The enquirer (Richmond, Va.), 1808-01-21 00:00:00

The Enquirer.
VOL. 4.]
RICHMOND, THURSDAY, JANUARY 21, 1808.
[No. 79.]
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS RITCHIE, OPPOSITE THE POST-OFFICE, AT FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM, PAYABLE IN ADVANCE.
TO PRINTERS—FOR SALE, on very reasonable terms: About 500 wt. of BURGEONS, and 300 of BREVIER: The same Type on which the ENQUIRER was lately printed.
PHILADELPHIA GRAND LOTTERY—Highest Prize 10,000 dollars. Authorised by an act of the Legislature of Pennsylvania, for the encouragement of USEFUL ARTS.
CASH PRIZES. Table listing prizes from 1,000 to 10,000 dollars and their respective counts.
Subject to a deduction of fifteen per cent. The most valuable Cash Prizes from 200 dollars and upwards, to be determined as follows: First drawn number on the first ten days' drawings, each $200...
THE PRICE of Tickets will advance as the drawing progresses. Note—The purchaser or holder of every ticket, will be entitled to a valuable patent right for manufactures of Sago, Starch, and Hair-Powder, from Potatoes...
KIRBY, DRAKE & TAYLOR—Have just received by the late arrivals from London & Liverpool, in addition to their Fall Assortment, 1 bale London superfine Cloths and Cassimeres, 20 do. Kendal Cottons, 2 do. Carpets and Carpeting, 4 boxes 4-4 Irish Linen, 1 do. Diapers, Lawn and Sheeting.
PUBLIC VENDUE—By virtue of a deed of trust from Wm. Hall to the subscribers, of sundry property, for the purpose of securing the payment of a debt due William Shanks (as will fully appear by referring to said deed, dated 5th Dec. 1806, and recorded at the Innington court of Petersburg, 6th April, 1807) will be sold without reserve, for ready money, on Thursday the 4th February next, the sloop ALEXANDRIA, burthen between 30 and 40 tons, with all her tackle and apparel, as she now lays at Rocketts.
TO THE PUBLIC—The subscribers beg leave to announce to the public that the whole line of Stages from Petersburg to Virginia, to Charlottesville in South Carolina, is now in complete order; so that persons inclined to adopt that method of travelling (most of whom have been heretofore deterred on account of part of the line having been out of repair) will hereafter meet with a certain, specific, & comfortable conveyance—From Petersburg to Fayetteville, the proportion of the line for which the subscribers have contracted, the rate of fare will be seven cents per mile, with a privilege to each passenger of 20 lbs. of baggage. Every 150 lbs. of baggage over that privilege will pay as one passenger in proportion; but while every attention will be paid to the baggage, there will be no responsibility for its loss.
TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER, on Thursday the 24th inst. if not, the next fair day, on a tract of 100 acres, at the plantation of the late Nathaniel Wilkinson, on Chickahominy creek, 10 miles from Richmond, containing about 400 acres, more or less, situate in the county of Henrico, near the village of Mechanicsville, containing a large quantity of old timber, Oats, Fodder, Hay, &c., some household and kitchen furniture, and farming utensils.
CASH SALES—To be sold, for ready money, in pursuance of a deed of trust from David Ross, esq., bearing date on the 31st day of July, 1806, & recorded in the general court, in order to raise the sum of $50,000 and upwards, and the charges and expenses of sale—Those well known MILLS with the appurtenances, in the city of Richmond, called the Columbian Mills. Two undivided third parts of the Deep Run Coal Pits, in the county of Henrico, containing about 1750 acres, more or less. Two undivided third parts of the Falling-Creek Coal Pits, in the county of Chesterfield, containing about one hundred acres. Two undivided third parts of the Dover Coal Pits, in the county of Goochland, containing about ninety acres, which three several tracts of Coal Land were held in partnership between the said David Ross, and James Currie, deceased.
WILLIAM TEMPLE, has received by the ship Herschel from Liverpool, and Calpe from London, an extensive supply of MERCHANDIZE, suitable to the present and approaching season, which he will sell low.
ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS REWARD—Runaway about the 1st instant from the service of Mr. William Rawleigh (to whom he was hired) a black man named JACKSON, a house carpenter by profession, of thin consumptive appearance, about forty years of age, five feet eight or nine inches high. From circumstances attending his employment, it is believed he intends making his way to one of the eastern states and has been provided with false papers of freedom. If taken within the state and delivered me here or secured that I get him, I will give fifty dollars, or if taken out of the state, one hundred dollars.
JOHNSON and REAT, Jewellers & Silversmiths, Richmond, a few doors above the Bell-Tavern, and just opposite Col. Mayn'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, viz. An elegant assortment of pearl and topaz Bracelets, Pins, Finger Rings and Bracelets, plain gold do. of nearly all patterns, Miniature Settings, mourning and fancy Lockets, Ear Rings, mourning and fancy, coral, coral, 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, Dinks, Pen Knives and Scissors; a general assortment of silver Spoons and Ladles, Scissor Chains, Thimbles, Pencil Cases, Pens, Spectacles, Tooth Picks, Ink Stands, Snuff boxes and Tweezers, Morocco Pocket Books and Thread Cases: Also, silver and plated Table Ware, consisting of Coffee, Tea and Milk Pots, Bread Baskets, Sugar Dishes, Castors, 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.
JOHN ALCOCK, informs his friends and the public at large, that he has just received, and is now opening, next door to Messrs. Prosser & Moncure's vendue, a large assortment of Merchandise, consisting of the following articles:—Carpenters and Joiners Tools, iron and steel Locks and Hinges, for house work and cabinet ware. I also carry on my Cabinet Manufactory, as usual, adjoining the fire insurance office, and have on hand three thousand dollars worth of furniture, finished in the best workman-like manner and in the newest fashion. Also, Windsor Chairs. I will sell all of the above goods, very low for cash, or good paper at a short date.
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 GROCERIES—among which are Antigua Rum, Soap, Candles, Holland Gin, Rice, Spanish Indigo, 4th pf. Cognac Brandy, Northern Cheese, Raspberry ditto, Best Spanish Segars, London particular Madeira, Hibbert's Porter and Stout, Port, Sherry & Teneriffe ditto, Brown Stout, 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, Imperial, Raisins, Almonds, Hyson, Pepper, Ginger, Young Hyson & } Teas, Queens-Ware, &c. &c. Soucbing, } &c. Which they will dispose of on liberal terms for cash, country produce, or on the usual credit to punctual customers.
NOTICE!!—The subscriber proposes leaving this City in the course of a few days, has determined to dispose of the whole or any part of his stock now remaining on hand at a very reduced price; which consists of a large and superb assortment of Mahogany Furniture, Mattresses of all kinds and sizes, Paper-hangings, Window Blinds, Fringes, Tassels, Cords, &c. &c. N. B. Those who feel inclined to purchase, will apply opposite the City Tavern, on the main street.
ENGLISH KID SHOES—Just received and for sale by Dodge & Cobb, 3 trunks Ladies' & Misses' white, black, figured and lace pattern KID SHOES, of Jackson's manufacture, London, & also, Gentlemen's best superfine London Hats.
FOR SALE—The subscriber is desirous of selling his PROPERTY in this City. The purchaser will be accommodated with time if required, on giving satisfactory security.
FOR SALE, 121,000 acres of LAND in Kenawha county, in the forks of Great Sandy river: 24,000 do. in Tazewell county, on the waters of Clinch river: 20,000 do. in the county of Wythe, on Reed and Peak creeks: 1,000 do. in Randolph county, on the waters of Cheat river: Also, 30,000 acres of Virginia Land Warrants. The above will be sold very low, and great accommodation given in the payments. To RENT, a Brick House, on Shockoe-Hill, in a good neighborhood, and possessing every accommodation for a family.
TO BE SOLD at Mr. Brooks's Tavern, on Thursday the 21st instant, one Horse and CHAIR: Also, sundry other articles, the property of Francis Rabineau, dec'd. Cash will be required.
NOTICE—All persons indebted to the late Alexander Banks, dec'd. of Manchester, are hereby requested to come forward and discharge their accounts as speedily as possible: and those persons having claims against the estate will bring in their claims properly authenticated, when provision will be made for their discharge.
PUBLIC SALE—On Saturday the 23rd day of January ensuing, will be sold, at the plantation of the late Alexander Banks of Manchester, the entire stock of Cattle, Corn, Fodder, Hay, Plantation Utensils, &c. Terms of sale—Cash for all sums under 20 dollars, over twenty dollars, six months credit, the purchaser giving negotiable notes with approved endorser, payable at the Bank of Virginia.
DISSOLUTION OF CO-PARTNERSHIP—The Co-partnership of Taylor & Brown was by mutual consent, dissolved the 31st December last. All persons having claims against the concern will apply for settlement to James Brown, Jun. who is authorised to receive all monies due therefor.
THE AUCTION & COMMISSION BUSINESS will in future be carried on by the Subscriber in the tenement heretofore occupied by Taylor & Brown, which is well calculated for the reception of a large quantity of goods. He has on hand for sale, both for cash and on a credit, a large assortment of GROCERIES: Amongst which are, 5 years old ANTIGUA RUM, 15 months old } Brown and Loaf Sugar by the bbl. and barrel, Imperial, Rason and Young Hyson Teas, Coffee, Cognac Brandy, Pennsylvania Whiskey, Salt in sacks, 9 years old Brazil Wine in hds. & casks, First quality Madeira in pipes, hds. & q. casks, Sherry Wine, &c. &c. &c. And a quantity of Dry Goods suitable for the season.
FEMALE EDUCATION will be continued at Mount-air, the ensuing year, under the direction of Miss Terrell; who will teach Reading, Writing, Arithmetic, English Grammar and Geography. The school will be opened on Monday the 18th January. Terms—For Board and Tuition, each finding her own bedding, $100 per annum, paid quarterly in advance; and as provisions will be made in due time for the reception of boarders, no deduction can be made for entering a boarder after a part of the first quarter has elapsed nor for the necessary vacations.
JUST RECEIVED, a general assortment of DUTCH BOLLING CLOTHS, of superior quality—For sale by J. DARMSDATT.
MORE CHEAP GOODS—JOHN KING, again respectfully informs his customers & the public, that he has just received, by the late arrivals from Philadelphia and New-York, a general assortment of Fashionable and Seasonable GOODS, which are now opening at his Store, the second door below the Eagle-Tavern; where they may be had upon as good terms, for cash, as at any other place in the City.
FRESH TEAS—The subscriber has still on hand a few chests and boxes fresh Imperial and Young Hyson Teas: Also, a few pieces best Company Nankeen, with an assortment of Satins, silks, Gauzes and Silks. Having laid in the above articles himself, in Canton, he can vouch for the quality and can sell them very cheap.
I WISH to purchase twelve RANKY MULES BATTHURST RANDOLPH. Amelia, Jan. 14.
TO RENT—Four Commodious TENEMENTS, near the Armory—FOR HIRE, Two Sawyers. E. J. HARVIE.
THE subscriber has opened an Auction & Commission Store in the house opposite Col. Gamble's, on the cross-street, where he will receive and dispose of Goods either at public or private sale. He has now on hand, at Private Sale, prime Muscovado Sugars in hds and barrels, Loaf Sugar, Coffee, Molasses, Holland Gin, French Brandy and Virginia Wine; Pine Apple Cheese, Demerara, and a few cases well assorted hollow Glass Ware.
SALES AT AUCTION—ON Tuesday, the 2nd day of February next, at the V. office of the subscriber, will be sold positively, without reserve, a large and general assortment of DRY GOODS—Imported last fall, consisting of Cloths, Coatings, Rose and Duffel Blankets, Cassimeres, Hosiery, Kerseys, Half Thick, Negro Cottons, Plains, Checks, Irish Linen, Brown Hollands, Drooghedas, Irish Sheetings, Diapers, Hats, Cambricks, Dimity, Wild-bots, Durants, Manchester Stuffs, Carpets, Seine Twine, Tapes, Bobbins, &c. &c. Together with a quantity of HARDWARE, and a great number of other articles too numerous to be specified. Also, 1 pipe and 3 quarter casks old Madeira Wine and 20 cases Porter. Terms of sale—For all purchases under $100 cash, above $100 and under $200, 60 days, and above $200, six months credit. Negotiable notes with approved endorser will be required. The sale will be continued from day to day until the whole quantity is sold.
NOTICE—VALUABLE PROPERTY FOR SALE—By virtue of a deed of trust from Abraham Shepherd to the subscribers, dated the 24th day of May, 1805, and recorded in the general court in the month of June of the same year, to secure the payment of a debt due from the said Shepherd to Robert Riddeh, and another debt due from the said Shepherd to Walter Jenkins and company; will be exposed to sale, by the subscribers or one of them, at auction, on Wednesday the 10th of next month, at the Store-House of the said Shepherd, in the County of Fluvanna, the seven following tracts of LAND, lying in the county of Fluvanna.
No. 1. A tract of 404 acres, more or less, being the same tract of land whereon the said Shepherd now lives, commonly called by him his dwelling house tract. On a part of this tract there is a prior incumbrance to David Ross, it will be sold subject to that incumbrance. No. 2. A tract of 333 acres, more or 34 acres, more or less, lying on Ballinger's creek; of this tract A. Shepherd bought 207 acres from Wm. Pace, and the residue he bought of Peter Brown. No. 3. A tract of 137 acres, more or less, lying on the Rivanna river, opposite to Barnersburg, being the same tract of land which A. Shepherd bought from Wm. and Jas. Payne. No. 4. A tract of 155 acres, more or less, lying on the south side of the Rivanna river, opposite to J. B. Magruder's mill; being the same tract of land which A. Shepherd bought of Robert Adams. No. 5. A tract of 184 acres, more or less, lying in the fork of Ballinger's creek, being the same tract of land which A. Shepherd bought of David Bullock and Richard Morris. No. 6. A tract of 88 acres, more or less, adjoining No. 5; being the same tract of land which A. Shepherd bought from Samuel Hardisty. No. 7. A tract of 172 1/2 acres, more or less, being the same tract whereon the store house of A. Shepherd stands, and lying on Machunk creek; seven acres and a half of this tract A. Shepherd bought of Peter Bernard, and the residue of the tract he bought from William Ballinger.
Twelve months credit will be allowed for one third of the purchase money—Two years credit for another third, & 3 years credit for the other third: except for that tract No. 3; for that tract, between fifty and sixty pounds must be paid down in cash, to take up a prior incumbrance to a Mr. Timberlake of Fluvanna county; and credit will be allowed for the residue of the purchase money. The purchasers must give bond and approved security for the purchase money, and a deed of trust on the land, to secure the payment. If the purchasers do not comply with the terms of sale when the property is struck out, it will immediately be set up to sale again, and if all the lands are not sold the first day, the sale will be continued from day to day until all is sold.
ADVERTISEMENTS. Will be sold, to the highest bidder, upon 12 months credit, on the 10th day of February, (if fair, if not the next fair day,) at the plantation of the late Col. Wm. Nelson, of King William, two parcels of LAND, one of an hundred acres more or less, adjoining the estate of Col. John Taylor, known by the name of Horn Quarter—the other of 205 acres, adjoining Mr. William West and Mr. James Meaux, which was some years ago bought of a Mr. Harry Shackelford. At the same time and place will be sold for cash, three large imported Still, very little injured, and a large Boiler. The administrator being anxious to pay off every just debt against the said estate, earnestly requests the creditors to bring in their claims authenticated, that arrangements may be made to satisfy them—those indebted will please to settle theirs as soon as possible—the estate not being in a situation for long indulgence.
IN CHANCERY—Middlesex County Court, December, 1807. Mary Calis, Elizabeth Minter, Ann Tomkins, John McLaughlin and Mary Overton his wife, Peter Cosby, George Tiller and Mary his wife, Complainants—Against John Cosby, David Cosby, Wm. Harvey and Judy his wife—And Mrs. and Polly his wife, and Meriwether and Barbara Minot his wife, Defendants. It appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the defendants are not inhabitants of this Commonwealth, not having entered their appearance and given security according to the act of Assembly and the rules of this court; On motion of the complainants, by their counsel, It is ordered, that the defendants appear here at March court next and answer the complaints bill, that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in the Enquirer for two months successively and another posted at the front door of the court-house of this county.
FOR SALE—By virtue of a deed of trust, executed to the subscriber by Goodman Barkdale, to secure the payment of a debt to William Galt, will be exposed to sale, at public auction, for ready money, on Saturday the 30th this present month (January) at Cloudous Buster's plantation, whereon Christian W. Baker now resides, a tract of LAND lying in the county of Albemarle, containing one hundred and twelve acres and a half, being the same land said Goodman Barkdale purchased of Douglas Barkdale. Also, two negro Girls, Maria and Morning, or so much of the aforesaid property as will be sufficient to discharge the debt, interest, and cost aforesaid; acting as trustee for others, will only convey the title vested in me as such.
DAVID ANDERSON, Trustee. Milton, January 7.
I TAKE this method of informing my distant clients, that I have relinquished the practice of LAW in the county courts of Northumberland and Lancaster, and the district court of Northumberland, and have transferred my law-business, except in those cases in which he was opposed to me, to Stokely Townes, esq. of Lancaster county.
PROPOSALS for carrying the MAILS of the United States on the following post-roads, will be received at the General Post-Office until the 14th day of February next.
1. From Fredericksburg by Orange & h. Milton and Charlottesville to New-York once a week. Leave Fredericksburg every Wednesday at 8 p. m. and arrive at Charlottesville on Friday by 6 p. m.—Leave Charlottesville at 7 a. m. and arrive at New-York by 11 a. m.—Leave New-York every Friday at 1 p. m. arrive at Charlottesville by 5 p. m. and arrive at Fredericksburg on Sunday by 10 p. m. 2. From New-York by Wanesboro' to Staunton once a week. Leave Staunton every Friday at 6 a. m. and arrive at New-York by 11 a. m.—Leave New-York every Friday at 1 p. m. and arrive at Staunton by 6 p. m. 3. From Richmond by Goochland & h. Columbia, Rising Sun and Milton to Charlottesville once a week. Leave Richmond every Tuesday at 1 p. m. and arrive at Charlottesville on Thursday by 6 p. m.—Leave Charlottesville every Saturday at 5 a. m. and arrive at Richmond on Monday by 11 a. m. 4. From Lancaster by Elizabethton, Middle-town, Karrington, Carlisle and Shippensburg to Chambersburg three times a week.—Leave Lancaster every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 4 p. m. and arrive at Chambersburg on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday by 10 p. m.—Leave Chambersburg every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 2 a. m. and arrive at Lancaster by 12 p. m. 5. From Chambersburg by McConnellsburg, Bedford, Somerset and Greensburg to Pittsburgh three times a week. Leave Chambersburg every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday at 5 a. m. and arrive at Somerset on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday by 9 p. m. and arrive at Pittsburgh on Thursday, Saturday and Tuesday by 10 a. m.—Return, Leave Pittsburgh every Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday at 2 p. m. and arrive at Chambersburg the next Friday, Monday and Wednesday by 8 p. m.
NOTES. 1. The contracts for the three first mentioned routes are to be in operation on the 1st day of April next, and to continue in force one year. Contracts for the two last routes are to be in operation on the 1st day of July next and continue until the 30th of September 1809. 2. The contractor will be subjected to the usual penalties for delays and failures, which will be specified in the contracts.
GIDEON GRANGER, Post-Master General. General Post-Office, Jan. 7.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MONDAY, January 11.
Mr. Boyle, from the committee on Public lands who were directed to enquire into the expediency of allowing an additional compensation to the commissioners for examining titles to land west of Pearl River, made a report recommending the adoption of a resolution declaring that it is inexpedient to grant an additional compensation to these commissioners; which was ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. Thomas asked and obtained leave of absence for twenty days. Mr. Newton, from the committee of Commerce and Manufactures made a report at length on the memorial of the merchants of Philadelphia, praying a modification of the embargo law, so as to permit vessels cleared out at the time of the passage of that law, to go to sea, notwithstanding the embargo, made a report concluding with the following resolution:
Resolved, That the prayer of the memorialists, merchants and traders of the city of Philadelphia is unreasonable and ought not to be granted. After some observations against immediately deciding on this report by Messrs. Tinker and Lyon, and by Mr. Newton in answer, on the suggestion of Mr. Smilie, the report was referred to a committee of the whole on Wednesday next.
On motion of Mr. Thomas, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the bill for the relief of Oliver Evans (allowing him to renew a patent which was of no effect from an informality in the original patent) and after some time spent in discussion of it, the committee rose and reported the bill, which was ordered to a third reading to-morrow.
Mr. Clapton obtained leave of absence for 15 days.
On motion of Mr. Randolph the House took up for consideration the resolution submitted by him a few days since, relative to the conduct of Brigadier General James Wilkinson.
Mr. Clarke laid upon the table the statement which he had been requested to make by a resolution of the House on Thursday last. The statement is long, accompanied by an affidavit of Mr. Clark to the truth of all the facts therein contained within his own personal knowledge; and to the best of his belief of the truth of what was not within his own knowledge.
Mr. Rowan moved to amend the resolution under consideration by striking out all that part after the word "Resolved," and inserting the following:
Resolved, That a special committee be appointed to enquire into the conduct of Brigadier General James Wilkinson in relation to his having at any time whilst in the service of the United States, corruptly received money from the government of Spain or its agents, and that the said committee have the power to send for persons and papers, and to compel their attendance and production—and that they report the result of their enquiry to this House. The Speaker declared the amendment to be a substantive and of course not in order. Mr. Randolph said he was decidedly of opinion that the gentleman from Kentucky ought to have an opportunity of taking the sense of the House on this motion; he therefore withdrew the resolution under consideration; when Mr. Resan moved the resolution as above stated. On this resolution a debate of some length took place, in which Mr. Randolph supported, and Messrs. Brien, Alston, Smilie, Love and Taylor opposed the motion, when

VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE. HOUSE OF DELEGATES. FRIDAY, Jan. 8.
DEBATE on the Amendment to the Federal Constitution, respecting the Judiciary. Mr. Brokenbrough (of Hanover) said that he considered it his duty to express his opinion on this subject. He knew that a considerable discordance of sentiment prevailed amongst his immediate constituents, and for that reason he was not inclined to give a silent vote.
The other day we were told, (said Mr. B.) by a gentleman from Orange, (Mr. Barbour) that we were attempting to introduce a novel principle into our constitution, and that the effort to place the judiciary in some degree under the control of the Legislature was a daring innovation upon our wise Institutions. The gentleman ought to have recollected that at this very moment, several of our sister states have established by their constitutions the very principle for which we contend, & it is well known that a similar provision has been engraven on the constitution of Great Britain for more than one hundred years. Nor is an attempt to increase the responsibility of the federal judges new, as it regards the U. States. A resolution similar to the one which is before us was proposed three years ago on the floor of the House of Representatives, and although it was not then acted on, it certainly excited considerable discussion out of doors. The novelty of our project therefore is no objection to it.
The same gentleman has cautioned us against interfering with our sacred Constitution as it was by that galaxy of talents which shone in the grand convention at Philadelphia. I admire, Mr. Chairman, the splendor of their talents, but the gentleman from Orange will admit with me that surpassing cloud must now and then have obscured their brilliancy. How else could it have been necessary to introduce so many amendments to their favorite work as have already been adopted? How else could it have happened that one branch of the Legislature was made so little responsible to the states? Or how else could so unwise and dangerous a provision have crept into the system as that which directs the method of electing the President and Vice-President? I mean that clause which requires that the electors shall vote for two persons without designating for whom the vote is given as President, and for whom as Vice-President; a provision which in the eventful period of February 1801 had nearly convulsed the commonwealth to its centre, & had well nigh caused the constitution itself to expire in agony. Let gentlemen be convinced by these facts that the galaxy of talents which appeared in the federal convention, and the still more resplendent constellation in the convention of Virginia were sometimes deficient in lustre.
The worthy gentleman again, and again adjures us not to innovate too hastily. I had supposed, Sir, that my friend from Orange was not one of those men who "see a spectre in every bush," and who fear dangers from every political change. But since his apprehensions are alive on this subject, let him be informed in the words of Gerald, "that the most useful discoveries in philosophy, the most important changes in the moral history of man, have all been innovations." The adoption of the federal constitution itself was an innovation, and this same system is pointed out a mode by which innovations may be quietly and safely introduced, whenever the good sense of the people may require them. Having made these general remarks, I will now with the permission of the committee enter more particularly into the merits of the question under discussion.
We have been told that this amendment will destroy the independence of the judiciary. This word, Independence, has a magical effect; no sooner is it mentioned than a thou and fears are conjured up. Whenever judicial independence is spoken of, all enquiry at once ceases; but, Sir, I contend that the question before us is not whether the judges ought to be dependent on the people but whether we ought not to increase their responsibility. In every Republican government it is essential that all the agents of the people should be accountable to them for their acts. If they were perfectly wise, and incorruptible it is probable, that the idea of responsibility would never have existed. But since those who are selected by the people to transact the public business are possessed of all the passions, and prejudices incident to human nature, since they are liable to be swayed by interest, and seduced from their duty by the blandishments of flattery, and the allurements of wealth, it becomes necessary that the people for whom alone government is instituted should be able to control them, and cashier them for misconduct. In this country the legislative and executive branches are immediately accountable to the people, being removable at certain definite periods, but the judiciary are almost irresponsible and uncontrolable by them. Why should judges be free from the control? Why should we be unable to purify the bench of justice which is profaned by wickedness and by inordinate ambition? According to the true import of the constitution, I contend that a judge cannot be removed unless he commit some offence for which he may be punished in a court of law. I will turn the attention of the committee to the fourth section of the 2d article of that instrument. "The President, Vice-President and all civil officers of the U. States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes, or misdemeanors." It may be fairly inferred from this clause that a judge cannot be removed unless he commit treason or bribery, or do some other act which resembles treason or bribery in the atrocity of its guilt, and in the severity of its punishment. This construction is strengthened by the third of the 1st. article which declares that judgments in cases of impeachment, shall not extend further than to removal, and disqualification, but that the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable to indictment, trial, judgment and punishment, according to law. Is it not reasonable to conclude, that if the party convicted on impeachment, is still liable to trial and punishment, according to law, he can be impeached for those acts only, for which he is so liable to be punished? To strengthen this opinion, I will endeavor to place this subject in another shape. The 4th section of the second article, not only provides for the removal of the judges, by impeachment; it extends to the President, Vice-President and all civil officers. There is no other mode pointed out in the whole constitution, by which a judge may be removed,
Washington City, 11th January, 1809. DANIEL CLARK. District of Columbia, to wit: January 11, 1808 Personally appeared before me, William Cranch, chief judge of the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia, Daniel Clark, Esq. who being solemnly sworn on the Holy Evangelists of Almighty God, doth depose and say, that the foregoing statement made by him under the order of the House of Representatives, so far as regards matters of his own knowledge is true, and so far as regards the matters whereof he was informed by others he believes to be true. Sworn before me, W. CRANCH.
DOMESTIC.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 13. Court of Enquiry in the case of General Wilkinson.
On Monday, about 1 o'clock, the Court of Enquiry in the case of Gen. Wilkinson, was opened at Morin's Tavern. Present... Col. Burbeck, President, & Cols. Cushing and Williams. The members of the Court were first sworn by Mr. Jones, the Judge Advocate, who was then sworn by the President. The Judge Advocate read an order from the Secretary of War, dated January 7, ordering in compliance with the request of General Wilkinson a Court of Enquiry, consisting of the above gentlemen, and naming Walter Jones, Judge Advocate, on the charge of General Wilkinson having been, or now being a pensioner under the government of Spain while holding a commission under the United States, with instructions to report to the department of War a correct statement of their proceedings, together with their opinion thereon.
After a short pause the President enquired of the Judge Advocate, whether he had any papers or evidence to submit to the Court. He replied that he had not; that he had supposed Gen. Wilkinson would have intimated the witnesses he wished summoned. A conversation then ensued among the members of the court on their course of procedure. It was observed that if the papers before the House of Representatives were to be viewed as the ground of enquiry, from the proceedings of that body it was uncertain whether they would be transmitted to the Executive (from whom it was most probable the court would receive them) and at what time, as the subject was understood to be still pending before them; that at any rate it was not likely they could be received until Wednesday. One of the members added that Gen. Wilkinson had intimated to him, that although ready to attend the court at any time, as he supposed nothing material would be done before that day, he should not sooner attend, unless otherwise desired.
It was thereupon ordered that the court stand adjourned till Wednesday at 10 o'clock A. M. that the Judge Advocate inform the Secretary at War, that the court were met and had nothing before them; and that he likewise inform Gen. Wilkinson that they were assembled and ready to receive anything he might have to offer.
The following motion was submitted by Mr. Asa for consideration, in the Senate, on Monday last.
Resolved, That a committee be appointed, with leave to report by bill or otherwise—and instructed to enquire, at what period the present embargo can consistently with the public interest, be removed; and whether, in what manner, and to what extent, upon its removal, the merchant vessels of the United States, shall be permitted, in defence of their lawful commerce, to be armed against, and to resist foreign aggression. On this motion no order has yet been taken.
Extract of a letter from a gentleman in Marietta, dated Dec. 28. "Blanchasset came into town last week, tarried a few days, and went off in a boat, privately, late in the night. While here he was afraid of every thing; he was afraid of being poisoned in the tavern. I understand that neither he nor Burr will attend their trial at Chillicothe."
We are informed that Aaron Burr on the 31st ult. lodged at Williamsport, Maryland, on his way to Chillicothe.
COMMUNICATION.
DR. LE BARON, a gentleman lately from Michilimackinac, and who has resided there for the last five years, has lately left this city for Philadelphia, New-York and Boston, for the very laudable purpose of forming a company of American Merchants from those cities to embark in the Fur Trade of our Northwestern frontiers. We hope the enterprise of Mr. Le Baron may be crowned with every possible success in this important object. It is the only means by which the current of that valuable and lucrative trade can be diverted from Canada to the U. States, & it is the only way to acquire such an ascendancy over the savage mind, as to ensure a pacific disposition on the part of the Indian Tribes. We are happy to learn, that every disposition has been manifested on the part of the government to encourage and support this important object. Nat. Intel.
ENOCH SULLIVAN respectfully informs his customers and the public in general, that he has just received a handsome addition to his former Stock, which renders his assortment very complete, consisting of—Silver Ware and Jewellery, plated, gilt, morocco & wood Castors, plated and brass Candlesticks, plated and steel Snuffers, silver, plated and Britannia Spoons and Ladles, Britannia and Pewter Tea Pots and Muggs, Waiters, Tea Trays, Caddies, Snuffers Trays and Bread Baskets, Knives and Forks, &c. Desk Knives, Letter Racks, Marking Types, Paper Folders, Ink stands, wafers, &c.—Razors, Hones, Straps, Boxes, Brushes, Hair-powder, Bugs, Windsor Soap, Wart Plaisters, &c.—Guns, horsemen's and pocket Pistols, plated and steel Spurred Powder Horns, Flasks, Shot Bags, Bird Nets, Horn Tumblers, sportsman's Knives, patent Cork Screws, Horse Phegums, Dog Collars, switch & chair Whips, Canes with and without spears, &c. and wood case Pocket Compasses, Ladies' and Gentlemen's Dressing Cases and Pocket Books, and ivory, tortoiseshell and horn Combs, hair, tooth, nail, comb, clothes, health, floor and shoe Brushes, half, globe and hand Lamps, plated and gilt, bottle Slides, &c. Ivory and bone Chessmen & Boards, Battle Doors, Shuttle Coeks, Elastic Glare Ties, silver, gilt, plated, tortoiseshell and steel Spectacles, reading and optic Glasses, Goggles, &c. steel, hair and leather Cases, gold, silver, conchshell and pearl Buttons, silver and plated mounting Pens, Pencil Cases, Tooth Picks, Treasers, &c. Thimbles, Book Pins, sewing, tambores, netting and knitting Needles, Reserves Colours, &c.—gold, gilt and steel Chains, Seals and Keys, with an assortment of Watch Materials, segars, tobacco and snuff Boxes, &c. Swords, Belts, Hats, Epauletts, Plumes, Sashes, Stocks, &c. Flutes, Fifes, Clarinets, Trumpets, French Horns and Drums. E. Sullivan continues to execute orders in his line of profession. Jan. 21. [E]
THE subscriber intends to leave the state of Virginia in a few days. THOMAS RANDOLPH. Amelia, Jan. 21. [14]
his shipment, and whose books are in my possession. In 1784, two gentlemen of the names of Owens and Collins, friends and agents of General Wilkinson, came to New-Orleans. To the first was exhibited, as I was particularly informed by the officers of the Spanish government, the sum of 10,000 dollars to be delivered to General Wilkinson on account of his own pension, and that of others. On his way, in returning to Kentucky Owens was murdered by his boat's crew and the money it was understood was made away with by them. This occurrence occasioned a considerable delay in Kentucky, and contributed by Mr. Power's visits at a subsequent period, to awaken the suspicion of General Wayne, who took measures to intercept the correspondence of General Wilkinson with the Spanish government, which were not attended with success.
Collins, the co-agent with Owens, first attempted to fit out a small vessel in the port of New-Orleans, in order to proceed to some port in the Atlantic states; but she was destroyed by the hurricane of the month of August of 1794. He then fitted out a small vessel in the Bayou St. John, and slipped in her at least eleven thousand dollars which he took round to Charleston.
This shipment was made under such peculiar circumstances, that it became known to many, and the destination of it was afterwards fully disclosed to me by the officers of the Spanish government, by Collins and by Gen. Wilkinson himself, who complained that Collins instead of sending him the money on his arrival had employed it in some old speculations to the West-Indies, in which he had lost a considerable sum, and that in consequence of the mismanagement of his agent, he had derived but little advantage from the money paid on his account by the Spanish government.
Mr. Power was a Spanish subject, resident in Louisiana, and the object of his visits to the western country became known to me in 1796, when he embarked on board the brig Gayoso at New-Orleans for Philadelphia in company with Judge Sebastian, in which vessel as she had been consigned to myself, I saw embarked under a special permission four thousand dollars or thereabouts, which, I was informed, were for Sebastian's own account, as one of those concerned in the scheme of dismemberment of the western country.
Mr. Power, as he afterwards informed me, on his tour through the western country, saw Gen. Wilkinson at Greenville, and was the bearer of a letter to him from the Secretary of War, dated January 7, 1796, advising that a sum of money had been sent to Don Thomas Portell, commandant of New-Madrid, to be delivered to his order. This money Mr. Power delivered to Mr. Nolan, by Wilkinson's directions. What concerned Mr. Nolan's agency in this business I learned from himself, when he afterwards visited New-Orleans.
In 1797, Power was entrusted with another mission to Kentucky, and had directions to propose certain plans to effect the separation of the western country from the U. States. Those plans were proposed and rejected, as often solemnly assured me, through the means of Mr. George Nicholas, to whom among others they were communicated, who spurned the idea of receiving foreign money. Power then proceeded to Detroit to see Gen. Wilkinson, and was sent back by him under guard to New-Madrid from whence he returned to New-Orleans. Power's secret instructions were known to me afterwards, and I am enabled to state that the plan then contemplated entirely failed.
At the periods spoken of, and for some time afterwards I was resident in the Spanish territory, subject to the Spanish laws, and without an expectation of becoming a citizen of the U. States. My obligations were then to conceal and not to communicate to the government of the U. States, the projects and enterprises which I have mentioned of General Wilkinson and the Spanish government.
In the month of October of 1798, I visited General Wilkinson by his particular request at his camp at Lofus's heights, where he had shortly before arrived. The General had heard of remarks made by me on the subject of his pension, which had rendered him uneasy, and he was desirous of making some arrangements with me on the subject. I passed three days and nights in the General's tent. The chief subjects of our conversation were the views and enterprises of the Spanish government in relation to the United States, and speculations as to the result of political affairs. In the course of our conversation he stated that there was still a balance of ten thousand dollars due him by the Spanish government, for which he would gladly take in exchange Governor Gayoso's plantation near the Natchez, who might reimburse himself from the treasury at New-Orleans. I asked the General whether this sum was due on the old business of the pension—he replied that it was, and intimated a wish that I should propose to Governor Gayoso a transfer of his plantation for the money due him from the Spanish treasury. The whole affair had always been odious to me, and I declined any agency in it. I acknowledged to him that I had often spoken freely and publicly of his Spanish pension, but told him I had communicated nothing to his government on the subject. I advised him to drop his Spanish connexion. He justified it heretofore from the peculiar situation of Kentucky, the disadvantages that country laboured under at the period when he formed his connexion with the Spaniards, the doubtful and distracted state of the Union at that time, which he represented as bound together by nothing better than a rope of sand, and he assured me solemnly that he had terminated his connections with the Spanish government, and that they never should be renewed. I gave the General to understand that as the affair stood I should not interfere say anything about it. From that period until the present I have heard one report only of the former connexion being renewed, and that it was in 1803, shortly after the General's departure from New-Orleans. I had been absent for two or three months, and returned to the city not long after General Wilkinson sailed from it. I was informed by the late mayor, that reports had reached the ears of the governor of a sum of ten thousand dollars having been received by the General of the Spanish government while he was one of the commissioners for taking possession of Louisiana. He wished me to enquire into the truth of them, which I agreed to do, on condition that I might be permitted to communicate the suspicion to the General, if the fact alleged against him could not be better verified. This was assented to. I made the enquiry and satisfied myself by an inspection of the treasury book for 1804, that the ten thousand dollars had not been paid. I then communicated the circumstance to a friend of the General, Mr. Evan Jones, with a request that he would inform him of it. The report was revived at the last session of Congress by a letter from Col. Ferdinand Claiborne of Natchez to the delegate of the Mississippi territory. A member of the House informed that the money in question was acknowledged by Gen. Smith to have been received at the time mentioned, but that it was in payment for tobacco. I knew that no tobacco had been delivered and waited on General Smith for information as to the receipt of the money, who disavowed all knowledge of it, and I took the opportunity of assuring him and as many others as mentioned the subject, that I believed it to be false, and gave them my reasons for the opinion.
This summary necessarily omits many details tending to corroborate and illustrate the facts and opinions I have stated. No allusion has been had to the public explanations of the transaction referred to, made by Gen. Wilkinson and his friends. So far as they are resolved into commercial enterprises and speculations, I had the best opportunity of being acquainted with them, as I was during the time referred to, the agent of the House who were consequence of the General at New-Orleans, and who had an interest in
in this combination, he must have been appointed to office by the first administration under this government, and continued by the second, with a full and complete knowledge of this fact. The present republican party found Gen. Wilkinson in office, and abundant proof can be produced that he possessed the confidence of the two preceding administrations. If he was originally a member of the old Spanish combination, or has at any period prior to the year 1801, been guilty of any act calculated to destroy the public confidence, let the responsibility rest on those who appointed and continued him in office. We have seen in one state of the union a member of this combination removed from the important office of judge, on the ground of being a Spanish pensioner. A charge of the same kind is now made on a member of this House, against an officer of the U. States. It is time that all the information possessed by the government of the United States on the subject of this combination, should be brought fairly before the public. With a view to obtain this information, he offered the following resolution:
Resolved, That the President of the U. States be requested to lay before the House of Representatives all the information which may at any time from the establishment of the present federal government to the present time, have been forwarded to any department of the government, touching a combination between the agents of any foreign government and citizens of the U. States, for dismembering the union, or going to shew that any officer of the United States has at any time corruptly received money from any foreign government or its agents. Distinguishing as far as possible the period at which such information has been forwarded, and by whom.
Mr. Randolph seconded this motion. After a few objections to this resolution from Mr. Quincy, on account of its being too comprehensive, not giving the President power to withhold confidential correspondence, the question was on motion of Mr. Rhea (T.) taken by Yeas and Nays, and carried unanimously, every member present, to the number of one hundred and twenty, voting in the affirmative.
Mr. Rhea said that although a decision on his resolution had been eluded, out of respect for the opinions of gentlemen who objected to particular parts of it, he had modified it, and offered it as follows: Resolved, That a special committee be appointed to enquire into the conduct of Brig. Gen. Wilkinson, in relation to his having at any time whilst in the service of the U. S. either as a civil or military officer, been a pensioner of the government of Spain, or corruptly received money from that government, or its agents; and that the said committee have power to send for such persons and papers as may be necessary to assist their enquiries; and that they report the result to this House, to enable this House the better to legislate on subjects of the common weal, & our foreign relations, and particularly our relation with Spain, as well as on the subject of the increase of the army of the United States and its regulations.
A motion to consider this resolution was negatived—60 to 46. Mr. Holland moved that a committee be appointed to wait upon the President with the resolutions this day adopted.
Mr. Love moved that the evidence or information laid before the House relative to the conduct of Gen. Wilkinson be transmitted to the Executive.
Mr. Randolph moved an adjournment.—Negatived—Ayes 47—Nays 57.
The House agreeing to consider Mr. Love's motion—Ayes 67.
On motion of Mr. Rhea, seconded by Mr. Randolph, the words "copies of" papers, &c. were inserted; and The resolution for transmitting copies of the papers was agreed to without a division. The motion for appointing a committee to wait on the President with these resolutions and copies, was agreed to without a division. Messrs. Randolph and Eppes form the committee.
MR. CLARKE'S STATEMENT.
In obedience to the direction of the House of Representatives expressed in their resolution of Friday last, I submit the following statement:
I arrived from Europe at New-Orleans in December 1783 having been invited to the country by an uncle of considerable wealth and influence, who had been long resident in that city. Shortly after my arrival, I was employed in the office of the Secretary of the government. This office was the depository of all state papers. In 1787 Gen. Wilkinson made his first visit to N. Orleans, and was introduced by my uncle to the governor and other officers of the Spanish Government.
In the succeeding year, 1788, much sensation was excited by the report of his having entered into some arrangements with the government of Louisiana to secede the Western country from the U. States, and this report acquired great credit upon his second visit to New-Orleans in 1789. About this time I saw a letter from the General to a person in New-Orleans giving an account of Col. Connolly's mission to him from the British government in Canada and of proposals made to him on the part of that government, and mentioning his determination of adhering to his connexion with the Spaniards.
My intimacy with the officers of the Spanish government, and my access to official information disclosed to me shortly afterwards some of the plans the general had proposed to the government for effecting the contemplated separation. The general's project was, the secession of the western country from the U. States, and the establishment of a separate government in the alliance and under the protection of Spain. In effecting this, Spain was to furnish money and arms, and the minds of the western people were to be seduced and brought over to the project by liberal largesses resulting from it, to be held out by Spain. The trade of the Mississippi was to be rendered free, the port of New-Orleans to be opened to them, and a free commerce allowed in the productions of the new government with Spain and her West-India Islands.
I remember about the same time to have seen a list of names of citizens of the western country who was in the hand writing of the General, who were recommended for pensions, and the sums were stated proper to be paid to each, and I then distinctly understood that he and others were actually pensioners of the Spanish government.
I had no personal knowledge of money being paid to General Wilkinson or to any agent for him on account of his pension previously to the year 1793 or 1794. In one of these years, and in which I cannot be certain until I can consult my books, a Mr. La Cassagne, who I understood was post-master at the falls of Ohio, came to New-Orleans, and as one of the association with General Wilkinson in the project of dismemberment, received a sum of money, four thousand dollars of which or thereabouts, were embarked by a special permission of duty on board a vessel which had been consigned to me, and which sailed for Philadelphia, in which vessel Mr. La Cassagne was passenger. At and prior to this period I had various opportunities of seeing the projects submitted to the Spanish government, and object-
A motion to adjourn was negatived 52 to 51. Mr. Gardner moved that the subject be postponed till to-morrow, in order that the evidence of Mr. Clark might be printed for information.—Negatived, ayes 42. A motion to adjourn was now carried, ayes 66.
TUESDAY, Jan. 12.
The Speaker laid before the House a report from the Secretary of the Navy in obedience to the act respecting the salaries of the Clerks in his office. Referred to the committee of Ways and Means.
Also, a report on the subject of the Navy pension fund. Referred to the committee of Ways and Means. A bill to provide for the payment of certain expenses incurred in the impeachment of Samuel Chase, was read the third time and passed.
A bill for the relief of Gen. Evans was read the third time, and (after a motion to reconsider it was negatived, ayes 30) passed. Mr. Van Horn presented the memorial of the Mayor, Aldermen, Common Council, and many of the inhabitants of Annapolis, who state that the harbor of Annapolis might, in time of war be so fortified as to afford protection to that city, and a secure harbor for craft navigating Chesapeake Bay. Referred to the Secretary of War.
Mr. Eppes from the committee to whom was referred the petition of sundry inhabitants of the first and second wards and the memorial of the Common Council of the city of Washington, reported a bill to amend the act for the incorporation of the city of Washington. Read twice and referred to a committee of the whole.
On motion of Mr. Rhea, the House took up for consideration the resolution submitted by him relative to an enquiry into the conduct of General Wilkinson.
The House agreeing to consider it, Mr. Rhea moved to insert after the words agents, the following amendment: Or in relation to his having during the time aforesaid been an accomplice; or in any way concerned with the agents of any foreign power, or with Aaron Burr, in a project to dismember the Union.
Mr. Love moved to amend the amendment by adding the following: And that a fair copy of the information and papers laid on the Clerk's table relative to the conduct of the said Gen. James Wilkinson, in the matters in question, and any other papers or information which may hereafter be received by the said committee or this House be immediately transmitted to the President of the U. States.
No question was taken on either of the amendments or on the resolution.
A debate took place, not confined however to the amendments, but on the general propriety of the enquiry by this House, in which Messrs. Love, Eppes, Rhea, and M. D. Williams supported, and Messrs. Alston, Fisk, Holland, Sloan, and Upham opposed the right and propriety of passing the resolution for enquiry.
About 4 o'clock a motion was made by Mr. Small to adjourn, and carried, the House having decided no one point under consideration.
WEDNESDAY, Jan. 13.
Mr. Rhea (T.) moved that the deposition laid on the table by Mr. Clark (N. O.) be printed.—Agreed.
Mr. Lewis from the committee to whom the subject was referred, reported a bill authorising the proprietors of squares or lots in the city of Washington, to have them subdivided. Read twice and referred to a committee of the whole.
Mr. Lloyd obtained leave of absence for ten days.
Mr. W. Alston, from the committee to whom was referred the message from the President on the subject of the mint, reported a bill further to prolong the continuance of the mint at Philadelphia. Read twice and referred to a committee of the whole.
Mr. Morrow (Ohio) presented a petition from a number of purchasers of public lands, stating that they were not able to pay the proper instalments, and praying indulgence in point of time. Referred to the committee on public lands.
Mr. Parke offered the following resolution, which was adopted, and Messrs. Parke, Bard, Taggart, Gardner and Sawyer, appointed a committee.
Resolved, That a committee be appointed to enquire into the expediency of extending the right of suffrage in the Indiana territory, and that they have leave to report by bill or otherwise.
The bill for continuing the Mediterranean Fund was returned from the Senate, with amendments.
The House took up for consideration the resolution offered by Mr. Rhea on Monday. The amendments made yesterday by Messrs. Rhea and Love being incorporated with it.
Mr. Alston moved to strike out all the resolution after the word "Resolved" except the part relating to the transmission of the evidence to the Executive.
Mr. Rhea withdrew his resolution, that a decision on the principle might not be evaded by the amendment just proposed—and
Mr. Randolph immediately renewed the motion which he originally proposed in the following words:
Resolved, That the President of the U. S. be requested to cause an enquiry to be instituted into the conduct of Brig. Gen. J. Wilkinson, commander in chief of the armies of the U. States, in relation to his having, at any time, while in the service of the U. States, corruptly received money from the government of Spain, or its agents.
After a debate of three hours, which shall be given hereafter, the question was taken on this resolution by Yeas and Nays, and carried—72 to 49.
Mr. Eppes said he had stated on a former day in place that no information had at any time been received by the present administration which went to charge Brig. Gen. Wilkinson with being a Spanish pensioner. This statement was made in reply to a gentleman from Kentucky, who thought it unnecessary to forward to the Executive the evidence exhibited against Gen. Wilkinson, on the ground that this evidence was already in possession of the Executive department. A fact so important to the public ought not to rest on the assertion of any individual. If corruption has at any period of our political existence fixed its fangs on this government, if men known to be Spanish pensioners have at any period been honored with confidence by any administration; it is proper the people should understand at what period this confidence commenced, and by whom it was reposed. So far back as the year 1789 or 1790, information was forwarded to the Executive department of this government, that a combination between citizens of the U. S. and the Spanish government, had been formed, for the purpose of dismembering the U. States. This information (together with the names of most of the persons concerned in the combination) was forwarded to the first administration formed under this government, at the head of which Gen. Washington was placed. It was known to the second administration under Mr. Adams, and additional information forwarded to him by Mr. Elliot.—Gen. Wilkinson was originally concerned

and although he holds his office during good behavior, what constitutes bad behavior, can only be ascertained by referring to the clause already quoted, which marks out the acts for which, and the mode by which his removal may be accomplished. Far different, however, is the case of the President. We know that it is not by the article respecting impeachment that the responsibility of the President is secured: the quinquennial election of that officer, the constitutional expiration of his term of office, the opportunity given to the people of displacing him by the exercise of the elective franchise, constitute the efficient check upon him. If then, the President abuses his trust, if he makes improper and ridiculous appointments, if he recommends unwholesome laws, if he violent passions which agitate his soul, he insults the understanding of the people, and provokes foreign nations to war, the remedy for these evils is to be found not in impeachment before the Senate, but in the steady & determined resolution of the people to assert their rights, and maintain their dignity by the election of a more useful officer. The aberrations of his mind may produce infinite mischief, but the silent operation of the right of suffrage, will afford a complete antidote to the poison. If the people relied solely on the trial by impeachment, to rectify such deviations, the President might hold his office for life. For what acts then, can the President be impeached? The constitution answers the question: not for misconduct, or misbehavior in office, but for high crimes and misdemeanors . If then, the President can only be impeached for some offence, for which he may be punished according to law, does it not follow as a necessary consequence that the impeachment of the judges must be confined within the same limits, since the same language is applied to both, without the variation of a word, and the whole provision is contained within the same sentence? This conclusion seems to be confirmed by a paragraph in the Federalist, vol. 2, p. 211.—The writer after endeavoring to prove that the Senate is the most proper court for the trial of all impeachments proceeds thus: "The punishment which may be the consequence of conviction upon impeachment is not to terminate the chastisement of the offender. After having been sentenced to a perpetual ostracism from the esteem and confidence, and honor, and emolument of his countrymen, he will still be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law."
The trial of Judge Chase, Mr. Chairman, affords in many respects an instructive lesson both as it regards the independence of the judiciary, and the efficacy of the trial by impeachment. The great argument urged by the counsel, is precisely that which I have used. It was contended that a judge was not impeachable for any offence for which he was not indictable, and in proving this point, they have certainly shown that the constitution was very defective. I will not fatigue the committee by making elaborate quotations from their speeches, but will refer them generally to the speeches of Mr. Hopkins, & Mr. Martin. I beg leave however, to read an extract from the able and eloquent observations of Mr. Harper on this subject, as he enforces the opinion which I have adopted, with great strength of mind, and perspicuity of language. (Here Mr. B. read an extract from the speech of Mr. Harper, vol. 2, p. 257. & Chase's Trial.) But we are asked by the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Tucker) whether we are to take the arguments of the lawyers as solemn truths, and now we are to ascertain upon what grounds the Senate decided that case. It is true, sir, that the Senate did not condescend to inform the public what were the reasons of their decision, but it is possible that Judge Chase could have been acquitted on any other ground? How else could he have been acquitted? There were manifold proofs that he had attempted to prejudice a jury against an unfortunate man, who was arraigned on a criminal charge, that he had acted as a political preacher, that he had even descended to the office of a public prosecutor, and was guilty of the grossest misbehavior on the bench of justice. It appears then, to me, that he could not have been acquitted on any other ground than a defect in the constitution, unless we are to consider, with the gentleman from Frederick, the whole trial as a judicial juggle, in which case a still farther amendment ought to be proposed, and the power of impeachment totally taken away from the Senate.
Ought there then to be no other cause of removal than the commission of a punishable offence? I conceive there are many, and will recite a few of them. It appears to me, sir, that a lunatic cannot be removed under the present constitution, for lunacy is neither a high crime, nor misdemeanor, it is a misfortune only. You can only remove by impeachment, and you can only impeach for a punishable offence. Would it not seem strange for the House of Representatives to appear before the Senate and impeach a judge for high crimes and misdemeanors, and as an instance of his criminality to charge him with the loss of his senses? To enlarge the principle, a judge may be totally incapable of discharging the duties of his office. Incapacity is no crime. Shall a judge in that situation hold his office in spite of the public wishes? In vain may it be proved that his judgment is impaired, that the public confidence in him is gone, that individuals are injured or ruined by the weakness of his intellect, he remains on the judgment seat persevering, misconstruing the law, and bringing its decisions into contempt and odium. The absurdity of retaining incapable judges was foreseen by the Federalist, who attempts to surmount the difficulty by asserting that the mensuration of the faculties of the mind has no place in the catalogue of known arts. But shall it be said that when the public voice has audibly pronounced a man incapable of holding an important office, that those who are selected to express that voice, are unable to decide on that capacity?
Again, it may well be doubted whether negligence in discharging the judicial functions be an impeachable offence. I presume it is not. Judges are like other men; they are liable to be swayed by interest, and to become indolent when they have no interest to be industrious. If a judge is influenced by a bribe or a sense of honor, if he makes it a matter of conscience to discharge his duty with punctuality and diligence, it is well; but if he is not actuated by such principles what is there which can compel him to do his duty? His stipend is fixed, no part of his salary can be withdrawn, and idleness will not reduce his wages. If he was to receive his compensation in proportion to the quantity of work performed, interest might coerce him into industry; this is forbidden by the constitution, and give me leave to say, that I admire that provision in it, but the existence of the provision shows that you have not a sufficient check upon the care as a judge, un-
less you are enabled to remove him for gross neglect.
There is another and still stronger reason for removing a judge by a legislative address; I mean the habitual expression of opinions absurd in themselves, and dangerous to the community. I know, sir, that I shall here be considered as treading on delicate ground. The expression of such opinions as I have mentioned can never be deemed a crime or misdemeanor. The burthen of proof will always be thrown on the accusers; they must show that the opinions however absurd and dangerous, proceeded from corrupt motives, and you can seldom infer criminality from mere opinion. Nothing however is clearer to me than that a judge ought to be controlled, and removed for arbitrary, and unconstitutional decisions, although they be perfectly honest and conscientious. The gentleman from Wythe, (Mr. Smith) has recited many opinions, for the expression of which a judge ought to be removed. I will confine myself to one which many of the federal judges have expressed, and which threatens in my estimation the most serious evils to the United States. About eight years ago, judge Ellsworth decided that the common law of England was the law of the United States in its federal capacity, and under that law he deprived an American citizen of the right of expatriation. It is said that several other federal judges have expressed similar opinions. I will not now examine the correctness of the opinion, but I will venture to assert that when a question on it shall be fairly propounded, nine tenths of the people, and of the most enlightened part of the community will declare such a position to be a stupid and detestable dogma. Shall it be said that a government instituted solely for the regulation of the exterior concerns of this country, a government which has no power but that which is expressly delegated to it, rests for its support on the code of another country?—Shall the rights of the people of America be deduced from the impure source of barbarous law, instead of being drawn from the ever-living fountain of nature? Shall the free people of America allow a code of laws to be fixed upon them without their own consent? I confess, sir, I am so strongly impressed with the belief that this opinion is dangerous to the state sovereignty, and that it tends irresistibly to the consolidation of the states, that for the formal assertion of such an opinion I do not hesitate to say that any judge ought to be removed from his station. We were told on a former occasion by a gentleman from Norfolk (Mr. Mordaunt) that if the judges have expressed such an enormous opinion, it would be easy for Congress to correct the evil by declaring that the common law was not the law of the land. What kind of remedy is this? The constitution has not adopted this code; congress have not, and they cannot adopt it; and if all you can content to tell the few persons who have attempted to force it upon us against all principle, that their decisions shall be binding until Congress shall think proper to rescind them?
We are told, Mr. Chairman, that there is no necessity to increase the responsibility of the judiciary, because it is the weakest branch of the government. It is said that it has neither force, nor will and merely possesses judgment. Our experience contradicts the fact; for our judges have already attempted to force a whole body of laws upon us, and in some instances they have succeeded, and they will probably be still more successful unless the good sense, and vigilance of the people prevent them. But there is another proof of their strength. The decisions of courts become precedents , and precedents once established have all the force of laws : an absurd opinion therefore once delivered not only operates on the individual to whom it is at first applied, but becomes a general rule, and bears upon the whole community. There is one subject on which the federal judges may act, in which they have greater power than the Congress of the United States. Treason is defined by the constitution. Congress have no right to vary the definition. The judges interpret it, and their interpretation becomes the fixed rule of the country. If their interpretation establishes doctrines dangerous to the country, or destructive to the rights of individuals, it cannot be altered without a change in the constitution. I have no doubt, sir, that if the volumes of the English law were carefully examined, many instances might be found in which the judges have so completely evaded the law as to have established rules not only new, but unthought of by the legislature. These reasons induce me to think that the strength of the judiciary is considerable, and that whilst the other branches of the government are responsible to the people, this ought not to be free from all responsibility.
The argument derived from the weakness of the judiciary corresponds very badly with the power which is assigned to them of deciding on the constitutionality of laws. At one time we are told that it is as weak as an infant, at another it is represented as the political Atlas on which the whole constitutional universe is to repose. But rely on it, Mr. Chairman, that whenever the trial is fairly made, their shoulders will be found too weak to support the enormous burthen. I will say but little on this subject since the gentleman from Wythe has nearly exhausted it. It is said that in a limited constitution it is peculiarly necessary that the judges should interpose between the legislature and the people to prevent the former from injuring, the latter by infringing on the constitution. In other words, the judges are to be the guardians to whose safe keeping the keys of the constitution are to be entrusted. But who will answer for the correct deportment of these guardians? Can we rely with more confidence on them, than on those whom we have selected to represent our feelings, and express our opinions? Is more wisdom, more integrity, or more impartiality to be found in a few judges, than in the whole body of the representatives of the people? For myself I entirely disclaim the doctrine. There is nothing in the constitution which expressly gives the judges the power to decide on the constitutionality of laws. The oath of office cannot impart the right, for the same oath is taken by every inferior officer, executive as well as judicial. It is said that the construction which the legislative body may place in their own powers ought not to be binding on the other departments. I think it ought. The constitution is intended for the benefit of the people, and they can surely trust those who are immediately removable by them, better than the officers who are beyond their reach. Be assured, sir, that it is not the judiciary on whom we can rely in the hour of danger, to prevent violations of the constitution. If the people trust to any, but themselves, they will be betrayed. The freedom of the press, frequent elections, and the existence of the separate state sovereignties will, I trust, preserve the constitution invio-
late; these constitute the palladium of our safety.
Gentlemen are in the constant habit of eulogizing the English Judiciary. What kind of independence is theirs? Previous to the 13th year of William the third, the king had the power of removing his judges. By a law made in that year, the king is prevented from removing them unless by an address of both Houses of Parliament. Blackstone informs us that by the statute of King William, and by a statute made in the first year of the reign of George the third, which provides that the Judges shall hold their offices notwithstanding the demise of the king, the independence of the English Judiciary is completely secured. Paley expresses a similar opinion. What then, Sir, is the difference between the English system, and that which we contemplate? Our resolution provides for the removal of a Judge by the two branches of the legislature, without the aid of the President. We thereby avoid the danger arising from Executive influence—Again, the English parliament elected for the term of seven years is known to be a corrupt body, and completely under the influence of the ministers. Executive influence therefore in that country, may still indirectly attain that object, which according to the theory of the government it cannot reach. In this country we have a proud superiority in this respect. One of the branches of our legislature being removable by the people every two years, it is not to be expected that Executive influence can ever cause the removal of a Judge. From this view of the subject it appears clearly that if this amendment is adopted, the Federal Judiciary will be more independent of the Executive than the English Judiciary, at the same time that they will be placed under the control of the people, to whom they ought to be amenable.
Before I conclude my observations, Mr. Chairman, I beg leave to reply to some of the arguments of the gentleman from Frederick (Mr. Tucker). We are called on to recollect that Henry the apostle of Liberty, looked to the independence of the Judiciary as the safeguard of our rights. I believe, Sir, that Henry objected to the federal Judiciary on account of the enormity of its powers, and because he thought he could foresee that it would swallow up the state Judiciary. I wish he may not have been a true Prophet. When it is recollected that Henry frequently eulogized the English Judiciary, I think it is not unfair to conclude that if he were now amongst us, his eloquence would be enlisted on our side. But why should the gentleman quote the opinions of others; how often have we been cautioned not to repose on the authority of great names?
"We are hurried away by passion, and because Burr has been acquitted, we are departing from our old political principles. I wish not to turn the attention of the committee to that subject; we are perhaps coming too near home, feelings might be excited which would perhaps be unfavorable to the calm investigation of the resolution. As to Aaron Burr I will only observe that I trust his nefarious projects and schemes will shortly go, where his reputation has long since gone, "to the tomb of all the Capulets."
No reliance is placed on the integrity of Congress by the gentleman from Frederick, for he asks are Congress and the people convertible terms; if the people ought to be entrusted with the power of removing a Judge, shall Congress have the same power? It is true that Congress and the people are not convertible terms, but Congress is the best organ for expressing the will of the people, and it is well known that the people cannot assemble in a body to deliberate on the propriety of displacing an unworthy servant from the bench.
"We are asked if we have forgotten those hard unconstitutonal times, when Alien and Sedition Laws were enacted, when an unfortunate wretch was tried under this roof for sedition; we are asked if Judge Chase would have acted as he did towards Callender if he had not had Congress at his back, and whether we should ever have had a trial for sedition without the interposition of Congress. No, Sir, I have not forgotten those times; I trust the people never will forget them; I trust that the four years administration of Mr. Adams will be held up a beacon to warn the people against political dangers. But what does the conduct of the federal judges at that time prove? Did they come forward as the friends and guardians of the people in the house of danger? Did they declare the alien and sedition laws unconstitutional? By what means were those evils removed? Certainly not by the Judges, but by the public voice. They rigidly enforced those laws, and stooped to prosecute under them. The history of that administration proves incontestably that the federal Judiciary cannot be relied on to protect the people from the tyranny of an usurping Congress. But, Sir, a sedition law was about to be fastened on us without the aid of Congress. The federal Judges seemed anxious to a-bridge or destroy the freedom of speech, under the auspices of the English Common Law. If I am not mistaken Luther Baldwin was indicted in the federal court of N. Jersey under the Common Law, and punished by fine and imprisonment for using certain opprobrious words against the President. So that these guardians of the people were perfectly willing to introduce a sedition law without being supported by Congress. An objection is made to this amendment because no man of honor and delicate feelings will ascend the bench if it is adopted. What, Sir, is not the English bench graced with men of honor and delicate feelings? And how does it happen that we have men of honor in the other departments? The President, Vice-President, Senators, and Representatives, are all removable by the people, and we find men of talents and integrity always willing to accept those offices."
The gentleman from Frederick has sounded the alarm about state rights; he tells us that if we adopt this amendment, state rights will be prostrated, the several sovereignties will be amalgamated. No man would regret this effect more than myself. But how long have the federal judges been the champions of state rights? They, the champion of state rights? They, who are fed, and clothed, & paid from the federal treasury. They, the champions of state rights? They, who bro't the state of Massachusetts to the footstool of their power. They, the champions of state rights? They, to guard against whose usurpations it was necessary to erect a constitutional barrier. No, Sir, believe me if the states ever repose on the Judiciary, they will awake from their slumbers with their fetters rivetted. Who vindicated our rights in '98 and 99? The gentlemen within these walls, and the Legislature of Kentucky. By their conduct they acquired immortal honour.
To prove the necessity of the judges deciding on the constitutionality of laws, the gentleman has referred us to several acts which he supposes were contrary to the con-
stitution. I think he was unfortunate in his selection of cases. The carriage tax was considered as the supreme court and they decided in favour of it. The sedition law is again referred to: I have said enough of this. And we are told that Congress is every day violating state rights; that they have lately done so in the election of Mr. McCrery: I agree with the gentleman on this subject:—But how can the judges remedy this decision? By what process can a disputed election of a member of Congress be brought before a court? Certainly not by a Quo Warranto . But if the judges should think proper to issue such process, it will not probably be treated with the same calmness and indifference with which the Secretary of State treated the Mandamus . The only remedy for this improper decision is to be found in the Protest of the States, and I hope that the Legislature of Maryland will protest against the violation of their law.
It is true, Mr. Chairman, that twenty years ago no one did propose this measure on which we are now called to act, but, Sir, it will be recollected that twenty years ago our people had not witnessed such enormous strides of judicial powers as we have seen since that time, nor is it probable that the measure would be now proposed if we had "Cats" on the bench. It is because we have no such men, & because such men cannot be expected, that it is necessary we should increase the responsibility of the judicial department. Mr. B. concluded by saying that if he for a moment supposed that the amendment would jeopardize the best interests of his country, or even destroy the rights of a single individual, he would be one of the last to advocate it, but believing as he did that the judges are capable of making enormous usurpations, and that a check ought to be placed on their aberrations, he should give the resolution his support.
(Debate to be continued.)
The following important bill has been engrossed for a third reading in the H. of D. on Tuesday. A motion was made to postpone it till 31st March, and rejected by a large majority.
(A bill concerning the sale of property under executions and incumbences.) Be it enacted by the General Assembly, that so much of the act passed on the tenth day of December, one thousand seven hundred and ninety three, entitled "An act, for further continuing and amending the act, entitled An act for reducing into one the several acts concerning executions, and for the relief of insolvent debtors," as directs, that when goods, or other estate, taken in execution, cannot be sold for three-fourths of their value, the debtor or debtors, may give bond and security to pay the debt within twelve months, or that the said goods, or other estate, may be sold on 12 months credit, and every part of the said recited act as concerns such executions, either in the appointment of commissioners to carry the same into effect, or for the direction of the sheriff or other officer, or the clerk of any court in suing out an execution on any such bond or any other person whomsoever, and of every matter or thing therein contained, shall be, and the same is hereby declared to be, in full force; and all courts, sheriffs, and other officers, as well as the parties concerned, are to govern themselves accordingly, any thing in any law to the contrary, notwithstanding.
Be it further enacted. That before any Commissioners appointed by the decree of any court of Chancery to sell any real or personal estate, or any trustee under any deed of trust, shall proceed to sell the estate decreed to be sold, or conveyed in trust, the commissioners directed to be appointed by this act, or any three of them, shall value the estate intended to be sold, on the request of the creditor, and if three-fourths at least of the estimated value shall not be offered by the highest bidder, the estate shall not be sold, nor shall it be at any time thereafter sold during the continuance of this act, for less than three-fourths of such estimated value. The valuation shall be made and entered in writing, signed by the commissioners, or any three of them, and delivered to the Commissioners appointed by the Courts of Chancery, and to the trustees respectively. The commissioners who may act by virtue of this section, shall be entitled to the sum of one dollar for each day, they shall be employed to be paid by the creditors.
This act shall commence and be in force from and after the passage thereof, and shall continue until the first day of February one thousand eight hundred and nine.
Extract of a letter from Gen. James Wilkinson, to a member of the Virginia Legislature, dated Washington, Jan. 13th, '08. "In the dawn of this attack, I demanded from the President an enquiry into my conduct, which was granted for the 11th inst. since which Mr. R. has denounced the mode of trial secured to me by the constitution and the law, and has branded the whole army for defection or traitorous propensities.—This day however, after my character has been worried and torn and mangled for a week, the House have referred the subject to the President, and my Court will proceed the day after to-morrow, when I shall open with a preliminary address, in which you shall see some things developed respecting Clark, to excite the chagrined of every Burrite, Randolphite and Tory in our country. Clark after much affectation & more duplicity, after twisting and wreatheing under the anticipation of the horrors which await him, has come out with a farrago of perjuries, transcending if possible Major Bruff himself, I authorise you to say that his information to Congress, is utterly destitute of truth, that it is in the face of his written assurances to T. Pickering, Secretary of state, for that report has been found in Clark's own hand."
"And shall the word or the oath of such a man, a stranger in our country, and an impostor every where, go to sully the fame of an officer of thirty years service, by the unqualified charge of corruption, without substantiating deed, word, fruit or effect, to designate the criminal intent or operation of the foul engagement? Harmless indeed, must be that corruption, which produces no sinister object or influence—and hard indeed the fate of the man, against whom such foul allegations are alleged, whilst his whole life has manifested an ever flowing current of hardy, faithful and zealous exertion in the very cause which it is basely asserted he was bribed to betray. I put all my enemies at defiance, & will submit to eternal infamy, when it shall be proven by competent testimony, that I have ever been guilty of the commission or omission of an act injurious to my country."
Extract of a letter from a member of Congress, to his friend in the Virginia Legislature, dated the 17th inst. "It really appeared to me, that members yielded from fear (to the extravagance of Mr. Randolph's proposition,) to influence the
executive in the duties of its office. The fear I mean, of being accused of a desire to suppress information, and is favorable: many I have no doubt, voted for it as it conveys in terms which cannot be mistaken, & were not intended to be mistaken by the author, a most direct censure on the President. Some and but few indeed I fear voted for the resolution from a due sense of duty—but this would have satisfied me, if I had not been before convinced of the dangers which must always arise, when a legislature permits itself to trammel of the legislative duties, and attempt to act on men—it then becomes no better than a lawless giddy mob. As a proof on the moment, adopted a resolution offered by Mr. Eppes, which is calculated, I fear, if literally complied with, to produce very bad effects, in giving up the authors of all the secret information the government has had with respect to Spanish intrigue—some of those things require to be kept secret, not only for the sake of those persons who have honestly and zealously served us in their communications, but because it will set an example which must have the effect of discouraging, perhaps preventing future communications. The safety of the country may be endangered by this last hasty step, at some future crisis. All that we ought to have asked for, was the sum of information as it respected the civil officers of government, over whom we have a control, and that without the original form of the information, or from whom received. I am however pleased to find that the president has in his reply stated that he would send such as the nature of our situation with foreign nations, did not require to be kept secret. And to Mr. R.'s resolution he answered, he would make a written reply, which we shall probably have to-morrow."
"Mr. Rose and suite have taken lodgings, he was sent for by a government boat to a small distance below Alexandria, the vessel came in having got aground. It is the determination of the government to listen with temper to, and deliberate with calmness and patience on all the propositions he may have to make. He yesterday delivered his letter of credence to the President, and the day before, duplicates in the office of the Secretary of State—we hope in the course of a week to hear something from him."
"The Presidential election, a subject so highly interesting, we have done nothing in yet; we hoped it would be unnecessary, from the general impression here that there would be scarcely an opposition to Madison—but if there is a probability of it in our state, and the expression of all but four of the Virginia representation could influence the ticket; I am sure it would be had; but I think without the appearance of necessity, it would be best to make no expression of opinion—this tho' I begin to think necessary, and it is probable that in the course of the present week, we shall have a meeting in order to determine to express an opinion or not, and if we determine to do so, shall do it then."
"On Friday Messrs. Randolph, Clark and Rowan, were summoned to attend the court of enquiry and refused to attend."
A member of the Assembly, is sorry that the CARD in the Enquirer was not more explicit. In inviting the members of the Virginia Legislature to attend a meeting at the Capitol, it is, certainly to be understood that the Republicans alone are included—he means no disrespect to the Federalists, when he says, that on all political questions there can be no real concert between the two parties.
Lest it might be misunderstood, it is proper to state that in our observations on a statement from the Argus respecting the next Presidential Election, we did not mean to intimate that such letters had not been received in this city, but that the arrangement they described, could not have been made.
"PHILO-PHOCLION"—and "REMARKS on the Presidential Election"—as soon as possible.
BRITISH BLOCKADING DECREE.
A respectable merchant of this city yesterday received a letter from Liverpool, dated the 16th of November. It came by the Resolution arrived at Boston; and states, that the London Gazette of the 14th notices, that a supplement would be published on the Monday following, with the proclamation declaring the ports of France and her allies in a state of blockade.—N. Y. Gaz.
FACTS ARE STUBBORN THINGS.
John P. Shields's account with G. L. Haller: 1807, April 26. To entrance-money for three daughters of John P. Shields at $5 for each, according to established rules $ 15 00 Fees for public tuition from the 26th of April for 9 months only, at $10 per quarter, instead of $15 as usual, for each of his daughters 90 00 Music-master paid for three quarters, at $12 per quarter, do 108 00 Dancing-master for two quarters at $8 per do. do 48 00 Two writing desks with locks, keys, inkstands, pens, &c. 13 50 French books, rulers, pen-knives, writing books, quills, &c. furnished to his three daughters during 9 months 14 81 $ 289 31
CR. Deduct 169 36 Balance due to G. L. Haller, $ 119 75
N. B. 1. Note given to me for the above balance in lieu of cash. 2. After the first quarter, no advance paid by John P. Shields, contrary to the established rules of this institution. 3. No interest charged for the delay of payment. 4. Music and dancing-masters paid their self for the three daughters of John P. Shields. 5. No charge made for the use of my dancing nearly 9 months. 6. A deduction of $5 per quarter made in consequence of his making his own arrangements for public tuition of his daughters, whereas my usual fee is $15 per quarter for each young lady, payable in advance. 7. Sunday other minute account of his three daughters. Thus much in favour of John P. Shields, yet said John P. Shields that the 16th instance of his doing so was on the 21st.

DEBATE On the Resolution requesting the President to cause an enquiry to be made into the conduct of Gen. Wilkinson.
(CONTINUED) Mr. Sloan said, he rose with an intention, and for the purpose of making some observations on what had fallen from the gentleman from New-York (Mr. Gardener) whom he did not now see in his place, but if he was within the walls he should be glad to know.
He had intended in the first place to have acknowledged and expressed in his plain way, his gratitude to the gentleman for his endeavors to enlighten the House, and this he should have endeavored to do in a very few words. This member had expressed his extreme surprise that the motion which he had offered on a former day had not been more adverted to by members of the House; he should have recollected that every member of the House was not endowed with the same sagacity and penetrating genius which he so abundantly possessed. But permit me to say, said Mr. S. that I was not less surprised than that gentleman could be, that the first move made this morning was not (under existing circumstances) to withdraw the resolution. It was a fact known and believed by every member on the floor, that the proper authority had undertaken to investigate the object of the resolution. Under a consideration and from a full conviction that this House was not the proper tribunal to try this case, his surprise and disappointment had surpassed that expressed by the member from New-York, that the subject had not been taken up yesterday morning. Mr. S. said he was then prepared to have made a pretty lengthy speech, the notes for which he now held in his hand; but the House had been taken up the whole day in discussing what course they should give to a certain (Yazoo) memorial. In the course of that debate he had been much instructed by the member from Vermont (Mr. Elliot) being warned of the taking the bill by the horns, and also something about a club and Hercules; although these expressions were somewhat obscure, they had raised some sensation in his mind, and induced him to think he had better be cautious how he made speeches on that floor; he had therefore concluded not to make this long speech which he had digested and prepared.
But before he sat down, he would say, that being privy to certain circumstances, altho' he had no right to speak of them, he had certainly a right to think; and he would state what thoughts this resolution produced in his mind. Knowing, as no doubt every member of the House did, of what had lately turned up between certain great men, it brought to his mind a circumstance which might be thought simple, but he hoped he might be permitted to introduce a simile: when he went to school in his youthful days he had seen little affairs turn up between the boys, and he had known those who were likely to get the worst of the bargain, cry out, "I'll tell daddy, or mammy; I'll tell my master." This struck Mr. S. very forcibly as applicable to the present case.
He would not detain the House much longer, but barely observe, that he hoped the amendment would be rejected; and after that, that the resolution itself would be rejected with all the contempt which it deserved.
Mr. Elliot. I am opposed to the amendment proposed to the motion of the gentleman from New-York, and to the motion itself; and shall probably be opposed to any amendment that may be offered to the original resolution. All this for the best of all possible reasons, because I am in favor of the original proposition in its original form.
Had I not long since resolved to adopt, as a political man, the motto nil admirari , I should regard with some degree of admiration, if not of astonishment, the extreme squeamishness which is manifested by some gentlemen respecting an invasion of Executive functions, which they apprehend will be involved in the adoption of the resolution, and the very curious arguments which are advanced to support the position. But admiration and astonishment ought not to be excited by any political events or opinions of the present day.
It is to be regretted, that the gentleman from New-York (Mr. Gardener) has suffered himself to wander into so wide a field of eloquent declamation, respecting the celebrated campaign of the officer who is the object of the present resolution, against which what have been called the Burrites at New-Orleans. I regret it, sir, because I wished argument, and argument alone, to be used upon the present occasion. Still, whenever an opportunity is fairly offered for the expression of an opinion upon that subject, I shall not hesitate for a moment to express that which it has been my lot to form. It was a horrible, though bloodless campaign! And I believe the continuance in the command of the army of the United States in the chief command, subordinate to the President, who is the constitutional commander in chief of our armies, of that officer, since that period, has placed a disgraceful stain upon the early annals of our new western world, which the annual inundations of the Mississippi, were they increased to the magnitude and duration of those of the Nile, could not efface in a century.
Few members, perhaps none, have expressed any doubts of the propriety of the measure, if we possess the constitutional power to adopt it. But as many serious doubts are entertained of its constitutionality, it may be proper to go into an argument with a view to dissipate those doubts.
It is triumphantly asked, from what constitutional source do you derive this power? Here it is but fair to meet gentlemen on their own ground, and to admit that if we cannot find in the constitution authority for the measure, they may very properly enquire, quo warranto ? By what warrant do you attempt its exercise? To answer the enquiry, as it is certain that the constitution has not, in express terms, given us authority to adopt this particular measure, let us take a cool review of the whole of our constitutional powers.
To me it appears that three classes of powers are bestowed upon us by the constitution. Two of them by express terms of incorporation the third by inevitable implication. The great and comprehensive legislative powers, properly so called; and this as one of the branches of the legislature, and in that character, the exercise of these all comprehensive powers, gives within the process within the first section of the constitution.
All legislative powers herein granted, shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. These are the initial words of the constitution. They describe no specific powers. They merely invest the general power of legislation. They refer us to other parts of the constitution for the delineation of the particular attributes of the legislative character. They attach those attributes to us in common with the Senate. They give us no distinct and independent powers. Nor does any other clause of the constitution, in direct terms, vest in us the power for which we now contend.
The second class of powers is given to us, rather as a distinct and independent assemblage of individuals, than as a component branch of the national legislature.
These are not powers, strictly speaking of a legislative character, but powers with which we are invested for the purposes of our own organization, government and discipline, as an independent political body. Such as the power to choose our Speaker and other officers; to judge of the elections and qualifications of our own members; to adjourn; to compel the attendance of absent members; to expel members; to establish rules of proceeding; and to keep and publish journals.
Before I proceed to the third class of our constitutional attributes, I will just notice two eccentric or anomalous authorities with which the House of Representatives is invested by the constitution, and which complete the circle of our political functions. We have the sole power of impeachment. As it respects the exercise of that power, we are divested of our legislative character, and transformed into the great inquest of the nation. In certain cases we become the electors of the President. We then again lose our legislative character, and are changed into an electoral body.
The third class of our constitutional powers, and it is by no means an unimportant one, although it is not given to us in express terms, is essential to our political existence. I speak of those which, by an irresistible and incidental implication, are bestowed as incidental to those which are specifically vested by the constitution. This incidental authority must of course be extensive and important. While it is our duty to cherish and sustain this great and plenteous source of power, we ought cautiously to govern ourselves by the true spirit and genius of the constitution. Here great discretion is required, because here arises that danger of usurpation with which gentlemen are alarmed on the present occasion. Yet the existence of incidental power is questioned by none. By this alone are we authorized to pass resolutions calling upon the Executive for information, a practice coeval with the government itself. Gentlemen will say that we then act in our legislative capacity. But they are mistaken. The legislative power is the power of making laws. We only act as legislators, when we discuss among ourselves the project of a law, or act upon one received from the Senate. The information which we ask may or may not be given by the Executive. It is true that it is his constitutional duty to give us information from time to time; but at what time and in what manner is left to his own discretion. Where we have no coercive, we have no legislative authority. The information, if it be obtained, may or may not be such as to require or even to induce us to act legislatively. If then we possess this power of calling upon the Executive for information and it has long been settled, by a practical construction of the constitution, that we do possess it, it is in our possession as incident not only to the actual but to the potential exercise of the general function of legislation.
But an important distinction is taken, and one which would be conclusive, if it would bear examination. It is, however, a nominal rather than a real distinction. It is admitted that we may call upon the Executive for information, but it is said that we now propose to call upon him to perform his duty, in a case exclusively within his own constitutional jurisdiction. It is just so in every case of a call for information. It is his duty to give us information, but in his own time and in his own way. Calling upon him to communicate to us information, upon any subject whatever, we call upon him to perform a duty which the constitution authorizes him to perform when and how he pleases. In every instance we may or may not legislate in consequence of what we obtain, and we do not legislate in the act of asking for it. We cannot coerce the communication; we cannot even demand it, we can only request it. We ask the President to do his duty in the one case as well as in the other. But it is said that as we cannot impeach a military officer, as the President alone can remove him, we can neither ask for his removal, or for an inquiry into his conduct. It seems to me to be considering rather too curiously to consider so: The fact is, that we propose to request an inquiry, for the very purpose of obtaining information, and for that purpose alone; and in every other case, the information, when obtained, may induce us to act in our legislative capacity.
Here it is proper to call the attention of the House to the clause of the constitution which was read this morning by the honorable mover of the resolution. "No title of nobility shall be granted by the U. States to any person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state." Can any one doubt our power to pass a law for the purpose of giving effect to this great and prominent provision of the constitution? We cannot legislate upon the subject ex post facto ; we cannot provide for the punishment of an infraction of this article which has already taken place, but we can guard against such infraction in future. It is said that your commander in chief has long been the pensioner of a foreign power. We only wish that his innocence may be established or his guilt developed. If the development of his guilt should be the result of the proposed enquiry, it should be proved to have been the great infraction of the constitution, what more powerful argument could be urged to the members of the national legislature, to induce them to pass a law to prevent or punish such treacherous conduct in future?
Some gentlemen who appear to doubt our power to pass the resolution, declare that the information which we possess upon the subject ought to be transmitted to the President, and that they will vote for its transmission. How is this to be done? Will the Speaker or the Clerk transmit it without the order of the House? It may be presumed not. The House, then, must act upon the subject. And surely it will be more proper and dignified to request the President to do a certain act, than to hint to him that we ex-
pect him to do it. And our right is the same in one case as in the other.
To this point then the coast is clear. We only ask for information, and we have a right to ask. But we shall be told that we are begging the question, and that the great difficulty which exists in the case still recurs upon us. You propose to call upon the President to do his duty. One branch of the government has no right to make such a call upon another. Upon this point alone I should be willing to rest the decision. Has not one branch of the government a right to make a request to another? What forbids it? The right is certainly not expressly given. But if it if not forbidden by any part of the constitution; if it be not reserved to the States, the people, or any power on earth; if it be naturally incident to the intelligent and proper exercise of the great powers actually vested; and if it has long been declared to exist by a practical construction of the constitution; the exercise of such a right is at least harmless, and of course neither unconstitutional, nor extra-constitutional. From the course which I have thought it my duty to pursue, not only in the present session, but on former occasions, I shall not be suspected of possessing an overweening confidence in the Executive; but I will venture to say that the Executive will feel none of that squeamishness upon this subject, which is manifested here. Whatever may be my opinion as to particular measures of the Executive, I have too much confidence in his good sense and patriotism, to believe that he will object to a compliance with our request. If, indeed, he shall be of opinion that we are invading or usurping the proper province of executive prerogative, it will be his duty to tell us so, and he will tell us so. But this, I presume, is not apprehended by any one.
I have confined myself closely to the question. The view which I have taken of the subject occurred to me after the debate commenced this morning. I feel a real, not an affected diffidence, in my powers of argument upon this or any other subject. I cannot hope to convince—I will not say the members of this House, for the remark would imply that they are inattentive to my observations—any assembly of intelligent men whatever. But when doubts arise upon a great constitutional question, it is proper for every one to throw in his mite with a view to dispel those doubts. This has been done. If any good effect has been produced, it is very well, if not, I have done my duty.
Mr. Dana said, it was not strange, that upon a subject that was so greatly interesting to the people of the United States as this—upon a subject that went very seriously to affect the character of the commanding officer of the army, that gentlemen should entertain a difference of sentiment as to the best course proper to be pursued. There seemed to be but one opinion as respected the general charge, that it merited serious attention in some way and in some form. It concerned the character of the officer himself if innocent, that an enquiry should be had, as well as it concerned the people and the nation if he were guilty. In the situation in which he was now placed, and feeling as he did, how much the reputation of a military officer was his best estate, Mr. D. thought it necessary to exercise peculiar discretion and not (though other gentlemen appeared to think differently) to express any opinion on the innocence or guilt of this officer. If there were information before the House which might give a full knowledge of facts, he would wish it should be so disposed of as to meet a fair enquiry; and could wish also, that the delegate from Orleans should be called upon to declare what he knew of the acceptance by this officer of any money or of the project or agreement of any persons to dismember the union, or to render it dependent on any foreign power; and for this reason, that this gentleman, received as a member of this House, though not having the privilege of voting or debating, enjoyed every other privilege of members of the House, being entrusted with the discharge of high public functions and amenable to the authority of the House; and that the privilege of this House must be deemed precedent and paramount to the authority of any court martial or court of enquiry. Although this was his general opinion on the subject, he doubted very much the propriety of adopting the motion of the gentleman from New-York for the appointment of an authorised committee. If the House has resolved to appoint a committee of enquiry which should directly investigate the character of any officer, it would be proper to arm such committee with the power of sending for persons, papers, &c. As he now understood the object of the present resolution it was merely to appoint a committee to enquire whether the House should adopt a particular resolution requesting an enquiry and was therefore different from a motion for enquiry. In the case of Sinclair, which had been quoted, the committee was appointed to enquire, and not to consider the propriety of enquiring; so that the case did not apply. It was very immaterial whether the amendment were agreed to or not; but as a motion had been made to amend it, by striking out this part of it, he should give his vote in favor of the motion.
Mr. Fisk was opposed to the amendment to the resolution; and was surprised at being so long detained on the subject this day, after being told that a court was already authorized to make the enquiry. This being the case, if no other end was to be attained, than merely to throw light on the guilt or innocence of General W. there was now no necessity for adopting the resolution. If no court were ordered, it would be proper to enquire whether it would be necessary to adopt the resolution. If there was no sufficient evidence before the House, on which to ground the resolution, why should it be adopted? Was it to throw the additional weight of the House of Representatives into the scale? He presumed no gentleman in the House would acknowledge this object.
Mr. F. did not believe the House possessed the power to institute an enquiry. It did not follow that they possessed this power merely because the power merely because the constitution had not prohibited it to them; and the constitution had certainly not given it to them. The gentleman from New-York (Mr. Gardener) had told them that if they could control the master they had power over the servant. Mr. F. said this did not follow as a correct conclusion. The House could impeach the judges of the supreme court, but could not remove a clerk of the same court; they could delegate the power, but could not exercise it themselves. For what purpose should the enquiry be made? When made, could they elect any object by it? No. And why? Because the constitution has reserved to this House a power to remove the superior officer, who alone could remove the inferior. If gentlemen thought it proper to bring forward a resolution to en-
quire into the propriety of impeaching the superior officer, and showed cause for it, no objection could be made.
While gentlemen were extremely careful to guard the constitution from violation, he begged they would not trespass on it themselves; while they complained of a supposed breach of trust by a public officer, he hoped not to see it realized in this House. The constitution had confined the power of the House within a certain limit; and when they exceeded that limit, they violated the constitution.
The gentleman from New-York had told the House that he hoped what had been denied in the palace would not be refused here. Mr. F. asked what had been denied here "the palace." The gentleman from New-Orleans had told them that the evidence did not relate to the subject, and that it was not sufficient for conviction of any person. The gentleman from New-York had also stated that if the House transmitted this evidence to the President without referring it to a committee, they would be left in the same situation as they were now, because the gentleman from New-Orleans would keep his word as he always did. The gentleman from New-Orleans might consider this as a compliment; Mr. F. was willing all the honor intended should attach to him, but he did not believe that gentleman was possessed of such principles; he did not believe any gentleman was so lost to the honor of his country as to suffer private pique to seal his lips when called upon to give evidence by any authority whose duty it was to enquire. Would the gentleman indeed decline in such a case? It was impossible that he could. Mr. F. could not have so contemptible an opinion of any gentleman whatever as to suppose that his love of country would not triumph over private animosity.
The same gentleman from New-York had very emphatically asked when would the cup of guilt be full? Mr. F. said, when gentlemen came forward to justify treason, when they attempted to paralyze all the exertions made to arrest such nefarious plans as those of the late conspiracy—then would the cup be full; then would the distraction of the country be complete.
But, the House were told, this officer had violated the constitution. How had he violated the constitution? In arresting traitors? And should traitors alone enjoy all the constitutional rights? Mr. F. said this man also had rights. Let him have a fair enquiry. Why influence the public mind and blow his guilt (if guilty) from this source? Why had not the prosecution been pursued in the courts of justice? Why had not this information been given to the President? Why was it brought to this House? Let it be brought forward properly. He believed when the evidence added was examined, it would not bear the light.
Mr. F. said no doubt that Burr and all his friends would rejoice that all the evidence against them should be arrested in any way; and whatever were the guilt or innocence of Gen. W. it would be proper that the thing should pursue the usual course. He could not see why this had been brought into the House, or why it was pursued and insisted on while an enquiry was progressing in the proper way. Believing this enquiry not to be within their constitutional power, and no necessity to exist for it, if it were, he should give his vote against it in every stage of the business.
Mr. W. Aiton said it was not his intention to detain the House one moment; he rose but with a view to state to the House that facts had been strangely misrepresented. When the gentleman from New-Orleans had risen a few days ago, he had told the House that the information which he had meant to communicate, and which had been disregarded year after year, did not relate to this subject. And what was the language which had this day been held forth on the subject? "A deaf ear had been turned to the subject in the palace!" In order that he might be assured that this gentleman might be assured that this was an egregious error. Mr. A. said he had asked the gentleman from Orleans if he did not understand him to say, that Mr. A. that his information did not particularly relate to this subject, and I understood him correctly: I wish it to be explicitly so stated to the House and to the nation. Gentlemen who heard the observations this day made would attribute to them that credit which they deserved. When was it that general Wilkinson became so obnoxious to a particular part of the community? Not till his exertions had saved the country from ruin—not till he had raised his hands against Burr and his associates. Look to his appointment to office some time ago and to those who supported him; revert to the language they used at that day, and listen to their denunciation now—"Wilkinson had violated the constitution—the executive held him by the hand—his conduct was not enquired into—the representatives of the nation were therefore called upon to do that duty which the executive had neglected"—this was now the language of those who once cherished him. What could cause this wonderful change of sentiment?
The present question presented itself at every moment in a very different shape. If the object of it were merely to give to the executive information which it did not now possess, no one would object to it. The gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Dana) had told the House that the evidence of the gentleman from N. Orleans ought to be commanded, and it could not be done but by the House—that the gentleman possessed all the privileges of a member of this House, and he doubted much whether his evidence could be procured in any other way. Would the evidence of the gentleman be taken down & delivered through the medium of newspapers as evidence for a committee of enquiry? This must be what the gentleman meant, although he cared very little whether the committee had power to enquire into it or not. Was the House in possession of any evidence whatever on this subject? Mr. A. said not. No evidence whatever had been laid on their table on this subject. There was before them a resolution on which they were called upon to decide. In making this decision had they before them any evidence on which to found their agreement to it? Let us get possession of the evidence, said he, & then the House may make a proper disposition of the resolution and of the papers bearing on the subject in their possession. If a court of enquiry had been ordered, was not that sufficient? Was not the purpose of the resolution thus answered? What other object was to be attained? He could see no other, except it were to give gentlemen an opportunity to arraign the conduct of the executive, and exhaust their imagination in sheer invective. He could not for his soul see, after they were informed that an enquiry was ordered, why they should enquire further.
(Debate to be continued.)
WINGFIELD SCHOOL, Forks Plantation. The subscriber having received very ample assistance, can take 12 or 15 students in addition to his usual number. In this institution it is proposed to teach the Greek, Latin, French and English Languages, Writing, Arithmetic, Geometry, Geography and the use of the Globes. Terms—Board, tuition, washing, and fuel, 100 dollars per annum, with an extra charge of $16 for every student who shall apply himself wholly or partially to the study of the French Language—Bed and Bedding, when found by the subscriber, $6 2-3 per annum. In all cases quarterly payments in advance will be required to be made with punctuality. The subscriber refers those gentlemen, to whom he may not be sufficiently known, to some papers in the hands of Col. George Wm. Smith of the city of Richmond. The school will be opened on the 21 Wednesday of the present month and be closed on the 24 Friday in December next, with a vacation of four weeks, commencing the 24 Friday in June. PETER NELSON. [2aw2w]
Jan. 12. NOTICE—On the 10th of last month, Elijah Kirby delivered to me in Orange county, on a way from Woodford county, Kentucky, a MARE, which he requested me to deliver to a Mrs. a widow Watkins in Goodrich; I carried her to the widow Watkins, her sons being from home, and not likely to return for some months; she refused to receive her. The right owner is requested to call on me for her six miles above Columbia in Fluvanna county. BENJAMIN SEAY. [1aw3w]
Jan. 7. VIRGINIAW VIRGINIA—At a Superior Court of Chancery held at the Capitol, in Richmond, May 1st, 1807. Samuel Booker, administrator, with the will annexed of Wm. Brown, deceased, Plaintiff—A. J. John Scott and William Weir, Defendants. The defendant Wm. Weir, not having entered his appearance and given security according to the act of Assembly and the rules of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that he is not an inhabitant of this country, on motion of the plaintiff by counsel; It is ordered, that the said defendant do appear here on the first day of the next term and answer the bill of the plaintiff, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some newspaper published in the city of Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the Capitol in the said city. A Copy. Teste, PETER TINSLEY, c. c. Dec. 19. [1aw3w]
VIRGINIA—At a Chancery Court held in the city of Williamsburg, the 26th day of April, 1806. Benjamin H. Hilliard, Plaintiff—Against Ar. mstead Hilliard and Reuben Jones, Defendants. The defendant Ar. mstead Hilliard not having entered his appearance and given security according to the act of Assembly and the rules of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that he is not an inhabitant of this country, on motion of the plaintiff by his counsel; It is ordered, that the said defendant do appear here on the first day of the next term and answer the bill of the plaintiff, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some newspaper of the city of Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the former Capitol in this city. A Copy. Teste, ANTY ROBINSON, c. c. Dec. 31. [1aw3w]
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 1500 acres, lying in Buckingham, which is a most excellent site for a town, being two or three miles from the town's Manufacturing Mill, and five from New Canton. This Land is very valuable, having on it 200 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 cleared land, to employ 10 or 12 hands advantageously. This tract will be shown to any person inclined to purchase, by Capt. Peter Catterant, now resident on the land—One tract on Rappahannock creek, of 409 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 part of a tract owned by Mr. Maurice Langhorne—Another tract in Powhatan, of 200 acres, known by the name of Gileadton. 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. Powhatan, Dec. 4. WADE MOSSY, (Fm)
IN CHANCERY. At a quarterly court, continued and held for the county of Prince Edward, November the 17th, 1807. Martin Deshazor, Compt. against Zachariah Rice, Executor of John Deshazor, decd. John Deshazor, Zachariah Rice, guardian of James Deshazor, Martha Deshazor, Susanna Deshazor, Wm. Deshazor, Polly Burgess, lately Polly Deshazor, Elizabeth Panton, 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 his 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. Dec. 4. (Fm)
WILL BE SOLD, at public auction, on the 18th day of January next, at the door of the Eagle-Tavern, ninety-two thousand, seven hundred and thirty acres of western LANDS, lying in the counties of Montgomery, Harrison and Kanawha. A credit of one, two, three and four years will be allowed, if satisfactory security shall be given. SAMUEL GLENHOWN. Richmond, Oct. 7. (0aw3w)
NOTICE is hereby given to all whom it may concern, That Mr. JOHN CROW of Urbana, is authorised and empowered by the subscribers to transact any business relative to the late James Mills, Dr. Robert Spratt, Overton Cosby & Co. James Ross & Co. Overton Cosby and Dr. George D. Spratt. JOHN MINOR, JAMES ROSS. Jan. 12. [1aw3w]
NOTICE—If JAMES MOYLAN, who came to this Country from Ireland, in the year 1770, and who taught a School in the Counties of Albemarle and Prince George in 1777 and 1778, will make application to Wm. C. Hill, he will receive intelligence of a Brother with whom he once corresponded. If application be not made by the rising of the Legislature, it must be made to John O'Connor, near North-West River Bridge, Norfolk County. January 12. [1aw3w]