right has been always claimed and exercised - That by the modern practice of civilized nations, National vessels are exempted from search - That this right, as to National vessels, will not be claimed. It is not, however, relinquished. That reparation for the outrage on the Chesapeake will be made. That a Minister will be sent to the United States for that purpose. No hint is given as to the nature or extent of the reparation. On the contrary, it is stated, that the claim for reparation on the part of the American government is greatly diminished by the refusal to deliver up the men, and by the proclamation of the President, both of which are considered as acts of hostility on our part. It is expressly declared, that the minister sent will not be authorised to blend with the adjutant of the outrage on the Chesapeake, the impression of our seamen, or any other subject of difference between the two nations. That these subjects being separate and distinct, must be the subject of separate and distinct arrangements. The answer is in a style more haughty than conciliatory, and calculated to increase rather than diminish the sentiment of indignation so generally excited by the unprincipled conduct pursued by the British Government towards all neutral Nations, and more particularly towards the United States."
"These dispatches were forwarded to New-York by the British packet, which left Washington on the 16th October. Col. Monroe's dispatches are probably sent by the Revenge."
A committee has been appointed in the Senate of the U. S. to enquire whether it be compatible with the honor and privileges of that body, that John Smith, a senator from the state of Ohio, should any longer be permitted to have a seat therein.
It is now rumoured (says the National Intelligencer) that Mr. Canning's answer was taken by the President's proclamation we had taken the business of satisfaction for the aggression on the Chesapeake, so far into our own hands, that still however the British government was ready to enter into a discussion of that act, if it could be done separately, leaving their general claim to future negotiation; but as Mr. Monroe considered himself unauthorised to settle this act separately, that government would enter with him into no explanations concerning it, but would send a minister to this place for that special purpose. Whether this is a mere rumor
or to avoid a settlement, and lose the subject altogether in the maze of negotiation, is to be judged of by the promptitude or the delay of this mission. In the mean time our peace is left at the mercy of their officers who are interested and will be war with all mankind; and how can it be pretended that the subjects have no connection?
FOR FREIGHT to New-York, the Schooner ACTIVE - Apply to Capt. BASIAN, on board, at Low-18's new wharf, or to SHAPIRD & LUCKE. Who have landing, train Oil, Sugars, Salt W. India and N. E. Rum. Dec. 4 - (30)
LANDS FOR SALE - The subscriber offers for sale, the following Tracts of LAND, in which, to persons making early application, he will give great bargains: One tract of 1200 acres, lying in Buckingham, which is advantageously situated for trade, being two or three miles from Scott's Manufacturing Mill, and five from New-Canton. This Land is very valuable, having on it 900 acres of woods, nearly all of which is good tobacco Land; there are also very good improvements, such as are well calculated for the accommodation of a family, and a sufficiency of chestnut land, to employ 10 or 12 hands advantageously. This tract will be shown to any person inclined to purchase, by Capt. Peter Guernay, now resident on the land - One tract on Randolph's creek, of 400 acres, the greater part of which is fresh and will produce good wheat and corn; it joins the lands of Col. Wilson and Mr. Gilley Lewis - One other tract, in the neighborhood of New-Canton, of 212 acres, being a moiety of a tract owned by Mr. Maurice Langhorne - Another tract in Powhatan, of 300 acres, known by the name of Gloriatan.
These Lands will be offered for sale at very reduced prices, which may be known, during my absence, by application to Col. William Daniel of Cumberland, who is authorised to contract for them. The title will be made by me on my return from Kentucky, which will probably be between the 10th and 20th of February next.
WADE MOSBY. (F6)
Powhatan, Dec. 4. THE subscribers having formed a connection in the Grocery line, under the firm of BRIDGES & ROBERTSON, they now offer for sale at their Store on the corner of the street leading to Byrd's ware-house, and opposite to Messrs. Jno. & Robt. Gamble, jr's - a General assortment of CROCERIES - among which are Antigua Rum, Soap, Candles, Holland Gin, Rice, Spanish Indigo, 4th of Cogniac Brandy, Northern Cheese, Raspberry ditto, Best Spanish Segars, London particular Madeira, Hibbert's Porter and Madeira Wine, Brown Stout, Port, Sherry & Teneriffe ditto, English, Swedish and Country Iron, Best green Coffee, Nail and spike Rod, Brown & Loaf Sugar, Pickled Salmon, Best Chocolate, F. F. Gun-powder in Kegs, Gun-powder, Raisins, Almonds, Imperial, Pepper, Ginger, Young Hyson & Souchong, Queens-Ware, &c. &c. Which they will dispose of on liberal terms for cash, country produce, or notes, on the usual credit to punctual customers.
JAMES BRIDGES, WM. ROBERTSON. Richmond, Dec. 4. (F6)
IN CHANCERY. At a quarterly court, continued and held for the county of Prince Edward, November the 17th, 1807. Martha Deshazor, against Zachariah Rice, Executor of John Deshazor, dec'd. John Deshazor, Zachariah Rice, guardian of James Deshazor, Martha Deshazor, Susanna Deshazor, Wm. Deshazor, Polly Burgess, lately Polly Deshazor, Elizabeth Paunton, late Elizabeth Deshazor, and John P. Burgess, husband of the said Polly Burgess. The defendant William Deshazor, not having entered his appearance and given security according to an act of the General Assembly and the rules of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that he is not an inhabitant of this state, on the motion of the complainant, by her counsel, It is ordered, That the said defendant, William Deshazor, do appear here on the first day of February court next, and answer the complainant's bill, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some one of the public newspapers printed in the city of Richmond, for two months successively, and also posted at the front door of the Court-House of this county. A Copy: Teste, F. WATKINS, c. c. (F8w.)
CITY TAVERN. The subscriber respectfully informs the public, that he has fitted up the City Tavern for the comfortable accommodation of gentlemen travellers and others: where the most respectful attention will be paid to all who may favor him with their custom. Gentlemen attending the General Assembly may be accommodated during their stay in town, in a manner, and upon terms which cannot fail to give entire satisfaction. The best of every thing which our city can afford shall be constantly provided, with careful and attentive waiters, good stabling and lodgers. About thirty or forty gentlemen can be well supplied with boarding and lodging during the session. NATHL. WHITE. Dec. 4. (ep4w.)
WANTED TO PURCHASE. A NEGRO WOMAN of 25 or 30 years of age, that understands Cooking. For one that can come well recommended for cleanliness, sobriety and steadiness, a liberal price will be given - Enquire at the Office of the ENQUIRER. Dec. 4. (F6)
THE SUBSCRIBER is desirous to receive from 12 to 15 MEMBERS of Assembly as Boarders, during the session, on reasonable terms - His residence is nearly opposite the Swan-Tavern. Richmond, Dec. 4. (F6)
JOHNSON & REAT, JEWELLERS & SILVERSMITHS; RICHMOND: A few doors above the Bell Tavern, and just opposite Col. Maye's New Building; beg leave to inform the inhabitants of Richmond, Manchester, and their vicinity, that they have on hand a large supply of work composed of the latest fashions, &c.
An elegant assortment of Pearl & Topaz Breast Pins, Finger Rings and Bracelets, plain Gold do. of nearly all patterns, Miniature Settings, mourning and fancy Lockets, Ear Rings, mourning and fancy cornelian, topaz, plain gold and common Watch Keys, gold, pebble and glass Seals, gold and gilt Chains, mourning and fancy gold mounted Necklaces, plain and ornamented Combs, pearl and tortoiseshell Sugar Boxes, Dirks, Pen Knives and Scissors; a general assortment of Silver Spoons and Ladies' Scissor Chains, Thimbles, Pencil Cases, Pens, Spectacles, Tooth Picks, Ink Stands, Snuff Boxes and Tweezers; Morocco Pocket Books and Thread Cases; ALUM, silver and plated Table Ware, consisting of Coffee, Tea and Milk Pors, Bread Baskets, Sugar Dines, Calfons, Tumblers, Salt Stands and Candlesticks; and a number of other articles too tedious to enumerate: All of which they offer to their friends on the most moderate terms that can be afforded. Orders from any place will be thankfully received and speedily despatched. December 4. ept.

LETTER THE SECOND.
TO JOHN MARSHALL,
CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES.
SIR, I have solemnly undertaken to shew, that you have rendered the administration of justice suspected...
This letter might with more propriety have been addressed to the public. Neither a statement of facts, nor the addition of arguments, are necessary to convince your understanding of the truth of those charges.
I will not intrude the public judgement by professing to believe in the shallowness of your head, or the purity of your heart; nor do I mean to flatter you, when I declare, that my admiration of the one, is only equalled by my detestation of the other.
Perhaps it may be asked how a conduct, which plainly betrays the truth of the charges alleged against you, can consist with your understanding, and talents. The answer is easy. A very limited knowledge is sufficient to inform us, that perverseness & prejudices more frequently direct the actions of men, than prudence and judgement; that the very care to hide our partialities, often betrays them; and that means, altho' indirect, sometimes point out and defeat the end for which they were calculated.
The examination of Aaron Burr before you at the Eagle Tavern in Richmond, I presume was not final; the proceedings at the capitol on the succeeding day, were nothing more than a continuation of that examination. I make this conclusion, because the functions of an examining magistrate cease, as such, immediately on his determining the probable guilt or innocence of the accused, and discharging, bailing or committing to the custody of the prisoner.
If you had decided upon the probable guilt of Aaron Burr at the Eagle Tavern, your functions were ipso facto discharged, and you could not have re-examined him on the same warrant the next day at the capitol; for you would have had no jurisdiction, having previously decided on the same charges.
Do the laws of Congress, or the state of Virginia authorize an examining magistrate to take the body of the accused out of the custody of the officer, having a warrant against him, and to bail, discharge or commit him previous to the decision of his probable guilt or innocence.
Is not the right to bail, &c. consequent of the decision of the case upon the exhibition of the testimony? If it is, from whence derive the legal right to bail A. Burr during the examination and before the delivery of an opinion upon this case?
But suppose this to be one of the powers confided to the second discretion of an examining magistrate; that he might even make any temporary order pendente examination, to fit his own convenience, that of the accused, or to foster the cause of justice, or humanity; was this a case where the exercise of that discretionary power was necessary, either for the purpose of humanity, of justice, or such convenience, as was compatible with the safe keeping of the accused until a final decision?
Every man who recollects that Richmond was the scene of the examination, must know that A. Burr might have been accommodated in the custody of the marshal for one day without being put to any inconvenience sufficient to justify you in giving him an opportunity to escape. Do you believe that he had any thing to fear from the cruelty, or even any supposable rudeness of Major Scott? You must know that the politeness of the marshal would have afforded to his charge every accommodation which was consistent with his duty.
For what purpose then, sir, if you had the right, did you bail A. Burr, between the time of the private examination at the Eagle Tavern, and the public one the very next day at the Capitol?
I defy all the Federalists, traitors, caufists, and jesuits of counsel for you, to help you to one good reason.
This extraordinary and illegal act of partiality and tenderness no doubt relieved the groundless fears of Burr. The very act which gave him an opportunity to escape, proved incontestably that flight was not necessary to his safety; that he had literally "a friend at court." But it seems, that the humanity of the act was even exceeded by the mercy of the means. You were determined to lay no restraint on the exercise of his understanding as to the expediency of flight. Although you had convinced him that he should have all the advantages of a trial without rigour to his person, yet you did not wish that he should be compelled by any pecuniary considerations to experience during the tedious forms of a trial, the many little favors a chief justice can confer. You therefore bailed him in the sum of dollars 5,000, before the examination was terminated, while it was yet undetermined whether there was not probable cause to believe that he was guilty of the highest crime which a member of society can commit—treason against his country.
And yet, on a succeeding day, after an examination of all the evidence, and a discussion upon its merits, after solemnly determining that there was not probable cause to believe that treason had been committed by the accused, you required bail to the amount of dollars 10,000 for probable cause to believe that he had been guilty of misdemeanor only. ....
When it is doubtful whether the accused had not committed both treason and misdemeanor, you bail him in dollars 5,000, when it is ascertained that he is probably guilty of misdemeanor only, you require bail in 10,000 dollars!
You would soon be as expert at the inversion of numbers, as you are now at the perversion of justice. According to your judicial arithmetic, if a crime five thousand times more criminal and detestable than treason could be devised and perpetrated, the offender ought to be bailed in the sum of one dollar.
To attribute these acts of monstrous and manifest partiality to the town-distracting of an upright judge, would disgrace the understanding of an idiot. The discretion of a judge, is not his unbridled and wayward will, but the discerning of that which is just, according to the laws and customs of his country. It will be much easier to find a precedent for partiality to shelter yourself, than to prove to your countrymen, the purity of your principles, or the propriety of your conduct.
You might have gone much farther, and cited precedents for your satisfaction. If A. Burr had been brought before you, with the cup of poison and the sword of treason in his hands, you might have bailed him and have satisfied civilians with the authority of Lord Mansfield, who bailed a felon taken with the stolen goods in his hands. But all of us are not civilians, and some even doubt the propriety of following a bad example altho' it assumes the shape of a law precedent.
It would be well therefore, before you cite authorities, to prove their legality and justice, and that their authors had not the same pre-emptive claims to public suspicion and animadversion, by which you are at present distinguished. You are not the only chief justice whose labors have not been properly rewarded. The people of the U. S. have yet the power of doing you some justice through the medium of constitutional provision, and I hope they will exercise it.
I shall not here remark upon that part of your opinion, on the motion to commit A. Burr for treason and misdemeanor, which defines treason by leaving you. That it cannot be reconciled either with the opinion of the supreme court of the United States, delivered by yourself, in the case of Bollman and Swartwout, nor with the opinion, double and dissonant on the motion to arrest the evidence on the trial in chief of A. Burr, must be obvious to the understanding of every man, who will admit that a definite idea can be conveyed by any words in the English language.
If any one of the three opinions, declares the sense of the constitution, the other two pervert it. The one enlarges, the other restrains, one contradicts, the other dilates, the meaning of an instrument too stubborn to be easily adapted to your own views of it.
to be easily adapted to your own views of it. A stretching and contracting to suit the location of the accused; changing as the rays of evidence shed their increasing light upon it.
But from the record of your own opinion, added to notorious facts, I shall shew that your reasons for not inferring in the warrant of commitment the charge of treason, were not founded on legal axioms, nor on facts admitted or proven; but were merely specious, unfounded, and based upon an unwarrantable supposition inconsistent with facts known to the public, and which is fair therefore to presume were within your knowledge.
In that part of your opinion which considers the probability of the commission of an overt act of treason, by an actual assemblage of men for the purpose of making war against the U. S. States, I understand you to have said of Swartwout's declaration, relied on to render the fact of assemblage probable, that "the utmost point to which this testimony can be extended is, that it denotes a further embodying of men, which is more particularly mentioned in the letter itself, and that it affords probable cause to believe, that the troops did actually embody at the period designated for their assembling, "which is sufficient to induce the justice to whom the application is made to commit for trial."
Here is an admission that Swartwout's declaration cannot extend to the points of probability, that troops did actually embody at the period designated for their assembling.
Now it must be granted, that as the probability of guilt, is all that is necessary to be proven before an examining magistrate; and as this testimony was affirmative of that probability, it was certainly sufficient, and ought to have induced you, to commit A. Burr on the charge of treason, unless the probable cause to believe the commission of the overt act, afforded by this testimony, was done away by other equally weighty & opposing evidence.
For whenever legal evidence is adduced in court to establish a fact capable of such proof, the court are bound to consider it as true the facts supported by the evidence, until other testimony is introduced, which disproves either the supported facts themselves, or leaves the mind free by impeaching the credibility of the witnesses on whose veracity the belief depends.
I am warranted in going farther, whenever a legal presumption is created, that presumption must stand until the contrary is proven. Now, sir, where is the testimony doing away the presumption admitted to arise from Swartwout's declaration? There was none produced by the accused.
After admitting that Swartwout's declaration can furnish probable cause to believe that the fact was committed, "which is sufficient to induce the justice to whom the application is made, to commit for trial," you require proof of the fact itself, yet ask "why is it not proved?" Let me answer, by asking where was the necessity of positively proving the fact, if Swartwout's declaration can afford probable cause to believe, that "troops did actually embody at the period designated for their assembling," which is sufficient to induce the justice to whom the application is made, to commit for trial.
You ask for farther proof of what? Of that which you have already admitted to be proven sufficiently to induce a commitment.
The amount of your doctrine is, that legal presumptions are destroyed by the non-production of positive proof. At one blow, you annihilate the whole doctrine of presumptive evidence. For if the non-production of direct testimony destroys presumptive proof, how can it exist?
I know of no other kinds of evidence, except positive and presumptive. The production of positive proof certainly leaves no room for presumption, and according to your doctrine, its non-production, destroys the very existence of that presumption. But even could I admit the legality of this extraordinary doctrine, yet I shall shew that in this case, the non-production of which you so much complain ought not even to have weakened the strength of the presumption arising out of Swartwout's declaration, and that "your reasons were at least based upon an unwarrantable supposition inconsistent with facts known to the public, and which it is fair therefore to presume were within your knowledge."
In my next, I undertake to shew, that you have exhibited a culpable partiality towards the accused, and a shameless solicitude (in which you failed) to implicate the government of your country as negligent of their duty—and that this imputation of negligence framed by your own ingenuity, was a negligence of doing what it was impossible to do; while if the judge had, as was his duty, attended to the course of conduct pursued by the executive, the diligence which was pursued ought to have exonerated from a less malicious magistrate, sentiments more consistent with the dignity of the judicial character, and more creditable to his liberality, instead of being reproachful to his head and heart. LUCIUS.
Congress.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
MONDAY, Nov. 23.
Mr. Elliot, from the committee appointed to enquire what alterations were necessary to be made in the act for appointing an additional judge, &c. in the Mississippi territory, reported a bill for extending jurisdiction in certain cases to the territorial courts, and for other purposes; which was read twice and referred to a committee of the whole House to-morrow.
Mr. Mason presented the petition of James Wilson, which was referred to the committee of Commerce and Manufactures.
Mr. J. M. Morris said that by the several acts for placing on the pension list persons who were wounded in the service of the U. S. no provision was made for persons wounded on the frontiers of the U. S. or elsewhere since the revolutionary war, many persons in that situation were undoubtedly entitled to relief. He therefore offered the following resolution, which was agreed to.
Resolved, That the committee appointed on the 5th inst. to enquire what compensation should be allowed for injury to commissions, giving authority to take testimony or examinations relative to claims or applications under the act to provide for persons who were disabled by known wounds received in the revolutionary war, be instructed to enquire whether provision ought not to be made by law for placing on the pension list of the U. S. persons who have received wounds in the service of the U. S. subsequent to the revolutionary war, and who were called into service under any of the several acts of Congress providing for the protection of the frontiers, such persons having served in the militia, in a volunteer corps, or in the regular forces or under a special engagement, and that they report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. Chandler presented the petition of fundry inhabitants of Kennebec, in the district of Maine, praying for the establishment of a port of delivery; which was referred to the committee of Commerce and Manufactures.
An engrossed bill for allowing additional compensation to the Secretaries of the Mississippi, Indiana, Louisiana and Michigan territories, was read the third time and passed.
The engrossed bill for the erection of a bridge over the river Potomac, was about to be read for the third time, when
Mr. Nelson moved that it be recommitted to a select committee for the purpose of amendment.
On this motion a debate ensued, in which the motion was supported by Messrs. Nelson, Sloan, Smith, Key, Crowninshield, Duda, Bacon and Tallmadge, and opposed by Messrs. Lewis and Gardener.
The reasons given in favor of recommittal, were, that the corporation was made perpetual; that there ought to be some provision allowing the U. S. to become purchasers if they chose, after a certain length of time, in order to make it a free bridge; that there was in the bill no provision making the shares of a stockholder amenable to process of law; that a man might consequently vest all his property in this stock
in order to defeat his creditors; and that there was in the bill no provision for clearing the channel of the river, in case it should be injured by the bridge being carried away by ice, storms, &c. or should be left unfinished.
Those who opposed the motion expressed their regret that these amendments had not been thought of when the bill was before the committee of the whole, and open for amendment; that this was done with a design to defeat the principle of the bill, and that the advocates of the motion might be compared to physicians who administered their nostrums to an infant till they strangled it; in answer to the first objection it was replied that the risk which the subscribers would run in the experiment entitled them to ample remuneration, and yet whenever the annual income exceeded 15 per centum on their capital, Congress was authorized to lower the rolls; to the second objection it was answered that every monied institution was liable to the same objection; that creditors were authorized to seize upon rolls arising from the stock of individuals, and to liquidate them till they received their dues; and to the third objection, it was said that these events were within the bare compass of possibility, and might never happen.
The motion for recommittal to a select committee was carried—Ayes 72; and the same committee appointed that brought in the bill.
Mr. G. W. Campbell, from the committee of Ways and Means, made a report in favour of the petitions of Edward Weld and Samuel Beebee; which was referred to a committee of the whole on Thursday next.
Mr. G. W. Campbell from the same committee made report on the petitions of the measurers of salt and coal, and inspectors of customs in the district of New York; and on the petitions of several inspectors of Baltimore, New York and Boston; declaring it as the opinion of the committee, that it is inexpedient at this time to grant their request. These reports were referred to the committee of the whole to-morrow.
Mr. Blount moved that the petition of sundry traders, merchants, &c. in the district of Edenton, N. C. praying for a port of entry, be referred to the committee of Commerce and Manufactures—Agreed.
Mr. Blount also moved that the petition of sundry inhabitants in the town of Washington, N. C. praying for the establishment of a mail boat to Shell Castle Island, be referred to the Post-Office committee—Agreed.
Mr. Thomas said, that by an act passed in 1798, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Comptroller of the Treasury, were appointed commissioners to examine the claims of refugees from the British provinces of Canada and Nova Scotia. These commissioners had made two reports on those claims, which had not yet been finally acted on. At the last session they were referred to a select committee, who reported a bill which passed this House, but was postponed in the Senate. He now moved that they be referred to a select committee. Agreed. Ayes 55. Nays 23; and the following gentlemen appointed the committee; Messrs. Thomas, Bibb, and Bacon.
On motion of Mr. Poindexter, the House went into a committee of the whole on the bill to extend the right of suffrage in the Mississippi territory, and for other purposes.
Mr. Troup moved to strike out the 1st section of the bill, extending the right of suffrage, as well on the ground of its being incompatible with the articles of cession and agreement between the U. S. and Georgia as on its expediency.
The motion was supported by Messrs. Troup and Bibb, and opposed by Messrs. Poindexter, W. Wilson, Rhea of Ten. and Sloan, who contended that there was no doubt of the right of Congress to legislate on this subject or of its expediency.
(An abstract of the arguments shall be given in a future paper.)
When the committee rose without coming to a decision, and obtained leave to sit again.
TUESDAY, Nov. 24.
Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Dawson for three days.
Mr. Brown presented the petition of Caspar Reifer, which was referred to the committee on claims, barred, &c.
Mr. Newton from the committee of Commerce and Manufactures reported a bill to change the name of the district of Burryport, in the district of Massachusetts, agreeably to the petition of Jeremiah Hill; which was read twice and referred to a committee of the whole on Thursday next.
Mr. Mansfield presented a petition from sundry merchants of the city of New York, praying for a modification of the duties on whale and sperm oil; which was referred to the committee of Commerce and Manufactures.
Mr. Blount said, that as chairman of the committee of appropriations, he had received a letter from the secretary of the navy stating some errors which had been discovered in the report of the committee of enquiry communicated by the secretary to the committee, and by them to the House; which letter was read, and ordered to be printed.
Mr. J. C. Clay moved that the petition of the measurers of salt and coal at Philadelphia, be referred to the committee of the whole to whom several petitions on the same subject were yesterday referred—Agreed.
On motion of Mr. J. C. Clay, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the bill authorizing the purchase of certain copies of the journals, which being gone through, was reported by the chairman, Mr. Masters, and ordered to a third reading to-morrow. Ayes 50.
On motion of Mr. Darby, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the bill to incorporate the trustees of the Baptist Church in the city of Washington; which being gone through, Mr. Masters, the chairman, reported the bill, which was ordered to a third reading to-morrow.
IN SENATE, Nov. 20.
Mr. Mitchell, from the committee on that part of the message of the President of the United States, which relates to the defence of our seaport towns & harbors, reported in part, the following letter from the Secretary of the Navy; also a bill to appropriate money for the construction of an additional number of gun-boats.
Navy Department, 18th Nov. 1807.
SIR, In answer to your letter of the 16th inst. in which you ask for such information in relation "to the defence of our seaport towns and harbors, and the further provision to be made for their security," as the navy department may possess; I have the honor to state that in aid of the fixed fortifications, which will be submitted by the Secretary of War, it is presumed that there will be required at the ports and harbors mentioned below, the number of gun-boats annexed to them respectively, viz.
At New Orleans, 16, Savannah, 8, St. Mary's, 4, Charleston, S. C. 10, Georgetown, do. 1, Wilmington, N. C. 3, Ocracoke, 4, Albemarle Sound, 1, Norfolk, 60, Alexandria, 2, Baltimore, 3, Philadelphia, 4, Delaware bay and river, 10, Egg harbor, N. J. 1, Amboy, 2, New York, 50, Long Island, 4, New London, 6, Connecticut Shore, 6, New Port, R. I. 12, Tiverton, 1, Boston, 12, Salem and Newburyport, 6, Portland, 6, New Bedford, 4, Marblehead and Cape Ann, 2, York, Kennebec and Sacu, 2, Kennebec, Sherpucot, Danaribecourt, Broad Bay, St. George's, 5, Penobscot, 3, Frenchman's Bay, 2, Passamaquoddy Bay, 3, Portsmouth, N. H. 4. Making in all, 257
Of which we have at this time provided, 69 Would leave to be provided, gun-boats 188 The building of these gun-boats is estimated on an average at 5000 dollars each. 188 gun-boats, at 5000 dollars make dollars 940,000 Deduct the amount of timber contracted for, as stated in the exhibit of extraordinary expenses incurred by the navy department since the 22d June last, 87,500
Would leave to be appropriated for building of 188 gun-boats, dollars 852,500 Respectfully submitted, R. SMITH.
Hon. SAMUEL L. MITCHELL, Chairman of a Committee of the Senate.
The bill is as follows: Be it enacted, &c. That the President of the United States be, and he hereby is authorized and empowered to cause to be built a number not exceeding gun-boats, and to equip, arm, man, fit out and employ the same, for the better protection of the ports and harbors of the United States, and for such other purposes as in his opinion the public service may require.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That a sum not exceeding dollars be and hereby is appropriated for this purpose, out of any monies in the treasury not otherwise appropriated.
A NOCTURNAL BALLOON.
Garnerin has made a new and beautiful use of the Balloon at Paris. He mounted from the gardens of Tivoli at night, in a balloon illuminated with 120 lamps. He mounted from the gardens at 11 o'clock on a very dark night, under Russian colours, as a sign of peace. When floating high in the air, above the multitude of admiring spectators, a flight of sky-rockets were discharged at him, which, he says, broke into sparks, hardly rising to his waist from the earth; and Paris, with all its blaze of reflecting lamps, appeared to him but like a spot—like the Pleiades, for instance, to the naked eye. He gained an elevation, he says, of 3000 toises, and speaks with enthusiasm of his being the sun rise at that height. After a flight of seven hours and a half, he descended near Reims, 45 leagues from Paris.
LOAN OFFICE, STATE OF VIRGINIA, JUNE 8, 1807.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, THAT, in conformity with the provisions of the act supplementary to the act, entitled "An act making provision for the redemption of the whole of the public debt of the United States," books will be opened at the office of the commissioner of loans for the state of Virginia, on the 1st day of July next, to continue open until the seventeenth day of March, 1808, inclusively, the fourteen last days of each quarter excepted, for the purpose of receiving subscriptions for such parts of the old six per cent. deferred six per cent. and three per cent. stocks, as may, on the day of subscription, stand on the books of the said commissioner of loans.
Those proprietors of the old six per cent. and deferred stocks, who may subscribe, will receive in lieu thereof a new six per cent. stock, equal to the unredeemed amount of the stock surrendered, redeemable at the pleasure of the United States, under a proviso however, that no reimbursement shall be made except for the whole amount of any such new certificate of stock, nor till after six months previous notice: and the proprietors of the three per cent. stock who may subscribe, will receive in lieu thereof, a six per cent. stock, equal to sixty-five per cent. of the amount of three per cent. surrendered, redeemable in the same manner as the new six per cent. above mentioned, but not reimbursable however, without the assent of the holders, until after the whole of the new six per cent. (given in exchange for old six or deferred as abovenominated,) as well as the whole of the eight per cent. stock of the United States, shall have been reimbursed. It is also provided that in every reimbursement which may take place, a preference will be given to those creditors who may notify their will to be reimbursed; and that if the applications to that effect shall at any time either exceed or fall short of the sum then applicable to that purpose, the priority of payment shall, so far as may be necessary, be determined by lot.
The present stock-holders who reside in any part of Europe, and may assent to that modification, may at their option, receive the interest accruing on the new stock, either in the United States as heretofore, or in London, or Amsterdam, at par; in which case, the interest will be paid there by the bankers of the United States, six months subsequent to the day, on which the same would be payable in the United States, and subject to no variation; nor to any other deduction than a commission to the bankers, of one half per cent. on the interest thus paid.
JOHN PAGE, Commissioner of Loans.
Table with 2 columns: Description of stock, Amount. Includes entries for 1000 dollars nominal, 644 37, 619 03, 853 78, 855 52, 831 49.
IN conformity with the 1st section of article XIV, of the constitution of the Mutual Assistance Society, against Fire on buildings of the state of Virginia, the Members of the said Society, are hereby notified to attend their annual General Meeting, to be held at the Capitol, on the first Monday in January next, being the fourth day of the said month.
Any Member who doth not attend at the said meeting in person or by proxy, will be represented by the Member of the State Legislature of the county, or the Senator of the district wherein such absentee resides.
LEWIS M. RIVALAIN, Acting as Principal Agent M. A. S.
General Office of Affairance, Richmond, 15th Nov. 1807
Form of the Credentials to be produced by the person voting at the annual meeting by proxy, to wit: Subscribing Member of the Mutual Assistance Society, do hereby constitute and appoint to attend the annual General Meeting of the said Society, to be held at Richmond, on the first Monday in January next, as proxy to vote and act on behalf, on any business which may come before the said meeting, as fully as if personally present.
In Testimony whereof, have hereunto set hand and seal, the day of 1807. Telfe, Nov 27. law3w
TO THE PUBLIC.
THE Subscriber, residing in Lynchburg, has commenced the practice of LAW, in the Hittings Court of that Town, the county courts of Campbell, Amherst and Bedford, and the District court of Franklin. Those who may confide their business to his care may depend on his attention.
WILLIAM RADFORD, Lynchburg, Nov. 27. law4w
FOR SALE.
That Large, Valuable and Well Built BRICK LUMBER-HOUSE, lately the property of Messrs. Wm. McKenzie & Co. 30 feet front, 50 feet deep, and three stories high, situated on the back street leading from the Basin, nearly opposite to the house lately occupied by Mr. John Henry. The terms will be liberal and convenient to the purchaser. Apply to TAYLOR & BROWN. Nov. 20. law5w
TO ALL THOSE WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN.
JOSIAH THOMPSON, executor of Joseph Thompson, dec'd. having previously constituted Thomas Watkins of Powhatan county, my attorney in fact, since my removal from the state of Virginia, to transact and negotiate in my name, all business relating to the management of the estate of Josiah Thompson, dec'd. and the said Thomas Watkins refusing to exercise those powers of attorney in future; I have therefore thought fit, by these presents, to revoke my letter of attorney granted to the said Thomas Watkins from the date hereof, given under my hand and seal the 23d November, 1807. JOSIAH THOMPSON. Nov. 27. law2w
EDUCATION.
THE Subscriber (who resides in the county of Hanover, about 30 miles from Richmond) having employed Mr. Wm. Nelson, Jr. to instruct a small number of boys, not exceeding twelve, including his own children, in the Greek and Latin languages, English Grammar, with a new & complete Syntax, compiled by himself, Mathematics, the elements of Natural Philosophy, Belles Lettres, Geography, Reading, Writing and Arithmetic. His price for board, tuition, washing, fuel, &c. is 30 $ payable quarterly in advance. The subscriber flatters himself that this charge will be tho' extremely moderate, when the undoubted attainments & qualifications of Mr. Nelson, the high price at which he has been engaged, and the size of the School are taken into consideration. The School will commence the 11th of January next, and expire the 1st of December following. It is desired that those persons who feel disposed to patronize the undertaking, should make known their intention as soon as possible, either to Mr. Nelson, or to the subscriber: this may be done by a letter to either of them, directed to the Post Office called New Found Mills. WM FONTAINE. Hanover, Nov. 27. law3w
To be Sold to the highest bidder, on Tuesday the twenty-ninth of December next:
A TRACT OF LAND in Powhatan county, about four miles above the court house and 400 from Peterville church, containing by a late survey, 450 acres; there are many considerable conveniences attached to this Land, it being in a good neighborhood, in which are a number of manufacturing and grist mills; is remarkably well watered, abounding with good springs, and bounded by three bold streams on three sides, on the smallest of which streams is a large manufacturing mill within 400 hundred yards of my barn, the soil very good and lies level. On this tract are two settlements with good orchards of well selected fruit on each, which may be sold separately. The terms of sale will be one third of the money in hand, and the other two thirds in four equal annual payments, giving bond and security and a deed of trust on the Land, to secure the payments. At the same time and place will be sold as above, the crop of Corn, Fodder, and Oats, the Stock of all kinds, Plantation Utensils, house hold and kitchen Furniture, one good London made Still, apple and pear Brandy, a quantity of late cider, vinegar, &c. Cash will be required for all sums under 20 dollars; six months credit for all sums between twenty and eighty dollars, and twelve on all sums above eighty dollars. There will be hired out for one year (to commence the first of January next) 8 or 9 NEGROES, on the usual terms of hire, at the same time and place. DAVID OWEN. Nov. 27. law4w
A. B. Should the day appointed for the sale of the above property, prove unfavorable, it will be continued from day to day until sold. Nov. 27. law4w
I WISH to sell the following TRACTS of LAND, and will make the time to accommodate the purchasers:
1. 12 acres in the county of Greenbrier, on the Great Kanawha Road, on Rock Creek, patented in my name. 2. 152 acres in the same county, lying on Rich creek, patented in my name. 3. 118 acres in the same county, on the same creek, patented in my name. 4. 580 acres in Kanawha county, on Gauley river, patented in my name. 5. 1000 acres in the same county, on the same river, patented in my name. 6. 1540 acres in the same county, on the south side of new river, patented in my name. 7. 2000 acres in the same county, on the waters of Cole river, patented in my name. 8. 3000 acres in the county of Monroe, on the waters of Second and Turkey creeks, patented in my name. These lands were taken up at a very early date, and from the best information,