Virginia Argus (Richmond, Va.), 1808-04-15 00:00:00

VIRGINIA ARGUS.
[XVTH YEAR.]
A FREE PRESS MAINTAINS THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE.
[No 1450.]
RICHMOND:—PRINTED (ON TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS) BY SAMUEL PLEASANTS, JUNIOR, PRINTER TO THE COMMONWEALTH.
[Four Dollars Per Annum—Paid in Advance.]
FRIDAY, APRIL 15, 1808.
[12 1-2 Cents Single.]
ADVERTISEMENT.
THE Subscriber respectfully informs his friends and the public, that he has lately received an Excellent Assortment of LEATHER, of the very best quality, which he will have manufactured in the BEST MANNER , to supply his customers, &c and which he will dispose of on the most reasonable terms that such work can be sold.
David Logan.
17, 1808.
For Sale or Rent,
THE HOUSE, OFFICE & STABLE, with an excellent garden, all in good order, and at present occupied by Mr Samuel P. Parsons, joining major Prior, on the Hay-Market square; For particulars apply to JASPER ROBBINS, at Mr. JOHN M'ENRY'S.
Feb. 24, 1808.
TO RENT
The House and Lot,
AT present occupied by Mr Hezekiah Mosby pleasantly situated on Shockoe Hill and very convenient for the accommodation of a family—Possession may be had on the 3d March next when Mr Mosby's time will expire Thomas Elliott. Richmond, 29th Jan 1808
REMOVAL.
WE have removed our Countinghouse to the house immediately below, and contiguous to the one we have hitherto occupied, where we have for sale, Muscovado Sugar by the hogshead or barrel, Sherry Wine, in quarter casks, and a few cases Old Claret of superior quality. ROBERT & ALLAN POLLOCK, & Co. March 8, 1808.
I AM desirous to exchange the following property, or any part thereof, as may be agreed on, for a small tract of good Land, in a healthy situation, with a dwelling house and other improvements, a good spring of water, and an agreeable neighborhood, at a distance of 30 to 100 miles up the country—To say for Houses in this city—Lands in Henrico county, joining the academy lands, and near this city—2,000 acres on Richmond creek, in Lincoln county, Kentucky—1,000 acres on the waters of the Ohio, in Mason county—and two tracts of Military Lands on the river Tennessee, each 355 2 3 acres. Robert Mitchell. Richmond, Feb. 6, 1808.
NOTICE.
WILL DISPOSE OF MY TRACT OF LAND,
LYING in Powhatan county, containing 500 acres, of which there is 80 or more prime low grounds, which never is over-flowed by the river Appomattox. There is also a fine mill seat, the dam nearly completed, and timbers ready to go to complete the mill, upon a never failing stream. The terms will be one-half cash, the balance in 12 months. I will sell or treat with any one between this and the 1st July next, otherwise it will be sold upon the premises, to the highest bidder, together with other property. The terms of the personal property will be made known on the day of sale. John H. Saunders. January 5, 1808.
TO BE SOLD,
By public auction, for cash, on Monday the 25th April next, at Cumberland court house, being court day.
Two tracts of Land,
In the county of Buckingham, formerly belonging to Mr. Peyton Saunders, viz one tract of 400 acres, adjoining the lands of Reily Chastain and John Harris. The other tract lies on Buffalo creek, five miles from the town of Caïra, containing 258 acres, adjoining the lands of Eleanor Bowling, John Druin, John Lipscomb and James Huggins. Mr. Edw. W. Trent will be invested with free power to act for me, in being at court on that day. CHAN. H. SAUNDERS. Richmond, March 26, 1808.
100 Dollars Reward.
RUN AWAY about the first inst. from the service of Mr. William Rawleigh, (to whom he was hired,) a BLACK MAN, named JACKSON, a House Carpenter by profession, of thin consumptive appearance, about 40 years of age, five feet eight or nine inches high; from circumstances attending his engagement, it is believed, he intends making his way to one of the Eastern States, and has been provided with false papers of freedom.—If taken within the State, and delivered to me here, or secured, that I get him, I will give Fifty Dollars, or if taken out of the State, One Hundred Dollars. Robert Gamble, Jr. Richmond, Dec. 24th, 1807.
TO RENT,
A GOOD TENEMENT on Market Alley, opposite the Market House; it is among the best stands in the neighborhood for a grocery. For terms apply to the subscriber or to Harry Tompkins ISAAC WEBSTER. February 15.
JUST RECEIVED AT THIS OFFICE, No. 4, of THE American Military Library OR, Repository of Modern Tactics; Adapted to the use of the Militia of the United States.—Illustrated with a sheet plate of nineteen manoeuvres. (The plate alone sells for 75 cents.) March 9
BLANK BONDS
For Sale at this Office.
NOTICE.
THE Subscriber having formed a connection in business, under the firm of HOVEY & SIZER, OFFER FOR SALE, at the Store lately occupied by Mr. Charles F. Marmaduke, the following articles:
 50 hds. N. E. Rum,  25 hds. loaf and lump sugar,  12 bags of pepper  2 ton of bar lead  10 boxes cotton and wool cards,  25 boxes candles  15 boxes N. York chocolate  25 trunks of shoes assorted  50 tierces Stone Lime. 
HENRY HOVEY, JAMES SIZER.
ALL PERSONS who are indebted to the Subscriber are requested to make immediate payment. No other indulgence will be given to those whose bonds and accounts have been due six months. HENRY HOVEY. April 5th, 1808
For Rent,
THE House on the Main Street, next to Messrs Ellis and Allan, and now occupied by Mrs. Phebe. Possession will be given on the first of January next—apply to JOSEPH GALLEGO Richmond, Dec. 27, 1807.
Valuable Lands.
THE subscriber will Sell, on a credit, or exchange for Property in Richmond or its neighborhood, the following LANDS, to wit: 822 acres in the state of Kentucky, by survey bearing date the 10th day of October 1797, lying and being in the district set apart for the officers and soldiers of the Virginia state line, on Little Barren river.
Also, 1000 acres, in Kentucky, by survey bearing date the 10th October 1797, likewise lying in the district set apart for the officers and soldiers of the Virginia state line, on the north side of Little river, a branch of Cumberland river, and about two and an half miles from the mouth of Little river.
Also, 450 acres of Land in the county of Mason, state of Virginia, on Old Town creek, about 8 miles from Mason courthouse.
Indispensible titles will be made to the above mentioned lands; and plots of each tract may be seen on application to the subscriber residing in Richmond.
THOMAS BOHANNAN. January 234, 1808.
To be Sold
TO the highest bidder, for ready money, on Thursday the 21st instant, April, at the house called Napier's Tavern, in the town of Columbia, a
Tract of Land
whereon Abraham Shepard now lives, on the Rivanna, in the county of Fluvanna, containing by a late survey, 334 acres, more or less, adjoining the lands of Charles Adams, Richard Adams, Pleasant Bybee, and others, being land sold by David Ross to said Shepard, and conveyed by him, Shepard, to us in trust, to secure a debt due to said Ross, as stated in said trust deed, which said debt has since been assigned by said Ross to Henry E. Coleman—We sell our right as trustees only.
George Holman, } Trustees. William Pasteur, } Jacob Myers, } 1st April, 1808.
Will be Sold
FOR ready money, on the premises on the fourth day of June next, in obedience to a decree of the Superior Court of Chancery, for the Richmond District, made on the ninth day of February last past, in the suits in said Court, viz:
Brown, Rives, and Company, Merchants and partners, } pfs against William Alcock, Andrew Hart, Robert Alcock, James Barbour, and Martin Dawson, } dfs and William Galt, } pfs against William Alcock, Andrew Hart, Robert Alcock, James Barbour, Brown, Rives & Company, Martin Dawson & David Anderson, } dfs.
ONE TRACT or PARCEL OF LAND, in said suits mentioned, lying and being in the county of Albemarle, in the North Garden, on the head waters of Hardaway river, containing SEVEN HUNDRED AND EIGHTY FOUR ACRES , be the same more or less, and adjoining the lands of James Garland, Hoke R. Morris, William Woods, &c, subject to the life estate of the defendant Robert Alcock and Mary his wife, in the lower moiety thereof. MARTIN DAWSON. March 21, 1808.
10 Dollars Reward.
RUN AWAY from the Subscriber on Friday last, a Negro Man named JOHN, a carpenter by trade. He is six feet and upwards high, very likely, of insinuating manners, extremely polite when spoken to. For three years past he lived with Mr. Anderson Barrett. He has a free mulatto woman for his wife, in Richmond, living near the work house, where I expect he will stay. He took with him several articles of husbandry; amongst them, a pair of iron wedges, marked with the letter P. I will give a reward of ten dollars, if delivered to me in the lower end of Hanover, or eight if confined in jail, and I apprised of it. He is called by the negroes John Russell. ARMISTEAD RUSSELL. Hanover, January 24, 1808.
BY THE GOVERNOR of the Commonwealth of Virginia, A Proclamation.
WHEREAS it is represented to the Executive on the affidavit of John Cockarill, gentleman, of the county of Northumberland, that on the 14th day of March last, on his way to the court of the said county, he the said John Cockarill was waylaid and feloniously shot from a gun by some person unknown; that Peter Cockarill the son of the said John Cockarill, about 14 years old, was at the same time struck with one shot; and that it was the opinion of Corban Baker, a physician of the county aforesaid, that the said John Cockarill would have been killed by the said shot but for the thickness of his clothing: I have therefore thought fit, with the advice of the council of state, to issue this proclamation, hereby offering a reward of one hundred dollars to any person or persons who shall discover, apprehend and cause to be prosecuted to conviction, the person or persons, thus waylaid and feloniously shooting the said John Cockarill. And I do moreover enjoin all officers, civil and military, and exhort the good people of the commonwealth, to discover, apprehend and cause to be brought to justice, the person or persons so waylaid and feloniously shooting the said John Cockarill.
Given under my hand with the seal of the Commonwealth annexed at Richmond this seventh day of April, 1808. (Signed) WM. H. CABELL.
WHEREAS the SUBSCRIBER together with John Stockwell the Elder, and George Johnston and Jane his wife of the county of Tyrone in the kingdom of Ireland, executed a power of attorney, dated the 9th day of April 1806, authorising John Stockwell, jun. to receive, and to sell and convey all the estate, real and personal, to which we were entitled under the wills or as heirs at law of Mark Stockwell late of the city of Washington, or of Henry Stockwell late of Philadelphia consisting principally of Lots in the city of Washington, and Lands in Greenbrier, and Kanawha, counties in Virginia. Now know all to whom this writing shall come, that we, for good causes, do hereby revoke and entirely annul the said letter of attorney herein before mentioned. Given under our hands and seals this 28th day of March, 1808. (Seal) JAMES HANCOCK. April 6.
NOTICE.
ALL persons to whom the estate of a late Judith Robinson, dec. of Cumberland county, is indebted, are desired on or before the first day of October next to bring forward their claims properly authenticated, that provision may be made for payment, and to all claims exhibited after that period, this advertisement will be plead in bar. A division of said estate among the legatees will be made on the above day. JOHN HATCHER, Exr. March 17, 1808.
A FEW COPIES OF TOOKE'S Divisions of Purley, are for sale at this office—also Fisher's Military Tactics, and a good edition of Steuben's Exercises. ALSO Hening's New Virginia Justice, Containing the Duties of a Justice of Peace, &c, together with a variety of useful precedents, adapted to the laws now in force. Also, forms of conveyancing, such as deeds of bargain and sale lease and release, mortgage, trust, &c.
By Authority.
AN ACT, To provide for the payment of certain expenses incurred in the enquiry into the conduct of John Smith, a Senator from the state of Ohio. BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the accounting officers of the treasury be, and they are hereby directed to audit and settle the accounts of all persons who may have claims against the United States, for expenses incurred in the enquiry into the conduct of John Smith, a Senator of the United States, for the state of Ohio, as an alleged associate of Aaron Burr; which expenses may have been authorised by the committee of Enquiry, or by order of the Senate: Provided, That the said accounts shall have been first certified, by the chairman of the committee, or by the Secretary of the Senate.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That to every witness before the said committee of enquiry or before the Senate upon the said enquiry, there shall be allowed and paid, for every day's attendance thereon, the sum of three dollars. And to defray the said expenses, there is hereby appropriated the sum of five hundred dollars, to be paid from any monies in the treasury not otherwise appropriated. J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. February 19, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT, For the relief of Samuel Whiting. BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the treasury be and is hereby authorised and directed to pay to Samuel Whiting four hundred and forty dollars, in satisfaction of the said Samuel Whiting's claim for services rendered and expenses incurred, pursuant to the directions of the post-master general, in the apprehending and prosecuting one Henry Deming, late a deputy post-master at Hinsdale, in Massachusetts, who was indicted in the circuit court of the United States at Boston, for embezzling certain letters which came to his possession, containing bank notes belonging to the said Samuel Whiting. J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States and President of the Senate. February 25, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT, Making further provision for the disposal of the sections of land heretofore reserved for the further disposition of Congress. BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That all the sections of land heretofore reserved for the future disposition of Congress, not sold or otherwise disposed of, and lying within either of the districts established for the disposition of public lands in the state of Ohio, with the exception of the section numbered sixteen; of the Salt Springs and lands reserved for the use of the same shall be offered for sale in that district, within which such reserved sections may respectively lie, on the same terms and under the same regulations as other lands in the same district: Provided, That such sections shall previously be offered to the highest bidder, at public sales, to be held under the superintendence of the registers and receivers of public monies of the land offices respectively to which they are attached, on the same terms as have been provided by law for the public sales of the other lands of the United States, and on such day or days as shall by a proclamation of the president of the United States be designated for that purpose: And provided also, that no such heretofore reserved section shall be sold either at public or private sale, at a less price than our dollars per acre. J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. February 29, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT, Supplementary to the act, entitled "An act to prohibit the importation of certain goods, wares and merchandise." Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That nothing in the act to which this act is a supplement, shall be so construed as to prohibit the importation of the following articles, that is to say: First. Wrappers and outside packages in which goods, the importation of which is not prohibited, usually are and shall be wrapped or packed at the time of their importation: Second. Bags or sacks in which salt shall be imported: Third. Glass bottles or phials in which drugs, medicines, or any other article, the importation of which is not prohibited, shall be imported: Fourth. Printed books, maps and charts; Fifth. Watches, tradesmens' and artificers' tools; mathematical, astronomical and surgical instruments; gift buttons, locks and all other articles manufactured partly of brass and partly of any other metal. Sixth. Snalloons, and woollen stuff, muskets, bayonets, swords, cutlasses and pistols.
Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That the articles of the following description shall be held and considered as being embraced by the description of articles, the importation of which is prohibited by the act to which this act is a supplement, that is to say: All articles manufactured entirely of silk and wool, or of silk and flax, or of flax and wool; floor-cloths; woollen cassimers, carpets, carpeting, and mats, whose invoice prices shall exceed five shillings sterling, per square yard. Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, That no articles imported on board any vessel of the United States, cleared out before the fourteenth day of December last from any port within the United States or the territories thereof, shall be subject to the prohibition enacted by the act to which this act is a supplement: Provided, That such vessels which may have cleared for any port beyond the cape of Good Hope, shall return to some port in the United States or its territories within twelve months: And Provided, That such vessels as shall have cleared from any other port shall return as aforesaid within six months from the said fourteenth day of December. J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice President of the United States, and President of the Senate. February 27, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
AN ACT,
Making further provision for the disposal of the sections of land heretofore reserved for the further disposition of Congress. BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That all the sections of land heretofore reserved for the future disposition of Congress, not sold or otherwise disposed of, and lying within either of the districts established for the disposition of public lands in the state of Ohio, with the exception of the section numbered sixteen; of the Salt Springs and lands reserved for the use of the same shall be offered for sale in that district, within which such reserved sections may respectively lie, on the same terms and under the same regulations as other lands in the same district: Provided, That such sections shall previously be offered to the highest bidder, at public sales, to be held under the superintendence of the registers and receivers of public monies of the land offices respectively to which they are attached, on the same terms as have been provided by law for the public sales of the other lands of the United States, and on such day or days as shall by a proclamation of the president of the United States be designated for that purpose: And provided also, that no such heretofore reserved section shall be sold either at public or private sale, at a less price than our dollars per acre. J. B. VARNUM, Speaker of the House of Representatives. GEO: CLINTON, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate. February 29, 1808. APPROVED, TH: JEFFERSON.
FOR THE VIRGINIA ARGUS.
A series of essays have appeared in the Virginian, under the signature of Philo—they were chiefly intended to vindicate col. Monroe, against aspersions which have been very generally circulated. They were written by an individual, who was neither connected with col. Monroe, nor was ever attached to any political party; who never supported any man or question which did not meet his entire approbation; who neither ever did nor will desert a friend of a cause, merely because they are unpopular. These essays sometimes assumed a very elevated style, not so much for the purpose of irritating the adverse party as to elicit the truth; so that, if there should appear to be causes for real objection against col. Monroe, they might be promulgated.
When the series commenced, several papers had published articles which conveyed strong insinuations that the conduct of col. Monroe, in relation to public affairs committed to his agency, had been both degrading and disgraceful; but upon some late occasions, it has been very honestly acknowledged, even by many of his adversaries, that his conduct had been highly meritorious. Many instances might be cited, out I shall refer only to one, and this will be entitled to the more credit, because it is the voluntary avowal of an opponent.
Mr. Samuel Pleasants, is the proprietor and editor of the Virginia Argus—he opposes the election of col. Monroe as president; and is one of the corresponding committee to promote the election of Mr. Madison. For these reasons, any declaration made by Mr. Pleasants in favor of col. Monroe, deserves the highest credit.
To the candor of Mr. Pleasants, is due the following frank and liberal confession. Argus, April 1, 1808—"The whole world will be satisfied that the GREAT and GOOD MONROE, has always been faithful to his duty and principles." The friends of col. Monroe can ask no more, if a similar acknowledgment had been made three months ago, it would have saved much trouble, as well as many warm and ardent publications. It is very certain that the pieces under the signature Philo, would not have been published. They were written solely to vindicate the fame and feelings of a man, who at that time, was calumniated, and was also restrained by the delicacy of his situation, from vindicating himself.
All that the friends of col. Monroe ever contended for, was that his exalted endowments as well as strict integrity, and faithful service, entitled him to the universal suffrage of his country. All this is now admitted in the fullest manner by his opponents: Nothing more is necessary, but to add, that the people of the United States, now have it in their power, to elect a man to the high office of President, of whom even by those of adverse views, it is said, "That the GREAT and GOOD MONROE has been always faithful to his duty and principles."
Well then if this be acknowledged by all the world, can it be expected by any man of candor and just sentiments, that the friends of Monroe, or a single man of them, will desert a cause so well supported, until the PEOPLE, by their suffrages shall prove that they prefer another, against whom some very serious objections have been made.
Here I would close this essay, if the Argus, at the time when it acquired so much credit for candor and liberality, as relates to col. Monroe, had not implicated the writer of Philo in a charge, which he thinks himself bound to repel. The charge alluded to is as follows: "Messrs. Philo, Pacificus, Sparta and the Virginian, will discover the error of their ways in favoring and eulogizing the rejected treaty." Pacificus and the Virginian have already denied the charge, and Philo is now alive to follow their example.
Perhaps there was never a greater mistake committed than this. The writer of Philo, upon no occasion said more concerning it, than was necessary to counteract the prejudices which had been excited against col. Monroe as one of the signers, whilst Mr. Pinckney the other signer, was honored and rewarded. It is not necessary at this time to repeat former arguments, because the treaty being now published, and col. Monroe being no longer restrained by delicacy, the vindication of his conduct will be left to himself.
We understand that Mr. Madison and Mr. Monroe, have each written very lengthy remarks concerning the treaty. They will no doubt be very soon published. It is from these, that the best information will be derived; but let the arguments and the results be what they may, it is not now even pretended that the conduct of col. Monroe, has been upon any occasion otherwise than dignified as well as faithful to his duty and principles.
Unless more than this can be said in favor of another, why should any friend of Mr. Madison impute to the friends of Mr. Monroe either error or fault? or how can they expect that a cause will be deserted to which the whole world pays the voluntary tribute of liberal and general respect.
No! No! No!!! The man who believes as much in favor of Monroe as is acknowledged by the Argus, must be worse than a traitor, to desert him as long as there is a possibility of promoting his election. It is a question upon which, the people only have a right to judge and act; upon their suffrages to be given in November next, I rely; until then, let others do what they may, I will not cease to make every honorable effort to insure an event upon which the public happiness greatly depends; and in relation to a man, of whom, even his adversaries, can make no objection, but have voluntarily and honorably confessed that he has always been faithful to his duty and principles.
PHILO.
A NEW SYSTEM OF DOMESTIC COOKERY.
Formed upon Principles of Economy and adapted to the use of Private Families. Also, Just received, A few copies of OIL without VINEGAR.

LETTERS From the Secretary of State to Mr. Monroe, on the subject of impressments, &c. Also, extracts from, and enclosures in, the letters of Mr. Monroe to the Secretary of State, prior to the joint mission of him and Mr. Pinkney; part 2, accompanying the message of the President of the United States, received on the 22d of March, 1808.
Mr. Madison to Mr. Monroe. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, January 5, 1804.
Sir,—The information and observations which you have as yet received from me since your arrival in London, on the impressment of our seamen and other violations of our rights, have been in private letters only. The delay in making these injuries the subject of official communications, proceeded, first, from an expectation that the British government would have notified formally to the U. S. as a neutral power, the state of war between Great Britain and France, which would have been an apt occasion, for combining with assurances of the fairness with which our neutral obligations would be fulfilled, our just claims on a correspondent respect for our neutral rights, and particularly of those which had been least respected during the last war; secondly, from the expected arrival of Mr. Merry, which, if he should not be charged with such a notification, might be a favorable opportunity for commencing the explanations and discussions which must precede a thorough correction of the wrongs which we experience.
Since the arrival of Mr. Merry, accordingly, no time has been lost in calling his attention to the subject; and in preparing both it and him, for the negotiation which is now to be committed to you. If appearances are to be trusted, his impressions and representations will be friendly to it. In my conversations with him, which have been free and full, he has expressed the best dispositions, has listened with candor to the appeals made, as well to the considerations of justice, as of the solid interest of his nation; and although he suggests serious difficulties on certain points, he will, I believe, sincerely co-operate in lessening them, and in bringing about an arrangement which will be acceptable to this country. The only topic on which any thing has passed in writing between the department of state and him, is that of the pretended blockade of St. Domingo. Copies of my letter to him, and of his answer, are herewith included; as also of the letter written to Mr. Thornton, some time before, and referred to in that of Mr. Merry, in relation to a like blockade of Martinique and Guadalupe.
Although there are many important objects which may be thought to invite conventional regulations between the U. States and Great Britain, it is evidently proper to leave for subsequent consideration, such as are less urgent in their nature, or more difficult in their adjustment; and thereby to render the way plainer and shorter to an agreement with respect to objects which cannot be much longer delayed without danger to the good understanding between the two nations. With this view the plan of a convention contemplated by the President, is limited to the cases of impressments of our seamen, of blockades, of visiting and searching our vessels, of contraband of war, and of the trade with hostile colonies, with a few other cases affecting our maritime rights; embracing however, as inducements to Great Britain to do us justice therein, a provision for the surrender of deserting seamen and soldiers, and for the prevention of contraband supplies to her enemies.
The plan digested for your use is subjoined. The first column contains the articles which are to be proposed in the first instance, and which are considered as within our just expectations: the second modifies the articles into the concessions which the British government may possibly require, and which it may be expedient for us ultimately to admit.
[To save room, instead of arranging the articles in two columns, as done in the project, we have put the contents of the first column in Italics succeeding the contents of the second column.]
A CONVENTION BETWEEN THE U. S. AND G. BRITAIN.
ART. I. No seaman, seafaring or other person, shall, upon the high seas and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to the citizens or subjects of one of the parties, by the public or private armed ships belonging to or in the service of the other party, and strict and effectual orders shall be given for the due observance of this engagement: but it is to be understood that this article shall not exempt any person on board the ships of either of the parties, from being taken therefrom by the other party, in cases where they may be liable to be so taken according to the laws of nations, which liability, however, shall not be construed to extend in any case to seamen or seafaring persons, being actually part of the crew of the vessel in which they may be, nor to persons of any description passing from one port to another port of either of the parties.
ART. I. No person whatsoever shall, upon the high seas and without the jurisdiction of either party, be demanded or taken out of any ship or vessel belonging to citizens or subjects of one of the parties, by the public or private armed ships belonging to or in the service of the other, unless such person be at the time in the military service of an enemy of such other party.
ART. II. No person being a subject or citizen of one of the parties, and resorting to or residing in the dominions of the other, shall in any case be compelled to serve on board any vessel, whether public or private, belonging to such other party: and all citizens or subjects whatever of the respective parties, at this time compulsively serving on board the vessels of the other, shall be forthwith liberated, and enabled, by an adequate recompense, to return to their own country.
ART. II. The same.
ART. III. If the ships of either of the parties shall be met with sailing either along the coasts or on the high seas, by any ship of war or other public or private armed ships of the other party, such ships of war
or other armed vessels shall, for avoiding all disorder in visiting and examining the same, remain out of cannon shot, unless the state of the sea or the place of meeting render a nearer approach necessary; and shall in no case compel or require such vessel to send her boat, her papers or any person on board to the belligerent vessel; but the belligerent vessel may send her own boat to the other, and may enter her to the number of two or three men only, who may, in an orderly manner, make the necessary inquiries concerning the vessel and her cargo; and it is agreed that effectual provision shall be made for punishing violations of any part of this article.
ART. III. The same.
ART. IV. Contraband of war shall consist of the following articles only: salt petre, sulphur, cuirasses, pikes, swords, sword belts, knapsacks, saddles and bridles, cannons, mortars, fire arms, pistols, bombs, grenades, bullets, fire-locks, flints, matches and gun powder; excepting, however, the quantity of the said articles which may be necessary for the defence or use of the ship and those who compose the crew; and no other articles whatever, not here enumerated, shall be reputed contraband or liable to confiscation, but shall pass freely without being subjected to the smallest difficulty, unless they be enemy's property; and it is to be particularly understood, that under the denomination of enemy's property, is not to be comprized the merchandise of the growth, produce or manufactures of the countries or dominions at war, which shall have been acquired by the citizens or subjects of the neutral power, and shall be transported for their account; which merchandise cannot, in any case, or on any pretext, be excepted from the freedom of the neutral flag.
ART. IV. The same.
ART. V. In all cases where the prize courts of either party shall pronounce judgment against any vessel or property claimed by citizens or subjects of the other, the sentence or decree shall mention the reasons or motives on which the same shall have been founded; and an authenticated copy of the sentence or decree, and of all the proceedings in the case, shall, if demanded, be delivered to the commander or agent of the said vessel without any delay, he paying the legal fees for the same.
ART. V. The same.
ART. VI. In order to determine what characterises a blockaded port, that denomination is given only to a port where there is by the disposition of the power which attacks it with ships stationary or sufficiently near, an evident danger in entering.
ART. VI. The same.
ART. VII. [In consideration of the distance of the ports likely to be blockaded by either party, from the ports of the other party, and of other circumstances incidental to their relative situations] it is agreed that no vessel sailing from the ports of either, shall, although, cleared or bound to a blockaded port, be considered as violating in any manner the blockade, unless on her approach towards such port she shall have been previously warned against entering the same.
ART. VII. Omit the preamble.
ART. VIII. It is agreed that no refuge or protection shall be afforded by either party to the "captains, officers, mariners, sailors or other persons not found to be its own citizens or subjects, who shall desert from a vessel of the other party, of the crew whereof the deserter made a part; but on the contrary, all such deserters shall be delivered up on demand, to the commanders of the vessels from which they shall have deserted, or to the commanding officer of the ships of war of the respective nations, or to such other persons as may be duly authorised to make requisition in that behalf; provided, that proof be made, within two years from the time of desertion, by an exhibition of the ship's papers, or authenticated copies thereof; and by satisfactory evidence of the identity of the person, that the deserters so demanded were actually part of the crew of the vessels in question.
And for the more effectual execution of this article, adequate provision shall be made for causing to be arrested, on the application of the respective consuls or vice consuls to the competent authorities all deserters as aforesaid, duly proved to be such, in order that they may be sent back to the commanders of the vessels to which they belonged, or removed out of the country, and all due aid and assistance shall be given in searching for, as well as in seizing and arresting the said deserters; who shall even be detained and kept in the prisons of the country at the request and expence of the said consuls or vice consuls, until they shall have found an opportunity of sending them back or removing them as aforesaid. But if they be not so sent back or removed within three months from the day of their arrest, they shall be set at liberty, and shall not again be arrested for the same cause.
ART. VIII. Omit "captains, officers."
ART. IX. It is further agreed that no refuge or protection shall be afforded, by either of the parties, to any "officers or soldiers, not found to be its own citizens or subjects, who shall desert from the military service of the other; but that, on the contrary, effectual measures shall be taken, in like manner and under like regulations and conditions, as with respect to sailors, for apprehending any such deserting soldiers, and delivering them to the commanding officers of the military posts, forts or garrisons from which they shall have deserted, or to the consuls or vice-consuls on either side, or to such person as may be duly authorised to demand their restitution.
ART. IX. Omit "officers, or"
ART. X. It is however understood, that no stipulation herein made, shall be construed to empower the civil or military officers of either of the parties, to enter forcibly into any of the forts, garrisons, posts or other places, or to use violence of any sort within the jurisdiction of the other party, or be construed, in any manner, to contravene or derogate from the stipulation contained in the first of the above articles against demanding or taking any persons out of vessels on the high seas, and without the jurisdiction of either of the parties.
ART. X. Omitted.
ART. XI. Each party will prohibit its citizens or subjects, from clandestinely carrying away from the territories or domi-
nions of the other, any seamen or soldiers belonging to such other party.
ART. XI. The same.
ART. XII. Neither party shall permit any of the articles above enumerated, as contraband of war, to be cleared out from its ports to any place within the jurisdiction of an enemy of the other party, and in order to enforce this regulation, due proof and security shall be given, that all such articles of contraband as may be exported from the ports of either of the parties, have been actually destined elsewhere, than within the jurisdiction of any enemy of the other party.
ART. XII. The same.
ART. XIII. This convention shall be in force for the term of eight years from the date of the exchange of ratifications. It shall be ratified on both sides within months from the day of its signature, or sooner if possible; and the ratifications exchanged without delay, in the U. States, at the city of Washington.
ART. XIII. The same.
Observations on the preceding plan.
The first article relates to impressments from American vessels on the high seas. The commanders of British armed vessels have, as is well known, been long in this practice. They have indeed not only continued it, under the sanction of their superiors, on the high seas; but have, with impunity, extended it to our own coasts, to neutral ports and to neutral territory; and, in some instances, to our own harbors. The article does not comprehend these latter cases; because it would not be very honorable in Great Britain to stipulate against the practice of such enormities, nor in the U. States to recur to stipulations as a security against it; and because it may be presumed that such particular enormities will not be repeated, or unpunished, after a general stop shall have been put to impressments.
The article, in its first form, renounces the claim to take from the vessels of the neutral party, on the high seas, any person whatever, not in the military service of an enemy; an exception which we admit to come within the law of nations, on the subject of contraband of war. With this exception, we consider a neutral flag on the high seas, as a safe guard to those sailing under it. Great Britain, on the contrary, asserts a right to search for, and seize her own subjects; and under that cover, as cannot but happen, are often seized and taken off, citizens of the United States and citizens or subjects of other neutral countries navigating the high seas, under the protection of the American flag.
Were the right of Great Britain in this case not denied, the abuses flowing from it would justify the United States in claiming and expecting a discontinuance of its exercise. But the right is denied, and on the best grounds.
Altho' Great Britain has not yet adopted, in the same latitude with most other nations, the immunities of a neutral flag, she will not deny the general freedom of the high seas, and of neutral vessels navigating them, with such exceptions only, as are annexed to it, by the law of nations. She must produce then such an exception in the law of nations, in favor of the right she contends for. But in what written and received authority will she find it? In what usage, except her own, will it be found? She will find in both, that a neutral vessel does not protect certain objects denominated contraband of war, including enemies serving in the war, nor articles going into a blockaded port; nor, as she has maintained, and as we have not contested, enemy's property of any kind. But no where will she find an exception to this freedom of the seas, and of neutral flags which justifies the taking away of any person not an enemy in military service, found on board a neutral vessel.
If treaties, British as well as others, are to be consulted on this subject, it will equally appear that no countenance to the practice can be found in them. While they admit a contraband of war, by enumerating its articles, and the effect of a real blockade by defining it, in no instance do they affirm or imply a right in any sovereign, to enforce his claims to the allegiance of his subjects, on board neutral vessels, on the high seas. On the contrary, whenever a belligerent claim against persons on board a neutral vessel, is referred to in treaties, enemies in military service alone are excepted from the general immunity of persons in that situation; and this exception confirms the immunity of those who are not included in it.
It is not then from the law, or the usage of nations, nor from the tenor of treaties, that any sanction can be derived for the practice in question. And surely it will not be pretended that the sovereignty of any nation extends, in any case whatever beyond its own dominions, and its own vessels on the high seas. Such a doctrine would give just alarm to all nations, and more than any thing would countenance the imputation of aspiring to an universal empire of the seas. It would be the less admissible too, as it would be applicable to times of peace as well as to times of war, and to property as well as to persons. If the law of allegiance, which is a municipal law, be in force at all on the high seas, on board foreign vessels, it must be so at all times there, as it is within its acknowledged sphere. If the reason alleged, that the sovereign has then a right to the service of all his subjects, it must be good at all times, because at all times he has the same right to their service. War is not the only occasion for which he may want their services; nor is external danger the only danger against which their services may be required for his security. Again, if the authority of a municipal law can operate on persons in foreign vessels, on the high seas, because within the dominion of their sovereign they would be subject to that law, and are violating that law by being in that situation; how reject the inference that the authority of a municipal law may equally be enforced on board foreign vessels on the high seas, against articles of property exported in violation of such a law, or belonging to the country from which it was exported? And thus every commercial regulation, in time of peace too, as well as of war, would be made obligatory on foreigners and their vessels, not only whilst within the dominion of the sovereign making the regulation, but in every sea, and at every distance where an armed vessel might meet with them. Another inference deserves attention. If the subjects of one sovereign may be taken by force from the vessels of another, on the high seas, the right of taking them, when found, implies the right of searching, for them, a vexation of commerce, especially in time of peace, which has not yet been attempted, and which, for that as well as other reasons, may be regarded as contradicting the principle from which it would flow.
ART. XI. The same.
Taking reason and justice for the tests of this practice, it is peculiarly indefensible; because it deprives the dearest rights of persons, of a regular trial, to which the most inconsiderable article of property captured on the high seas, is entitled; and leaves their destiny to the will of an officer, sometimes cruel, often ignorant, and generally interested by his want of mariners, in his own decision. Whenever property found in a neutral vessel is supposed to be liable on any grounds to capture and condemnation, the rule in all cases is, that the question shall not be decided by the captor, but be carried before a legal tribunal, where a regular trial may be had, and where the captor himself is liable to damages for an abuse of his power. Can it be reasonable then or just, that a belligerent commander who is thus restricted and thus responsible in a case of more property of trivial amount, should be permitted, without recurring to any tribunal whatever, to examine the crew of a neutral vessel to decide the important question of their respective allegiances, and to carry that decision into instant execution by forcing every individual he may choose, into a service abhorrent to his feelings; cutting him off from his most tender connections, exposing his mind and his person to the most humiliating discipline, and his life itself to the greatest dangers? Reason, justice and humanity unite in protesting against so extravagant a proceeding. And what is the pretext for it? It is that the similarity of language and of features, between American citizens and British subjects, are such as not easily to be distinguished; and that without this arbitrary and summary authority to make the distinction, British subjects would escape under the name of American citizens, from the duty which they owe to their sovereign. Is then the difficulty of distinguishing a mariner of one country from the mariner of the other and the importance of his services, a good plea for referring the question whether he belongs to one or to the other, to an arbitrary decision on the spot; by an interested and irresponsible officer? In all other cases, the difficulty and the importance of questions are considered as reasons for requiring greater care and formality in investigating them, and greater security for a right decision on them. To say that precautions of this sort are incompatible with the object, is to admit that the object is unjustifiable, since the only means by which it can be pursued are such as cannot be justified.
The evil takes a deeper die when viewed in its practice as well as its principles. Were it allowable that British subjects would be taken out of American vessels on the high seas, it might at least be required that the proof of their allegiance should lie on the British side. This obvious and just rule is however reversed, and every seaman on board, though going from an American port and sailing under the American flag, and some times even speaking an idiom proving him not to be a British subject, is presumed to be such, unless he shews to be an American citizen. It may safely be affirmed that this is an outrage and an indignity which has no precedent, and which Great Britain would be among the last nations in the world to suffer if offered to her own subjects, and her own flag. Nor is it always against the right presumption alone, which is in favor of the citizen corresponding with the flag, that the violence is committed. Not unfrequently it takes place in defence of the most positive proof, certified in due form by an American officer. Let it not be said that in granting to American seamen this protection for their rights as such, the point is yielded that the proof lies on the American side, and that the want of it in the prescribed form justifies the inference that the seamen is not of American allegiance. It is to be distinctly understood, that the certificate usually called a protection to American seamen, is not meant to protect them under their own, or even any other neutral flag on the high seas. We can never admit, that in such a situation, any other protection is required for them than the neutral flag itself on the high seas. The document is given to prove their real character, in situations to which neither the law of nations nor the law of their own country are applicable. In other words to protect them within the jurisdiction of the British laws and to secure to them within every other jurisdiction, the rights and immunities due to them. If in the course of their navigation even on the high seas, the document should have the effect of repelling wrongs of any sort, it is an incidental advantage only of which they avail themselves, and is by no means to be misconstrued into a right to exact such a proof, or to make any disadvantageous inference from the want of it.
Were it even admitted that certificates for protection might be justly required in time of war from American seamen, they could only be required in cases, where the laps of time from its commencement had
ART. XI. The same.
given an opportunity for the American seamen to provide themselves with such a document. Yet it is certain, that in a variety of instances, seamen have been impressed from American vessels, on the plea that they had no proof of citizenship, when the dates and places of the impressment, demonstrated the impossibility of their knowing, in time to provide the proof, that a state of war had rendered it necessary.
Whether, therefore, we consult the law of nations, the tenor of treaties or the dictates of reason and justice, no warrant, no pretext can be found for the British practice of making impressment from American vessels on the high seas.
Great Britain has the less to say in excuse for this practice, as it is in direct contradiction to the principles on which she proceeds in other cases. Whilst she claims and seizes on the high seas, her own subject voluntarily serving in American vessels, she has constantly given when she could give as a reason for not discharging from her service American citizens that they had voluntarily engaged in it. Nay more, whilst she impressed her own subjects from the American service, although they may have been settled and married and even naturalized in the United States, she constantly refuses, to release from her, American citizens impressed into it whenever she can give for a reason that they were either settled or married within her dominions. Thus, when the voluntary consent of the individual favors her pretensions, she pleads the validity of that consent.—When the voluntary consent of the individual stands in the way of her pretensions, it goes for nothing! When marriage or residence can be pleaded in her favor, she avails herself of the plea. When marriage and residence and even naturalization are against her, no respect whatever is paid to either? She takes by force her own subjects voluntarily serving in our vessels. She keeps by force American citizens in voluntarily serving in hers. More flagrant inconsistencies cannot be imagined.
Notwithstanding the powerful motives which ought to be felt by the British government to relinquish a practice which exposes it to so many reproaches, it is foreseen that objections of different sorts will be pressed on you. You will be told first of the great number of British seamen in the American trade, and of the necessity for their services in time of war and danger. Secondly, of the right and the prejudice of the British nation with respect to what are called the British narrow seas, where its domain would be abandoned by the general stipulation required. Thirdly, of the use which would be made of such a sanctuary as that of American vessels for desertions and traitorous communications to her enemies, especially across the channel to France.
1st. With respect to the British seamen serving in our trade, it may be remarked first that the number, though considerable, is probably less than may be supposed. Secondly, that what is wrong in itself cannot be made right by considerations of expediency or advantage. Thirdly, that it is proved by the fact, that the number of real British subjects gained by the practice in question, is of inconsiderable importance, even in the scale of advantage. The annexed report of Congress on the subject of impressments, with the addition of such cases as may be in the hands of Mr. Erving, will verify the remark in its application to the present war. The statement made by his predecessor during the last war, and which is also annexed, is in the same view still more conclusive. The statement comprehends not only all the applications made by him in the first instance, for the liberation of impressed seamen between the month of June, 1797, and September, 1801, but many also which had been made previous to this agency by Mr. Pinkney and Mr. King, and which it was necessary for him to renew. These applications therefore may fairly be considered as embracing the greater part of the period of the war; and as applications are known to be pretty indiscriminately made, they may further be considered as embracing, if not the whole, the far greater part of the impressments, those of British subjects as well as others. Yet the result exhibits 2,039 cases only, and of this number, 102 seamen only detained as being British subjects, which is less than 1-20 of the number impressed, and 1142 discharged or ordered to be so, as not being British subjects, which is more than half of the whole number, leaving 805 for further proof, with the strongest presumption that the greater part, if not the whole, were Americans or other aliens, whose proof of citizenship had been lost or destroyed, or whose situation would account for the difficulties and delays in producing it. So that it is certain, that for all the British seamen, gained by this violent proceeding, more than an equal number who were not so, were the victims. It is highly probable that for every British seaman so gained, a number of others not less than ten for one must have been the victims, and it even possible that this number may have exceeded the proportion of twenty to one.
ART. XI. The same.
It cannot therefore be doubted, that the acquisition of British seamen by these impressments, who ever may be their advantage, is lost in the wrong done to Americans, ignorantly or wilfully mistaken for British subjects; in the jealousy and ill will excited among all maritime nations by an adherence to such a practice; and in the particular provocation to measures of redress on the part of the U. States, not less disagreeable to them than embarrassing to Great Britain, and which may threaten the good understanding which ought to be so highly cultivated by both. The copy of a bill brought into Congress under the influence of violations committed on our flag, gives force to the latter consideration. Whether it will pass into a law, and at the present session, is more than yet can be said. As there is every reason to believe that it has been proposed with reluctance, it will probably not be pursued into effect, if any hope can be supported, of a remedy by an amicable arrangement between the two nations. But such is the feeling through this country produced by the reiterated and arocious cases of impressments and other insults on our flag, that a remedy of some kind will ere long be called for in a tone not to be disregarded. A copy of the bill referred to is herewith included.

SIR HARRY,
THE handsomest and one of the best sons of Sir Peter Teazle, (unquestionably by the best stallion now in England & inferior to none ever bred in that country,) will stand the ensuing season at my stable, in King and Queen county, about 40 miles from Richmond, 7 from Dunkirk and 12 from Tappahannock, at 50 dollars the season, notes for which, and half a dollar for the groom, must be sent with the mares or before they are taken away. The 50 dollars may be discharged by the payment of 40 dollars cash. (and in the event of the embargo continuing, or war, by 30 dollars) on or before the expiration of the season, which will commence on the 1st March and end 1st August. Extensive high and low land pasturage, as good as any in Virginia, gratis. Mares may be fed with corn at the market price, and every attention will be paid to them, but no liability for escapes or accidents of any kind. Mares and foals will be kept by themselves.
Sir Harry was imported in the fall of 1804, from London, is now 12 years old, in high health and vigor, 15 hands 3 inches high, full of bone and muscle, fine points, elegant form and beautiful brown color. He has covered three seasons in this country, has proved himself a sure foal getter, and his stock are equal to any in the world. He was one of the best racers in England, both for speed and bottom, with very heavy weights, and probably cost more money than any horse ever imported into this country (standing the owner within a trifle of £1200 sterling when landed) and in the estimation of good judges, is equal, if not superior, to any that is now, or ever was in the state. As the universal practice here is to run heats, it is needless to point out to those who have fine mares, the advantages that may result from sending them to this horse.
His dam Marron, (foaled in 1785) was got by Alfred, grandam (dam of Pilot) by Mark, great grandam by Regulus, great great grandam (dam of Wildair and Vampire) by Sneyd, great great grandam by Palmer, Greyhound, Makeless, Counsellor, Brimmer, Place's White Turk. Alfred was got by Marchmont (foaled in 1770) out of a Snap mare (the dam of Conductor, Dictator, Georgian and others) bred by the duke of Kingston, foaled in 1762, her dam by the Cullen Arabian; Griswold's Lady Thigh, by Palmer; Greyhound; Sophonisba's dam, by the Curwen Bay Barb; Lord D'Arcy's chesnut Arabian; Whiteshirt; Old Montague mare.
Marchmont was got by Cade; Cade (own brother to Lath) was got by the Godolphin Arabian; Mark was got by Squirt; Squirt was got by Baret's Children; Regulus was got by the Godolphin Arabian.
Sir Peter Teazle was got by Highflyer, out of Papillon, by Snap, Snap was got by Snip; Snip was got by the Devonshire Children, out of a Basset mare; Highflyer was got by Herod, out of Rachel by Blank; Herod was got by Tartar, out of Cypron, by Blaze; Tartar was got by Palmer, out of Meliora, by Old Fox.
John Hoskins. January 15, 1808. N. B. It is not probable that Sir Harry will ever again stand to the northward of his owners in the neighborhood of Petersburg.
The thorough bred imported horse, GOUTY,
WILL stand the ensuing season at my plantation on Rucker's Run, 5 miles from Amherst courthouse and 12 from Farmville, and will cover mares at 25 dollars the season, 15 dollars the leap and 40 dollars insurance with one dollar to the groom in either case. The leap money to be paid at the time of service, the season on first day of August, and the insurance on first day of March 1809. Crop tobacco inspected at any of the warehouses on James river from Lynchburg to Richmond will be received in payment at 5 dollars per cwt. if tendered on or before the day it becomes due. Pasturage gratis but no liability for accidents or escapes. GOUTY is a beautiful bay, 11 years old, 5 feet 3 inches high, elegantly formed and of great strength. He was got by Sir Peter Teazle, and came out of the celebrated Yellow Mare, she was got by Tandem, her dam Perdita by Herod out of Fain Forrester by Sneyd, and so through the best stock that England has produced as may be seen by reference to the general stud book—Sneyd was the most distinguished racer of his day, & was never beat. GOUTY'S COLTS are running with great credit in England—In 1806 four only started, of which one was a winner and when losing they came in with great credit, beating the get of Buzzard. Precipitate, Oscar, Sir Peter Teazle and others of the first character in England—In 1807 Mr. Weatherby (author of the Racing Calendar) writes to me under date Sept 12th, at which time the racing for that year was not over, that several of Gouty's colts were winners, and one of them had the misfortune to break his shoulder, or it was supposed he would have been the best of his year in England. The season will commence on first March and terminate first August.
R. RIVES. February 10, 1808.
Charlotte Court, 1st February, 1808.
JOSEPH OLIVER, Plaintiff, AGAINST WILLIAM BAKER, Deft.
THE defendant 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 plaintiff by his attorney, it is ordered that he appear here on the first day of May court next and enter his appearance 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 courthouse of the said county. A Copy—Teste, THOMAS READ, Clk. At a Court held for Cumberland County, 25th January, 1808. JOHN ANDERSON, Plaintiff, AGAINST JOHN HOLLAND & JAMES HOLLAND, Defendants. THIS day came the plaintiff, by his attorney and the defendant JOHN, not having entered his appearance and given security according to law 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 plaintiff by his attorney aforesaid, It is ordered, that the said defendant JOHN, do appear here on the fourth Monday in April next and answer the plaintiff's bill, and that a copy of this order be published in one of the public newspapers printed in the city of Richmond for three months successively, and posted at the front door of the courthouse of this county. A copy—Atteste, (12.9) MILLER WOODSON, Clk.
REMOVAL.
GEORGE WATT, has removed to the main street, next door above the Bell-Tavern, where he offers for sale the following articles: 20 hds Brown Sugar, 30 hds Molasses, 8 Ties and 8 barrels best Green Coffee, 20 hds Antigua Rum, 5 pipes Hol and Gin, 4 pipes Cognac Brandy, 2 hds, and 20 bbls Northern Whiskey, 15 qr casks Old Sherry Wine, 3 chests Young Hyson Tea, 6 chests Hyson Skin, do. 5 chests Souchong, do. 70 sacks Liverpool ground Salt. Richmond, 16th March, 1808. 1aw6w
At a Court held for Buckingham County, the 11th day of January 1808.
Sarah Holloway, widow of Robert Holloway, deceased; Geo: Seaton Holloway, and Elizabeth Holloway children and devisees of the said Robert Holloway, deceased, by the said Sarah their mother and next friend, AGAINST Smith Tandy and Nathan Ayres, Defendants.
ON the motion of the plaintiffs by their counsel, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant Smith Tandy is not an inhabitant of this state: It is ordered and decreed that unless the said Tandy shall appear here on or before the first day of May term next and answer the bill of the plaintiffs; the court will then proceed to take the same for confessed as to him and decree the matter thereof accordingly, and that a copy of this order be forthwith published in some public newspaper of the city of Richmond for two months successively, and another copy be posted up at the front door of the courthouse of this county. A copy—Teste, R. Eldridge, jr. D. C.
At a Court held for Buckingham County, the 11th day of January, 1808.
James Murphy & Company, Plffs. AGAINST William Jones (son of John) and Thomas E. Jones, Defs.
ON the motion of the plaintiffs by their counsel, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that the defendant William Jones, is not an inhabitant of this state: It is ordered and decreed that unless the said William Jones shall appear here, on or before May court next, and answer the bill of the plaintiffs, the court will then proceed to take the same for confessed as to him, and decree the matter thereof accordingly, and that a copy of this order be forthwith published in some public newspaper of the city of Richmond, for two months successively, and another copy be posted up at the front door of the courthouse of this county. A Copy, R. ELDRIDGE, jr. D. C.
United States Court, Fifth Circuit & Virginia District, Nov. term. 1807. Charles and Jesse Lewis, Plffs. AGAINST Tristram D. Lee & Tobias Lear, merchants and traders under the firm of Lear and Company. Defs.
THE defendants Tristram Dalton and Tobias Lear, not having entered their appearance and given security according to the act of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that they are not inhabitants of this district, on the motion of the plffs. by their counsel, it is ordered that the said defendants do appear here on the first day of the next term and answer the plffs. bill, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some one of the newspapers published in the city of Richmond, for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the capitol in the said city. A copy—Teste, WILLIAM MARSHALL, Clk.
VIRGINIA: At a Superior Court of Chancery held at the Capitol in the city of Richmond, the 13th day of February, 1808.
John S. Moore, Plff. AGAINST John Magee and John Harris, Defs.
THE defendant John Magee not having entered his appearance and given security according to the act of assembly, and the rules of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court, that he is not an inhabitant of this country, on motion of the plaintiff by counsel it is ordered that the said defendant do appear here on the first day of the next term, and answer the bill of the plaintiff, and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some newspaper published in the city of Richmond, for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the capitol in the said city. A copy—Teste, Peter Tinsley. C. C.
United States Court, Fifth Circuit & Virginia District, Nov 23, 1807. James Ritchie and Company, plaintiffs, AGAINST Mary Brent, widow of George Brent, Daniel Brent, Robert Brent, John Cook, Bailey Washington, William Brent and Robert Brent, Mary Brent and George F. Brent, infant children of George & Mary Brent, defendants.
THE defendants Daniel Brent, Wm. Brent, and Robert Brent, not having entered their appearance and given security according to the act of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that they are not inhabitants of this district, on the motion of the plaintiffs, by their counsel, It is Ordered, that the said defendants do appear here on the first day of the next term and answer the plaintiffs bill; and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some one of the newspapers published in the city of Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the Capitol in the said city. A copy—Teste, WILLIAM MARSHALL, Clk.
United States Court, Fifth Circuit & Virginia District, November term, 1807. Edward Scott & Charles Scott, executors of John Scott, deceased, plaintiffs, AGAINST John Tyndale Ware, executor of William Jones, deceased, who was surviving partner of Farrel and Jones, defendant. THE defendant John T. Ware, not having entered his appearance and given security according to the act of this court, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that he is not an inhabitant of this district; On the motion of the plaintiff by his attorney, It is Ordered, that the said defendant do appear here on the first day of the next term and answer the plaintiff's bill; and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in some one of the newspapers published in the city of Richmond for two months successively, and posted at the front door of the Capitol in the said city. A copy—Teste, WILLIAM MARSHALL, Clk.
ENGLISH HORSE KNOWSLEY,
THE handsomest and one of the best sons of Sir Peter Teazle, now unquestionably the best stallion in England, imported in 1801, by William Lightfoot, Esq. and now the property of Messrs. Woods, of Albemarle, will stand the ensuing season at our stable, in Charlotte county, four miles above the courthouse, the same distance below Rough Creek Church, and ten miles from Coles ferry; & will be let to mares at Six Guineas the season, which may be discharged by the payment of Five Guineas, if paid by the first day of January next, or Twenty Dollars will be received as full compensation if sent with the mare or paid before taken away, and Forty Dollars to ensure a mare to be in foal; one dollar to the groom paid in hand, will be required with each mare; notes of hand payable as above, will be expected in every instance where the money is not sent with the mare. The season will commence the first day of March and expire the first of August. We shall be enabled to furnish five hundred acres of excellent pasturage (gratis) well enclosed in three separate fields, affording a variety of high and low grounds, well set with clover and green sward. Servants will be boarded at nine shillings per week, and grain furnished mares, as directed, at the lowest market price. We assure gentlemen who entrust their mares to our care, that the most pointed attention and strictest justice shall be rendered to every one, and all possible precaution taken to prevent accidents or escapes, but cannot be liable for any that may happen. KNOWSLEY is a fine bay, 15 hands three inches high, full of bone and muscle, with elegant points, remarkable for uniting great strength with an uncommon share of beauty; 12 years old last spring, and now in great perfection. It is deemed unnecessary to publish at full length, either the performance of Knowsley himself or his colts, as every gentleman conversant with the turf must be fully satisfied of his superior worth; let it suffice to say, that no horse ever imported into the state has produced more winning colts, from the number tried than Knowsley. In 1806, nine of his colts started, seven proved successful in winning eleven prizes. In 1807 we have only heard from five, two of which were winners, the other three run with great credit, and were always second best, beating several fine horses. WILLIAM GAINES. MARY IN HANCOCK. P. S. Any mares which were put to Knowsley last season, and did not prove with foal, shall be ensured the present year for the season money.
PEDIGREE. Given by Lord Derby in the following words, viz. "I do hereby certify, that the bay horse called Knowsley, late the property of the Prince of Wales, was bred by me. He was got by Sir Peter Teazle, out of Capelia, and was six years old last May, and no more." signed, DERBY, (Seal.) Knowsley, June 15, 1801. CAPELIA was bred by General Parker, foaled in 1773, and got by Herod, out of Miss Cape by Regulus, Black Eyes by Crab, Wacklock, Galloway. Sir Peter Teazle was got by Highflyer; Highflyer was got by Herod, and so on he may be traced through a noble line of ancestors, for ages past, without a single flaw in his genealogy, either in the male or female side. law1m
Advertisement.
BY virtue of a deed of trust executed by William Hutchinson to the subscribers, on the 24th day of October, 1805, which deed hath been since duly proven and recorded in the county court of Henrico, and in conformity to a request in writing, made by Charles Ellis, for whose benefit the said deed of trust was executed. The subscribers will, for the purpose of raising a sufficient sum of money, to discharge the amount due on two bonds, (given by the said Hutchinson to the said Charles Ellis) mentioned in the said deed of trust, and for other purposes therein specified, proceed to sell at public auction, for ready money, on the premises, on the 5th day of May next, all that Tract of Land in the deed aforesaid mentioned, or so much thereof as shall be sufficient to satisfy the debt aforesaid and other objects of the trust. The said Tract of Land is situate in the upper part of Henrico county, on the waters of Tuckahoe Creek, being the same Land on which the said Charles Ellis formerly resided, and is particularly described in the deed of trust aforesaid, and in the deed by which the said Charles Ellis conveyed the same to the said Hutchinson, both of which deeds, or copies thereof, will be shown on the day of sale. JOHN PATTERSON, STEPHEN ELLIS. 26th March, 1808. w31*
Wirt's Speeches.
The Editor of the Argus has this day published the SPEECHES of WILLIAM WIRT, Esq. on the trial of AARON BURR, and others. Richmond, March 11, 1808. wids
At a Court held for Louisa county on Monday the 8th day of February, 1808. Robert Yancey, & Co. Plffs. AGAINST William Meriwether and Robert Dickerson, Defs. THE defendant Wm. Meriwether, 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 state; therefore, on the motion of the plaintiffs by their counsel, it is ordered and decreed by the court, that the said defendant Meriwether do appear here on the second Monday in May next, and answer the plaintiffs bill; and that a copy of this order be forthwith inserted in one of the newspapers printed in the city of Richmond for eight weeks successively, and published at the front door of the court house of this county, on some court day. A copy—Teste, John Poindexter, C. L. C.
BY virtue of a deed of trust executed to us by Ambrose Dudley of King William county, to secure a debt due by the said Ambrose Dudley to Benjamin Mosby, assignee of William Dandridge—We shall proceed to sell, for ready cash, for the best price that can be obtained, on the premises, on the second day of June next, a certain Tract or Parcel of Land, lying and being in the county of King William, being the same on which the said Dudley now resides, and the same which the said Dudley purchased of William Dandridge, containing 602 acres, or so much thereof as will be sufficient to pay the sum of 400 pounds, current money, with legal interest thereon from the 1st day of April, 1807, till payment, together with all expenses attending the execution thereof. BERN'D LIPSCOMB. NATH'L FOX. 26th February, 1808. wids
BY virtue of a deed of trust executed to Edward P. Chamberlayne, dec. and myself by James B. Littlepage, to secure the payment of sundry debts therein mentioned, due by the said Littlepage, to Benjamin Mosby, assignee of William Dandridge. I shall on Wednesday the first day of June next, proceed to sell to the highest bidder, for ready money, at King William courthouse, a certain tract or parcel of LAND, lying and being in the parish of St. John's, and county of King William, and commonly known as and called by the name of Palmers, containing by estimation Four Hundred and Fifteen Acres of high Land, and One Hundred Acres of Marsh Land, be the same more or less, and bounded by the lands of Bernard Moore, William Gregory, George W. P. Custis and John Quarles, dec. and Matapony River. BERN'D LIPSCOMB. February 24. wids
BY virtue of a deed of trust executed to us by Drury Childers, in order to secure the payment of a certain sum of money due to William and Daniel Thompson, & all cost incurred by carrying the same into effect, we shall on Saturday, the thirtieth day of April next, at Mr. Peter Francisco's Tavern, proceed to sell for cash, four negroes, viz: Isham, Phillis, Rachel, and Salley, or so much thereof as will be sufficient to answer the purposes of said deed. TARLTON WILLIAMS, STEPHEN HOOPER, Trustees. B-kingham. 19th March 1808. ids.
Advertisement.
THE sale not having taken place at the time appointed in a former advertisement; will be sold on Friday the 6th day of May next, for ready money, on the premises, a
Valuable Tract of Land,
lying in the county of Halifax on Staunton river, containing seven hundred and twenty five acres, more or less; it was once the property of Samuel Beall, was sold by him to Wm. Moseley, and mortgaged by Moseley to Robert Andrews and John Pierce, trustees of Beall to secure the payment of the purchase money—The indenture of mortgage, which was recorded in the general court, bears date the 22d day of June 1795. At the same time and place, such of the SLAVES as are described in the said mortgage, and may be produced by the said Moseley, will also be sold for cash.—The sale is made by virtue of a decree of the superior court of chancery for the Richmond district, pronounced in a suit therein depending, in which the said Pierce, surviving trustee is plaintiff, and the said Moseley is defendant, and for the purpose of raising the following sums, with interest, viz: 1081. 15s with interest at the rate of 5 per cent, from the 1st of January 1793—1051. 2s. 6d. with like interest from the 1st day of January 1794—1011. 10s. with like interest from the 1st day of January 1795—971. 17s. 6d. with like interest from the 1st day of January 1796—961. 5s. with like interest from the 1st day of January 1797—811. 14s. with like interest from the 14th day of July 1802—and 35 dollars 88 cents, the costs of the suit. The residue of the money decreed to be raised the plaintiff does not pretend to claim, as appears by an endorsement made by the clerk of the said court on the order dissolving an injunction obtained by John B. Scott, to stay the sale of the said land, which endorsement is copied from a writing filed in the suit first above mentioned by the plaintiff's agent and attorney. THE COMMISSIONERS. Richmond, March 11, 1808. wids
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 on these 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 slate, 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 of the vessels, at the expense of cartage only to the purchasers. Any person skilled in the art of tiling, will put on those tile 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 DU VAL. Richmond, March 12, 1808. N. B. I wish to sell Patent Rights in several other states. wif B. D.
Ten Dollars Reward. RUN away from this city, about the 12th of last November, a negro man slave named CESAR, the property of the subscriber; he formerly belonged to Mr. Robert Alexander of Campbell county, and was bought from him a small boy in the year 1789; he is now about 6 feet high, his big toe on his right foot is very remarkable, being split with an axe thro' the nail and nearly as high as the second joint, by that it is much broader and larger than the other. He was accustomed to run James river above the falls, and was seen on the 16th of the same month, November, going thro' the locks in a bateaux, with a negro man slave named Abram, who was head man, and belongs to the estate of Col. John Harvie, dec. If Cesar is not concealed by the said Abram he is gone up the river in some other bateaux. On delivering him to me or securing him in some jail so that I get him again, shall be paid the above reward by Robert Mitchell. City of Richmond, 25th Jan. 1808. wif
ANAWAY on Wednesday last, from the Subscriber residing in the city of Richmond, a negro boy named BILLY, about 12 or 13 years of age, remarkably black, with short knotty hair, and a sensible countenance. He is noted for smiling when spoken to. He had on when he went away, a brown drab jacket, the sleeves of which were ragged, pantaloon of the same, patched in several places with light grey cloth, and an India cotton shirt; but was barefooted and without a hat. Any person who will deliver him to the subscriber, if he apprehends him in this city, shall receive a reward of five dollars; and, if elsewhere, of ten dollars; and reasonable expenses paid. He has relations at Shirley in Charles city county, and may perhaps have gone to that place; or he may have gone into Chesterfield, or farther South, as a gentleman says he believes he saw him on Thursday last, following a waggon on the Manchester Turnpike Road. There is reason to believe that he stole, and has either sold, thrown away or concealed with him the following valuable articles: a large miniature picture set in gold, with hair in the back and a pin, the gold a little dented in consequence of a fall; being the likeness of a young lady dressed in white, of fair complexion, black eyes, and light curling hair parted on the forehead and flowing on the shoulders, with red and white beads around the neck; also a small miniature picture (set in gold with a pin) of a young lady with black hair and eyes, and a beautiful face; the frame in the shape of an Octagon, and bent a little on the side, in consequence of having been trodden upon; also a small gold breast pin intended for hair, which was never put in, but black silk in it's stead. Whoever will bring either of the said articles to the Subscriber shall receive a liberal reward. ANNA BYRD. Richmond, April 1, 1808. wif
STOLEN, on Wednesday 23d instant, from near the Basin, in Richmond, a Chesnut Sorrel MARE, very heavy with foal, (Saddle and Bridle.) She is nine years old this spring, one if not both hind feet white to the foot locks, a small star in her forehead, a lump on her back, occasioned from a hurt of a saddle. She is about four feet nine or ten inches high. I will give ten dollars to any person who will deliver to me or at the Union Tavern to Mr. P. Moseley, the aforesaid mare, and ten dollars to any person who will apprehend the thief, so as he may be convicted. The man I am informed, is thin visaged, of a dark complexion, for a white man; he had a blue coat on with a blue spencer over it. JOHN FORE. Chesterfield, March 25th, 1808. w41*
P. S. I am rather inclined to believe that he made up the river road towards Tuckahoe.
MILITARY LANDS
IN THE STATES OF OHIO AND KENTUCKY. THE subscriber has for SALE, sundry valuable tracts of LAND, on the waters of the Miami and Scioto rivers, state of Ohio. Also, on the waters of Cumberland and Green rivers, state of Kentucky, which will be sold low for cash or good bonds—For further particulars enquire of William Price, register, who has the title papers, or to William Du-Val. Buckingham, January 20, 1808. wif
Charlotte County, to wit. TAKEN up by Capt. John D. Richardson, the 28th December, 1807, a Sorrel Horse, about fourteen years old, neither dock'd nor branded; he is blind in the right eye, and about 4 feet 8 inches high, appraised to thirty dollars. Copy, THOMAS READ C. C. w3t

There is a further consideration which ought to have weight in this question. Although the British seamen employed in carrying on American commerce, be in some respects lost to their own nation, yet such is the intimate and extensive connexion of this commerce, direct and circuitous, with the commerce, the manufactures, the revenue and the general resources of the British nation, that in other respects, its mariners on board American vessels may truly be said to be rendering it the most valuable services. It would not be extravagant to make it a question, whether G. Britain would not suffer more by withdrawing her seamen from the merchant vessels of the U. States, than her enemies would suffer from the addition of them to the crews of her ships of war and cruisers.
Should any difficulty be started concerning seamen born within the British dominions, and naturalized by the U. States since the treaty of 1783 you may remove it by observing first, that very few if any such naturalizations can take place, the law here requiring a preparatory residence of five years, with notice of the intention to become a citizen entered of record two years before the last necessary formality, besides a regular proof of good moral character, conditions little likely to be complied with by ordinary seafaring persons. Secondly, that a discontinuance of impressions on the high seas will preclude an actual collision between the interfering claims. Within the jurisdiction of each nation, and in their respective vessels on the high seas, each will enforce the allegiance which it claims. In other situations, the individuals doubly claimed will be within a jurisdiction independent of both nations.
2d. The British pretensions to domain over the narrow seas are so obsolete, and so indefensible, that they never would have occurred as a probable objection in this case, if they had not actually frustrated an arrangement settled by Mr King with the British ministry, on the subject of impressions from American vessels on the high seas. At the moment when the articles were expected to be signed, an exception of the "narrow seas" was urged and insisted on by Lord St. Vincent, and being utterly inadmissible on our part, the negotiation was abandoned. Mr King seems to be of opinion, however, that with more time than was left him for the experiment, the objection might have been overcome. This is not improbable, if the objection was not merely an expedient for evading a relinquishment of a favorite practice.
The objection in itself has certainly not the slightest foundation. The time has been indeed, when England not only claimed but exercised pretensions scarcely inferior to full sovereignty over the seas surrounding the British isles, and even as far as Cape Finisterre to the south, and Vansta ten in Norway, to the north. It was a time however, when reason had little share in determining the law and the intercourse of nations; when power alone decided questions of right; and when the ignorance and want of concert among other maritime countries facilitated such an usurpation. The progress of civilization and information has produced a change in all those respects, and no principle in the code of public law, is at present better established, than the common freedom of the seas, beyond a very limited distance from the territories washed by them. This distance is not indeed fixed with absolute precision. It is varied in a small degree by written authorities; and perhaps it may be reasonably varied, in some degree, by local peculiarities. But the greatest distance which would now be listened to anywhere, would make a small proportion of the narrowest part of the narrowest seas in question.
What are in fact the prerogatives claimed and exercised by Great Britain over these seas? If they were really a part of her domain, her authority would be the same there as within her other dominions. Foreign vessels would be subject to all the laws and regulations framed for them, as much as if they were within the harbors or rivers of the country. Nothing of this sort is pretended. Nothing of this sort would be tolerated. The only instances in which these seas are distinguished from other seas, or in which G. Britain enjoys within them any distinction over other nations, are first, the compliment paid by other flags to hers; secondly, the extension of her territorial jurisdiction in certain cases to the distance of four leagues from the coast. The first is a relic of ancient usurpation, which has thus long escaped the correction, which modern and more enlightened times have applied to other usurpations. The prerogative has been often contested however, even at the expense of bloody wars, and is still borne with ill will and impatience by her neighbors. At the last treaty of peace at Amiens, the abolition of it was repeatedly and strongly pressed by France, and it is not improbable that at no remote day it will follow the fate of the title of "King of France" so long worn by the British monarchs and at length so properly sacrificed to the lessons of a magnanimous wisdom. As far as this homage to the British flag has any foundation at present, it rests merely on long usage and long acquiescence, which are construed, as in a few other cases of maritime claims, into the effect of a general though tacit convention. The second instance is the extension of the territorial jurisdiction to four leagues from the shore. This too, as far as the distance may exceed that which is generally allowed, rests on a like foundation, strengthened perhaps by the local facility of smuggling, and the peculiar interest which G. Britain has in preventing a practice affecting so deeply her whole system of revenue, commerce and manufactures, whilst the limitation itself to four leagues necessarily implies that, beyond that distance no territorial jurisdiction is assumed.
But whatever may be the origin or the value of these prerogatives over foreign flags in one case, and within a limited portion of these seas in another, it is obvious that neither of them will be violated by the exemption of American vessels from impressions, which are no wise connected with either, having never been made on the pretext either of withholding the wonted homage to the British flag, or of smuggling in defiance of British laws.
(Mr. Madison's letter to be Continued.)
Virginia Argus.
RICHMOND:
FRIDAY, APRIL 15, 1808.
With extreme regret we perceive, from the annexed article, extracted from Colvin's Weekly Register , published in Washington, that Col. Monroe's letter to the Secretary of State, written since his return from England, was intended as a vindication of the rejected treaty, and contains sentiments so completely unwise and anti-American , as those cited from it by Mr. Colvin, relative to the impression of our seamen. It appears, therefore, that our expectation, (arising from confidence in his good sense as well as patriotism) that he did not himself approve of the treaty, was unfortunately not well founded! It was our belief that particular motives of policy, had induced Messrs. Monroe & Pinkney to sign that instrument, which, clogged as it was with the strange reservations expressed in the note of Lords Holland and Auckland , delivered to them before the signature, could not properly be called a treaty; that they signed it, nevertheless, for the purpose of obtaining temporary safety for the American trade, even to a limited extent, until the further determination of our government could be known; that conscientious as they must have been that the provision for the protection of our seamen, which their instructions positively declared to be "indispensable," had not been inserted in it, they could not have expected, or wished, it to be ratified; that, of course, they sent it over, as the ultimatum to which the British Government could then be persuaded to consent for the purpose only of receiving new instructions, as to the future course of the negotiation. We supposed it impossible that Col. Monroe , or Mr. Pinkney , could have approved of such a treaty as that, before we saw it, was represented to be; and since we perceived it, that supposition has acquired additional strength. When we found that, by the 2d article of this treaty, our commerce to the East-Indies would have been more restricted than under John Jay's ; that all the articles in the last mentioned odious compact, "which had not expired, nor, as yet, had their full operation and effect" were to be confirmed by the 2d article of this; and that the 13th article was a mere mockery of vague and indefinite promises for the protection of our vessels from the usurped right of search; we were absolutely convinced that the "great and good" Monroe never was of opinion that it ought to have been ratified by the President. We flattered ourselves that the obstinate perverseness of the British government only had thrown the treaty into a shape so injurious to the U. States. How great then is our astonishment and mortification, to be compelled to acknowledge our mistake in this particular, on being informed that Col. Monroe himself, either advocates it altogether, or contends that, defective as it was, it ought to have been sanctioned!
As we have not yet seen his memorial, we cannot tell how far he may have carried his ideas on the subject. When it comes to hand, which we hope will be in a few days, it shall be inserted in the Argus with all possible expedition, and we shall then take the liberty of making our own observations upon it.
From Colvin's weekly Register.
From the pestilence of European policy, I turn to Col. Monroe's explanatory letter communicated to Congress on the 22d ultimo by the President of the United States, and publickly read by Mr John Randolph in the house of representatives.
That a man should write a book to destroy the reputation of his adversary, may justly be credited; for every day's experience convinces us of the fact; But that any person should deliberately sit down and compose a volume calculated to injure his own character, is no less strange than it is inexplicable. We can attribute it to nothing else than a singular confusion of thought, to which the most enlightened men are sometimes subjected by the consciousness of previous weakness of conduct in the management of great concerns, or an indiscreet use of talents exercised in a manner calculated to discredit their possessor in the public estimation.
The very circumstance of colonel Monroe's having written a vindication, is strong proof of an opinion entertained on his part that the nature of the case required it. A man less convinced of the error of his ministry would have been silent, & have left the question for the decision of his fellow citizens: Or, if impressed with a strong conviction of the propriety of what he had done on behalf of his country, have cheerfully submitted in noiseless confidence to the judgment of enlightened cotemporaries. Let the public decision be as it may, the executive of the United States has exhibited a manliness and a magnanimity in communicating to congress in an official manner the explanatory letter of col. Monroe, which must preclude the possibility of any well grounded charge of governmental hostility to that gentleman.
Col. Monroe very justly exonerates Mr. Pinkney from any share in the terms of his vindication and candidly observes that he ought not to be considered as having any hand in it. The performance is therefore to be regarded as the individual production, both in style and argument, of the gentleman who offers it to the public; and as such throughout I shall strictly view it.
It is surely a strange assertion from the ex-minister, when he confidently avers, that the grounds on which the interest of American seamen was placed by the British was to us an arrangement both honorable and advantageous. That arrangement did not relinquish the right of impression: On the contrary, it declared that his Britannic majesty was not prepared to relinquish it; which, in substance amounted to an absolute refusal. The explanations given were couched in those cozening expressions which presented a phantom of hope to our imaginations in order to delude us. The British commissioners were authorised to give the commissioners of the U. States the most positive assurances that instructions had been given and should be repeated and enforced, to observe the greatest caution in impressing British seamen to preserve the citizens of the United States from molestation and injury, and that immediate and prompt redress should be afforded on any representation of injury sustained by them. And these are the grounds of an arrangement deemed by col. Monroe honorable and advantageous! What reliance can we place on positive assurances in such a case? By agreeing to pass over a point of such vast importance in a written contract, a point on which our government, under three presidents, for a period of eighteen years, had laid the greatest stress, and which was the cause of eternal bickerings between the two nations, we virtually waved the topic, and left the British in complete possession of the contested right, on their mere positive assurances of good behavior. This was in fact no new arrangement: Such assurances had long before been given, and we had learnt by innumerable and gross violations of our solemn protections granted to mariners, citizens of the United States, sailing under our flag, what little faith could be put in these most positive professions. The American negotiator might have found in the past conduct of the British marine, facts sufficient to destroy all the reasoning which the king's commissioners adduced to cajole him into an opinion that we should experience better demeanor in future. They told him, as he informs us, that instructions had been given. Yet the effect was precisely the same as if such commands had never gone forth: And to assure us, however positively they might do it, that the same instructions should be reiterated and enforced, was to us no safeguard whatever. We were still subjected to the humiliation of unceasing complaint for seizure of our seamen, even by the most contemptible of her privateers or letters of marque, to say nothing of the vexatious and insulting conduct of the commanders of her national ships of war. The same forms of demand, proof, and delay as before, were to be encountered by the United States in regaining her citizens piratically taken out of her merchant vessels. The proposition to postpone the article relative to impression was sufficiently explanatory, I should suppose, to have initiated col. Monroe into the whole policy of the British on the question. In a business as important as any other to this country, they meant to wheedle us by delay, whilst in every thing interesting to Great Britain they were anxious to press a definitive treaty as rapidly as possible. They were willing to bind us up to whatever comforted with their welfare; but if our commissioners urged a subject in which the dearest immunities of this country were involved, they were met full in the face with a sophistical evasion, and, with the most overstrained professions of amendment, a postponement of any formal arrangement whatever was insisted on. They complained very loudly of the difficulties of forming any determinate plan to the satisfaction of both parties; But who opposed those difficulties? The United States has always been willing to come to any reasonable understanding which might barely secure our legitimate rights; but in whatever form we have proposed an adjustment, it has been met by the government of Great Britain with excuses, objections, and procrastination, in all the possible shapes of delusion and insincerity.
It appears to me one of the most extraordinary things imaginable, how a man of considerable intelligence in public concerns generally, as I presume col. Monroe to be, could in the first place become the dupe of promises so flimsily made, and afterwards in order to justify his own credulity turn advocate for the integrity of a British ministry! The colonel not only suffered himself to be imposed on, but very triumphantly advances as a circumstance in palliation of his own acquiescence, that as a motive for the postponement of the article relative to impression, and the condition of it, he was assured that the British commissioners were instructed still to entertain the discussion of any plan which could be devised to secure the interests of both nations without injury to the rights of either. This very assurance of future discussion would, to my mind, have been ample evidence of a disposition to evade the question by putting it off indefinitely. It was a complete prevarication, which, taken in connection with the declaration that the king was not prepared to relinquish the right of impression, spoke as emphatically as words could speak, that they would, indeed, entertain us with negotiations on the subject as long as we pleased; but as to going any further, or putting pen to paper by way of security to us against future encroachment, we need not in the least expect it.
With regard to a disputed right, where the interests of two parties clash, it is certainly nothing but reasonable, that both sides should give way a little for the purpose of accommodation. But with respect to the impression of citizens of the U. S. the British government has never yielded a single point, but has invariably conceded to the utmost for the privilege to examine the crews of all merchant vessels, and to seize, on naked suspicion, such persons as in the opinion of the most inferior officer might be alleged to be English subjects. Considering the small foundation on which that government builds its claim to such seizures, even of her natural born subjects, there was solid reason to expect from it the exercise of such a power with more moderation and discretion than she has usually evinced: For the claim which the British monarch lays in such a forcible way is not sanctioned by the laws of his realm, as they now exist, with regard to allegiance. In times past, from the period that William the Norman introduced the feudal system into England, till the grant of Magna Charta by king John, and even up to the reign of Charles the second and the English revolution, when the crown was abdicated by James the second, the principle of fealty, which was the very essence of the feudal tenures, bound every man, from the lord to the villain, with "life, and limb, and earthly honor," to defend the nation at the call of the chief of the kingdom. But when, after various struggles, the prerogative of the crown, which was bottomed on the feudal tenures, was exchanged for the present settlement of the royal authority, the people of Great Britain were considered as having regained their rights, which they had anciently enjoyed under their Saxon princes, with considerable enlargements suggested by the intelligence of modern times. The complicated tie which under the duke of Normandy and his successors bound the vassal to his lord
and the lord to the king, was broken; and the subject was left to a free choice whether he would remain in the service of his prince, or depart from his jurisdiction and enter into the community of another nation. Such is the law of Eng and, rightly construed; and notwithstanding any different construction by implication, the day cannot be very distant when it must be formally acknowledged by the British in practice if not in theory.
It must be very clear to every man who will give himself the trouble to examine the subject, that no possible instructions to commanders of vessels of war, no arrangement which depends solely upon the British themselves, can prove effectual against the abusive exercise of the privilege which they claim; and that by the least and most informed act on our part, with regard to the relinquishment of our rights; or suffering by acquiescence the smallest in enval to creep into the continuity of our claim on that head, we tacitly yield to G. Britain a supremacy over us, which in fact amounts in that particular to sovereign jurisdiction. On the grounds which colonel Monroe believes to be both honorable and advantageous to this country, the U. S. were placed in the situation of a perpetual plaintiff, whilst G. Britain is at the same time the overbearing defendant and the inexorable judge. Our seamen are forcibly taken and detained by the British. To whom do we appeal for redress? To a third power? No! To the British? It is in vain that the English government quotes in its justification her ancient usages? they are not applicable. Admitting that one improper act could justify another, there has never existed a nation on whom the exercise of impression on their part could create such numerous misunderstandings. Our language, our habits, our appearance are the same.—Do these circumstances apologize for her frequent indiscriminations?—Then it ought to teach her more delicacy in regard to our citizens; and make her cautious in exercising a power where in doing herself a little right she may do us a great deal of wrong. Would she submit to a similar conduct from the U. States? I feel assured she would not. Yet we are, like her, an independent nation, and entitled in the estimation of the world to a community of national rights and a reciprocity of national privileges. The more I consider this subject, the more firmly and solemnly am I convinced, that colonel Monroe suffered himself to be led counter to that course of procedure which the dignity and interests of his country required.
Let me now draw the attention of the reader to Monroe's treaty, and to a few observations which I shall offer on the leading articles of it. For it is in this way I shall more effectually answer colonel Monroe's defence.
I select the third article, (as embracing a subject of deep interest to the commercial portion of the American people,) for primary consideration. That article involves the traffic entertained between the citizens of the U. S. and the possessions of the British in the East Indies: a navigation and trade which in times past have been very beneficial to this country, and which, with regard to G. Britain, have been extremely profitable to her possessions in the east. It is well known to men intimately acquainted with the business, that silver is actually necessary to the very existence of that quarter of the British empire, and that at all times it is difficult for them to procure it, more particularly during the prevalence of war. The intercourse between the U. S. and British India is maintained with silver, which is there invested in the refuse of those goods which remain on hand after the most choice and excellent of them have been selected by the English India company for their own purposes; and the goods thus purchased by the Americans are taken at very high prices. Theoretists, at first view, might suppose this trade to be detrimental to the British; but in truth so profitable has it been found to the company by affording the means of disposing of their surplus articles after their own demands had been satisfied, that they have never thrown the least obstruction in the way of it. Among the native and British inhabitants of India the trade is extremely popular; and being so highly beneficial to them they could not consider the loss of it otherwise than hurtful to their interests in the highest degree. The data upon which these facts are founded are within the knowledge of every person engaged in that commerce, and afford great room for an American negotiator most strenuously to urge more favorable terms than those which the third article offers. Col Monroe's habits of study, I apprehend, have not led him profoundly into the consideration of mercantile or commercial subjects; and I do not think I venture an assertion wide of the mark, when I suppose him not to have been sufficiently versed in the various branches of traffic in which the merchants of this country are most immediately concerned. Navigation and trade to India is of the most eminent advantage to the U. S. Prior to Jay's treaty those who adventured in it derived immense gain, and even after the operation of that treaty moderate profits have resulted. I will go a little into detail upon the subject in order more clearly to lay it open to public view.
Previously to Jay's treaty American vessels freely navigated to and from British India direct, or in any other way which appeared to them the most lucrative. Some went directly thither, freighted with specie; others with only a portion of specie, and touched at Madeira, where on a credit, they purchased wine, from whence they proceeded to the different ports in India, selling wherever they found it to most advantage. They afterwards returned either directly to the U. S. to the India ports, or to Ostend, with cotton goods, silk handkerchiefs, sugar, pepper, salt-petre, &c. &c. Many took a cargo of our own produce to some of the European ports, where by the gain and freight thereon they extended their funds, and in order to complete their return cargoes they drew on their friends in London or Amsterdam, making payment to them in produce of our own, which they sent to them, or by bills drawn by other persons for American produce sold in Europe; and with the dollars purchased in Europe proceeded to India, from whence they returned home or went to Europe.
(To be Continued.)
Delegates chosen to serve in the next General Assembly of this Commonwealth. Isle of Wight.—Thomas Purdie and Chas. Wren, Esqrs. Chesterfield.—Mathew Cheatham and B. C. Sta. and, Esqrs. Caroline.—Doctor Hoomes* and Henry C. Coleman* Esqrs. Rockbridge.—Thomas L. Preston and Joseph Grigsby, Esqrs. Princess Anne.—Tolly Robinson and Edward H. Moseley, Esqrs. Frederick.—Charles Bynt and Wm. Castleman* Esqrs. King George.—Calch Smith* and Wm. Hooe, Esqrs. * New Members.
The Case of JOHN SMITH decided. Our Washington correspondent (says the Baltimore Federal Gazette of the 14th inst.) has given us the result of this great state trial. Nineteen voted for his expulsion and ten against it. Two thirds of the votes being necessary to expel a member, he was cleared by one vote. The following are the yeas and nays:
AYES. Messrs. Adams, Anderson, Conrad, Cranford, Franklin, Gaillard, Gilliam, Gregg, Kitchel, Maclay, Mathewson, Miladedge, Moore, Robinson, Smith (Md.) Smith (Ten) Sumner, Tiffin, Turner 19.
NOES. Messrs. Gies, Goodrich, Hillhouse, Howard, Pickering, Pope, Reed, Smith (New York) Thurston, White 10.
ERRATUM.
In the last line of the ninth paragraph, of the peace signed Philo, on the 1st page of this paper, instead of alive , read about to follow their example.
Congress.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
SATURDAY, APRIL 9.
Mr. Randolph observed that he knew it was customary of late to do certain species of small business in the early part of the day; but the session was now drawing to a close, and it was little more than a mere matter of form for gentlemen now to present petitions, as it was scarcely possible to obtain reports on them. He therefore asked for the consideration of the bill for arming the whole body of the militia; and also asked for the Yeas and Nays on the motion, that it might appear on the Journals that it was from no neglect of his that the bill had not been taken up. Such was his extreme indisposition on this day as well as yesterday that nothing but a wish to get up the bill could have induced him to come to the House these two days.
The question on taking this bill into consideration was then decided by Yeas and Nays; Yeas 41, Nays 50.
The House resolved itself into a committee of the whole on the bill concerning the post office and post roads, Mr. Masters in the chair. The bill having gone through, was reported to the House.
Mr. Randolph renewed his motion for taking up the bill for arming the whole body of the militia.—Negatived 44 to 36.
The House then took up the report of the committee of the whole just made on the bill for altering and establishing certain post roads.
There being great difficulty in retaining a quorum within the bar, and the report not having been gone through.
After repeated motions for adjournment, one of which was taken by yeas and nays, the House at length adjourned 35 to 30.
Strayed or Stolen,
FROM the Subscriber, on Thursday the 7th inst,
A White Horse, and a Bay Mare.
The horse is about 4 feet 7 inches high, a pacer, and blows when rode; his right hip shoe. The mare lengthy made, marked with the gear, one white foot behind, not shod, and without any mark in her face. Whoever will take up said Horses shall be paid for their trouble and expense, and ten dollars for the rogue.
WM. A. HALSEY.
Richmond, April 14, 1808 2p
ROBIN REDBREAST.
THE imported horse Robin Redbreast, will stand the ensuing season at my stables, in the county of Chesterfield, 15 miles above Petersburg, to cover mares at 25 dollars the season, which may be discharged by the payment of 20 dollars at any time before the first day of October next, and one dollar to the groom. Good and extensive pasture gratis, and the strictest attention paid to mares left in my care, but will not be responsible for accidents or escapes.
The pedigree and performance of Robin Redbreast, having been so often published, it is deemed unnecessary now to repeat them, suffice it to say, that he was got by Sir Peter Teazle, out of Wren, his half sister, and is of nearer affinity to Sir Peter Teazle, (undoubtedly the best blood in England) than any horse on this continent—His stock in this country is highly approved of, and run at 2 years old last fall with the greatest credit.
THOMAS GOODE.
March 19, 1808 N. B. The death of old Diomed, which took place on the 10th instant, has prevented my publication sooner.
T. G.
THE SUBSCRIBER
Being by a power of attorney, duly authorised to settle the accounts and call in the balances due to the following co-partners formerly of this city, viz
Montgomery & Allen; Alexander Montgomery & Co. Montgomery's, Henry & Co. and Montgomery's & Henry, requests all those who remain indebted to either of said firms, to call and pay their respective balances to him.
GEO. WATT.
Richmond, 25th March, 1808. law6w
Rec's Cyclopaedia.
VOL. 7, PART 1st, or No. 13, Of this work, is just received at this office. Subscription still open.
March 11, 1808.