The enquirer (Richmond, Va.), 1808-12-24 00:00:00

The Enquirer.
VOL. 5.]
RICHMOND, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 24, 1808.
[No. 71.]
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS RITCHIE, OPPOSITE THE GLOBE TAVERN, AT FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM, PAYABLE IN ADVANCE.
We are authorised to state, that Bethesda Yance , is a Candidate for the Senatorial District, composed of Caroline and Hanover. dec. 10. 10t
MUSEUM WAX-WORK. MR. BISHOP, the proprietor, respectfully acquaints the public, that his celebrated collection of WAX-FIGURES, will be exhibited for this week only. Probably so elegant a Museum will never again visit the state of Virginia, as he is on his return, and going to establish them with all his collection as a permanent Museum, in the city of Philadelphia. december 22. epst
THE partnership of Daniel Triplett & Co. is this day dissolved by mutual consent. DANIEL TRIPLETT, SAML. P. PARSONS. dec. 22. tf
THE Subscriber wishes to hire 40 or 50 NEGRO MEN, and a few BOYS of 14 or 15 years of age, to work at the coal business the ensuing year. DANIEL TRIPLETT. dec. 22. tf
BANK OF VIRGINIA. December 15th 1808.—The Stockholders are hereby notified that the election of Directors of the Bank, and the several Offices of Discount and Deposit, for the ensuing year, will be held on Monday the 24th day of January. tde
KIRBY, DRAKE & TAYLOR , intending to close their present concern, will dispose of their stock of DRY GOODS , at reduced prices, for cash, or on short credit, for approved notes in town. Those persons indebted to the concern by open account, are requested to make payment or execute bonds for their respective amounts. dec. 17. tf
AN OVERSEER'S PLACE WANTED. The Subscriber offers himself to any gentleman, who is wanting an Overseer; he has had long experience in this line of business, and can be highly recommended. Application to be made by letter or otherwise, to the Subscriber, in Jas. City county, near to Williamsburg. TIMOTHY RICHARDS. dec. 17. 2w
TO JOHN FOWLER of Kentucky, and JORDAN HARRIS, of Virginia, GENTLEMEN. Take notice, that on Thursday the 12th of next month, at John Anderson's Tavern, in New-Canton, I shall proceed to take the depositions of Robert Moseley and others, to continue from day to day, until finished: And on Friday, the 20th of next month, I shall, at Buckingham court-house, again proceed to take the depositions of Daniel Guerrant and others, which depositions are to be read as evidence in a suit depending in the High Court of Chancery for the Richmond District, wherein I am plaintiff and you are defendants. Yours &c. PETER GUERRANT. dec. 27. tf
JAMES STRATTON, TAYLOR. At the corner of the Brick Row and the Cross street leading to Mayo's Bridge, respectfully informs the public and his former customers, that (having returned to this city, and resumed his profession) he is ready and willing to execute their commands, on the shortest notice, in the best manner, and on the most reasonable terms. Nov. 11. [tf]
NOTICE. —In the year 1793, a request was made by letter from a gentleman in Virginia, (through Mr. Joseph Johnson, Consul in London) to Mr. Thomas Digges, then in England, to make enquiry for the heirs or the family of a Mr. Abraham Milnes, who, when a youth, left Briggs house near Huddersfield in Yorkshire, for America, and was a clerk to a merchant in Virginia, afterwards kept a store of his own, had a partner in trade, & died unmarried, about the year 1753, leaving landed and other property. Unfortunately, by the loss at sea, of the ship Jane and Rachel , capt. Dade from London to Alexandria, in the year 1798, the letters of request and other papers and memorandums were lost, and even the writer's name, which is supposed to be Farly or Farly, as well as his place of residence has been forgotten, but is guessed to be near Peters burg in Virginia. The subscribers, or either of them, will be much obliged to any one, informed of either of the parties above alluded to, or can give any trace as to their residence, or informed of any landed or other property of said deceased Abraham Milnes, by letter directed to the subscribers as before; and they will thankfully pay any costs for ascertaining the names, places of residence, or effects of said deceased, &c. &c. GEO. MILNES, Merchant Boston. THOS. DIGGES, Fort Warburton, Potomac, Maryland. GEO: W. RIGGS, George-Town. October 14. [3m]
HIS NAME WAS SPLIT MILLS or MILNES. RICHMOND TURNPIKE COMPANY. At a meeting of the Directors of the said Company, on Saturday evening the 3rd of December, 1808, the following resolution was agreed to: Whereas, from causes unforeseen as unexpected, the Board of Directors, at their last meeting, on the 29th ultimo, postponed the sale of SHARES belonging to delinquent subscribers, generally denominated Stock-Holder, which were advertised to be sold on that day: Resolved, That the Shares of delinquent holders which may be reported as such by the Treasurer of this Company, on the 7th day of January next, be, on that day sold, at public auction, at the front door of the Swan Tavern in this city. NATHANIEL SHEPPARD, CL. december 6. tds
MR. WM. E. WEBB, Administrator of Benjamin Edwards, dec'd. North-Carolina. —Please to take notice, that on the second Monday in January next, I shall take the deposition of Mr. Spencer Ball, Jr. of Northumberland county, in Virginia, at the court-house of said county, at the tavern occupied by Joseph Rogers at that place, to be used as evidence in the suit depending in Chancery in the United States circuit court, held in Richmond for the district of Virginia, in which I am plaintiff and you are defendant. CHARLES J. LOVE. nov. 18. [tf]
LANDING from the Schooner RICHMOND, at Lester's new Wharf: 23 Crates Earthen Ware, 25 Hhds. Maccavady Sugar, 11 Do. Green Coffee, 9 Bales Woolens, 15 TONS 100 bags Salt, 15 hds. Molasses, 10 tiers green Coffee, 6 quarter casks Sugar, 3 pipes Gin, 50 boxes Sugar, 3 bags Racy Ginger, Souchong, Hyson Skin and Young Hyson Tea. For sale by GEORGE WATT. nov. 4. [tf]
MUTUAL ASSURANCE SOCIETY. —The General Annual Meeting of the Mutual Assurance Society, against Fire on buildings of the state of Virginia, will be held at the Capitol, in the city of Richmond, on Monday, the 24th day of January next. SAMUEL GREENHOW, Principal Agent. Richmond, General Office of Assurance, Dec. 1, 1808. oawt24j
All the Printers in Virginia, and in the town of Alexandria, are requested to publish the above once per week, until the second day of January next. S. G.
NAPT COTTONS & KERSEYS. —The Subscriber received a consignment of Napt Cottons and Kerseys , which he offers at a reduced price, for cash, or indorsed negotiable notes. ROBERT JOHNSTON. december 6. (H)
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
DECEMBER 1.
DEBATE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS.
(CONTINUED.)
(Mr. Burwell's Speech Concluded.)
There is a remark made by Mr. Canning, connected with this subject, which deserves a reply. He says the embargo by an unfortunate concurrence of circumstances, did come in aid of the "blockade of the continent." The minister would find a very natural solution for this mystery, if he would only recollect the "unfortunate concurrence" in point of time of the extension of the French decree and his orders against neutral commerce. But, sir, the embargo was materially unlike the blockade of the continent, inasmuch as British goods were not excluded from your ports, and consequently "did not come in aid of it." I again disclaim all identity in the cause or concurrence in the view of the French emperor. My ground was exclusively American: I asked no surrender of British rights. How far the effects of this measure have been defeated by events in this country, appears very obvious to my mind. How does it happen that Mr. Pinkney, as late as July, had every reason to believe the British government would accede to a proposition which has been since rejected? How does it happen that their tone has been so suddenly changed? This alteration could not have been caused by the events in Spain, because they were known previous to that time, and the change was too abrupt to have an entire connection with the state of things in Spain and Portugal. Sanguine calculations were entertained that the United States would be dismembered, and your government destroyed. This was the common prophecy of news-papers and pamphlets. The author of "Hints to both Parties" no less a man than Mr. Marriot, a ministerial member of Parliament, sagely remarks that the chief of your government must follow the fate of Paul, when Russia and Great-Britain were at war; that he is mistaken (as my colleague, Mr. Randolph, declared) we all know; but the effects were the same as if the calculation had been correct, because the ministry had acted upon it, assuming it to be a fact. But this writer is certainly mistaken in assimilating this government to that of Russia. Though it would be as easy to take off an individual in this country—it will be found infinitely more difficult to effect a revolution in its policy. The destruction of one man would not change the temper of the people, or alter the policy of the national councils. While I regret the effects produced in Europe by the intemperance of our own people, and the shameful misrepresentations of the papers and foreign emissaries, I am far from questioning the right of the people in every section of the country to speak what language, and to give what intelligence they please to foreign powers. It is one of the evils arising from our political institutions, but which is counterbalanced by the good effects which the liberty of the press produces. It is however lamentable that the essential interests of the country have been sacrificed by retarding a settlement of our differences.
There is one fact which proves that the calculation of the British government on our division has been decisive in her councils. I mean the proclamation inviting the violation of our embargo laws—affording a protection to those who resist the authority of the law. Is this the conduct to be pursued towards us by a nation professing friendship? Is it the conduct of one civilized country to another? It is not, and can only proceed from the delusion produced by the reports of individuals who have been scattered through this country to engender mischief. Mr. Canning speaks this language, as if his hopes of rebellion were consummated. He evidently considers us torn to pieces, incapable of resistance, and obliged to fall a victim to their policy. But I trust there is a redeeming spirit which will avenge the wrongs of this injured nation. There has been another effect produced by the embargo, notwithstanding the shameful evasion of the law. The price paid in the West India islands for your products, some of which are essential to existence, and all necessary to comfort; this price has been extravagantly high, and must have been injurious to the planters, who, while they found the means of vending their produce limited, were compelled to pay for articles of foreign growth high prices, and exchange their own below the usual price, which even at its common standard afforded no profit. In Great Britain herself, as was expected, the gradual advance on the price of all the raw materials for her manufactures has not only embarrassed their operations, but thrown thousands out of employment; the effect has kept pace with the exhaustion of the stock on hand when the embargo was laid.
The plan proposed by the gentleman from New York, (Mr. Mumford) for permitting a trade with Spain and Portugal, would be far from affording adequate relief to the great and important interests concerned. Your exports to Spain and Portugal do not exceed four million of dollars in domestic, and sixteen in foreign produce. Supposing this commerce free, what would be the effect of prosecuting it? Do you think in the present state of things you can come into competition with the Spanish, Portuguese, and British vessels? I apprehend not—for it will unquestionably be the policy of the new government to favor their own navigation, and that of the British nation, with whom they are in alliance, in preference to another.
And let me tell you, by this moment, their markets have been glutted with foreign produce, by the English, who are convenient, and have themselves a super-abundance. But have you any assurance the present state of things will continue? Suppose your vessels were to clear out for ports of Spain and Portugal; is there any certainty you would not find them occupied by French troops? And in that case an unprincipled confiscation of all your property must be the immediate consequence. Besides, how do you know these countries are not within the scope of the orders of council? All you know upon this subject, is a conversation said to have passed between some merchants and Mr. Canning. He tells you, to be sure, it is not impossible some relaxation of the orders not calculated to impair their rigor, may take place. You understand pretty well from experience, what those favorable modifications mean—I shall presently have occasion to speak of them. You rely then upon a conversation in which a British minister has undertaken to do—What? to regulate the trade between this country and an independent nation? (for it must be considered independent until subdued.) He tells you, that you may carry direct your own, and the produce of the Spanish and Portuguese colonies, and bring back the produce of those countries in return. This boon, seized upon here with avidity, is stamped with an assumption of authority, subversive of your national independence. If it rests with them to regulate your commerce at their pleasure, what pledge have you when it conflicts with their interests, they will not curtail it? How are you to satisfy the scrupulous consciences of the admiralty courts—that the sugar you carry was raised in Cuba, and not in Martinique or Guadalupe. And if you succeed in this, a thousand pretexts will be found by the learned crafts of Doctor's Commons, to rob you of your property. When I talk of the security of our trade, I talk of non-entry. It is regulated by the single dash of a pen, and that not of your own government, but of a foreign power.
But, sir, gentlemen may attach some stability to this indulgence, from the exception of the Spanish and French colonies in the orders of council. They have often adverted to the fact; and the British government itself has not failed to press it upon you as a proof of her favor, and a new claim upon your gratitude. The truth is, she was more concerned in the trade to the colonies than you were yourself, for which your merchants exported only four or five millions in native products. They became factors of the British, and circulated nearly twenty millions of English goods, which could not otherwise find entrance into those ports. Is it not easy to discover what was the policy of the permission to trade to these islands? It was that her special interests, not yours, were promoted by it. No, she would not even permit you to seek a market for your indemnification after serving her. Now she can go there directly and sell her goods without your assistance—what follows? Does she consult your interest by permitting you to carry on the trade open to her own merchants? No, sir, and if any doubts remain, let me call your attention to the late proclamation, blocking up the French West-India islands. We have dispatches from England down to the 25th of September; at that time there was no intimation to your minister, and not a whisper in the political circles of this thing—and suddenly when it was supposed in England, (in the language of the gentleman from Massachusetts) "that we must take off the embargo," you see a proclamation dated only fifteen days later than the latest dates from England, declaring that every vessel going to the French West-India islands, shall be liable to seizure and condemnation. What language does it speak? What policy does it evince? To my mind it presents a train of reflections, to which I am unwilling to give utterance, and apply the appellation which the transaction deserves. It is insidious and hostile to its utmost extent. Suppose the gentleman had moved to take off the embargo the first of the session, & had succeeded by the tempting promise of that trade. You well know the French islands have been literally ruined by the embargo. They have not been (like the islands of his majesty) supplied by the infractors of the law, (principally British agents,) through Canada and Nova-Scotia, with provisions. Every vessel laden with flour and provisions would have shaped her course to these islands, where there was the greatest scarcity, and the greatest probability of profit; and by this "unfortunate concurrence" between the removal of the embargo, (as was expected in England,) and the proclamation of blockade, all your commerce in that direction would have been swept off and destroyed. This blockade is of old standing, at least as old as the petitions of the last summer; it is sent by express for our notification about ten days after the meeting of Congress, at which time it was supposed the embargo would be raised. It is said this express vessel met British vessels going into Barbadoes as she came out, from whom the instructions were received. But it is reduced to certainty, these vessels arrived on the 20th, and the proclamation issued on the 14th. Yes, sir, the nets were artfully spread, the sportsmen stationed, and the whole flock would have been entangled and taken, but for the embargo. Will gentlemen not take warning?
There has been one observation made on which I will make a few remarks, and but few; but they are necessary to a fair and candid discussion. It has been said that we ought to have resisted the Berlin decree; that if we had done that, we should have been saved from the present disagreeable situation, and have taken from Great Britain a
pretext for enforcing her orders in council. The gentleman from Massachusetts defines submission to be the doing that which you are commanded to do, and resistance in the doing that which you are commanded not to do. I thank him, he is perfectly correct. I will use his definition, and apply his own principles to this case. What said the Berlin decree? You shall not go to Great-Britain, if you do, France will seize and confiscate your property. What was our conduct? we did go to Great-Britain, and our shipments were nevertheless as great as before the decree, we did carry on the forbidden trade; and therefore by the gentleman's own definition, resisted. Let us take another view of this subject. In the note of lords Holland and Auckland, attached to the rejected British treaty; they tell us among other things, that the enemy should carry these threats into execution, and the United States should acquiesce, they should probably be compelled to retaliate in the same way; but disclaim the right to retaliate, if the French government formally abandons, or tacitly relinquishes them. What is tacit relinquishment? was there a single case in which it was executed, and known to us previous to the orders in council? Not one, and does not the fact that American vessels went from England to France as before, prove a tacit relinquishment? Certainly. Indeed so far from being a tacit relinquishment, it was a formal abandonment, amounting to a positive and express acknowledgment, that the decree was not in force against the commerce of the United States. I have already shown, England received no injury from the operation of that decree, because we traded with her as we had done before, & the retaliating orders, admitting the right of Great-Britain to retaliate on her enemy through neutral trade, could not exist until we had received an injury and acquiesced in it. But so far from its being known we had acquiesced, the execution of the Berlin decree, and the orders of 11th of November, reached this country nearly at the same time. If our commerce had been vitally assailed by this monstrous decree, and we had not effectually resisted, I am not prepared to say how far it would have been a departure from our neutrality, and would have justified the measures adopted. Sir, I never would have submitted to it. You must remember I declared I would vote against a general embargo, but that I anticipated from the British measures quite similar to those of France. We did our duty, resisted when attacked by it, and I scout all idea that the people would have submitted, or that any man would have proposed such submission. You hear no apology for France; you hear no palliation of her outrages, or disguise of her views, and you see every man ready to exert the energies of the nation to avenge the wrongs of the country. Take the orders of council in another point of view; they profess to retaliate on France through us, because we have permitted her to attack our rights. Why then were they not confined in their operation to France; why did they comprehend nations with whom we were in amity, and from whom we had received no injury? Will any person say we ought to have gone to war with Russia, Denmark, and Sweden? You are bound to consider these nations independent, and treat them as such; while they manifest no disposition to change the subsisting relations between us, & refrain from hostile acts. The unlimited scope given to the orders in council, manifestly shows the retaliation on France was a mere pretext. But if the object of Great-Britain was really retaliation on France, how could she get over the proposition made by the government of the U. States to continue the embargo as to France, and remove it as to England, provided she would withdraw her orders in council? This would have been a compliance with her requisition for resistance to the Berlin decree, and destroyed all the ground for the continuance of the orders. But here we are told that our government has offered to comply with that, which if they had done in the first instance, would have saved us from difficulties. This is indeed a strange inference; that England would have acceded to the proposition formerly, because she now rejects it. Sir, the U. States can never consent to give authority to that unlimited right of retaliation which she claims. And so far from this offer being a compliance with that demand, it was an honest and fair avowal of the conduct which the government would pursue towards France, if left to itself. It was honorable, and the rejection of that favorable proposition, connected with the obvious causes of that rejection, convinces my mind she does not want to be on good terms with us. She thinks more may be made in another way.
It has been urged in the course of this debate that the embargo destroys all our revenue, and that if we remove it our treasury would be again filled. What is the fact on this subject, taking it upon their own ground? You inevitably lose upwards of a million of dollars collected by way of drawback, on articles re-exported from the U. States, for consumption in foreign markets; the obstacles interposed by the orders, and the imposition of transit duty by act of Parliament equivalent to the duties remitted in this country, cut off at once this amount; it is pocketed elsewhere. Again, we have heretofore derived a revenue from all that part of our importations which is from the continent of Europe and every other part of the world not included in the orders of council; the impost derived from this trade, and the means which it afforded of paying revenue into the treasury are at an end; nor could it be resumed by raising the embargo. I will venture to assert these losses constitute one half of the revenue; they are irretrievably lost while Europe continues in its present state. Again, suppose you continue to trade with England, how would your revenue derived from the consumption of her manufactures stand affected? Grant that one half of our revenue is now collected from the commerce with Great-Britain. If the produce of this country is reduced to a mere drug by being restricted to her ports (and I have shown that would be the case) could you continue to consume her goods? It is an established axiom in trade that the exports and imports always bear an exact proportion, and it is ridiculous to suppose the use of foreign goods,
would continue after the means of payment ceased to exist; in other words, the exchange of labor between the two countries would be too unequal to last. In a short time even that branch of revenue would dwindle into insignificance; it would not replenish the treasury. Thus, sir, take these points of view, their operation upon your commerce is exclusion from the continental market, the destruction of your revenue, the lessened value of the produce of your soil, and the prostration of your fisheries and navigation. Enterprise cannot continue when every avenue of commerce is cut off—in short, they produce the very evils which gentlemen wish to charge on the embargo. I have endeavored to consider this question as a question of pecuniary calculation altogether, and it is so clear to my mind, that there does not exist a temptation to sacrifice the honor and independence of the U. S. that I am astonished gentlemen can take any other view of the subject than that I have taken. To take off the embargo at this time, while the decrees of France and the orders of England remain in force, without adopting some other measure equally efficient, would be to submit to the meanest degradation. It would be sending your property to certain ruin, exposing it to the lawless spoliation of every pirate with which the ocean is infested, without the means of resistance or the hope of justice. If you do not now take a stand for your rights, when will you? Can the occasion ever be more urgent? It would be vain hereafter when you have yielded, and the nation is habituated to foreign domination. Do you flatter yourself that your grievances will close here? You will be mistaken—it is not the nature of power intoxicated with success to retract its encroachments, or commercial avarice to relax its pretensions. The little you now have will soon be claimed, and what you have already yielded, will furnish the pretext to enforce your compliance—you will not even be remunerated for profit for your disgrace. It is not a time when submission is entitled to moderation, or concessions ensure forbearance. Our agriculture must continue as it now is until some new direction be given to the destructive tempest, which renders it almost impossible to navigate the ocean. I know that the operation of our measures is strong, that every man must feel them more or less, and the plainest calculations cannot quiet the restlessness of pecuniary embarrassment. But, sir, while I candidly believe the members of this House feel their full share of the public pressure, (that at least is my case) and are honestly governed by what they believe the interest of the country, I cannot but rely upon the patriotism of the people. Let gentlemen, therefore, who disapprove of this system, come forward and say what they think best to be done. They owe it to themselves, and their constituents, and they cannot withhold their councils without violating a sacred duty, they are pledged to perform. Let them do this instead of dividing and distracting the government and weakening the nation—they are Americans and ought not to sacrifice the national rights to the pride of party. As to the embargo, shew me something better and I will retract like an honest man, and adopt it. I do not consider myself precluded from a choice of measures because I once voted for it. There is no object to which I stand pledged but the safety of the nation, and no system but that which will most certainly promote it. My colleague has said, we are called on by every sense of duty we owe to ourselves and country to unite and annoy our enemies, and make the strongest possible impression upon them. I agree with him. It is time to retaliate the aggressions and injuries of which we have been so long the victims. This is the only way to change their temper by retorting the evils of their own injustice—some foreign magic must have withered his brain, and that man must be under the influence of foreign governments who will not go all lengths to support the honor of the nation. It is to be regretted our harmony has been disturbed by the introduction of subjects not connected with the existing state of things, or calculated to meet future difficulties. Union would be more promoted by looking prospectively. As to those measures alluded to by gentlemen, as the causes of our present difficulties, they passed before I had a seat on this floor, and without any participation of mine. Can there exist a doubt that the crisis has arrived when we must take care of ourselves, and keep to ourselves? Every mode of insult to the nation has been tried, and even your public ministers have come in for their full share of neglect. As to keeping them any longer in Europe to be writing notes and papers, it is out of the question—for one, I am prepared to go along with my country and share its fate. I shall vote for the first and third resolutions, because we cannot without dishonor submit to the flagrant violation of our neutral rights, and because we should be prepared to defend them. The second, excluding armed vessels, shall also have my approbation—I am willing to place the English and French on the same ground. Their conduct has forfeited all claim upon us, to the hospitality and protection of our waters. I am disposed to exclude the productions of both and cut off all intercourse until they are disposed to renew it upon terms of equality. As for this measure injuring England more than France, we cannot help it; but it ought to be recollected that it has not been long since we were told by the British themselves, all their efforts to injure France were vain, while she enjoyed the benefit of American commerce.
(Debate to be continued.)
FOR SALE, the TENEMENT on which the subscriber lives, situated on Church-Hill, within about one mile of Richmond Market, containing two and half acres of Land, well enclosed and highly improved. The buildings consist of a large and well constructed Dwelling-House, Laundry, Kitchen, Dairy, Smoke-House, 2 Stables, Brick Office, Coach-House, Barn, Stable, and Hen House. All these buildings are in complete order for the accommodation of a large and genteel family, who may have easy access to all the advantages of the city, and lives as retired as they could wish. JOHN ELLIS. Nov. 26. [to w]

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, Dec. 17.
A quorum not appearing at the hour to which the House had adjourned, two motions were successively made and negatived by Yeas and Nays to adjourn.
A motion was made by Mr. Van Cortlandt, that the absent members be compelled to attend, but a quorum appeared before the motion was decided.
POTOMAC BRIDGE.
Mr. Lewis reported a bill to amend the bill authorising the erection of a bridge over the river Potomac. Twice read and referred to a committee of the whole.
NATURALIZATION LAWS.
Mr. Burrill reported a bill to establish an uniform rule of naturalization throughout the United States. He observed that it would be recollected that he had suggested a modification in this bill, but the committee had not been able to concur in opinion on the subject, and he reported the bill in the same form as it was proposed last session, intending to propose his modification in committee of the whole.
The bill was twice read, and referred to a committee of the whole, and made the order of the day for Monday three weeks.
IMPORTATION OF SALT.
Mr. Livermore said, that from information received from various parts of the United States, it appeared that the article of salt, so essential for public support, was very scarce, and had risen in his country 100 per cent. that is, to two dollars per bushel. He was therefore induced to offer the following resolution:
Resolved, That the committee of Commerce and Manufactures be instructed to enquire into the expediency of permitting certain vessels to depart from the ports and harbors of the United States, for the purpose of importing SALT, and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise.
The House agreed to consider the resolution. 58 to 25.
Mr. Cutts said, that he observed by a paper containing the price current, that the price was but 6s. 6d. per bushel.
Mr. Bacon, as this was a subject on which an instantaneous decision should not be made, moved that it lie on the table.
Mr. Livermore said, that the price of this article was rapidly rising; and it was extremely desirous that vessels should be permitted to go to Turk's island for the purpose of bringing in salt.
The motion that it lie on the table was carried, Ayes, 51.
FOREIGN RELATIONS.
The unfinished business of yesterday was taken up; the question being on the following resolution:
Resolved, That it is expedient to prohibit, by law, the admission into the ports of the United States of all public or private, armed or unarmed ships or vessels belonging to Great Britain or France, or to any other of the belligerent powers, having in force orders or decrees violating the lawful commerce and neutral rights of the United States; and also the importation of any goods, wares and merchandise, the growth, produce or manufacture of the dominions of any of the said powers, or imported from any place in the possession of either.
Mr. Rhea (T.) supported the resolution in a speech of near two hours.
Mr. Taggart opposed the resolution in a speech of two hours.
Mr. Randolph moved to adjourn alleging as a reason for the motion the situation in which the House found itself, many members being absent.
The question on adjournment was taken by Yeas and Nays, and negatived—Ayes 42—Nays 68.
A division of the question was called for, taking the sense of the House on each member of the resolution separately.
Mr. Van Horn moved to amend the last clause of the resolution, by striking out the words in Italie, and adding the following:
“And that the act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels within the ports or harbors of the United States and the several supplementary acts thereto, shall be repealed, so far as acts the ships and vessels belonging to and wholly navigated by citizens of the United States, to depart with their cargoes for places not in the possession of any of the said belligerent powers, and that the citizens of the United States be authorized to arm and equip their merchant vessels, and repel by force any assault or hostility which shall be made or committed by any vessel belonging to any of the said powers and may subdue and capture the same and may retake any vessel owned as aforesaid which may have been captured by any vessel belonging to any of the said powers.”
Mr. Durell moved to adjourn, as this amendment involved wholly a new principle, and required consideration—Ayes 38—Nays 51.
Mr. D. R. Williams called for a division of Mr. Van Horn's amendment, taking the question first on striking out the words in the original resolution.
And the motion to strike out was negatived—Ayes 24.
Mr. Van Horn moved to adjourn—Ayes 39—Nays 57.
Mr. Mumford called for the Yeas and Nays on the amendment.
Mr. Upham moved to adjourn, and called for the Yeas & Nays on the motion—Ayes 45—Nays 69.
Mr. Quincy called for a division of the amendment, so as to take the question first on the words in Italie.
Mr. Van Horn said, this was one way of making a null vote against his own motion; for he certainly must vote against the first clause if taken separately.
On the suggestion of Mr. G. W. Campbell that the gentleman would get at his object better by a distinct proposition at another time—
Mr. Van Horn withdrew his motion for the present.
Mr. Lewis moved to adjourn and called for the Yeas and Nays on the motion—Ayes 48—Nays 69.
Mr. Lewis moved to amend the original resolution by adding at the end of it the following:—“and also, that the act laying an embargo on all ships and vessels in the ports and harbors of the United States, and the several acts supplementary thereto, be repealed.”
The Speaker decided that the amendment was out of order, as it involved a subject already specially before a committee of the whole.
Mr. Stanford, though totally unfriendly to the gentleman's motion in the present state of our affairs, was friendly to the right of a member to make such a motion, and
appealed from the decision of the Speaker on the point of order.
Mr. Livermore moved to adjourn—Ayes 52—Nays 62.
The Speaker's decision on the point of order was confirmed by the House—Yeas 86—Nays 32.
Mr. Lewis renewed the motion, varied only by an addition to the end of it, of the words, “on the first day of January next.”
This the Speaker also declared out of order.
Mr. Lewis appealed from the decision; which was again confirmed by the House—Yeas 84—Nays 31.
Mr. Minor moved to adjourn—Ayes 51—Nays 58.
The question on the first clause of the resolution recurring—
Mr. Gardener called for a division of it so as to take the question separately on the exclusion of English and French ships.
Mr. Alexander moved to adjourn—Ayes 47.
Mr. Gardener spoke half an hour in explanation of his reasons for taking the question separately as to Great Britain and France.
The question was then taken on the following member of the resolution:
“Resolved, That it is expedient to prohibit, by law, the admission into the ports of the United States of all public or private, armed or unarmed ships or vessels belonging to Great Britain.” And decided by Yeas and Nays, as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Basset, Bibb, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyd, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Clay, Clopton, Cook, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Durell, Eppes, Fisk, Franklin, Gholson, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, J. G. Jackson, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Macon, Marion, McCree, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, John Morrow, Mumford, Nelson, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Pitkin, Porter, Randolph, Rea of P. Rhea of T. J. Richards, M. Richards, Say, Seaver, Shaw, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, J. Smith, S. Smith, Southard, Stanford, Storer, Swart, Taylor, Thompson, Trigg, Troup, Van Allen, Van Cortlandt, Van Horn, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, D. R. Williams, A. Wilson, N. Wilson, Winn—92.
NAYS—Messrs. J. Campbell, Champion, Chittenden, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Elliot, Ely, Gardener, Gray, Harris, R. S. Jackson, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Livermore, Masters, Milner, Moseley, Pitkin, Quincy, Russell, Stedman, Sturges, Taggart, Tallmadge, Upaham, Van Rensselaer—28.
Mr. Elliot called for a further division of the remainder of the first clause, so as to take it separately on excluding the vessels of France, and of other powers having in force edicts affecting neutral commerce.
And the question was taken on the words, “of France,” by yeas and nays as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Basset, Bibb, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyd, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Clay, Clopton, Cook, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Durell, Eppes, Fisk, Franklin, Gardener, Gholson, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, J. G. Jackson, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Macon, Marion, Masters, McCree, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, John Morrow, Mumford, Nelson, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Porter, Randolph, Rea of P. Rhea of T. J. Richards, M. Richards, Say, Seaver, Shaw, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, J. Smith, S. Smith, Southard, Stanford, Storer, Swart, Taylor, Thompson, Trigg, Troup, Van Allen, Van Cortlandt, Van Horn, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, D. R. Williams, A. Wilson, N. Wilson, Winn—97.
NAYS—Messrs. Alexander, J. Campbell, Champion, Chittenden, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Elliot, Ely, Gardener, Harris, R. S. Jackson, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Milner, Moseley, Pitkin, Quincy, Russell, Stedman, Sturges, Taggart, Tallmadge, Upaham, Van Rensselaer—24.
The question was then taken on the remainder of the first clause, viz. on the words “or to any other of the belligerent powers having in force orders and decrees violating the lawful commerce and neutral rights of the United States.” and carried as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. L. J. Alston, Willis Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Basset, Bibb, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyd, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Clay, Clopton, Cook, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Durell, Eppes, Fisk, Franklin, Gardner, Gholson, Goodwyn, Gray, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, J. G. Jackson, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Macon, Marion, Masters, McCree, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, John Morrow, Mumford, Nelson, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Porter, Randolph, John Rhea, (Pennsylvania) John Rea, (Tennessee) Jacob Richards, Matthias Richards, Say, Seaver, Shaw, Sloan, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, John Smith, Samuel Smith, Southard, Stanford, Storer, Swart, Taylor, Thompson, Trigg, Troup, Van Allen, Van Cortlandt, Van Horn, Verplanck, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, Williams, Alexander Wilson, Nathan Wilson, Winn—96.
NAYS—Messrs. Alexander, John Campbell, Champion, Chittenden, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Elliot, Ely, Gardener, Harris, Richard Jackson, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Milner, Moseley, Pitkin, Quincy, Russell, Stedman, Sturges, Taggart, Tallmadge, Upaham, Van Rensselaer—26.
The question then being on the second member of the resolution, as follows:
“And also the importation of any goods, wares, merchandise, the growth, produce or manufacture of the dominions of any of the said powers, or imported from any place in the possession of either.”
Mr. Randolph moved to adjourn—Ayes 46.
Mr. Randolph spoke for about two hours and a half against it.
Mr. Van Cortlandt moved to adjourn, as it was a late hour and he felt a want of sleep, —Ayes 42—Nays 72.
The question was then taken on the second clause, by yeas and nays, as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Basset, Bibb, Blackledge, Blake, Blount, Boyd, Boyle, Brown, Burwell, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Clay, Clopton, Cook, Cutts, Dawson, Desha, Durell, Eppes, Fisk, Franklin, Gardner, Gholson, Goodwyn, Gray, Green, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Humphreys, Isley, J. G. Jackson, Johnson, Jones, Kenan, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Love, Macon, Marion, McCree, D. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, J. Morrow, Nelson, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas,
Porter, Rea, (Penn.) Rhea, (Tenn.) J. Richards, M. Richards, Say, Seaver, Shaw, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, J. Smith, Southard, Stanford, Storer, Taylor, Troup, Van Allen, Wharton, Whitehill, Wilbour, D. R. Williams, A. Wilson, Winn—82.
NAYS—Messrs. Alexander, J. Campbell Champion, Chittenden, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Elliot, Ely, Gardener, Harris, R. S. Jackson, Jenkins, Key, Lewis, Livemore, Masters, Milner, Moseley, Mumford, Pitkin, Quincy, Russell, Sloan, Sturges, Swart, Taggart, Tallmadge, Thompson, Trigg, Upaham, Van Cortlandt, Van Horn, Van Rensselaer, N. Wilson—36.
The question was then taken on the whole resolution by Yeas and Nays as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. Lemuel J. Alston, W. Alston, junr. Ezekiel Bacon, David Bard, Joseph Barker, Burwell Basset, William W. Bibb, William Blackledge, John Blake, jun. Thomas Blount, Adam Boyd, John Boyle, Robert Brown, W. A. Burwell, William Butler, Joseph Calhoun, George W. Campbell, Matthew Clay, John Clopton, Richard Cutts, John Dawson, Joseph Desha, Daniel M. Durell, John W. Eppes, William Findley, Jas. Fisk, Meshaab Franklin, Francis Gardner, Thomas Gholson, junr. Petersen Goodwyn, Edwin Gray, Isaiah L. Green, John Heister, William Helms, James Holland, D. Holmes, Benjamin Howard, Reuben Humphreys, Daniel Isley, John G. Jackson, Richard M. Johnson, Walter Jones, Thomas Kenan, William Kirkpatrick, John Lambert, John Love, Nathaniel Macon, Robert Marion, William McCree, John Montgomery, Nicholas R. Moore, Thomas Moore, Jer. Morrow, John Morrow, Roger Nelson, Thomas Newbold, Thomas Newton, Wilson C. Nicholas, J. Porter, J. Rea, (P.) J. Rhea, (T.) J. Richards, M. Richards, Benj. Say, Ebenezer Seaver, Sam. Shaw, Dennis Smelt, John Smilie, J. K. Smith, John Smith, H. Southard, R. Stanford, Clem. Storer, John Taylor, G. M. Troup, James I. Van Allen, Archibald Van Horn, Daniel C. Verplanck, Jesse Wharton, Robt. Whitehill, same Wilbour, D. R. Williams, Alex. Wilson, Richard Winn—88.
NAYS—Messrs. Even Alexander, John Campbell, Epaphroditus Champion, Mart. Chittenden, John Culpepper, Samuel W. Dana, John Davenport, junr. James Elliot, William Ely, Barnet Gardener, John Harris, Richard Jackson, Robert Jenkins, James Kelly, Phillip B. Key, Joseph Lewis, junr. Matthew Lyon, Josiah Masters, William Milner, Jonathan O. Moseley, Timothy Pitkin, junr. Josiah Quincy, John Russell, James Sloan, Lewis B. Sturges, Samuel Taggart, Benjamin Tallmadge, Jabez Upham, Philip Van Cortlandt, Killian K. Van Rensselaer—20.
Mr. Durell moved to adjourn—negatived—Ayes 28.
The question then being on the following resolution:
“Resolved, That measures ought to be immediately taken for placing the country in a more complete state of defence.”
Mr. Dana observed, that as this would probably be a nearly unanimous vote, he wished the full sense of the House to be expressed on it, and therefore called for the yeas and nays, which the house agreed to take.
But upon the suggestion of several members the taking them was dispensed with by common consent.
And the question being put on the resolution, the House replied “Aye” with an undivided voice. And when it was required that any one who objected should answer “No”—No reply was made.
The non-intercourse resolution was referred to the committee who reported it, with instructions to bring in a bill or bills in pursuance of it.
The last resolution was referred to the committee on our military and naval establishments;
And then the House adjourned.
Much desultory debate took place on the points of order, &c. in this day's business; which not being material to the main question, is not noticed.
MONDAY, Dec. 19.
A bill from the Senate authorizing the President of the United States to arm, man and fit out for service, all the public ships of war, vessels and gun-boats of the United States was twice read and referred to the committee of the whole, to whom was referred the report of the committee on our military and naval establishments.
On motion of Mr. Lewis, a memorial of the city council of Washington, presented at the last session, was referred to the committee on the district of Columbia.
Mr. Dana presented a letter from the Society of United Brethren for propagating the gospel, accompanying a donation of their works, which was read.
On motion of Mr. Marion, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Mr. Trigg in the Chair, on the bill from the Senate further to amend the judicial system of the U. States. After some discussion the committee rose and was refused leave to sit again; and on motion of Mr. Gholson, the bill was re-committed to a select committee for the purpose of amending its details.
MIRANDA'S EXPEDITION.
Mr. Love called for the order of the day on the report of the committee on the subject of the 36 persons confined in Carthagena, South-America. The following is the resolution reported by the committee:
Resolved, That the President of the U. States be requested to adopt the most immediate and effectual means in his power, to obtain from the Vice-Roy of Grenada, in S. America, or other proper authority, the liberation of thirty-six American citizens, condemned on a charge of piracy, and now held in slavery in the vaults of St. Clara, in Carthagena, and that the sum of 1000 dollars be appropriated to that purpose.
Mr. D. R. Williams moved to postpone the consideration of the subject indefinitely. Negatived, 50 to 35.
The House then went into a committee of the whole on the subject, Mr. Trigg in the Chair, 39 to 33.
Mr. Love moved to amend the resolution by striking out the words in Italie, and inserting “authorized to request.” Carried, Ayes 54.
Those gentlemen who supported this resolution in the debate were, Messrs. Love, Lyon, Bacon, Nelson, Sloan and Wilbour. Those who opposed it were, Messrs. D. R. Williams, Taylor, Smilie, Macon and Southard.
The gentlemen who opposed the resolution, amongst other objections, contended that an agreement to the resolution would involve the government in difficulty without answering any good purpose; that it would in fact be aiding the attempt of a certain party to prove that the general government had some connexion with this expedition origi-
nally, which it certainly had not; that the facts set forth in the petition were wholly unsupported by evidence; that these persons had engaged themselves in a foreign service; that they had become weary of the privileges of free-men, and had entered into a hostile expedition against a foreign country, and in so doing had been taken, condemned for piracy and immured as a punishment for that offence; that the British government, having been at the bottom of this business, was the proper power to release these persons, and indeed had applied to the Spanish Commander for the purpose; that even were the United States bound by the laws of justice or humanity to intercede for these persons, they knew not to whom to make application, and would probably meet with a refusal, perhaps a rude one, if any judgment could be formed from the present situation of our affairs with Spain; that if gentlemen wished for objects, on which to exercise their humanity, they might find them in the late-routed backs of our impressed seamen, without extending it to criminals. In reply to an observation of Mr. Lyon, that if we did not get these men G. Britain would get them, and employ them to extend her naval force; Mr. Macon replied, if she did she was welcome to keep them; but she was in the habit of supplying her navy with seamen from our vessels without the trouble which the acquisition of these men might occasion her.
In reply to these objections and in support of the resolution, the humanity of the House was strongly appealed to. It was urged that the government could in no wise be involved by an appeal to the generosity of the provincial government; that these men had not wilfully committed piracy, but been deluded under various pretences to join the expedition; that they had joined it under a belief that they were entering into the service of the United States; that, even admitting them to have been indiscreetly led to join the enterprise, knowing it to be destined for a foreign service—yet that they had been sufficiently punished by the penalty they had already undergone; that it was wholly immaterial what inference any persons might draw from the conduct of the U. S. in this respect, as to their concern with the original expedition; that such considerations should have no weight with the House; that if these poor fellows were guilty, they had repented of it; and Mr. Nelson quoted on this point the scriptures, to show that there should be more joy over one sinner that repenteth, than over ninety and nine who have no need of repentance. In reply to an intimation that it was not even ascertained that they were American citizens, Mr. Bacon observed, that one of them had been born in the same town in which he was, and was of a reputable family.
The resolution was negatived by the committee, 49 to 31.
The committee rose and reported the resolution, which report the House agreed now to consider, Ayes 57.
Mr. Lyon moved to adjourn. Ayes 34.
Mr. Fisk called for the Yeas and Nays on concurrence with the committee.
Mr. Gardner moved to adjourn. Ayes 34.
The question of concurrence with the committee in their disagreement to the resolution was decided by Yeas and Nays as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Basset, Bibb, Blackledge, Blount, Boyd, Brown, Butler, Calhoun, Clay, Desha, Eppes, Findley, Gholson, Goodwyn, Heister, Helms, Holland, Holmes, Howard, Jones, Macon, Marion, D. Montgomery, N. R. Moore, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, J. Morrow, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Porter, Rea, (P.) Rhea, (T.) J. Richards, M. Richards, Seaver, Shaw, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, S. Smith, Southard, Taylor, Whitehill, D. R. Williams, A. Wilson and Winn—50.
NAYS—Messrs. Bacon, Bibb, Blake, Chittenden, Clopton, Culpepper, Elliot, Fisk, Gardner, Green, Harris, Humphreys, Isley, R. S. Jackson, Jenkins, Kirkpatrick, Love, Lyon, Masters, McCree, Milner, J. Montgomery, Mumford, Pitkin, Riker, Russell, Say, Sloan, Sturges, Trigg, Upaham, Van Allen, Van Horn, Wilbour, and Winn—34.
And the House adjourned at a quarter past four.
TUESDAY, Nov. 20.
Mr. Joseph Story, elected from Massachusetts, vice J. Crowninshield deceased, appeared and took his seat.
Mr. Holland presented a memorial from sundry inhabitants of the county of Lincoln, N. C. praying for the repeal of the embargo; which was referred to the committee of the whole on Mr. Chittenden's resolution.
Mr. Lewis presented the memorial of the President and Directors of the Bank of Alexandria, praying an extension of their charter; which was referred to the committee on the district of Columbia.
Mr. Morrow presented the petition of the commissioners of the Land Office of the U. S. at Detroit, praying further compensation; which was referred to the committee of Public Lands.
TERRITORIAL COURTS.
Mr. Pointdexter after a few prefatory remarks, offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That the select committee to whom was referred a bill from the Senate “Further to amend the judicial system of the U. S.” be instructed to enquire into the expediency of extending jurisdiction to the superior courts of the several territories of the U. S. in which a district court has not been established, for the trial of treason and other offences committed against the laws of the U. S. within the limits of the said territories, and to empower said courts to pronounce such judgment, or sentence on conviction of the offender or offenders, as the law directs.
Mr. Dana said, as it was probable that the situation of the revenue might require the consideration of the house during this session, it would be acceptable to the members of the House to have as ample information on the subject as could be conveniently obtained. From this and other considerations, he was induced to offer the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury be directed to lay before the House a general statement of the sums annually received at the Treasury of the U. S. since the commencement of the proceedings under the constitution—exhibiting distinctly the proceeds of the customs, internal revenue, loans and miscellaneous receipts, for each year, with the amount of the respective branches of the customs and the charges thereon.
REVENUE.
Mr. Stanford moved the following resolution, observing that he thought it important at this particular juncture in our affairs, that some provision should be made to establish a communication by rail between the seat of the general and state governments as direct, certain and expeditious as possible. This not being the case at present,
sent, his object was to instruct the proper committee to make the necessary inquiry.
Resolved, That the committee on post-offices and post-roads be instructed to enquire into the expediency of establishing a mail stage from Fayetteville in N. C. to Cheras court house, Camden, Columbia, Augusta and Millidgeville in Georgia, and that they report by bill or otherwise.
Mr. Alexander reported a bill prescribing the mode of proving judgments and decrees of courts of one state in another state. Twice read and committed to a committee of the whole.
The engrossed bill authorizing the payment of certain pensions by the Secretary of War at the seat of government, was read the third time and passed.
INVALID CORPS.
Mr. Nelson reported a bill for the relief of the infirm, disabled and superannuated officers and soldiers of the revolutionary army and of the present army of the U. S. which was twice read and referred to a committee of the whole.
EMBARGO.
Mr. Chittenden called for the order of the day on the resolution offered by him for the repeal of the embargo; and the question “will the House now resolve itself into a committee of the whole on the resolution?” Was decided as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. Alexander, Basset, Blount, Boyle, J. Campbell, Chittenden, Culpepper, Dana, Davenport, Elliot, Ely, Eppes, Gardener, Gaudner, Gray, Harris, Helms, Holmes, Isley, R. Jackson, Jenkins, Kelly, Kirkpatrick, Lambert, Livermore, Macon, Marion, Milner, N. R. Moore, John Morrow, Moseley, Pitkin, Quincy, Rhea (P.) J. Richards, Russell, Sloan, S. Smith, Stanford, Sturges, Taggart, Tallmadge, Taylor, Trigg, Upham, Van Horn, Verplanck, Wharton, D. R. Williams—49.
NAY—Messrs. L. J. Alston, W. Alston, Bacon, Bard, Barker, Bibb, Blake, Boyd, Brown, Butler, Calhoun, G. W. Campbell, Clay, Clopton, Cook, Cutts, Dawson, Deane, Durell, Findley, Franklin, Gholson, Goodwyn, Green, Heister, Holland, Howard, Humphreys, Johnson, Kenan, Love, McCree, D. Montgomery, J. Montgomery, T. Moore, Jer. Morrow, Mumford, Nelson, Newbold, Newton, Nicholas, Porter, Pugh, Rea, M. Richards, Riker, Sawyer, Say, Seaver, Shaw, Smelt, Smilie, J. K. Smith, John Smith, Southard, Storer, Story, Swart, Thompson, Troup, Whitehill, Wilbour, A. Wilson, N. Wilson, Winn—64.
REVENUE BONDS.

WEST-INDIES.
KINGSTON, Nov. 25.
At the Janet, Brimsdown, from London, with dry goods, and the Spanish ship Santa Erazina del Cachem, from Malaga, with wine, raisins, &c. both for Havana, taken by the French privateers Jean Bart, and Du Gay Trouin, of La Grange, and retaken by the Royal Navy and Port Royal yesterday. They had been plundered of part of their cargoes by the privateers.
By these vessels we have accounts of the capture of Samana, that famous rendezvous for a horde of pirates, by the frigates La France, Aurora, and Daedalus, and Rein Deer and Pert Briggs. On the 10th current, these vessels anchored off the town, when the alarm was soon spread, & at the sight of such superior force, the principal part of the inhabitants, consisting of more than 2000 men, women and children, sought refuge on board the Exchange privateer, of 14 guns and 100 men, and another privateer in the harbor, expecting to escape to St. Domingo with the assistance of their sweeps. But 4 British boats well manned, were dispatched, which soon captured them. In the mean time, other boats proceeded on shore to storm the fort, which was taken after a slight resistance. We however regret that Capt. Doer of the Aurora, was dangerously wounded in the hip by a musket ball, while leading on the party. Four vessels, laden with coffee, fell into the captors' hands. A vessel was shortly afterwards dispatched to Porto Rico, with the intelligence, and requesting a sufficient number of troops to be sent from thence to garrison the place.
The French national ship, Colibri, of 8 guns and 66 men, and the Flore de la Mer, were sent in yesterday by the Polyhedrus of sixty-four guns.
By the above vessel, as well as by the Hebe, we learn that the death of Gen. FERRAND is correct. It appears that on the first attempt of the Spaniards to gain possession of the City of St. Domingo, the general did not command the troops himself, but on the following day, when he learned a large body of Spaniards from Porto Rico had landed, and things began to wear an alarming appearance, he marched out at the head of a very fine corps, on whom he placed the most implicit confidence; but scarcely had he proceeded when the major part of them, who were Spaniards, and who were exasperated at the outrages of the French against their country, deserted his ranks, and joined their countrymen. Enraged to see himself thus abandoned by his only hopes, Gen. Ferrand terminated his existence by blowing his own brains out with a pistol. Still however, they were unable to gain possession of the city, but retired to a strong position to wait for reinforcements; when the attack was to be renewed.
An English squadron has taken Samana, in the Island of Santo Domingo, and afterwards delivered it to the Spaniards. This news is authentic, as it is a corroboration of a communication of the 20th of this month from Mr. Robert Bevan, commander of the English frigate Garland, to capt. Delgado. Havana Aurora, Nov. 26.
DOMESTIC.
PORTLAND, Dec. 12.
The district court is now sitting in this town and there is much business to be acted upon; consisting principally of suits commenced for alleged evasions of the embargo laws. There has been one trial of this kind. Some time in August, a sloop, owned by a Mr. Emmons, of Georgetown, went to sea, having on board a quantity of fish and flour, and has not been heard of since. The collector of Bath, in behalf of the U. States brought an action against Mr. E. to recover double the value of the vessel and cargo for a violation of the embargo. But it did not appear that Mr. Emmons either knew or consented to the vessel's departure; and the jury very justly found a verdict in favor of the defendant.
NEW-YORK, Dec. 15.
INTERESTING NARRATIVE.
This morning arrived the schooner Experiment, capt. Fitch, in 40 days from the Island of Trinidad in the South sea. This vessel was dispatched by government, to bring home, from the uninhabited Island of Trinidad, six unfortunate men, who were unavoidably left there by the ship Leonidas, a whaler, belonging to New London. From the men who were left on the Island we have been favored with the following interesting account of every thing which occurred from the time they left the Leonidas:
May 5, about 6 A. M. made the Island, bearing E. S. E. distance 3 leagues; ran down and set two boats ashore with the chief and second mates; landed and left the boat steersman to stay by the boat outside the surf, while the rest of the people went to get some refreshment. The chief mate being on the Island with one boat, and the surf running so high that he could not get off, ordered the other boat to go on board the ship, which lay off the island all night. May 6, sent five men to bring off those who were on the Island; when they were within one mile of the Island, it came on so thick and squally we could not see the ship. We then went ashore, and shortly after it cleared up so that we could discern the ship, when the chief mate took his boat and six men (the boat could carry no more with safety) and went on board. The other boat being at another part of the island, where the surf ran so heavily she could not get off, remained with Joseph Barney, second mate, Isaac English, boat steersman, Jason Rogers, Samuel E. Bull, Stephen Moore, and David Branch, who returned to the south side of the island, and slept there all night. The next day, Branch went upon a mountain, and saw the ship bearing N. E. by E. standing to the N. and W. We now supposed she had left us; and on 8th of May began to build a house, and concluded to stay until some whale ships came out, if no opportunity offered of getting off in some American vessel. We sometimes had thoughts of putting off in our boat, but found we could not procure salt enough to cure our provisions, nor carry a sufficiency of water to last us any time. The first month, we suffered much, scarcely procuring provisions enough in a whole day to serve for a meal. We sometimes caught crabs and fish; at other times furnished ourselves with fowl and pursley. We were afterwards fortunate enough to take some sea turtle, which proved a reasonable relief.
June 8, saw a sail to N. N. E. about six leagues off. We went to the place where we left our boat, in order to make the ship, but found she had been blown about five rods from the place, and stove in such a manner as to frustrate our expedition. We then built a fire which the ship perceiving tacked, and sent a boat to us—she was an English frigate. The officer asked us to go on board, but to no purpose. He said he would land us at Ringeneve. Finding we would not accept of his offer, he gave us sixty cartridges and balls, fifteen biscuits and a tin pot, which relieved us very much.
June 21, saw a sail to the Northward—made a fire, which she saw and hauled in
THE ENQUIRER.
RICHMOND, DECEMBER 24, 1808.
FOR THE ENQUIRER.
The following is an ADDRESS from a respectable portion of the citizens of Albemarle, Orange and Louisa counties, who in consequence of the invitation of Hugh Nelson and Charles B. Hunton, Esquires, of Albemarle, associated for the purpose of improving themselves in military tactics, under the auspices and superintendence of those two gentlemen. They have, through the summer and autumn months, assembled once a fortnight under a constitution and laws of their own formation, for the purpose of exercising, and variety of firing, evolution and manœuvring. During the awful crisis to which our country is reduced, this conduct is highly worthy of imitation.
At a meeting of the Albemarle Military Association at William Cooper's Tavern, on Saturday the 16th December, 1808. Ludlow Bramham was called to the Chair, and Thomas W. Maury appointed Secretary. A committee was appointed to draft an Address to Hugh Nelson and Charles B. Hunton, Esquires, expressive of the gratitude which the members of this association feel towards those two gentlemen for their patriotic and disinterested services in its promotion, who submitted the following, which was read and adopted by an unanimous vote. On motion of the Chairman, it was unanimously resolved, that the Editor of the Enquirer be requested to insert the Address and the proceedings of this meeting in his paper. LUDLOW BRAMHAM, Chairman. THOS. W. MAURY, Secretary.
We have for a series of years viewed with the warmest solicitude, the storm which has been lowering over our country. Its progress has been slow, but it has been portentous. The powers of Europe have long viewed with jealousy the encroaching prosperity and importance of our Republic, and are continually throwing obstacles in the way of its advancement. The genius of our country teaches us that the evils of war ought never to be encountered but from absolute necessity, and that it is always better to procure an amicable adjustment of differences, and pacific reparation for wrongs and injuries, (however flagrant and atrocious), than to contend for principles and for right at the point of the sword. But the honor of our country is as dear to us as our own, and we never will consent that it shall be sold or bartered. Pursuant to these convictions, our government has essayed every pacific means of conciliation, has repeatedly made mild but manly appeals to the justice of France and Britain, without the most distant prospect of effect. However painful the alternative, we believe that our last resort must be an appeal to arms. To prepare us for this awful event has been your favorite pursuit. To accomplish this object, you have voluntarily subjected yourselves to a variety of privations. Your industry, zeal and attention in this pursuit are not to be surpassed. In support of this opinion, we urge our own progress and improvement. At the commencement of the operations of this institution, most of us were perfect novices in the art of war; but your instructions and attention have entitled us to the appellation of soldiers. We have been reviewed by hoary veterans of our glorious revolution, from whom our progress and improvement have claimed and received the tribute of praise and admiration. Indeed we hesitate not to believe, that our liberties would be safe, if committed to the care of an army as well disciplined as ourselves. We regret the necessity of sounding our own praise, but justice to ourselves requires it of us. For our country and ourselves we offer you our warmest thanks, for your patriotic and disinterested services, and for ourselves our most cordial wishes for your health, happiness and prosperity.
To the Members of the Albemarle Military Association. GENTLEMEN. Your flattering testimony has been received with feelings of great sensibility. Candor compels the declaration that the partiality of neighbors and friends has led you to place too high a value on our services. The improvement attained by the corps, is to be attributed much less to the exertions of those, whom you honored with the superintendence; than to the patriotic zeal and ardor in so laudable an institution, which animated the members of this association; an active zeal which led them to prepare to aid efficiently in the defence of their country, whose rights had been so wantonly and so flagrantly assailed by the despots of Europe. Such ardent zeal and patriotic enthusiasm could not fail, promptly to render you qualified to aid in defending the Republic; and should the destiny of our country lead to the last direful appeal to arms, I feel the strongest conviction that the members of this institution will demonstrate to the world, that the genuine sons of freedom, inured to military discipline, and the use of arms in their own voluntary associations, are not to be vanquished by the hiring vassals of European tyrants.
If any services have been rendered, they are more than amply requited by your generous acknowledgements. Accept, Gentlemen, my grateful acknowledgements and sincere wishes for your welfare and prosperity. HUGH NELSON. Richmond, December 17th, 1808. To the Albemarle Military Association. GENTLEMEN, The high consideration in which you hold the services I rendered you, in the attainment of the object of your institution, and the distinguished marks of attention and respect, which you have at all times extended to me, excite in me feelings towards you that I am unwilling to suppress. You have, Gentlemen, in undertaking such a pursuit, given a striking evidence of your patriotism and public zeal, and have presented to your American brethren in arms, as citizen soldiers, an example worthy of imitation, and by your voluntarily bestowing such a portion of time and expence on the objects of your institution, independent of the constraints of the law to that effect, you tender an earnest to your country in the event of war, of the services to be rendered by you, and if kind Providence should avert that calamity for the present, yet if the maxim be true, which we have high authority for, that to a old war, is to be prepared for it; You will not fail in your primary object, which evidently must be, the public good. These considerations will induce you to continue
your laudable pursuit, and let me assure you, that any aid I can afford you at any time, collectively or individually to the full attainment of the objects in view, shall not be withheld, but rather given with heartfelt satisfaction, under an impression of duty I owe to you and my beloved country. I beg you, Gentlemen, to accept of my unfeigned respects and ardent wish, that health, happiness and prosperity may be your terrestrial portion, and may you merit a blissful hereafter. CHAS. B. HUNTON. December 14, 1808. EXTRACTS FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES. WEDNESDAY, December 17. The committee of Privileges and Elections made a report in the case of a contested election between Richard E. Parker and Peter P. Cox of Westmoreland; which is too voluminous for insertion in our paper. It occupies more than three entire pages of the Journal. The conclusion of the report is in the following words: Resolved also, as the opinion of your committee, that the votes of Trussell Hall, Robert Bailey, Jeremiah Smith, Presley Cox, Foushee Garner, Robert Jeffries, Robert Anthony, Daniel Mealy, William Courtney, Bushrod Washington, Daniel Moxley, John Smith, George Carey, Francis Self, Richard Wright, Burgess Longworth, Rolliam Hudson, Thomas Cox, Stewart Purcell, William Longworth, George B. Smith, Frederick Alverson, Richard Straughan, Thomas Rignaud, William Askins, Thomas Douglass, Thomas Fisher, John Hardwick, Aaron Hardwick, Charles Scott, John Baily, Samuel Lewis, John Crabb, Charles R. Thompson, William Cole and James M. Crusk, ought to be expunged from the poll of Peter P. Cox, because they are illegal votes. The poll of P. P. Cox stood thus, at the close of the Election. Deduct illegal votes 36. Good votes, 100. Resolved also as the opinion of this committee, that the votes of William Y. Sturman, John R. McNeale, Thomas Dolesman, Samuel Rust, James Robinson, Wesley Porter, Thomas Neale, Thomas M. Washington, John Grimson, John T. Courtney, Smith Jenkins, John Weaver, William H. Parker, Elijah Sanford, Vincent Edmonds, Stewart Franklin, John Barrett, George Olliff, James Montgomery, Barnett Good, Newman Jackson, William Settles, Charles Olliff, & John D. Olliff, ought to be expunged from the poll of Richard E. Parker, because they are illegal votes. The poll of Richard E. Parker stood thus, at the close of the Election. Deduct illegal votes, 24. Good votes, 107. Resolved therefore, as the opinion of your committee, that the poll ought to stand thus; for Peter P. Cox, one hundred—for Richard E. Parker, one hundred and seven—and that Richard E. Parker was duly elected to represent the county of Westmoreland, in this present General Assembly; Resolved also as the opinion of your committee, that the petition of Richard E. Parker, complaining of the undue election of Peter P. Cox, returned to serve as a delegate from the county of Westmoreland, in this present General Assembly, is reasonable. The said resolutions being twice read, were agreed to by the House. THURSDAY, Dec. 15. An engrossed bill "Allowing persons arraigned of misdemeanors in certain cases the right of challenge," was read a third time; Resolved, That the bill do pass, and that the title be, "An act allowing persons arraigned of misdemeanors in certain cases the right of challenge." Ordered, that the clerk carry the said bill to the Senate and desire their concurrence. A bill "For dividing the county of Harrison;" and A bill "For dividing the county of Kanawha, and for other purposes," were severally read a second time, and on motion, ordered, to be committed to the committee of Propositions and Grievances. The Speaker laid before the House, a letter from the Governor, covering a statement of the docket of the Court of appeals for the last two years. On motion, Ordered, That the said statement be referred to the committee to which is referred the subject of the judiciary establishment. The Speaker laid before the House a letter from the Auditor of Public Accounts, covering a statement of the accounts, &c. of the Manufactory of Arms which have been audited since its establishment. On motion, Ordered, That the said letter & enclosure be referred to the committee to which is referred the subject of the manufactory of arms. Mr. Sheffey from the committee for Courts of Justice, made the following report: The committee for Courts of Justice, have according to order, had under their consideration the petition of Nancy Bayne to them referred, & have agreed upon a report and come to a resolution thereupon, as follows: It appears to your committee, that the petitioner is the daughter of honest and respectable parents, by whom she was educated in principle of religion and virtue, and that by a course of virtuous and correct conduct, she had acquired the character of a woman of unsullied reputation;—that some time during the last year she was addressed by Griffin Bayne, with whom about the month of February last she was united in matrimony, being then about the age of sixteen years.—That this marriage took place in the house of her father, who finding that the said Griffin Bayne had engaged the affections of the petitioner, at length yielded a reluctant assent to their union—that on the first night of their marriage, the said Griffin Bayne accused her of want of chastity, charging her with an abortion, & even alleging that she had not then recovered of it—that these charges have been at various times repeated, and that the said Griffin Bayne has accused her of criminal intercourse with different persons since their intermarriage, and amongst others with his own brother—that he persisted in this course of conduct towards her, and in other respects treated her in the most cruel and unfeeling manner, till at length he drove her off, and she was compelled to seek an asylum in her father's house, where she still continues, and that since their separation he has contrived to circulate the same calumnies against her. It further appears to your committee, that there is good reason to believe that since their
separation he has contracted the venereal disease, and trusting that her affection for him which he once knew to be ardent, still continued, sought an opportunity to communicate it to her. It further appears to your committee, that the said Griffin Bayne is a man of dissolute character—that previous to his intermarriage, he entertained and expressed such brutal opinions of the chastity of the female sex, as probably predisposed him to make such accusations against his wife. It further appears to your committee, from the information in writing of many respectable neighbors of the parties, that they still consider the character of the petitioner as a chaste and virtuous woman, to be unexceptionable, notwithstanding the attempts of her husband to injure it. Your committee are therefore of opinion, that the charges made by the said Griffin Bayne against the petitioner, are unsupported and unfounded—that the indirect admission extorted from her by the said Griffin Bayne, under a promise that it would restore her to his confidence and affection, ought not to diminish her claims upon the Legislature for redress. Resolved, therefore, as the opinion of this Committee, that the petition of the said Nancy Bayne, praying that an act may pass divorcing her from her said husband is reasonable. The said resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same, by striking out at the end thereof the words "is reasonable," and inserting in lieu of them, the words "be rejected," and the question being put on the proposed amendment, it passed in the negative. On motion of Mr. Robertson (of Amelia,) seconded by Mr. Orey, Ordered, that the ayes and noes on the said question be inserted in the Journal—Ayes 21, Noes 159. The question being then put on the resolution as reported, it passed in the affirmative. Mr. Sheffey, from the committee for Courts of Justice, made the following report: The committee for Courts of Justice have, according to order, had under their consideration the memorial of the trustees or vestry of Lynchham parish in the county of Princess Ann, to them referred, and have come to the following resolution thereupon: Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the said memorial, praying that the act relative to the trustees of the said parish, may be explained and amended, is reasonable. A motion was made for leave to bring in a bill "For reducing the salaries of the officers of this commonwealth, including the members of the General Assembly and their officers;" and the question being put on the said motion, it passed in the negative. On motion of Mr. Garland, seconded by Mr. Hull, Ordered, that the ayes and noes on the said question be inserted in the Journal—Ayes 14, Noes 140. A petition was presented and read from a number of the inhabitants of Accomack county, praying the Legislature to adopt means for calling a convention to revise the constitution of this state. On motion, Ordered, That the said petition be referred to a committee of the whole house on the state of the commonwealth. A petition was presented and read from Benjamin Winslow, praying relief from a judgment obtained against him by the commonwealth, part of which remains yet unsatisfied; Also a petition from Anne Alricks, of the county of Loudoun, praying to be divorced from her husband West Alricks; Also a petition of sundry inhabitants of Monongalia county, stating the inconveniences arising to the community from the ignorance of sundry persons who attempt the practice of medicine, and praying the establishment of some tribunal, by which persons intending to practice physic may be examined, & from which they shall receive a licence for that purpose. Referred to the committee for courts of justice. A petition was received from Elizabeth Morris, of Greenbrier county, on the subject of being permitted to bring certain slaves into this commonwealth, and referred to the committee appointed to take into consideration the law prohibiting slaves to be brought into this commonwealth. At the close of the poll held for Caroline county, on Monday last, for Representatives to the General Assembly, for the said county—the votes stood thus: Wm. Hoomes, 238 Wm. Jones, 225 Henry C. Coleman, 128 Wm. Dickenson, 47 Several original articles are unavoidably postponed—to make way for the proceedings of Congress and other articles. We conclude Mr. Burwell's Speech in this day's paper. It is recommended to the careful attention of our readers. We have seen no Speech, delivered during the session, that displays more sound sense, & more practical wisdom. If we are not much mistaken, this gentleman is destined to be one of the most useful, enlightened, and virtuous statesman in this country. As the Debates in both houses of Congress, have been spun out to an immense length, it would but fatigue the attention of the public to lay the whole mass before them. We shall therefore make such selections of the Speeches, in both Houses, as are most instructive or interesting to our circle of readers. * * * Messrs. Graham and McPherson, both Preachers of the Gospel, (lately from Scotland) will preach in the Baptist Meeting-House, on Sunday, the Lord's day, at half past 11.
THE LAST DAY!!!
Mr. Bishop's exhibition of WAX-WORK will positively close this Evening. Dec. 24
HAT MANUFACTORY.—GILBERT & GRAVEN, being about to establish a HAT MANUFACTORY in the city of Richmond, near the Bridge, with a determined resolution to do justice to those who may favor them with their custom.—They flatter themselves that their knowledge and long experience in their business, together with the punctuality, neatness and dispatch with which their work will be executed, will justify their claim to public patronage; they inform the public that they now have a large quantity of the best country made Wool Hats, and a considerable assortment of Fine Hats. Their Manufactory will be in operation in a few weeks, when they will be able to make their assortment complete, and comply with any orders they may receive. dec. 24. oawdw
P. S. They have a strong new Pennsylvania made WAGGON for sale at $100.
FOR SALE, eighteen SHARES in the Manchester Turnpike. THOS. NORVELL. dec. 24.