The enquirer (Richmond, Va.), 1808-05-03 00:00:00

PUBLISHED BY THOMAS RITCHIE, OFFICE OF THE POST-OFFICE, AT FIVE DOLLARS PER ANNUM, PAYABLE IN ADVANCE.
JOSEPH MARX & Co. have on hand an assortment of German Oznaburgs, Ticklenburgs, Dowlas and Towelling, by the bale, box, or piece. Cognac Brandy, Molasses, Sack Salt, coarse and fine, which they will sell for cash, tobacco, or approved paper.
WANTED TO PURCHASE, 200 hogsheads of tobacco of a dark greenish colour, for which a greater price will be given than for the bright-coloured tobacco. Enquire at the Eagle-Tavern at Richmond for the subscriber. PETER LORILLARD.
IN consequence of the death of William Bullock, the Co-partnership of NONVELL, WIATT & BULLOCK of this place, and NORVELL, WIATT & Co. of Lynchburg, is dissolved. All persons indebted to the said Company, are desired to make payment to either of the Partners, or to Edmund Norvell. Those having claims against them, will apply to John J. Wiatt of Richmond, or William Norvell of Lynchburg for payment. Wm. NORVELL, JOHN WIATT, JOHN J. WIATT.
Richmond, April 29.
NOW OR NEVER!!
A LIVING ELEPHANT to be seen at the WASHINGTON TAVERN, from Monday the 2d, to Saturday the 7th of May. Those that wish to gratify their curiosity by seeing the WONDERFUL WORKS OF NATURE, will do well to call previous to that time, as the ELEPHANT positively will be removed the next Morning. Perhaps this generation may never have the opportunity of seeing the ELEPHANT again, as this is the only one in the United States, and the last visit to this City. ADMITTANCE, 25 CENTS.
LOST OR MISLAID, A bundle of papers, wrapped in a piece of dressed sheep-skin, either between my house & Richmond, or Chesterfield Court-House—amongst the papers are, three bonds from Duty and John Porter, to Joel Estes, for £47: 10s each, payable one in April 1805, 1806 and 1807—one other bond from Maj. William Brown to myself for £34: 10s: 3d—one Twenty Dollar note of the bank of Virginia—one old paper money; say one $2000 bill, a number of other papers of various descriptions. Should any person find them or give information, that I get them, shall be reasonably rewarded—I likewise caution all persons taking an assignment for said Bonds. WM. LOGWOOD.
Chesterfield County, April 29. THE MILLING BUSINESS which has heretofore been carried on under the firm of LADIS & WEBSTER, was dissolved on the first instant. THOMAS & AMOS LADD, ISAAC WEBSTER.
A LIBERAL price will be given for an unexceptionable Male COOK—One of a middle age would be preferred—Enquire of Prosser and Moineure.
SIMPSON MORRIS, opposite the Eagle-Tavern, respectfully informs the public that he still continues selling off under cost and charges till the whole of the stock is sold and wishes the public not to lose this opportunity as goods are daily raising—The stock consists of the following articles, viz: 7-8 and 4-4 Irish Linen, Kenting, Linen and Cotton Cambrics, a large assortment of India & British Muslin, corded and cambric Dimity, a large assortment of silk & cotton Hose, ladies silk Gloves, Damask Silk, Shawls, Black twilled Sarcenets, Florentine silk, printed Calico, Linen & Cotton Chequers, linen & cotton Cambric hdkfs. white & Black French laces, white and colored Marseilles and Janes, India Cotton and Wildboar, Bennett's patent Cord, Cassimere, Broad Cloth, Flannels, Dressing Boxes, and a number of other articles too tedious to enumerate.
THE TAPPAHANNOCK RACES will commence on Wednesday the 25th of May, 1808. 1st DAY—The Jockey Club Purse of four hundred dollars, four mile heats. 2d DAY—The Jockey Club Purse of three hundred dollars, three mile heats. 3d DAY—A Sweepstake for three years old Colts and Fillies, two mile heats, one hundred dollars entrance; the subscription will remain open until the 25th May. Weights as follows—Aged horses 130lbs. 6 years old 120lbs. 5 do. 110lbs. 4 do. 100lbs. 3 do. 96lbs. under three years, a feather. Mares and Geldings allowed 3lbs.
In consequence of the following resolution of the Club, there is no doubt the members will be punctilious in paying their subscription, as the money on each day will be placed in the hands of the Judges. Resolved, That the Secretary shall have the Rules of the Club printed and furnish each member with a copy, and that a list of the members shall be handed in to the Club on the first day of each race, to be read in the dining room, stating who has and who has not paid their subscription. ARTHUR S. BROCKENBROUGH, Secretary and Treasurer.
FOR SALE, 121,000 acres of LAND in Kennebec county, in the forks of Great Sandy River: 24,000 in Tazewell county, on the waters of Clinch river: 20,000 in the county of Wythe, on Reed and Peak creeks: 1,000, 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. THOS: NORVELL.
REMOVAL—We have removed our Counting House to the House immediately below and contiguous to the one we have hitherto occupied, where we have for sale, Muscovado Sugar by the hhd. or bbl. Sherry Wine in quarter casks, and a few cases old Claret, of superior quality. ROBERT & ALLAN POLLOCK & Co.
ENGLISH GOODS—AFFLETON & Co. By the John Adams, St Johns, from Liverpool, 16, Calvert-Street, have received their regular supply of GOODS calculated for the present and approaching season. Cambric and Common Calicoes, Plain and striped Dimities, Printed Marseilles Vesting, White Jeans, Furniture Chintz, Do. Dimities, London Superfine Broad Cloths, Do. do. Cassimeres, Yorkshire fine Cloths and Cassimeres, Patent Nankenees, Cords, Grandurells, Cotton Cassimeres, 6-4 and 4-4 Cambric Muslins, Japan, Haricord and Check do. Plain and Figured Mull do. Leno, Victory, Ruddle, &c. do. Colored do. do. do. 4-4 Plain Book do. Ginghams, Silk do. Sattins, Persians and Sarsnets, Bonnet Silks, Silk Gloves, Silk Handkerchiefs, Fancy Shawls, Cotton Umbrellas, Do. Brace, Do. Laces and Footings, Do. Quiltings, English Kid Gloves, Cotton Hosiery, Handkerchiefs, Fringe and Bed Lace, Cotton and Linen Checks, Buttons, Birmingham Ware, &c. &c. In store, a few dozen gentlemen's best Beaver Hats, from Marseilles. These Goods will be sold low for cash, or undoubted paper at 60 days. Baltimore, April 19.
THE BROAD-ROCK SPRING RACES will commence the 11th day of May next. The 1st day, the Jockey Club Purse of $400, four mile heats—The 2d day the Proprietor's Purse of $200 three mile heats—The third day, a purse of $100 two mile heats—Entrance $20. For this purse, any person may run a horse whether he be a member of the Jockey Club or not—Agreeable to the Jockey Club weights, winning horses for the first and second days' races not allowed to start for the third day's purse. WM. BALL, Proprietor of the Field.
FOR SALE—30 ton Country and Swedes Iron assorted, 2 ton Nail Rods, a few hds. Northern Whiskey, and a few Bales prime Cotton. Likewise, just receiving 27,000 weight of choice Bacon, among which are 750 hams—All of which we will dispose of on reasonable terms, for cash or a short credit. RUSSELL & WALLACE, Left corner of street leading to Byrd's Warehouse.
NOTICE—The subscribers having formed a connection in Business, under the firm of HOVEY & SIZER, offer for sale (at the store lately occupied by Mr. C. J. Macmurdo) the following articles, viz:
 50 hds. N. E. Rum,  25 hds. Loaf and Lump Sugar,  12 bags of Pepper,  2 ton of bar Lead,  40 boxes Cotton and Wool Cards,  25 boxes Candles,  15 boxes New-York Chocolates,  25 trunks of Shoes assorted,  50 tiers Stone Lime. 
FITZWHYLSONN & POTTER have just received a very extensive supply of Foolscap and Letter PAPER, which they offer for sale on terms advantageous to the purchaser. They have on hand a great variety of Day-Books, Journals, Pocket Books, and Ledgers, Pen knives, Record and Sheriff's Travelling and other Books, Trunks, Music, and Music Spectacles mounted in Silver, Tortoise-shell and Steel, Musical Instruments and Strings, Elegant Visiting Paper Hangings for rooms, Cards. With a general assortment of articles in the Blank Book and Stationary line. Richmond, April 19.
SPRING & SUMMER GOODS—RICHARD BROOKS has just received a full assortment of GOODS, suitable for the present and ensuing season, all of which he will sell low for cash—Among which are—Superfine and second Cloth, Superfine and second Cassimeres, Twilled and Tabby Velvet, Hunter's constitution and silver Cords, Cotton Cassimeres and English Nankenees, India Nankenees, Bandannah, Rehmahl and Madras Hkfs. White and coloured Jans, Do. do. Marseilles, Calicoes and Chintz, Pink, blue and purple Ginghams and Muslins, Dimity and Cambric Dimity, Furniture do. Linen and Cotton Checks, 4-4 and 7-8 Irish Linen and shirting Cotton, 9-8 and 6-4 Cambrics, Plain and Figured Lenoes, Elegant mull Mull Robes and short Dresses, Worked and Figured Sarsnets and Crapes, Real Lace Veil, black and white, Narrow and broad black Laces, Fashionable Scarfs and Shawls, Gentlemen and Ladies' silk and cotton Hose, 7-4, 10-4 Damask Silk Shawls, and 1 case fashionable Bonnets and Head Dresses, just from Paris.
NOTICE—This subscriber being by a power of attorney authorised to settle the accounts and collect the balances due to the following different co-partnerships, formerly of this city, viz: Montgomery and Allan, Alexr. Montgomery & Co. Montgomery's, Henry & Co. and Montgomery's and Henry, requests all those who remain indebted to either of said firms to call and pay their respective balances to him. GEO: WATT.
NOTICE—By virtue of a deed of trust from Wm. Rawleigh, dated the 25th day of December, in the year 1807, and recorded in the district court of Richmond; made to secure the payment of a debt due from the said Rawleigh to Samuel Myers—Will be exposed to sale, at Auction, on the premises, on Saturday the 7th of next month, at 11 o'clock in the forenoon, all that LOT OF GROUND OR TENEMENT on Shockoe-Hill, in the city of Richmond, which the said Rawleigh bought of Simpkin Bryan. This piece of ground is twenty-nine & a half feet in front, on the street, and runs back 110 feet. There is on it a new three story Brick-House, lately built by said Rawleigh—Sixty days credit will be allowed for twelve hundred dollars of the purchase money, and twelve months credit for the residue; the purchasers giving negotiable notes, with approved endorsers: But the title to the property, as well as the possession, will be retained until the note for 1200 dollars is paid; and if not paid at the Bank of Virginia at the time it falls due, the said LOT OR TENEMENT will at any time thereafter, when the subscriber shall think proper, be sold by him at auction, under the deed of trust aforesaid, for ready money: And if on such second sale, it shall produce less than it sold for at the first sale, then the first purchaser, together with the endorser or endorsers to his notes, will be liable for the deficiency; but if it shall sell for more, the surplus will be paid to the first purchaser. In case of a second sale, ten days notice thereof shall be published in one of the news-papers printed in the city of Richmond. CHARLES COPLAND, Trustee. Richmond, April 23.
NOTICE—By virtue of a deed of trust from Wm. Rawleigh, dated the day of this month, made for the benefit of his creditors, whose names are annexed to the said deed, Will be exposed to sale, at Auction, at 12 o'clock of the day mentioned in the above advertisement, four SLAVES—A Man, two Women, and a Girl—A Wagon and four Horses—Six Mules and three Carts—Two Cows, and all the Household and Kitchen Furniture of the said Rawleigh. Six months credit will be allowed for all sums above fifty dollars. The purchasers giving negotiable notes, with approved endorsers, payable at the Bank of Virginia. And cash must be paid for all purchases under fifty dollars; no article will be delivered till the money is paid, or a note given as above. ROBERT HYDE, CHAS: COPLAND, Trustees. April 26.
IN CHANCERY—Charlotte Court, 8th March, 1808. Claiborne Barkdale and son, assignees of Major Parsons, Plaintiffs—Against James Green & Parish Green, Defendants. The defendant James, not having entered his appearance 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 state, on the motion of the plaintiffs by their attorney, It is ordered, that he appear here on the first day of August court next and enter his appearance, and give security for performing the decree of the court, and that a copy of this order be inserted in one of the newspapers printed in Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the court-house of the said county. A Copy. Teste, THOMAS READ, Clk.
IN CHANCERY—Charlotte Court, 8th March, 1808. Grief and Claiborne Barkdale, jr. Plaintiffs—Against Charles Harris, Henry A. Watkins, executor of William Pentecost and Richard Pentecost, Defendants. The defendant Harris, not having entered his appearance 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 state, on the motion of the plaintiffs by their attorney, It is ordered, that he appear here on the first day of August court next, and enter his appearance and give security for performing the decree of the court, and that a copy of this order be inserted in one of the newspapers printed in Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the court-house of the said county. A Copy. Teste, THOMAS READ, Clk.
LAND FOR SALE—The subscriber offer for sale that valuable Tract of LAND in Amherst county, now in the occupancy of Thomas Coppedge. This Land lies on Buffalo River, two miles from New-Glasgow and one from the Oaks; and from its contiguity to those places, with the advantage of the Lynchburg road running through it, is equalled by few stands in the upper country for a tavern or private entertainment. There is on this land a very commodious one story dwelling house 32 by 18, two rooms below and two above stairs, a good kitchen, smoke house, barn, corn house and stable, and a number of never-failing springs of excellent water; also, a variety of excellent fruit trees. This tract contains two hundred and twenty-five acres, and is bounded on two sides by Buffalo river, and one by Tribulation creek, affording a good portion of low grounds and several mill seats and distilleries—The payments must be one half when possession is given, which may be had in November next, the other half in two equal annual payments—For price and other particulars, application must be made to the subscriber living in New-Haven, Rockingham county, Virginia, or Thomas Coppedge on the premises. MATTHEW WATSON.
NOTICE—In Pursuance of a decree in Chancery, made by the Court of the U. States for the 5th circuit, in the district of Virginia; at the November term, in the year 1803, we shall expose to Public Auction, at the time and place hereinafter mentioned: Two TRACTS in the county of Goochland, one on Beaver Dam Creek, containing nine hundred acres; and the other called Little-Island, containing 10 acres, at Goochland court house, on the court day thereof, on Monday the 16th day of May, 1808. The dower of the widow of Wm. Ronald, will be first deducted, and the conditions on which the said land are directed under the said decree, will appear therein and will be communicated on the day of sale. The terms of purchase will be as follows: one fourth of the purchase money to be paid in cash, and the remaining three fourths in three equal instalments of six, twelve and eighteen months credit. In all other respects the aforesaid decree will be pursued. WM. BERKELEY, JOSIAH ELLIS, WM. MANN, Commissioners. March 15.
MAHOGANY—The subscriber has nine logs of MAHOGANY for sale on low terms for cash or good paper. EDWARD JOHNSTON. Rocketts, April 22.
TUITION OF YOUNG LADIES—Mrs. BARBOUR, who has lately become a resident of Richmond, proposes on the 1st of May to open a School for the tuition of Young Ladies, in the house lately occupied by Mr. Warden; in a very healthy and agreeable part of this City. She will teach Reading, Writing, Arithmetic & the English Grammar—Her price for these will be eight dollars per quarter, payable in advance. Likewise the Elements of Natural Philosophy, Natural History, History of Nations, Geography and Belles Lettres, at $12 and fifty cents per quarter, and in advance. Young Ladies will also be boarded—the price for tuition, boarding and washing will be one hundred and sixty dollars a year, payable quarterly and in advance. Mrs. Barbour will zealously and ardently devote her whole attention to her School, and if she meets with sufficient encouragement, her plan will be enlarged, and proper persons will be employed to teach music, drawing, the French language, and other branches of polite and useful education. Those who may be dissatisfied with the progress of their children, will be at liberty to withdraw them at any time. Richmond, April 19.
ADVERTISEMENT—I forewarn all persons whatever from trading or taking an assignment for a bond now in the hands of Mr. George Williamson of Powhatan, Exor. of Jacob Williamson, dec'd. The bond was given by Mrs. Hannah Williamson to William T. Walker of Prince Edward, for the amount of 30 pounds, and the bond dated the third day of January, 1803. GEORGE EGGLESTON. Executor of Hannah Williamson, dec'd. April 22.
RICHMOND TILE MANUFACTORY—The subscriber having procured the exclusive right to manufacture in this and several other states Harwood's much improved Patent Tile for covering houses, and at considerable expense erected the necessary buildings, &c. for carrying on that useful business extensively, now offers to supply, at a short notice, any quantity that may be required, at the moderate price of thirty-five dollars per thousand, delivered at his Factory. He can with confidence, founded on actual experiment, in the covering of about 20 houses in this city, assert, that houses can be covered with this tile as cheap in the first instance, as with shingles of the first quality, and when the security against fire, the difference of insurance, the durability and particular construction of those tiles to resist the most penetrating rains and snows are considered, he cannot doubt of meeting with considerable encouragement. It requires only the examination of a well covered roof to convince the most prejudiced mind of their superiority to any other tile heretofore made, or to the best of state, and will cost less than the latter, after paying the expense of water carriage to almost any part of this continent. Particular attention will be paid to orders from other towns, and in all cases where they are shipped, he will deliver them whole and sound, along side the vessels, at the expense of carriage only to the purchasers. Any person skilled in the art of tiling, will put on those tiles with great facility, but where they cannot be procured, he can engage a few here who have had some experience, and will go a moderate distance, if the job is of sufficient magnitude and their travelling expenses paid. BENJAMIN DUVAL. Richmond, March 22. N. B. I wish to sell Patent Rights in several other States. B. D.
IN CHANCERY—Louisa County October Court, 1806. Andrew Todd, Plaintiff—Against Christopher Stanley, William Hodges, William Hodges, Jun. and Frederick Harris, Defendants. The defendants Christopher Stanley, William Hodges and William Hodges, Jun. not having entered their 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 they are not inhabitants of this state, therefor, on the motion of the plaintiff by his attorney, It is ordered and decreed by the court, that the said defendants, Christopher Stanley, Wm. Hodges and William Hodges, Jun. do appear here on the second Monday in January next and answer the plaintiff'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 eight weeks successively, and posted at the front door of the court-house of this county on some court day. A Copy. Teste, JOHN POINDEXTER, c. l. e. April 1.
VIRGINIA—At a Superior Court of Chancery held at the Capitol, in the city of Richmond, the 13th day of February, 1808. Robert Birchett, Peter Puryear and Edmund Birchett, merchants and partners, under the firm of Birchett and Puryear, Plaintiffs—Against Thomas Stokes, administrator of Wm. Stokes, deceased, Defendant. The defendant 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 plaintiffs 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 plaintiffs, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some newspaper published in the city of Richmond for two months successively, & posted at the front door of the Capitol in the said city. A Copy. Teste, PETER TINSLEY, c. l. e. March 29.
IMPRESSED SEAMEN—It has been represented to the Secretary of State, that Nathan Thompson, Thomas Williams, Benjamin Bagnell, Joseph Setts, Joseph Cox, Charles Redding, Samuel Henshaw, A. Gordon, Samuel Clapson, William Thompson, John Brant, Thomas Webben, Matthew Soderborn, F. Race, George Smith, William Brown, Minor Smith, William Bender, Robert McCord, William Price, Henry Muller, David Porter, Benjamin Young, Charles Anderson, Isaac Gaines, Thomas Cook, William Jones, John Gallaway, Peter Lewis, Thomas Marcum, John Malville, Daniel M. Hogan, James Boggs, William Tiel, John Jason, James Curney, John Lemon, William Lindsey, Nicholas Miller, John Porter, Peter Murphy, James Patterson, John Skinner, Thomas Allen, Christopher Styon, J. C. Brecket, Jno. Swaine, Jno. Jarvis, Wm. A. Jennings, Theodore Young, James Hoyt, Joseph Rosey, John Till, Joseph Haswell and John Williams, who call themselves American citizens, have been impressed and are now detained in the British service. The friends of these men are hereby notified, that upon their transmitting to this department, proof of the citizenship, together with a description of the persons of the above named seamen, measures will be taken to procure their discharge. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, April 13, 1808.
The Editor of the National Intelligencer, and the Editors of such other papers as publish the laws of the Union, in the Atlantic States, are requested to insert the above notice three times, in their respective Gazettes. April 26.
DOMESTIC.
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS.
PART III.
(CONTINUED.) Mr. Madison, Secretary of State, to Messrs. Monroe and Pinkney, ministers extraordinary and plenipotentiary of the U. States, in London.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, March 18, 1807.
GENTLEMEN. Your dispatch of January 3, with the treaty signed December 31, with the British commissioners, were safely delivered on the 15th inst. Your letter of December 27, notifying the approach of that event had been previously received in time to be included in a communication of the president to congress, then in session. A copy of the instrument in its actual form, with the declaration of the British commissioners on signing it, was received by Mr. Erskine on the day of the adjournment of congress, and communicated by him to the executive.
The observations relating to the whole subject, as it is now presented, with such instructions in detail as will explain the views of the president, will be prepared with as little delay as possible, and transmitted by Mr. Purviance who holds himself in readiness to be the bearer.
For the present, I am charged by the president to refer you to my letter of February 3, and to signify his desire that the negotiation may proceed in the form therein stated, but without being brought to an absolute conclusion until further instructions shall arrive.
You will conform also to the views of the president, in forbearing to enter into any conventional arrangements with the British government, which shall embrace a trade or intercourse of its subjects with the Indian tribes, within any part of the territories westward of the Mississippi, under the authority of the United States. Considerations derived from a recent knowledge of the state of the aboriginal inhabitants of that extensive region, irresistibly oppose the admission of foreign traders into it.
I have only to add, that a proclamation will immediately issue, suspending the non-importation measure until the next session of congress. This will be a sufficient evidence to the British government of the conciliatory sentiments of the president, and of his sincere desire that no circumstance whatever may obstruct the prosecution of experiments for putting an end to differences, which ought no longer to exist between two nations having so many motives to establish and cherish mutual friendship.
I have the honor to be, &c. (Signed) JAMES MADISON. FROM THE SAME TO THE SAME. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, May 20, 1807.
GENTLEMEN. My letter of March 18 acknowledged the receipt of your dispatches, and of the treaty signed on the 31st December, of which Mr. Purviance was the bearer was the bearer, and signified that the sentiments and views of the president, formed on the actual posture of our affairs with Great Britain, would, without any useless delay, be communicated. The subject is accordingly resumed in this dispatch, with which Mr. Purviance will be charged. To render his passage the more sure and convenient, he takes it in the sloop of war, Wasp, which will convey him to a British port, on her way to the Mediterranean. She will touch also at a French port, probably L'Orient, with dispatches for Gen. Armstrong and Mr. Bowdoin, and will afford a good opportunity for any communications you may have occasion to make to those gentlemen.
The president has seen, in your exertions, to accomplish the great objects of your instructions, ample proofs of that zeal and patriotism in which he confided; and feels deep regret, that your success has not corresponded with the reasonableness of your propositions, and the ability with which they were supported. He laments more specially that the British government has not yielded to the just and cogent considerations which forbid the practice of its citizens in visiting and impressing the crews of our vessels, covered by an independent flag, and guarded by the laws of the high seas, which ought to be sacred with all nations.
The President continues to regard this subject in the light in which it has been pressed on the justice and friendship of Great Britain. He cannot reconcile it with his duty to our seafaring citizens, or with the sensibility or sovereignty of the nation, to recognize even constructively, a principle that would expose on the high seas, their liberty, their lives, every thing, in a word, that is dearest to the human heart, to the heart, to the capricious or interested sentences which may be pronounced against their allegiance, by officers of a foreign government, whom neither the law of nations, nor even the laws of that government will allow to decide on the ownership or character of the minutest article of property found in a like situation.
It has a great and necessary weight also, with the president, that the views of congress, as manifested during the session which passed the non-importation act, as well as the primary rank held by the object of securing American crews against British impressment, among the objects which suggested the solemnity of an extraordinary mission, are opposed to any conventional arrangement, which, without effectually providing for that object, would disarm the United States of the means deemed most eligible as an eventual remedy.
It is considered, moreover, by the president, the more reasonable that the necessary concession in this case, should be made by Great Britain, rather than by the United States, on the double consideration, first, that a concession on our part, would violate both a moral and political duty of the government to our citizens, which would not be the case on the other side; secondly, that a greater number of American citizens, than of British subjects are, in fact, impressed from our vessels and that, consequently, more of wrong is done to the United States, than of right to Great Britain, taking even her own claim for the legal criterion.
On these grounds, the president is constrained to decline any arrangement, formal or informal, which does not comprise a provision against impressments from American vessels on the high seas, and which would, notwithstanding, be a bar to legislative measures, such as congress have thought, or may think proper to adopt, for controlling that species of aggression.
Persevering at the same time in his earnest desire to establish the harmony of the two nations on a proper foundation, and calculating on the motives which must be equally felt by Great Britain to secure that important object, it is his intention that your efforts should be renewed, with

a view to such alterations of the instrument signed on the 31st December, as may render it acceptable to the United States.
That you may the more fully understand his impressions and purposes, I will explain the alterations which are to be regarded as essential; and proceed then to such observations on the several articles, as will show the other alterations which are to be attempted, and the degree of importance respectively attached to them.
1st. Without a provision against impressments, substantially such as is contemplated in your original instructions no treaty is to be concluded.
2d. The eleventh article on the subject of colonial trade, cannot be admitted, unless freed from the conditions which restrict to the market of Europe, the re-exportation of colonial produce, and to European articles, the supplies to the colonial market.
3d. The change made by the 3d article in the provisions of the treaty of 1794, relative to the trade with the British possessions in India, by limiting the privilege to a direct trade from the U. States, as well as to them, is deemed an insuperable objection.
4th. Either an express provision is to be insisted on for indemnifying sufferers from wrongful captures, or at least a saving in some form or other, of their rights against any implied abandonment.
5th. Articles 18 and 19 to be so altered as to leave the United States free, as a neutral nation, to keep and place other belligerent nations on an equality with Great Britain.
6th. No such alternative as is presented by the declaratory note on the subject of the French decree of November 21st, 1806, will be admissible.
First. The considerations which render a provision on the subject of impressments indispensable, have been already sufficiently explained.
Second. The essential importance of the amendment required in the 11th article, results from the extensive effect which the article, if unamended, would have on the system of our commerce as hitherto carried on, with the sanction or acquiescence of Great Britain herself.
It was hoped that the British government in regulating the subject of this article, would at least have yielded to the example of its treaty with Russia. It could not have been supposed that a modification would be insisted on, which shuts to our neutral commerce important channels left open by the adjudications of British courts, and particularly by the principle officially communicated by that government to this, through Mr. King, in the year 1801.
According to that principle and those adjudications, the indirect trade through our neutral ports was as free from enemy colonies, to every other part of the world, as to Europe; and as free to such colonies, in the articles of all other countries, as in European articles.
According to the tenor of the article, and the general prohibitory principle assumed by Great Britain, to which it has an implied reference, the productions both of the continental and of the insular colonies in America, can no longer be re-exported as heretofore to any part of Asia or Africa, or even of America, and consequently can no longer enter into the trades carried on from the United States, to the Asiatic or African shores of the Mediterranean, nor to any of the places beyond the Cape of Good Hope, offering a market for them; nor finally to any other enemy or neutral colonies in this quarter, to which in reason, as well as according to practice, they ought to be as re-exportable as to the countries in Europe to which such colonies belong.
In like manner the importations from beyond the Cape of Good Hope, more especially the cotton fabrics of China and India, can no longer be sent as heretofore to the West-Indies, or the Spanish Main, where they not only now yield a great profit to our merchants, but being mixed in cargoes with the produce of this country, facilitate and encourage the trade in the latter. Besides the effect of the article in abridging so materially our valuable commerce, the distinction which it introduces between the manufacturers of Europe and those of China and India, is chargeable with evils of another sort. In many cases it might not be easy to pronounce on the real origin of the articles. It is not improbable that supposititious attempts also might be occasionally made, by the least scrupulous traders. With such pretexts as these, arguing from the abuse made of less plausible ones, the interruptions and vexations of our trade, by the greedy cruisers which swarm on the ocean, could not fail to be augmented in a degree not a little enforcing the objection to the article in its present form.
As the prohibitory principle of Great Britain does not extend to the case of a colonial trade usually open, and no judicial decision has professionally applied the principle to such a trade, it is a reasonable inference, that the article will not be so construed as to interfere with the trade of that description, between enemy colonies beyond the Cape of Good Hope, and other countries and ports in that quarter. But on the other hand, it may not be amiss to guard against a construction of the article that would abolish the rule observed in the prize courts of Great Britain, which, in the case of the eastern colonies, presumes that these ports were always open, and thereby throws on the captors, instead of the claimants, the disadvantage of proving the fact in question.
It is observable, that the duration of this article is limited to the period of the present hostilities, whilst the others are to be in force for ten years; so that if there should be a peace and a renewal of the war, as is very possible, within the latter period, the onerous part of the bargain would survive a part, in consideration of which, they were assumed. Justice and reciprocity evidently require that the more important articles of the treaty should be regarded as conditions of each other, and therefore that they should be co-durable. In this point of view, you will bring the subject under reconsideration; and without making this particular amendment an ultimatum, press it with all the force which it merits. This amendment ought to be the less resisted on the British side, as it would still leave to that side, an advantage resulting from the nature of the two great objects to be attained by the United States, namely, the immunity of our crews, and of our neutral commerce, which are connected with a state of war only; whereas the stipulations valued by Great Britain, will operate constantly throughout the period of the treaty, as well in a state of peace, as in a state of war.
Whatever term may be finally settled for the continuance of this regulation, it will be proper to retain the clause which saves the right involved in the article from any constructive abandonment or abridgement. Even the temporary modification of the right, as it will stand without the inadmissible restrictions now in the article, is considered as an important sacrifice on the part of the United States to their desire of friendly adjustment with Great Britain. To an admission of the article with these restrictions, the president prefers the footing promised to the colonial trade, by the deference of Great Britain for the maritime powers, and by an unfeigned right of the United States, to adopt their regulations to the course which her policy may take.
That the operation of the article in its present form, might be more fully understood, it was thought proper to avail the public of the ideas of a citizen of great intelligence and experience with respect to our commerce. His remarks, contained in a paper herewith enclosed, afford a valuable elucidation on the subject. They will suggest at the same time, some explanatory precautions worthy of attention, particularly in the case of articles, which paying no duty on importation into the United States, do not fall under the regulation of drawbacks; and in the case of securing by bond, instead of actually paying, the duties allowed to be drawn back. It appears by the observations in your letter of January 3d, that
the bond was understood, as it surely ought to be, equivalent to actual payment. But this is a point so material, that it cannot be too explicitly guarded against the misinterpretation of the interested cruisers, and the ignorance or perverseness of inferior courts.
Third. The necessity of the change required in the third article, in order to secure an indirect, as well as a direct trade to the British East-Indies, will be fully explained by the observations which have been obtained from several of our best informed citizens on that subject, and which are herewith enclosed.
As this latitude of intercourse was stipulated by the 13th article of the treaty of 1794, as judicially expounded by the British superior courts; as it was enjoyed by the United States prior to that epoch, and has been always enjoyed, both before and since by other friendly nations; and as there is reason to believe that the British government has been at all times ready, since the article expired, to renew it in its original form, it may justly be expected that the inserted innovation will not be insisted on. Should the expectation fail, the course preferred is to drop the article altogether, leaving the trade on the general footing of the most favored nation, or even trusting to the interest of Great Britain for such regulations as may correspond with that of the United States.
Should the negotiation take up the East-India article of the treaty of 1794, you will find several amendments suggested in the extracts above referred to, some of which may be attempted with the greater chance of success, as they are harmless, if not favorable to the British system. To these suggestions may be added, a privilege to American vessels of touching at the Cape of Good Hope. The objection to such a stipulation, under the present defeasible title of Great Britain to the Cape, may be obviated by a descriptive provision, not necessarily applicable to it, in the event of its restitution by a treaty of peace, but embracing it in case the British title should be established by that event. It may be agreed that vessels of the United States may touch for refreshment at all the ports and places in the possession of Great Britain on, or in the African or Asiatic seas.
Fourth. Without a provision, or reservation, as to the claims of indemnity, an abandonment of final settlement of existing controversies. It cannot be presumed, that a precaution against such an inference, in any mode that may be most effectual, can be opposed or complained of. On the contrary, it excites just surprise, that so much resistance should be made to indemnifications supported by the clearest rules of right, and by a precedent in a former treaty between the two countries, from which so many other articles have been copied. The only colorable plea for refusing the desired provision, flows from a presumption, not only that the British courts are disposed, but that they are competent, to the purpose of complete redress. Not to repeat observations heretofore made on this subject, an unanswerable one is suggested by the clause in the article of the treaty, annulling the principle, or rather the pretence, that vessels without contraband of war on board, returning from a port to which they had carried articles of that sort, were subject to capture and condemnation. Previous, even to this recognition, it had been settled as the law of nations, by the British high court of admiralty, that vessels so circumstanced, were exempt from interruption. Yet a British order of August 1803, expressly declares them to be lawful prizes; and it is well known, that a number of American vessels, have been seized and condemned under that order. Here then is a class of wrongs, indeniably entitled to redress, and which neither can nor ever could possibly be redressed, in the ordinary course; it being an avowed rule, with the prize courts, to follow such orders of the government, as either expounding or superseding the law of nations. Even cases not finally decided, would probably be considered as falling under the rule existing at the time of the capture, & consequently be added to this catalogue of acknowledged, but unredressed injuries.
Fifth. Articles 18 and 19.—An effect of these articles is to secure to British cruisers and their prizes a treatment in American ports, more favorable than will be permitted to those of any enemy; with a saving of contrary stipulations already made, and a prohibition of any such in future. As none of our treaties with the belligerent nations (France excepted) stipulated to their cruisers an equality in this respect, and as there are parties to the war, with whom we have no treaties, it follows that a discrimination is made, in the midst of war, between the belligerent nations, which it will not be in the power of the United States to redress.
Weighty considerations would dissuade from such a deviation from a strict equality towards belligerent nations, if stipulated at a time least liable to objection. But it would be impossible to justify a stipulation, in the midst of war, substituting for an existing equality, an advantage to one of the belligerent parties over its adversaries; and that too, without any compensation to the neutral, shielding its motive from the appearance of mere partiality. Hitherto the United States have avoided as much as possible such embarrassments and with this view have gratuitously extended to all belligerents the privileges stipulated to any of them. Great Britain has had the benefit of this scrupulous policy. She can therefore with the less reason expect it to be relinquished for her benefit.
The last paragraph of the 19th article, establishes a just principle as to the responsibility of a neutral nation, whose territory has been violated by captures within its limits; but by extending the principle to the two miles added to our jurisdiction by the 12th article, qualified as that addition is, it is made peculiarly important that an amendment should take place.
Passing by the failure of a reciprocity, either in the terms or the probable operation of the responsibility, the United States seem to be bound to claim from the enemies of Great Britain, redress for a hostile act, which such enemies may not have renounced their right to commit within the given space; making thus the United States liable to the one party, without a correspondent liability to them in the other party; and at the same time entitled Great Britain to redress for acts committed by her enemies, which she has reserved to herself a right to commit against them.
Should all the other belligerent nations, contrary to probability, concur in the addition of two miles to our jurisdiction, this construction would still be applicable to their armed ships; those unarmed alone being within the additional immunity against British cruisers; and the armed as well as the unarmed ships of Great Britain, being expressly within the additional responsibility of the United States.
Sixth. No treaty can be sanctioned by the United States, under the alternative presented by the declaratory note on the subject of the French decree of November 21. It is hoped that the occasion which produced it will have vanished, and that it will not be renewed in connection with a future signature on the part of Great Britain. The utmost allowable in such a case would be a candid declaration that, in signing or ratifying the treaty, it was understood on the part of Great Britain, that nothing therein contained would be a bar to any measures, which if no such treaty existed, would be lawful as a retaliation against the measures of an enemy. And with such a declaration, it would be proper, on the part of the United States, to combine an equivalent protest against its being understood, that either the treaty or the British declaration would derogate from any rights or immunities, against the effect of such retaliating measures, which would lawfully appertain to them, as a neutral nation, in case no such treaty or declaration existed.
Having given this view of the alterations which are to be held essential, I proceed to notice such others as, though not included in the ultimatum, are to be regarded as more or less deserving your best exertions. This will be most conveniently done by a review of the several articles in their numerical order.
The 2d, 4th & 5th, all relate to the trade & navigation between the two countries. The two first make no change in the stipulations of the treaty of 1794. The last has changed, and much for the better, the provisions of that treaty on the subject of tonnage and navigation.
Two important questions however, enter into an estimate of these articles.
The first is, whether they are to be understood as a bar to any regulations, such as navigation acts, which would merely establish a reciprocity with British regulations. From the construction which seems to have been always put on the same stipulations in the treaty of 1794, it is concluded that no such bar could be created and consequently that the articles are in that respect unexceptionable. It may be well, nevertheless, to ascertain that the subject is viewed in this light by the British government.
The second question is, whether the parties be, or be not, mutually restrained from laying duties, as well as prohibitions, unfavorably discriminating between articles exported to them, and like articles exported to other nations.
According to the construction put by the United States on the same clause in the treaty of 1794, the mutual restraint was applicable to discriminations of both kinds. The British discriminating duties on exports, introduced under the name of convoy duties, and since continued and augmented under other names, were accordingly combated, during the existence of the treaty, as infringing of its text. The British government, however, never yielded to our construction, either in discussion or in practice. And it appears from what passed in your negotiations on this subject, that the construction which is to prevail, admits discriminating duties on exports.
In this point of view, the stipulation merits very serious attention. It cannot be regarded as either reciprocal or fair in principle, or as just and friendly in practice.
In the case of prohibitions, where both governments are on an equal footing, because it is understood that both have the authority to impose them, neither is left at liberty to exercise the authority.
In the case of duties, where the British government possesses the authority to impose them, but where it is well known that the authority is withheld from the government of the United States by their constitution, the articles are silent, and of course the British government is left free to impose discriminating duties on their exports, whilst no such duties can be imposed by that of the United States. How will it be in practice? Stating the exports of Great Britain to the United States at six millions sterling only, the present duty of four per cent, levies a tax on the United States amounting to 240 thousand pounds, or one million, sixty five thousand, six hundred dollars; and there is nothing, whilst the war in Europe checks competition there, and whilst obvious causes must for a long time enfeeble it here, that can secure us against further augmentations of the tribute.
Even under a regulation placing the United States on the footing of the most favored nation, it appears that the British government would draw into its treasury from our consumption three-eighths of the revenue now paid into it by the U. S. Such a footing, however, would be material, as giving the United States the benefit of the checks accruing from the more manufacturing state of the European nations. But to be deprived of that check by the want of an article putting us on the footing of the nations most favored by Great Britain, and at the same time deprived of our own checks by clauses, putting Great Britain on the commercial footing of the nations most favored by the United States, would in effect confirm a foreign authority to tax the people of the United States, without the chance of reciprocity or redress.
The British duty on exports of the U. States has another effect, not entirely to be disregarded. It proportionally augments the price of British manufactures, re-exported from the United States to other markets, and so far promotes a direct supply from Great Britain, by her own merchants and ships. Should this not be the effect of her regulations as now framed, there is nothing that would forbid a change of them, having that for its object.
On these considerations it is enjoined upon you by the President, to press in the strongest terms, such an explanation or amendment of this part of the treaty, as will, if possible, restrain Great Britain altogether from taxing exports to the United States, or at least, place them on the footing of the most favored nation, or if neither be attainable, such a change in the instrument in other respects, as will reserve to the United States the right to discriminate between Great Britain and other nations in their prohibition of exports, the only discrimination in the case of export, permitted by the constitution. The unwillingness of the President to risk an entire failure of the projected accommodation with Great Britain, restrains him from making an amendment of this part of the treaty, a sine qua non; but he considers it to be reasonable, and so much called for by the opinion and feelings of this country, that he is equally anxious and confident with respect to a compliance on the part of the British government.
ARTICLE 6.—This article, as taking the case of the West-India trade out of any general stipulation of privileges granted to other nations, may prove convenient, by disencumbering measures, which may be taken against the British monopoly, from questions of which, that stipulation might otherwise be susceptible.
ARTICLE 7.—Though to remain if desired, would be more reasonable, without the last paragraph, or, with a right only, to except places and periods, at which the trade of the other party may not be permitted.
ARTICLE 8.—This article is framed with more accuracy than the 17th, on the same subject, in the treaty of 1794, and is improved by the additional paragraph at the close of it. But as such general stipulations have not been found of much avail in practice, & as it continues to be the wish of the President to avoid, especially at the present juncture, unnecessary confirmations of the principle, that a neutral flag does not protect enemies property, an omission of the article is much preferred, unless it be so varied as to be free from this objection. This may easily be done by substituting a general stipulation, "that in all cases where vessels shall be captured or detained for any lawful cause, they shall be brought to the nearest or most convenient port; and such part only of the articles on board, as are confiscable by the law of nations, shall be made prize; and the vessel, unless by that law, subject also to confiscation, shall be at liberty to proceed, &c."
There ought to be the less hesitation on the British side, in making this change, as the article in its present form, departs from that of 1794; and there is the more reason, on our side, for requiring the change, as the addition of "or for other lawful cause," after specifying the two cases, of enemy's property, and contraband of war, is probably valued by Great Britain as supporting her doctrine, and impairing ours, with respect
to colonial trade. The only case other than those specified, to which the right of capture is applicable, is that of blockades, which might have been as easily specified as provided for by such a residuary phrase; and the pretext for appropriating this phrase to the case of the colonial trade, would be strengthened by the specific provision, in a subsequent article, for the case of blockades.
It cannot be alleged that the specification of the two cases of enemy's property and contraband of war, is necessary to prevent uncertainty and controversy; the U. States having sufficiently manifested their acquiescence in these causes of capture. If there be a source of uncertainty and controversy, it is in the expressions "other lawful cause," and "otherwise confiscable," & this source could not be increased by the change here proposed.
ARTICLE 9.—This article is an improvement of that on the same subject, in the treaty of 1794; inasmuch as it excepts from the list of contraband, tar and pitch, when not bound to a port of naval equipment; & when so bound, substitutes pre-emption for forfeiture. It has an advantage also, in the clause renouncing the principle of the British order of June 1803, against vessels returning from places, to which they had carried contraband of war.
On the other hand, it would not have been unreasonable to expect that the British government would, in a treaty with the United States, have insisted on no stipulation less favorable than her stipulation on the same subject, with Russia; especially as the naval stores exported from the United States, are equally the growth and produce of their country.
Consistency, again, as well as reason, evidently required that the exception in favor of tar & pitch should have been extended to every species of naval stores, equally applicable to other uses than those of war, & destined to places, other than those of naval equipment.
Lastly, it is observable, that even turpentine and rosin are not included with tar or pitch, in the favorable exceptions, though of a character so kindred as to leave no pretext for the distinction.
Neither has the British government the slightest ground for regarding as a concession, on her part, the stipulated immunity of a vessel, which, on her outward voyage, had carried contraband to a hostile port. The hostile port. The principle asserted by her order on that subject, is an innovation against the clearest right of neutrals, as recognized and enforced even by British courts. The very language of the article implies that this is a pretext for the innovation.
These considerations urge a re-modification of the article; and they are strengthened by the great dislike of the President to formal recognitions, at this particular moment, or principles combated by some, and unfavorable to all neutral nations. So ineligible indeed in his view is any step tending in the least to retard the progress of these principles, that naval stores are to be left on a stipulated list of contraband, in the event only, of an inflexible refusal of the British government to omit them; nor are they to be retained in any event, without an addition or explanation that will except turpentine and rosin, as well as tar and pitch; there being no plausible motive for the distinction; and the quantity and value of the two former exported from the U. States, being found, on enquiry, to make them of equal importance with the two latter. It can scarcely be supposed that the British government will insist on this unwarrantable distinction. It is not, indeed, improbable, that it has been a mere inadvertence. Such an inference is favored by the circumstance of your speaking, in your comment on this article, of tar and turpentine as being the two exceptions. Whatever the true state of the case may be, it is thought better to omit a list of contraband altogether, than not to include in the exception from it turpentine and rosin, as well as tar and pitch.
ARTICLE 10.—The abuse of blockades has been so extravagant, and has produced so much vexation and injury to the fair commerce of the U. States, that as on one hand it is of great importance to find a remedy; so, on the other, it is the more necessary, that the remedy should be such as not itself to admit of abuse. The considerations which reconciled you to the tenor of the article, are at least a constructive approach to a solid provision for the case, are allowed the weight which they justly merit; whilst the course which your discussions took are a proof of the exertions which were used to give the article a more satisfactory form.
The failure, however, of the British commissioners to substantiate a favorable construction of the article, by a proper explanatory letter addressed to you, with their reasons to insert in the treaty a definition of blockade, justify apprehensions that the vague terms which alone were permitted to compose the article, would be more likely to be turned against our object, by courts and cruisers, and perhaps by a less liberal cabinet, than to receive in practice the more favorable construction which candor anticipated.
The British doctrine of blockades exemplified by practice, is different from that of all other nations, as well as from the reason and nature of that operation of war. The mode of notifying a blockade by proclamations & diplomatic communications, of what too is to be done, rather of what in fact has been done, is more particularly the evil which is to be corrected. Against these nominal blockades, the article does not sufficiently close the door. The preamble itself, which refers to distance of situation, as a frequent cause of not knowing that a blockade exists, though in one view giving the United States the advantage of a favorable presumption; in another view, carries an admission unfavorable to our principle, which rests not on the distance of situation, but on the nature of the case, and which consequently rejects in all cases the legal sufficiency of notifications in the British mode. The preamble is liable to the remark also that it separates our cause from the common one of neutral nations in a less distant situation, and that the principle it may even be pleaded against us in the case of blockades in the West-Indies. These considerations would have been outweighed by the advantage of establishing a satisfactory rule on this subject, in favor of our trade; but with such provision in the article, it is thought less advisable to retain it, than to trust to the law of blockades as laid down by all writers of authority, as supported by all treaties which define it, and more especially as recognized and communicated to the United States, by the British government, through its minister here, in
last, not to mention the influence which the course of events, and the sentiments of the maritime nations in friendship with G.
Britain may have, in producing a reform on this subject.
The last paragraph, though subjecting persons in civil as well as military service of an enemy, to capture in our vessels, may prove a valuable safeguard to ordinary passengers and mariners, against the wrongs which they now frequently experience, and which affect the vessel as well as themselves. (To be continued.)
Worthy Conduct.—Mr. John Adams, late President of the United States, voted in Massachusetts for Governor Sullivan, the Republican candidate, and assigned his reasons for his vote. He observed that the country, insulted and abused by foreign nations, was in danger, and that this was no time for opposition to the government. The government, said Mr. Adams, should be supported in the correct steps which it has taken. The EMBARGO was an indispensable and wise measure. N. Y. Amer. Cit.
EUROPE.
LONDON, March 23. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 22.
Commercial policy of the Orders in Council. The order of the day was then moved and Lord Lauderdale arose to make his promised motion respecting the result of the operation which the orders in council must have on the general commerce of the country. His lordship took a wide field in arguing this point, and insisted chiefly on the injurious tendency they must have first and directly on America; & 2dly, and indirectly on ourselves. The orders in council must sink the value of all the articles of American export, and thus disable the United States from paying the debts they owed to this country. By suspending or annihilating the trade of America, there would be no inlet into the continent for colonial produce. In a word, it was the object and boast of orders in council to relieve our West-India colonies, and to increase our general trade. Now, experience would prove the fact to be, that they would aggravate the embarrassment of our West-India planters, while they must tend to the detriment of the general commerce of the empire. Besides their operation upon France would be very different indeed from their effects upon the inhabitants of this country. In France it was well known that 16 out of 20 subsisted on Agricultural pursuits, while in England 15 out of 20 depended upon their commercial and manufacturing industry. In a word, the orders in council might affect the luxury of France; but they must prey upon the very subsistence of Great Britain. His lordship concluded with reading the resolutions, orders in council affecting our external and internal trade, as improving the commercial resentment as highly impolitic, both as a temporary and permanent measure.
Lord Bathurst made a very comprehensive and able reply to all the statements of the noble lord, and proved, by facts, that since 1806, both our exports and the imports of America had considerably decreased, previous to the issue of the orders in council, and that since December last, they had again recovered and increased in the re-export articles, the demand for which, according to the arguments of the noble lord, must have been diminished by the operation of these orders.
Lord King spoke in support of the resolutions of his noble friend.
Lord Grenville went over his former ground, of the ruinous consequences to our commerce, which might result from the orders in council, particularly as they affected America, and which he contended, would be the real cause of the war between the two governments, if war should ultimately prove the consequence of what was now transacting. He did not stick at saying, that the intention of such a measure as the orders in council, was the real cause of the embargo laid on by the United States; and that such an intention was known to the American government, antecedently to laying on the embargo.
Lord Hawkesbury would not at so late an hour enter again on the repetition of arguments, which had already been adduced in this question; but would content himself with saying, that as far as his information went, the American government knew nothing of the orders in council, when the embargo was laid on in the American ports.
The question was now impatiently called for, and the house divided on the question of receiving Lord Lauderdale's resolutions—
  Contents 21   Non-Contents 56   Majority for Ministers 35 
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Petitions against the Orders in Council. On the motion of the chancellor of the Exchequer, the house went into a committee, to hear evidence on those petitions, that mode of hearing evidence being most conformable to the general practice of the house; though the speaker stated, that it was not uncommon to hear evidence with the speaker in the chair.
On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the house went into a committee, in which adjourned consideration of the petitions against the orders in council was resumed.
The following witnesses were then called in and examined, Mr. Wm. Bell, Mr. Thomas Martin, Mr. Alexander Forrester, and Mr. Abraham Mann.
On account of the lateness of the hour, and there being then 5 other witnesses to examine, the further consideration of the question was postponed till to-morrow, when the latter witness was again ordered to be examined. Adjourned at twelve o'clock.
THE PETITION
Of the London American Merchants to Parliament.
HUM'LY SHEWETH,
THAT your petitioners contemplate with the greatest anxiety and apprehension the alarming consequences with which they are threatened from certain Orders in Council, purporting to be issued "for the protection of the Trade and Navigation of Great Britain;" but on which, they are induced, after mature consideration, to believe that they must be productive of the most ruinous effects. Your petitioners are duly sensible of the necessity of making every sacrifice of personal interests, to promote the strength and resources of the country in the present extraordinary crisis of public affairs; and if the total change introduced into the whole commercial System of this country, and of the world, by the Orders in Council, could be conducive to so considerable an object; your petitioners, great as their losses must be, would submit without a murmur; but understanding that these orders are principally, if not wholly, recommended by an opinion, that they will prove beneficial to the commercial interest of this country, they feel it to be their duty, humbly to represent their conviction, that this opinion is founded on error; and that if the prayer of their petition be granted, they shall be able to prove, that they must be productive of the most fatal consequences to the interests, not only of your petitioners, but of the commerce and manufactures of the Empire at large.

Your petitioners will abstain from enforcing, by any details, their apprehension, that these measures are likely to interrupt our peace with the United States of America ; our intercourse with which, at all times valuable, is infinitely more so since we are excluded from the continent of Europe. To this only remaining branch of our foreign intercourse, we must now look for a demand of our manufactures, for many of the most important materials for their support; and for supplies of provisions and naval stores, necessary for our subsistence and defence.
Your petitioners feel assured that they will be able to prove to the satisfaction of your Honourable House, that the neutrality of America has been the means of circulating to a large amount, articles of the produce and manufactures of this country, in the dominions of our numerous enemies, to which we have no direct access:—
That the annual value of British manufactures exported to the United States , exceeds Ten Millions Sterling; and
That as our consumption of the produce of that country falls far short of that amount, the only means of paying us must arise from the consumption of the produce of America in other countries which the operation of the Orders in Council must interrupt, and in most instances totally destroy.
That the people of America , even if they remain at peace with us, must by a want of demand for their produce, and by the general distress our measures must occasion, be disabled from paying their debts to this country, which may fairly be estimated to amount to the enormous sum of Twelve Millions Sterling:—
That the neutrality of America , so far from being injurious to the other commercial interest of Great-Britain , has promoted materially their prosperity:—
That the produce of our colonies in the W. Indies , of our Empire in the East, and of our fisheries on the banks of Newfoundland has frequently found a foreign market by this means; and
That by the destruction of the Neutrality of the only remaining neutral State, all possibility of intercourse with the rest of the world being removed, trade cannot possibly be benefitted, but must necessarily be annihilated.
Your petitioners feeling, as they do most sensibly with their fellow subjects, the pressure of a war in which their commerce has principally been aimed at by the enemy; would fain plead their distress in recommendation of Measures inconsistent with the Honor and substantial interests of their country; but they humbly rely upon the wisdom of the Legislature that this distress shall not be increased by our own errors, and they confidently believe that if they are permitted to illustrate by evidence the facts they here state, and to explain many others which they shall here refrain from enumerating, they cannot fail to establish the conviction with which they are so strongly impressed.
That the Orders in Council are founded on the most mistaken opinions of the commercial interests of the Empire, and must be particularly fatal to those of your petitioners.
Your petitioners therefore pray that they may be heard by themselves or Counsel at the Bar, of this Honourable House, and be permitted to produce evidence in support of the allegations of their petition; or that this Honourable House will examine into the nature and extent of their grievances in any mode which may appear advisable, with a view of affording such relief as this Honourable House in its wisdom may think proper.
And your petitioners will ever pray.
Latest from England. A gentleman who came passenger in the British sloop of war Emulous , arrived here on Friday last, in three days from Halifax, has furnished the following: That Sir George Prevost, had within a few days arrived at Halifax, and taken upon himself the civil and military government of Nova-Scotia; Sir John Wentworth retiring with a handsome pension:—That three regiments, of 1000 men each, (the 7th, 8th, & 23d Welch Fusiliers) arrived with Sir George; the 13th regt. which left England in company, had proceeded to Bermuda.
BOSTON, April 25. LATEST FROM THE STRAITS. Captain Hilliard, arrived yesterday from Alicante, informs, that three days previous to his sailing, accounts were received there that 8,000 French troops had arrived at Barcelona, on their way to Alicante, to take possession of that place; and it was understood that the French were to occupy all the Spanish sea ports.
NEW-YORK, April 28. By the brig Hope , Capt. Andrews, arrived on Monday 18th inst. at Marb head, from Gijon, in Spain, in the Bay of Biscay, we have news from that country, to the 10th of last month. It appears that the citadel of Pamplune, in the kingdom of Navarre, and that of Pigneyras in the principality of Catalonia, had been garrisoned with French troops, with the consent and by order of the King of Spain, and therefore without any opposition from the commandant of the same:—That the general opinion of the best informed class in Spain, was, that the Prince of Asturias, the heir apparent of the throne, would be married to Miss Beauharnais, daughter of the ambassador; a niece of the Empress of France; and that Murat had already arrived in Madrid, no doubt preparatory to the coming of the emperor and the consummation of the said event, together with other arrangements, such as allotting Portugal as a dowry to his said niece.—There were in Ferrol 5 ships of the line, one new, N 120 guns, and 3 frigates, ready for sea.— Merc. Adv.
WEST-INDIES.
NEW-YORK, April 26. By captain Doy, from Falmouth, Jamaica, the Editor of the Merchants' Advertiser has received a file of papers to the 30th of March. Captain D. informs, that provisions of all kinds were very high and scarce in Jamaica. Flour at Kingston was 25 dollars per barrel. An embargo was momentarily expected to be laid on all American vessels.
KINGSTON, (Jamaica) March 28. Late on Friday evening arrived at Port-Royal, his majesty's brig Demerara , of 18 guns, captain Catterton, from Bermuda, in 14 days, bringing dispatches from admiral Sir John B. Warren, to vice admiral Duers, stating that Mr. Rose had requested Sir John, of the government of America having evinced such symptoms of hostility towards Great Britain, that he intended to quit the United States immediately, and would touch at Bermuda, on his way to Great Britain.
CONGRESS.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, April 23.
Mr. Randolph said the House would recollect that a few days past, he had given notice of an intention to move for an enquiry into a certain subject, which intention grew out of a fact which he had then stated to the House as having come to his knowledge. He was happy to have it in his power to state, that the difficulty had not arisen from fraud, but from the circumstance that there were two persons of the same name; and that after a great deal of delay and difficulty, the business of the party had been accomplished.
The House then took up the unfinished business of yesterday, on the bill to authorise the equipment of the frigates.
Mr. D. R. Williams observed, that there was a law already in force, authorizing the President to keep in employment, during peace, as many ships as he should think proper. Mr. W. said he had voted against that; but that, compared to this bill, which contained a positive requisition to the President to buy but as a mole-hill to a mountain. The honorable gentlemen who were the fathers of this navy system, created it to defend commerce. Had we now, he asked, any commerce to defend? It is embargoed. Then why this extravagance? He declared, that he felt himself at a loss to find a term sufficiently expressive of his abhorrence of a navy: He would go a great deal further to see it burnt, than extinguish the fire; he wished it was burnt, for it was a curse to the country, and never had been any thing else. What would be the expenditure if the President of the U. S. does what the bill requires? We never had enough money in the treasury to effect the object. The ten millions boasted in the treasury at the commencement of the session, would not have been competent; with the embargo system it was absolutely impossible, and they must resort to the old system of internal taxes & loans. He had always voted against these highly federal measures, and thanked his God that he had an opportunity to vote against them again.
Mr. Goldsborough wished to give to the President of the United States, a discretionary power to call into service our armed vessels to carry into effect our laws. A law had the other day passed, for maintaining peace in the ports and harbors; and another this morning amending the embargo law. For these purposes the armed force of the United States might be necessary.
Mr. Macon had thought, after the affair of Copenhagen, that the nation would think no more of a navy; he had thought that it would have been entirely given up. The President had already authority to call out frigates; then where was the necessity of repeating the authority? for gentlemen seemed to be unwilling absolutely to require it, as the Senate had done. If the Executive had been guilty of neglect in not exercising the authority reposed in him, there was a constitutional mode of calling him to account for it, without doing it indirectly by passing this bill.
Mr. Smilie was strongly opposed to the bill. If the navy were equipped and sent to sea, war would be the inevitable result; and even if it would not, the expence would exceed calculation.
The question on postponement was then taken by yeas & nays, & the bill was postponed 55 to 42.
The House then went into a committee of the whole, on the bill making appropriation to supply the deficit in the appropriation for the public buildings for the year 1807, and for other purposes.
The bill having gone through the committee of the whole, after filling up the blanks for the deficit, and for a small sum for finishing the wall round the President's house, and refusing to make an appropriation for the ensuing year, for other purposes, the committee rose and reported the bill.
The House then adjourned till 5 o'clock.
The House took up the report of the committee of the whole, on the above bill. And the Yeas and Nays being required by Mr. D. R. Williams on concurrence with the sum reported to supply the deficit (50,000 dollars) there were for concurrence 75, against it 14.
The appropriation for the South wing of 11,500 dollars, was negatived. So that the bill now contains nothing but the appropriation for the deficit.
MONDAY, April 25.
On motion of Mr. Newton , a resolution was adopted, 57 to 14, directing the Secretary of the Treasury to enquire what and report to the next session the emoluments and fees of the collectors, naval officers, and surveyors of the customs, during the last year and whether any addition be necessary thereto.
Mr. Clark said, it would be recollected by the House, that he had some time since been directed to make a statement in relation to Gen. Wilkinson . He now held in his hand a correspondence with the Spanish government, which he laid upon the table as it went to substantiate the facts contained in that statement.
These papers were read, and consist chiefly of memoranda in the hand writing of Philip Noland, and purporting to be instructions from Gen. Wilkinson to Thomas Power, and of answers from Thomas Power.
Mr. Randolph moved that they be printed.
Mr. Smilie opposed the printing, as if it were indeed testimony, this House was not the tribunal to decide upon it.
Mr. Randolph said, it was certain, that from the noise in the House, or some other cause, the papers as read could not be understood. They appeared to embrace a correspondence of Philip Noland, said to be the agent of general W. with Power, and in the course of them there was a recommendation that Gen. W.'s hand writing should not be used. He presumed that gentlemen felt more interested in these than in the papers every day laid on their tables and printed.
Mr. Smilie said, they had had enough of this business of denunciation, and he wished no more of it. He was willing that the papers should be sent to the court of enquiry, but he would go no further.
The question was then taken by yeas and nays on printing, and carried, 52 to 30. On motion of Mr. Kelly , the papers this day presented by Mr. Clark , were ordered to be transmitted to the President of the U. States.
Mr. Holmes , from the committee of claims made a report on the claim of madame Beau-marchais. The committee thought proper to state by way of report why the claim
had not been decided by the committee this session. The report asks leave for the committee to be discharged from the further consideration of the claim the present session. Agreed.
On motion of Mr. Nelson , the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole, Ayes 38, on the bill for the relief of the supernumerary officers and soldiers of the army of the U. S. Mr. Cutts in the chair.
Mr. Bibb moved that the committee rise and ask leave to sit again; for he did not believe that three members of the committee had considered the bill, or knew its provisions.
Mr. Nelson objected to this motion. Our soldiers at present, he said, were in a worse situation than those of any other nation. In most countries there is a provision of this kind; in this country, however, to its disgrace, there was no such provision. Even now they might see poor wretches around the door, reduced to their crutches from hard service. No man of humanity could see it unmoved. These men even now would do good garrison service. They would be capable of giving good instruction and useful information; they would form in fact so many military schools. Mr. N. went into an examination of this subject. There were also he said, at present officers in the army of the U. S. who by age were incapable of performing a tour of duty. He cited instances of two majors, one of whom lately died, who were totally incapacitated from service, and being both revolutionary soldiers, and guilty of no misconduct, the Executive, altho' authorised so to do, would never be so totally dead to feeling as to dismiss them from service. The one now left was obliged to be drawn about or carried in a blanket from camp to camp; while others younger or more active men, were kept back from service by his occupying the place.
Mr. Bibb felt as much commiseration for this class of citizens, as any one could do. It was not to the principle which he objected; but the House were not now prepared to investigate the merits of any bill which needed discussion to explain them, and it was therefore he had made the motion. At the next session, he should be willing to meet the gentleman on the subject.
The committee then rose, Ayes 53, reported progress, and were refused leave to sit again, 41 to 31.
Mr. J. Montgomery called for the consideration of the amendments to the bill concerning courts martial.
Mr. Lewis moved to postpone the subject indefinitely; for when there was but a bare quorum in the House, it was not proper to act on the bill.
The motion was agreed to, Ayes 46. The bill for making appropriations to supply the deficit in the appropriation for public buildings, was returned from the Senate with amendments.
The first amendment allowing 25,000 dollars to carry up the solid work in the interior of the north wing being under consideration, This amendment of the Senate was then agreed to, 48 to 22.
An amendment of 11,000 dollars for finishing the interior of the south wing, being under consideration.
The amendment of the Senate was agreed to, 52 to 21.
FIVE O'CLOCK.
The House met; and postponed indefinitely a number of bills.
The bill from the Senate to authorize the President under certain contingencies to suspend the non-importation law having been called up, and a motion having been made to postpone it indefinitely.
Mr. Nelson said he should never vote for the repeal or suspension of this law. He hoped to see the time when it should become a permanent regulation; he would not yield to any of the powers of Europe, and he wished to be independent of them. There were many things now imported from Europe, which could as well be made in our own country. If they could be as well made, he considered it sound policy to give a preference to our own manufactures, and so far to prohibit theirs as to effect a preference of our own. Whether in this principle I am right or wrong, said he, I am certainly right in this: that at this late period of the session it is impossible to discuss such a question as this; and therefore I wish the motion to prevail.
Mr. Burwell said, he would add but a single observation to those of the gentleman just sat down. He was in favor of postponing the bill indefinitely, because he wished it to be understood that we have a right to make all regulations we please respecting our commerce, or trade, or ought else, without consulting the dispositions of any power whatever. He wished it to be understood here and elsewhere; and therefore he was in favor of postponement of this bill.
Mr. Marion said he was one of those who originally voted for the non-importation law, and he had never repented his vote; but he voted for it under a firm persuasion that it would go into operation. It had been afterwards suspended because there was a negotiation pending and a prospect of accommodation; but if it were the determination never to suffer it to go into operation, he had much rather see it repealed. If it were to be kept in suspension, hung up like a rod in terrorem , it would merit ridicule. What cause could there be for suspending it at present? Any negotiation pending? He believed not. If it were the understanding of a majority that the bill should not go into operation, he hoped they would propose a repeal of it.
Mr. Eppes said, it appeared that the question of suspension of the non-importation act, was very different from that of a suspension of the embargo. The former was a measure of coercion on Great-Britain, and whether it had that effect or not, he believed at the time that the law was passed, that the only way in which we could operate on that power was by commercial restrictions. And he felt now free to declare, that if ample reparation were made for the outrage on the Chesapeake, if the decrees were withdrawn and every injury redressed, that he would hold on upon the non-importation law so long as the impressment of our seamen remained. Whenever you take off this, said he, you have nothing to enforce your rights as to impressment, nor as to that system of commercial pillage which has been adopted by Great-Britain. We know that the embargo was imposed as a measure of safety. It was to give us time to make preparation to meet the event. If the decrees which produced the embargo are withdrawn, the embargo may be withdrawn with propriety. But let me ask any gentleman whether he believes that any circumstance which produced the non-importation act will be removed? Whether they believed that Great-Britain will give up her system of impressing seamen? If he does, let him look at the
course she has adopted. After appointing a minister to negotiate with you, she has issued a proclamation, establishing the right of impressment on its broadest footing. Shortly after it was declared by the king at the opening of parliament to be one of those rights which never could nor ever would be admitted. I was originally in favor of the non-importation law, and I am still so. If gentlemen take into consideration all the circumstances which produced the law, I will venture to say that there is not a man in the House originally in favor of it who can now vote for its suspension. It has never yet been fairly in operation. It is now indeed a law of the land, but its operation is virtually suspended by the embargo. I am in favour of its going into operation, and never will consent to its suspension, till its intended effect be fulfilled, or the experiment is made.
The question of indefinite postponement was carried 58 to 29.
On motion of Mr. G. W. Campbell , Resolved, That a joint committee be appointed to wait on the president of the United States, and inform him of the proposed adjournment of Congress.
Messrs. G. W. Campbell & Nicholas were appointed the committee.
Mr. Bibb said that notwithstanding the difference of opinion which had taken place occasionally between the members of this House, during the present session, on questions of policy, he was pleased to perceive that no difference of sentiment existed in regard to the injuries done us by foreign nations. He believed that but one spirit actuated the people of the United States—that they were attached to their country and to their country alone. He wished not only by professions, but by practice to shew foreign nations that we can live without them. He therefore offered the following resolution:
RESOLVED, That the members of the House of Representatives will appear at their next meeting, clothed in the manufactures of their own country.
This was supported by Messrs. Bibb & Eppes , & opposed by Messrs. Macon & Rhea . When Mr. Bibb said, he had not expected an objection would be made to the resolution—but as it had produced debate, he withdrew it.
The House adopted several resolutions making additional compensation to Door-keepers, Assistants, &c. for extra services.
Mr. Coles , the Secretary of the President of the United States, informed the House that the President had no further or other communication to make to them.
Mr. Smilie moved that the House adjourn.—Agreed, nem. con.
The Speaker (Gen. Varnum .)—Permit me, gentlemen, to wish you a pleasant journey home, and a happy meeting with your families and friends. This House is adjourned till the first Monday in November next.
ENQUIRER OFFICE.
Another hoop to the barrel, and it is water tight.
Congress have passed a supplementary law, which will prevent most of the rascality practised under the original embargo. No vessel having a cargo on board is, without a special permission of the President of the U. States, allowed to depart for any port or district adjacent to the territories of a foreign nation: by which provision, it is expressly intended to prevent any vessel clearing for, or going to, either the district of Passamaquoddy, (including Eastport) in Maine, or that of St. Mary's in Georgia.
No foreign vessel is permitted to go from one port of the U. S. to another port in the same.
The lading of every vessel, other than those whose employment is confined to the navigation of bays, sounds, rivers and lakes, must hereafter be made under the inspection of the revenue officers.
Every vessel, whose employment is confined to bays, sounds, rivers and lakes, and bound from one district to another district, must previous to her departure, deliver a manifest of her cargo & obtain a clearance. Bonds are then to be given for double the value of the vessel and cargo; which bonds are to be cancelled in a month.
The act also authorises the collectors to detain any vessel ostensibly bound with a cargo to some other port of the U. States, whenever in their opinion, the intention is to violate or evade any of the provisions of the act laying an embargo, until the decision of the President of the U. S. be had thereupon. The frequent and gross violations of the embargo had rendered that provision necessary.
If there is to be an embargo at all, let it be an effectual one.
The people of this country will bear with cheerfulness any sacrifices or inconveniences, which these embargo laws will impose upon them. They know, that this is the great crisis, when the leading policy of the U. S. is brought to a decisive experiment. This is the first and great epoch in our history, when this experiment is about to be made. Our great means of defence against the encroachments of European powers, is not war, nor force, but restrictions on their commerce and navy. This is the great native armour of the U. S. Great-Britain contends with her navy: France with her armies and fortified frontier: the U. S. by commercial restrictions. It is a commercial warfare, which is the most suitable to our interest and to our power.—It is the cheapest, because it saves the expence of fleets and armies. It is equally effectual, if it be rigidly enforced.
If the first great experiment, which is made of the efficacy of this instrument, fails, the belligerent powers of Europe may hereafter laugh at the mighty ascendancy of our commercial restrictions; and amidst all the great usurpations of those powers, we shall have no other alternative than War .—This idea, though not the original cause of the embargo, may prove the ultimate issue of the experiment.
And if such be the consequences, what opinion shall be formed of those despicable merchants, who have violated the Embargo law by a smuggling trade to the W. Indies ? Rogues, who are getting rich at the expence of honest men. These men are as bad or even worse than the Tories were during the revolution. Then we were contending with Great-Britain for our national independence; and now we are contending with the same power for our independence on the ocean.—We have heard of an instance of this violation of law, in the case of a merchant in Fredericksburg.—We would advise our young friends in that town to abstain from the threatened coat of tar and feathers, and to adopt a mode of punishment more public and equally severe: to send us a well authenticated account of that transaction, and we will hand that gentleman to the world in his proper colours.
We sincerely lament the fate of Dr. Bibb's resolution—Nor do we see the force of Mr. Macon's objection, that the H. of R. had no right to lay such an injunction on its members. They certainly had as much right as they exercise, when they enter into a resolution to weep for their departed members. It would have been a recommendation, which any man would have been at liberty to disregard, but which would have had the force of a law upon the mind of every patriotic member.
But what the members of congress could not or would not do, it is hoped that the people will do for themselves. We recommend such resolutions to the inhabitants of every town, village and county in Virginia. We recommend it first of all to the patriotic town of Petersburg; the only one in Virginia which is executing the plan of an association for the encouragement of our own manufactures.
We shall shortly publish the plan of an association, entered into and subscribed by 108 members of the old Virg. Legislature in '74—Among whom stands the present P. of the U. S.—to show what was then the spirit of our fathers.
We invite the attention of our readers to Mr. Madison's letter assigning the reasons for rejecting the late British treaty.
COMMUNICATION.
Capt. Byrd Willis of Fredericksburg, has been nominated as one of the committee to promote the election of Col. Monroe . He has a warm friendship for Mr. Monroe , & would do anything to serve him; but he also has a strong attachment to his country, and the duty which he owes it, forbids his promoting or patronizing the election of James Monroe . You are therefore authorized to state, for these reasons, that he refuses, most positively, serving as a committeeman for the Monroe ticket.
We are authorized to state, that Jas. Chipley , P. Williams, Jacob Rinker , & Wm. H. Doy , have declined serving on the committee for the county of Shenandoah.
We are authorised to state, that Nathaniel Wills declines serving on the Monroe correspond- ing committee for the County of Isle of Wight.
DELEGATES ELECTED TO THE NEXT LEGISLATURE.
Orange —Robert Mallely , James Barbour . Fauquier —John Edmonds , *Maj. Buckner . Rockingham —Archibald Rutherford , and Wm. Bryant Esquire . Botetourt —David Rowland , and *Elijah McClanahan . Shenandoah —Major James Allen and Samuel Strickler .
State of the poll for Amelia. Thomas Perkinson 189—Bathurst Randolph 166—James Robertson jr. 158—James P. Cocke 128.
James Trevant is elected a Senator for the district composed of the counties of Dinwiddie, Sussex, and Southampton. *John Horace Upshaw Esq. is elected to the Senate from the district of Essex, King & Queen and King William. *Fluvanna—Dr. John Wills , *John Forbes .
* New Members.
DIED —On Saturday last, BEVERLY C. TAYLOR , eldest son of Mrs. S. Taylor, formerly of New-Kent, now of this city: An affectionate wife, an amiable mother and two loving brothers, mourn the loss of this worthy young man—whose actions were guided by the dictates of honour and patriotism.
JUST PUBLISHED , and for sale at S. Grantland's Printing Office, opposite Dr. Duvall's Medicine Store, MILITARY TACTICS, or THE SOLDIER'S COMPANION .—Teaching how to form companies—with directions for the formation and exercise of a battalion and regiment, and the various forms of reports, &c. Likewise, evolutions for the Cavalry and Artillery, with explanations and improvements upon Baron Steuben .—By SAMUEL J. WINSTON , Brigade Inspector for the second Brigade . Subscribers will receive their Books at the Printing Office of Scaton Grantland, where they are requested to call or send for them. May 2. (3w)
TO RENT , for one or more years, the yellow HOUSE adjoining the Washington Tavern, now in the occupancy of Judge Roane .—This Tenement is contiguous to the Capitol, and well calculated for a professional gentleman with a family.—Possession will be given on the first day of June next, and terms known by application to E. HALLAM . May 3. [law3w]
THE subscriber has taken into Partnership in the Grocery Line, his son John R. Triplett , and in future the business will be carried on under the firm of DANIEL TRIPLETT & SON . He avails himself of this opportunity of returning his grateful thanks to all those who have heretofore favored him with their custom, and begs leave to solicit a continuance of their dealings with the new concern. DANIEL TRIPLETT. May 3. (1w)
WILL positively be sold, at public auction, without reserve, on Monday the 9th inst. at the subscriber's store, all his stock of Groceries, China, Glass-ware, &c.—The terms will be made known prior to the day of sale. DANIEL TRIPLETT. May 3. (1w)
THE subscribers want to hire, to work at their Coal Pits, 10 or 12 active Negro Men, for which they will give liberal wages. DANIEL TRIPLETT & CO. May 3. (3w)
THE HEALING SPRINGS , situated in the lower end of Louisa County and but thirty-one miles from Richmond, will be in readiness on the 1st of June next for the accommodation of boarders. The medicinal virtues of those waters have been proved in a great variety of instances; they derive their name from the power they possess of healing most kinds of eruptions, and it is believed, that in bilious cases they have never failed to afford relief. There are several small houses detached from the main building, intended for single families, who may apply in time, and the terms for board will be six dollars a-week. Healing Springs, Louisa, May 3. (1Ju.)
NOTICE .—By virtue of a deed of trust, executed by Robert Woodcock, the subscriber will offer for sale to the highest bidder, at Chesterfield Court House, on Monday the eleventh day of July, 1808, the Tract of LAND whereon the said Robt. Woodcock resides, in Chesterfield county, containing two hundred and four acres of Land, more or less, and adjoining the Lands of Samuel Farmer, Ephraim Garthright, Henry Woodcock, Thomas Gregory, John Hancock, Enoch Adkins, Mark Farmer and Daniel Farmer; this sale is made to satisfy a debt of two hundred and ten pounds, with interest from the 10th day of March, 1808, due from the said Robert Woodcock to major Winfree. THOMAS GRAVES, Trustee. May 3. [law3w]

A LETTER TO THE HON. HARRISON GRAY OTIS, A member of the Senate of Massachusetts, ON THE PRESENT STATE OF OUR NATIONAL AFFAIRS; With Remarks upon Mr. Pickering's Letter, To the GOVERNOR of the COMMONWEALTH. BY JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.
WASHINGTON, March 31, 1808. The second point upon which Mr. Pickering defends the pretensions of Great-Britain, is her denial to neutral nations of the right of prosecuting with her enemies and their colonies, any commerce from which they are excluded in time of peace. His statement of this case adopts the British doctrine, as sound. The right, as on the question of impressment, so on this, it surrenders at discretion—and it is equally defective in point of fact.
In the first place, the claim of Great-Britain, is not to "a right of imposing on this neutral commerce some limits and restraints"—but of interdicting it altogether, at her pleasure, of interdicting it without a moment's notice to neutrals, after solemn decisions of her courts of admiralty, and formal acknowledgements of her ministers, that it is a lawful trade—And, on such a sudden, unnotified interdict, of pouncing upon all neutral commerce navigating upon the faith of her decisions and acknowledgements, and of gorging with confiscation the greediness of her cruisers—This is the right claimed by Britain—This is the power she has exercised—What Mr. Pickering calls "limits and restraints," she calls relaxations of her right.
It is but little more than two years, since this question was agitated both in England and America, with as much zeal, energy and ability, as ever was displayed upon any question of national law. The British side was supported by Sir William Scott, Mr. Ward, and the author of War in Disguise. But even in Britain their doctrine was refused to demonstration by the Edinburgh reviewers. In America, the rights of our country were maintained by numerous writers profoundly skilled in the science of national and maritime law. The Answer to War in Disguise was ascribed to a gentleman whose talents are universally acknowledged, and who by his official situations had been required thoroughly to investigate every question of conflict between neutral and belligerent rights which has occurred in the history of modern War.
Mr. Gore and Mr. Pinkney, our two commissioners at London, under Mr. Jay's Treaty, the former, in a train of cool and conclusive argument addressed to Mr. Madison, the latter in a memorial of splendid eloquence from the Merchants of Baltimore, supported the same cause; memorials, drawn by lawyers of distinguished eminence, by Merchants of the highest character, and by statesmen of long experience in our national councils came from Salem, from Boston, from New-Haven, from New-York and from Philadelphia, together with remonstrances to the same effect from New-Burypore, Newport, Norfolk and Charleston. This accumulated mass of legal learning, of commercial information and of national sentiment from almost every inhabited spot upon our shores, & from one extremity of the union to the other, confirmed by the unanswered & unanswerable memorial of Mr. Monroe to the British minister, and by the elaborate research & irresistible reasoning of the Examination of the British doctrine, was also made a subject of full, and deliberate discussion in the senate of the United States. A committee of seven members of that body, after three weeks of arduous investigation, reported three Resolutions, the first of which was in these words "Resolved, that the capture and condemnation, under the orders of the British government, and adjudications of their courts of admiralty of American vessels and their cargoes, on the pretext of their being employed in a trade with the enemies of Great-Britain, prohibited in time of peace, is an unprovoked aggression upon the property of the citizens of these United States, a violation of their neutral rights, and an encroachment upon their national Independence."
On the 13th of February, 1806, the question upon the adoption of this Resolution, was taken in the Senate. The yeas and nays were required; but not a solitary nay was heard in answer. It was adopted by the unanimous voice of all the senators present. They were twenty eight in number, and among them stands recorded the name of Mr. Pickering.
Let us remember that this was a question most peculiarly and immediately of commercial, and not agricultural interest; that it arose from a call, loud, energetic and unanimous, from all the merchants of the United States upon congress, for the national interposition; that many of the memorials invoked all the energy of the legislature, and pledged the lives and properties of the memorialists in support of any measures which Congress might deem necessary to vindicate those rights. Negotiation was particularly recommended from Boston, and elsewhere—negotiation was adopted—negotiation has failed—and now Mr. Pickering tells us that Great Britain has claimed and maintained her right! He argues that her claim is just—and is not sparing of censure upon those who still consider it as a serious cause of complaint.
But there was one point of view in which the British doctrine on this question was then only considered incidentally in the United States—because it was not deemed material for the discussion of our rights. We examined it chiefly as affecting the principles as between a belligerent and a neutral power, but in fact it was an infringement of the rights of war, as well as the rights of peace. It was an unjustifiable enlargement of the sphere of hostile operations. The enemies of Great-Britain had by the universal Law of Nations, a right to the benefits of neutral Commerce within their dominions (subject to the exceptions of actual blockade & contraband) as well as neutral nations had a right to trade with them. The exclusion from that commerce by this new principle of warfare, which Britain, in defiance of all immemorial national usages, undertook by her single authority to establish, but too naturally led her enemies to resort to new and extraordinary principles, by which, in their turn, they might retaliate this injury upon her. The pretence upon which, Britain in the first instance, had attempted to color her injustice, was a miserable fiction—It was an argument against fact. Her reasoning was, that a neutral vessel by mere admission in time of war, into ports from which
it should have been excluded in time of peace—became thereby, deprived of its national character, and ipso facto was transformed into enemy's property. Such was the basis upon which arose the far-famed rule of war of 1756—Such was the foundation upon which Britain claimed and maintained this supposed right of adding that new instrument of desolation to the horrors of war—it was distressing to her enemy—yes! Had she adopted the practice of dealing with them in poison—Had Mr. Fox accepted the services of the man who offered to rid him of the French Emperor by assassination, and had the attempt succeeded, it would have been less distressing to France than this rule of the war of 1756; and not more unjustifiable. Mr. Fox had too fair a mind for either, but his comprehensive and liberal spirit was discarded, with the cabinet which he had formed.
It has been the struggle of reason and humanity, and above all, of christianity for 2 thousand years to mitigate the rigours of that scourge of human kind, war. It is now the struggle of Britain to aggravate them. Her rule of the war of 1756, in itself & in its effects, was one of the deadliest poisons in which it was possible for her to tinge the weapons of her hostility.
In itself and in its effects, I say—For the French decrees of Berlin and of Milan, the Spanish and Dutch decrees of the same or the like tenor, and her own orders of January and November—these alternations of licenced pillage, this eager competition between her and her enemies for the honor of giving the last stroke to the vitals of maritime neutrality, all are justly attributed to her assumption and exercise of this single principle. The rule of the war of 1756 was the root, from which all the rest are but suckers, still at every shoot, growing ranker in luxuriance.
In the last decrees of France and Spain, her own ingenious fiction is adopted; & under them, every neutral vessel that submits to English search, has been carried into an English port, or paid a tax to the English government is declared denationalized, that is to have lost her national character, & to have become English property. This is cruel in execution; absurd in argument. To refute it were folly, for to the understanding of a child it refutes itself. But it is the reasoning of British jurists. It is the simple application to the circumstances and powers of France, of the rule of the War of 1756. I am not the apologist of France & Spain; I have no national partialities; no national attachments but to my own country. I shall never undertake to justify or palliate the insults or injuries of any foreign power to that country which is dearer to me than life. The voice of reason and of justice could be heard by France and Spain, they would say—you have done wrong to make the injustice of your enemy towards neutrals the measure of your own. If she chastises with whips, do not you chastise with scorpions. Whether France would listen to this language, I know not. The most enormous infractions of our rights hitherto committed by her, have been more in fineness than in accomplishment. The alarm has been justly great—the anticipation threatening—but the amount of actual injury small. But to Britain, what can we say? If we attempt to raise our voices, her Minister has declared to Mr. Pinkney, that she will not hear. The only reason she assigns for her recent Orders of Council, is, that France proceeds on the same principles. It is only by the light of blazing temples, and amid the groans of women and children perishing in the ruins of the sanctuaries of domestic habitation at Copenhagen, that we can expect our remonstrances against this course of proceeding will be heard.
Let us come to the third and last of the causes of complaint, which are represented as so frivolous and so unfounded—"the unfortunate affair of the Chesapeake." The orders of Admiral Berkeley, under which this outrage was committed, have been disavowed by his Government. General professions of a willingness to make reparation for it, have been lavished in profusion; and we are now instructed to take these professions for endeavors; to believe them sincere, because his Britannic Majesty sent us a special envoy; & to cast the odium of defeating these endeavors upon our own government.
I have already told you, that I am not one of those who deem suspicion and distrust, in the highest order of political virtues. Baseless suspicion is, in my estimation, a vice, as pernicious in the management of public affairs, as it is fatal to the happiness of a domestic life. When, therefore, the British Ministers have declared their disposition to make ample reparation for an injury of a most atrocious character, committed by an officer of high rank, and, as they say, utterly without authority, I should most readily believe them, were their professions not positively contradicted by facts of more powerful eloquence than words.
Have such facts occurred? I will not again allude to the circumstances of Mr. Rose's departure upon his mission, at such a precise point of time, that his commission and the orders of council of 11th November, might have been signed with the same penful of ink. The subjects were not immediately connected with each other, and his Majesty did not chuse to associate distinct topics of negotiation. The attack upon the Chesapeake was disavowed; and ample reparation was withheld only, because with the demand for satisfaction upon that injury, the American Government had coupled a demand for the cessation of others; alike in kind, but of minor aggravation. But had reparation really been intended, would it not have been offered, not in vague and general terms, but in precise and specific proposals? Were any such made? None. But it is said, Mr. Monroe was restricted from negotiating upon this subject object; and therefore Mr. Rose was to be sent to Washington; charged with this single object; and without authority to treat upon or even to discuss any other. Mr. Rose arrives—The American government readily determine to treat upon the Chesapeake affair, separately from all others; but before Mr. Rose sets his foot on shore, in pursuance of a pretension made before by Mr. Canning, he connects with the negotiation, a subject far more distinct from the butchery of the Chesapeake, than the general impressment of our seamen, I mean the Proclamation, interdicting to British ships of war, the entrance of our harbors.
The great obstacle which has always interfered in the adjustment of our differences with Britain, has been, that she would not acquiesce in the only principle upon which fair negotiation between independent nations can be conducted, the principle of reciprocity; that she refuses the application to us of the claim which she asserts for herself. The forcible taking of men from an
American vessel, was an essential part of the outrage upon the Chesapeake. It was the ostensible purpose for which that act of war unproclaimed, was committed. The President's Proclamation was a subsequent act, and was avowedly founded upon many similar aggressions, of which that was only the most aggravated.
If then Britain could with any colour of reason claim that the general question of impressment should be laid out of the case altogether, she ought upon the principle of reciprocity to have laid equally out of the case, the proclamation, a measure so easily separable from it, and in its nature merely defensive. When therefore she made the repeal of the proclamation an indispensable preliminary to all discussion upon the nature and extent of that reparation which she had offered, she refused to treat with us upon the footing of an independent power. She insisted upon an act of self-degradation on our part, before she would even tell us, what redress she would condescend to grant for a great and acknowledged wrong. This was a condition which she could not but know to be inadmissible, and is of itself proof nearly conclusive that her Cabinet never intended to make for that wrong any reparation at all.
But this is not all—It cannot be forgotten that when that atrocious deed was committed, amidst the general burst of indignation which resounded from every part of the Union, there were among us a small number of persons, who upon the opinion that Berkeley's orders were authorised by his government, undertook to justify them in their fullest extent—These ideas probably first propagated by British official characters, in this country, were persisted in until the disavowal of the British government took away the necessity for persevering in them, and gave notice where the next position was to be taken. This patriotic reasoning however had been so satisfactory at Halifax, that complimentary letters were received from Admiral Berkeley himself, highly approving the spirit in which they were inculcated, & remarking how easily Peace between the United States and Britain might be preserved, if that measure of our national rights could be made the prevailing standard of the country.
When the news arrived in England, although the general sentiment of the nation was not prepared for the formal avowal and justification of this unparalleled aggression, yet there were not wanting persons there, ready to claim and maintain the right of searching national ships for deserters. It was said at the time, but for this we must of course rest upon the credit of unofficial authority, to have been made a serious question in the Cabinet Council; nor was its determination there ascribed to the eloquence of the gentleman who became the official organ of its communication—Add to this a circumstance, which without claiming the irrefragable credence of diplomatic note, has yet its weight upon the common sense of mankind; that in all the daily newspapers known to be in the ministerial interest, Berkeley was justified and applauded in every variety of form that publication could assume, excepting only that of official Proclamation—The only part of his orders there disapproved was the reciprocal offer which he made of submitting his own ships to be searched in return—that was very unequivocally disclaimed—The Russian right of superiority, was the solid base upon which this argument grew to the casuists of British national Jurisprudence, that the right of a British man of war to search an American frigate, was to them a self-evident proof against the right of the American frigate to search the British man of war. The same tone has been constantly kept up, until our accounts of latest date; and have been recently further invigorated by a very explicit call for war with the United States, which they contend would be of no possible injury to Britain, and which they urge upon the ministry as affording them an excellent opportunity to accomplish a dismemberment of this Union—These sentiments have even been avowed in Parliament, where the nobleman who moved the address of the house of Lords in answer to the king's speech, declared that the right of searching national ships, ought to be maintained against the Americans, and disclaimed only with respect to European sovereigns.
In the mean time Admiral Berkeley, by a court martial of his own subordinate officers, hung one of the men taken from the Chesapeake, and called his name Jenkin Ratford. There was, according to the answer so frequently given by the Lords of the Admiralty, upon applications for the discharge of impressed Americans, no such man on board the ship. The man thus executed had been taken from the Chesapeake by the name of Wilson. It is said that on his trial he was identified by one or two witnesses who knew him, and that before he was turned of, he confessed his name to be Ratford and that he was born in England—But it has also been said that Ratford is now living in Pennsylvania—and after the character which the disavowal of Admiral Berkeley's own government has given to his conduct, what confidence can be claimed or due to the proceedings of a court martial of his associates held to sanction his proceedings. The three other men had not even been demanded in his orders; they were taken by the sole authority of the British searching lieutenant, after the surrender of the Chesapeake. There was not the shadow of a pretence before the court martial that they were British subjects, or born in any of the British dominions. Yet by this court martial they were sentenced to suffer death. They were reprieved from execution, only upon condition of renouncing their rights as Americans by voluntary service in the king's ships—They have never been restored. To complete the catastrophe with which this bloody tragedy was concluded, Admiral Berkeley himself in sanctioning the doom of these men, thus obtained, thus tried, & thus sentenced, read them a grave moral lecture on the enormity of their crime, in its tendency to provoke a war between the United States and Great Britain.
Yet amidst all this parade of disavowal by his government—amidst all these professions of readinss to make reparation, not a single mark of the slightest disapprobation appears ever to have been manifested to that officer. His instructions were executed upon the Chesapeake in June—Rumours of his recall have been circulated here—But on leaving the station at Halifax in Dec. he received a complimentary address from the colonial assembly, and assured them in answer, that he had no official information of his recall. From thence he went to the West-Indies, and on leaving Bermuda for England in February was addressed again by that colonial government, in terms of high
panegyric upon his energy, with manifest allusion to his achievement upon the Chesapeake.
Under all these circumstances, without applying any of the maxims of a suspicious policy to the British professions, I may still be permitted to believe that their ministry never seriously intended to make us honorable reparation, or indeed any reparation at all for that "unfortunate affair."
It is impossible for any man to form an accurate idea of the British policy towards the United States, without taking into consideration the state of parties in that government; and the views, characters and opinions of the individuals at their helm of State. A liberal and a hostile policy towards America, are among the strongest marks of distinction between the political systems of the rival statesmen of that kingdom—The liberal party are reconciled to our Independence; and though extremely tenacious of every right of their own country, are systematically disposed to preserve peace with the United States. Their opponents harbour sentiments of a very different description—Their system is coercion—Their object the recovery of their lost dominion in North America—This party now stands high in power—Although Admiral Berkeley may never have received written orders from them for his enterprise upon the Chesapeake, yet in giving his instructions to the squadron at Norfolk, he knew full well under what administration he was acting. Every measure of that administration towards us since that time has been directed to the same purpose—to break down the spirit of our national Independence. Their purpose, as far as it can be collected from their acts, is to force us into war with them or with their enemies; to leave us only the bitter alternative of their vengeance or their protection.
Both these parties are no doubt willing, that we should join them in the war of their nation against France and her allies—The late administration would have drawn us into it by treaty, the present are attempting it by compulsion. The former would have admitted us as allies, the latter will have us no otherwise than as colonists. On the late debates in Parliament, the lord Chancellor freely avowed that the orders of Council of 11th November, were intended to make America at last sensible of the policy of joining England against France.
This too, Sir, is the substantial argument of Mr. Pickering's letter—The suspicions of a design in our own administration to plunge us into a war with Britain, I never have shared. Our administration have every interest and every motive that can influence the conduct of man to deter them from any such purpose. Nor have I seen any thing in their measures bearing the slightest indication of it. But between a design of war with England, and a surrender of our national freedom for the sake of war with the rest of Europe, there is a material difference. This is the policy now in substance recommended to us, and for which the interposition of the commercial States is called. For this, not only are all our outrages from Britain to be forgotten, but the very assertion of our rights is to be branded with odium.
Impressment—Neutral trade—British taxation —Every thing that can distinguish a state of national freedom from a state of national vassalage, is to be surrendered at discretion. In the face of every fact we are told to believe every profession—in the midst of every indignity, we are pointed to British protection as our only shield against the universal conqueror. Every phantom of jealousy and fear is evoked—The image of France with a scourge in her hand is impressed into the service, to lash us into the refuge of obedience to Britain—Insinuations are even made that if Britain "with her thousand ships of war," has not destroyed our commerce, it has been owing to her indulgence, and we are almost threatened in her name with the "destruction of our fairest cities."
Not one act of hostility to Britain has been committed by us; she has not a pretence of that kind to alledge—But if she will wage war upon us, are we to do nothing in our own defence? If she issues her orders of universal plunder upon our commerce, are we not to withhold it from her grasp? Is American pillage one of those rights which she has claimed and exercised until we are foreclosed from any attempt to obstruct its collection? For what purpose are we required to make this sacrifice of every thing that can give value to the name of freemen, this abandonment of the very right self-preservation? Is it to avoid a war? Alas! Sir, it does not offer even this plausible plea of pusillanimity—For, as submission would make us to all substantial purposes British colonies, her enemies would unquestionably treat us as such, and after degrading ourselves into voluntary servitude to escape a war with her, we should incur inevitable war with all her enemies, and be doomed to share the destinies of her conflict with a world in arms.
Between this unqualified submission, and offensive resistance against the war upon maritime neutrality waged by the concurring decrees of all the great belligerent powers, the Embargo was adopted, and has been hitherto continued. So far was it from being dictated by France, that it was calculated to withdraw, and has withdrawn from within her reach all the means of compulsion which her subsequent decrees would have put in her possession. It has added to the motives both of France and England for preserving peace with us, and has diminished their inducements to war.
It has lessened their capacities of inflicting injury upon us, and given us some preparation for resistance to them—It has taken from their violence the lure of interest—It has dashed the philter of pillage from the lips of rapine. That it is distressing to ourselves—that it calls for the fortitude of a people, determined to maintain their rights, is not to be denied. But the only alternative was between that and war. Whether will it yet save us from that calamity, cannot be determined, but if not, it will prepare us for the further struggle to which we may be called. Its double tendency of promoting peace and preparing for war, in its operation upon both the belligerent rivals, is the great advantage, which more than outweighs all its evils.
If any statesman can point out another alternative, I am ready to hear him, and for any practicable expedient to lend him every possible assistance. But let not that expedient be submission to trade under British licences, and British taxation. We are told that even under these restrictions we may yet trade to the British dominions, to Africa and China, and with the colonies of France, Spain and Holland. I ask not how much of this trade would be left, when our intercourse with the whole continent of Europe being cut off would leave us no means of purchase, and no market for sale? I ask
what trade we could enjoy with the colonies of nations with which we should be at war? I ask not how long Britain would leave open to us avenues of trade, which even in these very orders of Council, she boasts of leaving open as a special indulgence? If we yield the principle, we abandon all pretence to national sovereignty. To yearn for the fragments of trade which might be left, would be to pine for the crumbs of commercial servitude. The boon, which we should humiliate ourselves to accept from British bounty, would soon be withdrawn. Submission never yet set boundaries to encroachment—From pleading for half the empire, we should sink into supplicants for life—We should supplicate in vain. If we must fall, let us fall free men—If we must perish, let it be in defence of our rights.
To conclude, Sir, I am not sensible of any necessity for the extraordinary interference of the commercial States, to control the general councils of the nation. If any interference could, at this critical extremity of our affairs, have a kindly effect upon our common welfare, it would be an interference to promote union, and not a division—to urge mutual confidence, and not universal distrust—to strengthen the arm, and not to relax the sinews of the nation. Our suffering and our dangers, though differing perhaps in degree, are universal in extent. As their causes are justly chargeable, so their removal is dependent not upon ourselves, but upon others. But while the spirit of independence shall continue to beat in unison with the pulses of the nation, no danger will be truly formidable. Our duties are, to prepare with concerted energy, for those which threaten us, to meet them without dismay, and to rely for their issue upon Heaven.
I am, with great respect and attachment, Dear Sir, your friend and humble servant, JOHN QUINCEY ADAMS. Hon. Harrison Gray Otis.
BY virtue of eight deeds of trust executed to the subscribers by Thomas Cheetham, will be sold to the highest bidder, for ready money, before the door of the Eagle Tavern, in the City of Richmond, on Tuesday the tenth day of May next, or so much thereof as shall be sufficient to raise the sum of three hundred and ninety three pounds, ten shillings and four pence, due by the said Thomas Cheetham to James Gammell, John Likly, Peter Murdock and Walter Ewing McCray, together with interest thereon from the first day of March, 1804, including expenses of sale, &c. the following eight Tracts of LAND, to wit:
One tract containing one hundred and ninety eight acres eighty-nine poles—part of the tract called King's Land slades formerly belonging to James Wardrope, dec'd. One do. containing 66 acres nineteen poles. One do. containing one hundred and twenty three acres twenty-nine poles. One do. containing one hundred and forty five acres, one hundred and forty two poles. One do. containing one hundred and forty two acres ninety one poles. One do. containing one hundred and forty eight acres seven poles. One do. containing two hundred and fifty three acres, one hundred and nineteen poles. One do. containing five hundred and sixty one acres eleven poles. JAMES BROWN, WILLIAM TEMPLE. April 13.
MINE LANDS FOR SALE.—The subscriber will sell a Tract of LAND containing 2791 acres, lying in Hampshire county, within 20 miles of Winchester, on Cacapon, a branch of Potomac. This Land contains a large body of iron ore of an excellent quality, which has been worked on a small scale, but discontinued for want of funds; and would be to any person able to carry it on, a very valuable acquisition.
Also a tract in said county on the waters of Mill Creek under the South Branch Mountain, containing 253 acres—197 acres on Mill Creek, within 12 miles of Romney—400 acres on the waters of Cacapon—1000 acres on the falls of Green River in the state of Kentucky, and 1000 acres on the waters of Ohio in Kentucky.
Undisputed titles will be given; and terms made known by applying to Mr. Harry Heth at the Coal Pits or the subscriber at Curles, on James River, 15 miles below Richmond. WILL. M. HETH. March 12. [ep124]
IRON WORKS.—The following LANDS will be sold together or in separate parcels to suit purchasers, at Public Auction, at Mr. Chase's Vendue Warehouse, in Baltimore, on Saturday the 14th day of May next, at 12 o'clock; 23,345 acres of LAND, more or less, consisting of different surveys adjoining each other, lying in Bath and Botetourt counties, in the state of Virginia, on the Cowpasture river, which empties into James River. There is on the above Lands, a great abundance of Iron Ore, of the best quality, to be obtained with very trifling expence, near navigable water, and situations suitable for erecting furnaces and forges. The annexed certificate of Adam Clackner, (an experienced man of good character) is referred to for further particulars. The first named subscriber has also been on the Lands and examined the situations on the river for furnaces and forges, and is of opinion that the annexed certificate is in every respect correct.
The terms of sale will be 5000 dollars cash, and for the residue of the purchase money an extended credit will be given. The titles are believed to be unquestionable. The Patents may be seen by application to the subscribers. JOSIAS PENNINGTON, N. BRICE, Trustees of the Patents.
CERTIFICATE. I hereby certify, that in the year 1803, I examined the Ore banks on the above mentioned lands, and found the ore to be of a very superior quality, and in very great abundance. The ore banks consist of three mountains, and such is the facility of getting the ore, that in my opinion one man will be able to raise as much as will supply one furnace. The proper place for a furnace is not more than 1/4 of a mile from the banks, and for a forge that may be worked with four hammers, about 5 miles distant on a good road, there is also an abundance of wood to supply the furnace and forge, and a large quantity of White Limestone near the furnace seat. I am of opinion that there are two good seats for forges, (exclusive of the above mentioned) each to act with one hammer, within 1/2 of a mile of the furnace; upon the whole, I solemnly declare, that in my opinion (and I have been for many years acquainted with the qualities of ore, and the proper management of Iron Works) the above property has more advantages in every respect, for the establishment of Iron Works than any I have ever seen. ADAM CLACKNER. March 25. [ep125]
SELECT SCHOOL.—This school is removed to the former Loan-Office, opposite to the Swan-Tavern. The instructions given are in the Latin and Greek languages, Rhetoric and Mathematics, &c. The School hours are from 8 o'clock in the morning to 3 in the afternoon. The pupils are limited to twenty, and as that number is not filled up at present, a few will be received. The fees of tuition are fifteen dollars a quarter, payable in advance. There is no additional charge upon the Scholar's first entering, nor is there any for fuel. FRANCIS O'REILLY. Richmond, Apr. 14. [ep126]