Virginia Argus (Richmond, Va.), 1808-01-12 00:00:00

VIRGINIA ARGUS.
[XVTH YEAR.]
A FREE PRESS MAINTAINS THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE PEOPLE.
[No. 1423.]
RICHMOND:—PRINTED (ON TUESDAYS AND FRIDAYS) BY SAMUEL PLEASANTS, JUNIOR, PRINTER TO THE COMMONWEALTH.
[Four Dollars Per Annum—Paid in Advance.]
TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1808.
[12 1-2 Cents Single.]
Richmond Price Current.
   (CORRECTED WEEKLY.)     Tobacco, $ 4 00 CASH.   W HEAT, new, 0 67 do.   FLOUR, superfine, new, 4 50 do.   FLOR, fine, 4 00 do.   CORN, 2 00 do.   Hemp, clean, (per ton) 180 00 do.   Iron, 110 00 do.   Bacon, 14 00 do.   Whiskey, 50 do.  
Congress.
SENATE.
MR. ADAMS—From the Committee appointed to enquire whether it be compatible with the honor and privileges of this House that John Smith, a senator from the state of Ohio, against whom bills of indictment were found at the circuit court of Virginia, held at Richmond, in August last, for treason and misdemeanor, shall be permitted any longer to have a seat therein, and to enquire into all the facts regarding the conduct of Mr. Smith as an alleged associate of Aaron Burr, and report the same to the Senate—submitted the following
REPORT: Your Committee are of opinion that the conspiracy of Aaron Burr and his associates against the peace, union and liberties of these states, is of such a character, and that its existence is established by such a mass of concurring and mutually corroborative testimony, that it is incompatible not only with the honor and privileges of this House, but with the deepest interests of this nation, that any person engaged in it should be permitted to hold a seat in the Senate of the United States.
Whether the facts, of which the committee submit herewith such evidence, as under the order of the Senate they have been able to collect, are sufficient to substantiate the participation of Mr. Smith in that conspiracy, or not, will remain for the Senate to decide.
The committee submit also to the consideration of the Senate the correspondence between Mr. Smith and them through their chairman in the course of their meetings. The committee have never conceived themselves invested, with authority to try Mr. Smith. Their charge was to report an opinion relating to the honor and privileges of the Senate, and the facts relating to the conduct of Mr. Smith. Their opinion indeed cannot be expressed in relation to the privileges of the Senate, without relating at the same time to Mr. Smith's right of holding a seat in this body; but in that respect the authority of the committee extends only to proposal, and not to decision—But as he manifested a great solicitude to be heard before them, they obtained permission from the Senate to admit his attendance, communicated to him the evidence in their possession, by which he was inculpated—furnished him in writing with the questions arising from it, which appeared to them material, and received from him the information and explanations herewith submitted as part of the facts reported. But Mr. Smith has claimed a right to be heard in his defence by counsel, to have compulsory process for witnesses, and to be confronted with his accusers, as if the committee had been a circuit court of the United States: but it is before the Senate itself that your committee conceived it just and proper that Mr. Smith's defence of himself should be heard; nor have they conceived themselves bound in this enquiry by any other rules than those of natural justice and equity due to a Brother Senator on the one part, and to their country on the other.
Mr. Smith represents himself on this enquiry as solitary, friendless and unskilled, contending for rights which he intimates are denied him, and the defender of senatorial privileges, which he seems apprehensive will be refused him by Senators, liable so long as they hold their offices to have his case made their own. The committee are not unaware that in the vicissitudes of human events, no member of this body can be sure that his conduct will never be made a subject of enquiry and decision before the assembly to which he belongs. They are aware that in the course of proceeding, which the Senate may now sanction, its members are marking out a precedent which may hereafter apply to themselves—They are sensible that the principles upon which they have acted, ought to have the same operation upon their own claims to privileges as upon those of Mr. Smith, the same relation to the rights of their constituents, which they have to those of the legislature which he represents. They have deemed it their duty to advance in the progress of their enquiry with peculiar care and deliberation. They have dealt out to Mr. Smith that measure which under the supposition of similar circumstances they would be content to find imparted to themselves, & they have no hesitation in declaring, that under such imputations, colored by such evidence, they should hold it a sacred obligation to themselves, to their fellow-senators, and to their country, to meet them by direct, unconditional acknowledgment or denial, without seeking a refuge from the broad face of day, in the labyrinth of technical forms.
In examining the question whether these forms of judicial proceedings, or the rules of judicial evidence, can or ought to be applied to the exercise of that censorial au-
thority which the Senate of the United States possesses over the conduct of its members, let us assume, as the test of their application either the dictates of unlettered reason, and the letter and spirit of the constitution, or precedents, domestic or foreign, and your committee believe that the result will be the same—That the power of expelling a member must in its nature be discretionary, and in its exercise always more summary than the tardy process of judicial tribunals.
The power of expelling a member for misconduct results on the principles of common sense, from the interest of the nation, that the high trust of legislation should be invested in pure hands. Where the trust is elective it is not to be presumed that the constituent body will commit the deposit to the keeping of worthless characters. But when a man, whom his fellow citizens have honored with their confidence on the pledge of a spotless reputation, has degraded himself by the commission of infamous crimes, which become suddenly and unexpectedly revealed to the world, defective indeed would be that institution which should be impotent to discard from its bosom the contagion of such a member; which should have no remedy of amputation to apply until the poison had reached the heart.
The question upon the trial of a criminal cause, before the courts of common law, is not between guilt and innocence, but between guilt and the possibility of innocence. If a doubt can possibly be raised either by the ingenuity of the party or of his counsel, or by the operation of general rules in their unforeseen application to particular cases, that doubt must be decisive for acquittal, and the verdict of not guilty, perhaps in nine cases out of ten, means no more than that the guilt of the party has not been demonstrated in the precise specific and narrow forms prescribed by law. The humane spirit of the laws multiplies the barriers for the protection of innocence, and freely admits that these barriers may be abused for the shelter of guilt. It avows a strong partiality favorable to the person upon trial, and acknowledges the preference that ten guilty should escape rather than that one innocent should suffer. The interest of the public that a particular crime should be punished is but as one to ten compared with the interest of the party that innocence should be spared. Acquittal only restores the party to the common rights of every other citizen—it restores him to no public trust—it invests him with no public confidence—it substitutes the sentence of mercy for the doom of justice, and to the eyes of impartial reason, in the great majority of cases, must be considered rather as a pardon than a justification.
But when a member of a legislative body lies under the imputation of aggravated offences, and the determination upon his cause can operate only to remove him from a station of extensive powers, and important trust, this disproportion between the interest of the public and the interest of the individual, disappears; if any disproportion exists it is of an opposite kind. It is not better that ten traitors should be members of this Senate, than that one innocent man should suffer expulsion. In either case, no doubt, the evil would be great. But in the former it would strike at the vitals of the nation—in the latter it might, though deeply to be lamented, only be the calamity of an individual.
By the letter of the constitution, the power of expelling a member is given to each of the two Houses of Congress, without any limitation other than that which requires a concurrence of two thirds of the votes to give it effect. The spirit of the constitution is perhaps in no respect more remarkable, than in the solicitude which it has manifested, to secure the purity of the legislature, by that of the elements of its composition. A qualification of age is made necessary for the members to ensure the maturity of their judgment. A qualification of long citizenship to ensure a community of interests and affections between them and their country. A qualification of residence to provide a symmetry between every member and the portion of the union from which he is delegated. And to guard, as far as regulation can guard against every bias of personal interest, and every hazard of interfering duties, it has made every member of Congress, ineligible to office which he contributed to create, and every officer of the union incapable of holding a seat in Congress. Yet in the midst of all this anxious providence of legislative virtue, it has not authorised the constituent body to recall in any case its representative. It has not subjected him to removal by impeachment—and when the darling of the people's choice has become their deadliest foe, can it enter the imagination of a reasonable man, that the sanctuary of their legislation must remain polluted with his presence, until a court of common law, with its pace of small can ascertain, whether his crime was committed on the right or on the left bank of a river—whether a puncture of difference can be found between the words of the charge and the words of the proof—whether the witnesses of his guilt should or should not be heard by his jury—and whether he was punishable, because present at an overt act, or intangible to public justice, because he only contrived and prepared it. Is it conceivable, that a traitor to that country, which has loaded him with favors, guilty to the common understanding of all mankind, should be suffered to return unquestioned to that post of honor and confidence, where in the zenith of his good fame, he had been placed by the esteem of his countrymen, and in defiance of
their wishes, in mockery of their fears, surrounded by the public indignation, but inaccessible to its bolt, pursue the purposes of treason in the heart of the national councils? Must the assembled rulers of the land listen with calmness and indifference, session after session, to the voice of notorious infamy, until the sluggish step of municipal justice can overtake his enormities? Must they tamely see the lives and fortunes of millions, the safety of present and future ages, depending upon his vote, recorded with theirs, merely because the abused benignity of general maxims, may have remitted to him the forfeiture of his life?
Such in very supposable cases would be the unavoidable consequences of a principle which should offer the crutches of judicial tribunals, as an apology for crippling the Congressional power of expulsion. Far different in the opinion of your committee, is the spirit of our constitution. They believe that the very purpose for which this power was given, was to preserve the legislature from the first approaches of infection. That it was made discretionary because it could not exist under the prostration of general rules—That its process must be summary because it would be rendered nugatory by delay.
Passing from the constitutional view of the subject, to that which is afforded by the authority of precedent, your committee find that since the establishment of our present national legislature there has been but one example of expulsion from the Senate. In that case, the member implicated was called upon in the first instance, to answer whether he was the author of a letter, the copy of which only was produced, and the writing of which was the cause of his expulsion. He was afterwards requested to declare whether he was the author of the letter itself, and declining in both cases to answer, the fact of his having written it was established by a comparison of his hand writing, and by the belief of persons who had seen him write, upon inspection of the letter.
In all these points the committee perceive the admission of a species of evidence, which in courts of criminal jurisdiction would be excluded—and in the resolution of expulsion the Senate declared the person inculpated guilty of a high misdemeanor, although no presentment or indictment had been found against him, and no prosecution at law was ever commenced upon the case.
This event occurred in July 1797. About fifteen months before that time, upon an application from the legislature of Kentucky, requesting an investigation by the Senate, of a charge against one of the members from that state, of perjury, which had been made in certain newspaper publications, but for which no prosecution had been commenced, the Senate did adopt by a majority of 16 votes to 8, the report of a committee, purporting that the Senate had no jurisdiction to try the charge, and that the memorial of the Kentucky legislature should be dismissed. There were indeed very sufficient reasons of a different kind assigned in the same report, for not pursuing the investigation in that particular case any further, and your committee believe, that in the reasoning of that report, some principles were assumed, and some inferences drawn, which were altogether unnecessary for the determination of that case, which were adopted without a full consideration of all their consequences, and the inaccuracy of which was clearly proved by the departure from them in the instance which was soon afterwards to take place. It was the first time that a question of expulsion had ever been agitated in Congress since the adoption of the constitution. And the subject being thus entirely new, was considered perhaps too much with reference to the particular circumstances of the moment, and not enough upon the numerous contingencies to which the general question might apply. Your committee state this opinion with some confidence, because, of the sixteen Senators who in March, 1796, voted for the report, dismissing the memorial of the Kentucky legislature, eleven, on the subsequent occasion, in July 1797, voted also for that report, which concluded with a resolution for the expulsion of Mr. Blount. The other five were no longer present in the Senate—yet if the principles advanced in the first report, had been assumed as the ground of proceeding at the latter period, the Senate would have been as impotent of jurisdiction upon the offence of Mr. Blount, as they had supposed themselves upon the allegation against Mr. Marshall.
Those parts of the fifth and sixth articles amendatory to the constitution, upon which the report in the case of Mr. Marshall appears to rely for taking away the jurisdiction of the Senate, your committee suppose can only be understood as referring to prosecutions at law. To suppose that they were intended as restrictions upon powers expressly granted by the constitution to the legislature or either of its branches, would in a manner annihilate the power of impeachment, as well as that of expulsion. It would lead to the absurd conclusion that the authority given for the purpose of removing iniquity from the seats of power, should be denied its exercise, in precisely those cases, which most loudly call for its energies. It would present the singular spectacle of a legislature, vested with powers of expelling its members, of impeaching, removing and disqualifying public officers, for trivial transgressions beneath the cognizance of the law, yet forbidden to exert them against capital or infamous crimes.
Those two articles were in substance borrowed from similar regulations contained in that justly celebrated statute, which for so many ages has been distinguished by the name of the great Charter of England. Yet in that country, where they are recognized as the most solid foundations of the liberties of the nation, they have never been considered as interfering with the power of expelling a member, exercised at all times by the house of commons; a power which there however rests only upon parliamentary usage, and has never been bestowed as in the constitution of the U. States, by any act of supreme legislation. From a number of precedents which have been consulted, it is found that the exercise of this authority there has always been discretionary, and its process always far otherwise compendious, than in the prosecutions before the judicial courts. So far indeed have they been from supposing a conviction at law necessary to precede a vote of expulsion, that in one instance a resolution to demand a prosecution appears immediately after the adoption of the resolution to expel. In numerous cases the member submits to examination, adduces evidence in his favor, and has evidence produced against him, with or without formal authentication; and the discretion of the house is not even restricted by the necessary concurrence of more than a bare majority of the votes.
The provision in our constitution which forbids the expulsion of a member, by an ordinary majority, and requires for the act of rigorous and painful duty, the assent of two thirds, your committee consider, as a wise and sufficient guard against the possible abuse of this legislative discretion. In times of heat and violent party spirit, the rights of the minority might not always be duly respected if a bare majority could expel their members, under no other control than that of their own discretion. The operation of this rule is of great efficacy both over the proceedings of the whole body, and over the conduct of every individual member. The times when the most violent struggles of contending parties occur, when the conflict of opposite passions is most prone to excess, are precisely the times when the members are most equally divided. When the majority amounts to two thirds, the security in its own strength is of itself a guard against extraordinary stretches of power. When the minority dwindles to the proportion of one third, its consciousness of weakness dissuades from any attempts, to encroach upon the rights of the majority which might provoke retaliation. But its expulsion were admissible only as a sequel to the issue of a legal prosecution, or upon the same principles and forms of testimony, which are established in the criminal courts, your committee can see no possible reason why it should be rendered still more imbecile by the requisition of two thirds to give it effect.
It is now the duty of your committee to apply the principles which they have here endeavored to settle and elucidate, to the particular case upon which the Senate have direct return to report. The bills of indictment found against Mr. Smith, at the late session of the circuit court of the U. States, at Richmond (copies of which are herewith submitted) are precisely similar to those found against Aaron Burr. From the volume of printed evidence communicated by the President of the U. States to Congress, relating to the trial of Aaron Burr, it appears that a great part of the testimony which was essential to his conviction upon the indictment for treason was withheld from the jury, upon an opinion of the court that Aaron Burr, not having been present at the overt act of treason alleged in the indictment, no testimony relative to his conduct or declarations elsewhere, and subsequent to the transactions on Blennerhassett's island, could be admitted—and in consequence of this suppression of evidence, the traverse jury found a verdict "that Aaron Burr was not proved to be guilty under that indictment by any evidence submitted to them." It was also an opinion of the court that none of the transactions of which evidence was given on the trials of Aaron Burr did amount to an overt act of levying war, and of course that they did not amount to treason. These decisions forming the basis of the issue upon the trials of Burr, anticipated the event which must have awaited the trials of the bills against Mr. Smith, who from the circumstances of his case, must have been entitled to the benefit of their application—they were the sole inducements upon which the counsel for the United States abandoned the prosecution against him.
Your committee are not disposed now to question the correctness of these decisions, on a case of treason, before a court of criminal jurisdiction. But whether the transactions proved against Aaron Burr did or did not amount in technical language to an overt act of levying war, your committee have not a scruple of doubt upon their minds, that but for the vigilance and energy of the government, and of faithful citizens under its directions in arresting their progress, and in crushing his designs, they would in a very short lapse of time have terminated not only in war, but in war of the most horrible description—in war at once foreign and domestic. As little hesitation have your committee in saying, that the day light of evidence, combining one vast complicated intention, with overt acts innumerable, be not excluded from the mind by the curtain of artificial rules, the simplest understanding cannot but see, what the subtlest understanding cannot disguise—crimes before which ordinary treason whitens into virtue—crimes, of which war is the mildest feature. The debauchment of our army—the plunder and devastation of our own and of foreign territories—the dissolution of our national Union, and the root of interminable civil war, were but the means of individual aggrandizement—the steps to projected usurpation. If the ingenuity of a demon were tasked to weave into one composition all the great moral and political evils which could be inflicted upon the people of these states, it could produce nothing more than a texture of war, dismemberment and despotism. Of these designs, a grand jury, composed of characters as respectable as this nation can boast, have upon the solemnity of their oaths, charged John Smith with being an accomplice. The reasons upon which the trial of this charge has not been submitted to the verdict of a jury, have been shown by your committee, and are proved by the letter from the Attorney of the United States for the district of Virginia, herewith reported. And
your committee are of opinion that the decision of the prosecution, on these grounds, can not in the slightest degree remove the imputations which the accusation of the grand jury has brought to the door of Mr. Smith.
Your committee will not permit themselves to comment upon the testimony which they submit herewith to the Senate—nor upon the answers which Mr. Smith has given as sufficient for his justification. Desirous as the committee have been that this justification might be complete, anxiously as they wished for an opportunity of declaring their belief of his innocence, they can neither controvert nor disbelieve the operation of the evidence upon their minds, and however painful to their feelings, they find themselves compelled by a sense of duty, paramount to every other consideration, to submit to the Senate, for their consideration, the following resolution.
Resolved, That John Smith, a Senator from the state of Ohio, by his participation in the conspiracy of Aaron Burr, against the peace, union, and liberties of the people of the United States, has been guilty of conduct incompatible with his duty and station as a Senator of the United States, and that he be, therefore, and hereby is expelled from the Senate of the United States.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
THURSDAY, Dec. 31.
Mr. Thomas moved that the resolution moved by Mr. Randolph should lie on the table.
But a motion made to consider, was agreed to.
Mr. Randolph said as it appeared by the declaration of the gentleman from New Orleans, that he did possess information, and as the House had a right to it, he wished the Speaker or some other gentleman to inform him of the manner in which it might be obtained.
[No order was taken on this point.] Mr. Taylor moved that the resolution be committed to a committee of the whole, not on to-day or to-morrow, but at a distant day, that time might be afforded for consideration.
After debate, Mr. Taylor withdrew his motion.
Mr. Gardnier moved that it be referred to a select committee with power to send for persons, papers, &c.
Mr. Martin moved to strike out that part of this motion giving power to a select committee to send for persons, papers, &c.
Mr. Nelson made a motion to adjourn, which was negatived.
Mr. Smith moved to postpone further proceedings on this subject till Monday; on which motion the yeas and nays being called for by Mr. Randolph, were 68 to 40.
On the foregoing motions a very lengthy and somewhat desultory debate ensued of about 5 hours. The debate turned on many incidental questions, amongst which whether Congress had a constitutional right to request the President to cause the proposed enquiry to be made? To this it was answered that Congress had as much right to make this request as to request the President to lay before them public papers, either of which requests he might refuse. It was also said, that in making this request, the House could not command more attention than was due to a respectable individual.
It was doubted whether a member could be called upon to give information in his seat, or at the bar of the House? In answer precedents were produced of cases in which members of the House had been interrogated at the bar.
It was also contended, that if delivered in his place, the communication would be liable to commentary or reply by any gentleman who might think proper to discuss it in the same manner as any other speech.
It was made a question whether this information could be more properly received by a committee of the whole, or a select committee, or by the House? It was said on this that it had heretofore been the course of procedure to empower chairmen of committees in such cases to administer oaths; that in the House a member could be compelled to give information if the House thought fit, but in committee of the whole he could not be compelled; that if information or evidence were to be received in the House, it would perplex their proceedings, by loading the table and journals with interrogatories, &c.
It was questioned whether it were proper to decide it now, to refer it, or to postpone it? On these points there appeared to be a great diversity of opinion, some thinking that the evidence which they had received was insufficient to induce them to pass the resolution without further consideration, being a mere request to the President to enquire; others wished farther time and more evidence previous to giving their vote on the subject, considering it of great importance; others were in favor of a reference to a committee, to consider all the foregoing points as well as the propriety of the main resolution; some wished the committee to have power to send for persons and papers, to report to the house their opinion on the subject, together with evidence, believing that positive and satisfactory evidence should be produced before they adopted this resolution, and it was impossible to understand precisely the evidence now produced from the mere reading of it; other gentlemen wished it referred to a committee without power to send for persons, papers, &c. as they conceived the house did not possess power to enforce their orders in such case, general Wilkinson being a military and not a civil officer, whom the President alone had power to remove.
None of these points were decided either directly or by motion.
In the course of this devious discussion the succeeding observations on the main subject were made by different gentlemen.

Mr. W. Alston , had heard nothing in the documents read to-day impeaching the character of gen. Wilkinson, more than what the newspapers throughout the Union had teemed with for two years, except indeed a letter from Mr. Power; and who was Mr. Power, or what credibility could be attached to anything emanating from him? Every person in the U. States, who could read, knew his character. He was opposed to ordering evidence on considering a resolution proposing an enquiry, even if he were in favor of the enquiry.
Mr. Smilie thought the debate which had already taken place on a reference totally improper. He had heard sufficient evidence on this subject to convince him that such an enquiry was necessary; he did not think that there could be any further doubt on the subject. The house could not try gen. Wilkinson, he must be tried by another tribunal. They owed it to the country and to gen. Wilkinson himself to request an enquiry, and he hoped there would not be a dissenting voice on the question of agreement to the resolution. He could not give an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of general Wilkinson, but he thought it absolutely necessary that an enquiry should be had.
Mr. Gardener was satisfied of the impropriety of proceeding on the consideration of any question of importance too hastily, more especially in a case so materially affecting an officer of high rank in the U. States. He wished to have time to consider fully before he could vote on a subject of so much magnitude as this; they should not act from first impressions. If the subject were referred to a committee with power to send for persons, papers, &c. the testimony on the subject would come before them in a proper shape, and not with the inaccuracy which must always attend information given in this manner, but in a condensed form in which its force might be fully felt. He did not wish to be precipitated into an enquiry too soon; neither did he wish an enquiry to be made because it was due to general Wilkinson. If this enquiry was ordered by, and this motion intended as a favor to general W. he was astonished that it had not been brought forward before. There certainly had been ground enough shown for an enquiry into his conduct; but if gen. W.'s conduct had so far evinced his purity as not to excite in the administration even a suspicion against his character, if no enquiry had been made on the charges which had resounded from every part of the union. Mr. G. did not wish now, merely for the sake of doing justice to that officer, to press an enquiry which the executive had not thought proper to make. Neither did he wish rashly to decide on this question, because in doing this they would add the weight of their accusation to the cries of the whole nation; the united force of which no individual could resist.
Mr. Chandler said this was a subject which had been long before the nation, and with which they were all well acquainted; if that officer were innocent it was due to himself and his friends, that an enquiry should be made; if he were guilty it was due to the U. States. The evidence produced was sufficient on which to ground an enquiry, and he was ready to decide without further time.
Mr. Nicholas had no doubt but an enquiry ought to be made; after what had been heard, if general Wilkinson were the lowest officer of the U. States, he should be of opinion that an enquiry ought to be made, but he doubted whether this was a question on which they were now prepared to decide. For this reason he had seconded the motion for referring the resolution to a select committee who would consider whether this subject properly came under cognizance of the house; he considered the house as a mere legislative body except in the single case of impeachment. He was not prepared to say what was proper to be done with this resolution, but his first impression was against acting on it. It would open doors for receiving complaints of the misconduct of any officer; he did not think this power was lodged in the house, and had no wish to assume powers that did not pertain to them. As to the question whether there should be an enquiry or not, no man could doubt. An enquiry must be made. Would it be said that an officer of importance should be suffered to be retained by a man who had received a pension from a foreign government? He thought it could not; therefore he wished an enquiry to be made into the truth of this charge.
Mr. Burwell was decidedly opposed to reference to any committee whatever. It seemed to be the universal opinion that an enquiry ought to be had on the conduct of the commander in chief of the army of the United States; and it was highly important that the subject should be acted upon speedily. If the nation was (as appeared probable) to be involved in war, it was necessary that the commander in chief should possess the confidence of the army, the people, and the government.
Mr. Johnston said the good people of Kentucky were interested in this subject. Many reports to the prejudice of gen. Wilkinson existed there; nothing more certain had appeared against him, but the people entertained doubts on the subject, there were circumstances which they wished to be investigated; if nothing could be found against him, the sooner his innocence was known the better. Knowing this he should not hesitate to give his vote in such a manner as to dispose of the subject most speedily. The investigation was due to the people, and to the man himself.
Mr. Macon said if ever there had been a time since the year 1783, in which it was particularly necessary that those persons in office should have the confidence of the government and of the people, that time had arrived. Could it be expected after hearing the information which had been produced that the people would have confidence in general Wilkinson? It was as important that the commander in chief should be as free from suspicion as that the President or House of Representatives should be unsuspected. The commander in chief during the American revolution was irreproachable; calumny never assailed him, and of course enjoyed the full confidence of the people. The evidence which had been this day read, they were told had neither been before the grand ju-
ry or the court at Richmond, and there was certainly sufficient on which to ground an enquiry.
Mr. Taylor observed, that he accorded with those gentlemen who had asserted, that in this important crisis it was of the highest importance, that the character of the commander in chief of the armies should stand fair and unimpeached; that on the first and hasty view he had taken of the subject, it had appeared a sufficient motive for making the request to the President, as expressed in the resolution; but from the ideas expressed from different parts of the House, he had been led to consider the proposed measure in a new and different point of view. The gentleman from Virginia had given the House certain information, and on that information had founded his resolution. It was true that this resolution contained nothing which would impeach any other person than the General; but gentlemen had called on the delegate from Orleans for information corroborating the statement of facts he had given; and the delegate had stated that he had at divers times given information to the Executive, and at other times endeavored to give it to the Executive, but that department had turned a deaf ear to his communications or the subject. The resolution then after this assertion, that the executive had turned a deaf ear to the subject, assumed a new character—it amounted to this; that as you have not heretofore done your duty, we the representatives of the people now request you to do it. Was the House prepared thus to publish to the nation their want of confidence in the executive, upon the ex-parte testimony which is now before them? Were they prepared now to interfere thus with a department of the government, which in this instance they had not constitutionally a right to control—and to say, as that department had not done its duty, they would assume to themselves the important charge of taking care that the republic shall suffer no injury? He hoped not. He hoped that neither the important crisis alluded to by gentlemen, nor the necessity of the case itself, or their sense of justice towards the gentleman accused, could draw them into such a commitment of themselves, in opposition too, to the declared sentiments of a great majority of the nation, who had recently declared that this Executive had deserved well of its country.
Gen. W. might be guilty or he might be innocent. Mr. T. had his own opinions, perhaps prejudices on this subject. When the constitution or the mandate of a tribunal which had competent authority to compel him, should demand of him a publication of those opinions, he should give them; but like the delegate from Orleans, he would not volunteer the affirmative vote of this House, for if such vote should be taken, it would be volunteering; he should not vote with them; he believed that the Department of State was by the constitution free of their control, in respect to the proposed measure. They might, and he hoped would send the papers or documents, in the hands of the mover, to the executive, without any resolution on the subject. When they had given the information, they had fulfilled their duty. But, as respected the general himself, would he stand the same chance of acquittal by a court of enquiry or court martial, or by executive scrutiny, when the price and weight of an accusation from this House was set against him? He was for giving this officer fair play and the advantages of a fair and impartial trial.
Mr. Randolph said the gentleman last up was mistaken in supposing that the evidence which he had laid before the House had been offered to the President of the U. S. and rejected. Nor was this at all a question of confidence or otherwise in the executive, and he was astonished that any gentleman should attempt to convert it into a question of that sort. It was no such question. A member in his place had offered to the House a copy of an order of a Spanish governor (or rather a translation of which the original could be produced) to pay 9640 dollars to gen. Jas. Wilkinson; he had also offered a copy of a letter, certified by the governor of Natchez, and immediately after governor of Louisiana, which, unless possibly forged, established beyond a doubt the fact of the guilt of this commandant, not under the articles of war, for it had been this day suggested to Mr. R. that an officer was not amenable to military law for an offence committed so long ago—nor did he say under the common law or statute law—but that sort of offence which incapacitated that officer from the situation which he now held, and from which the President of the U. S. alone was competent to remove him. What did they ask the President of the U. S. to do by passing this resolution? To enquire: they left the mode of conducting that enquiry to his discretion. It was to enquire merely, and surely it was a strange doctrine to say that asking the President to enquire respecting the conduct of persons in high office under him, was an expression of confidence in the Executive. Far from it: if any thing, it would show a confidence in the executive, expressing a conviction that he would institute an enquiry, and upon the result of that enquiry do what was proper to be done. And what had this to do with confidence in the executive? They would make a question of adjournment before long a question of confidence; or on every question which came before the House would sound this tocsin, this whoop of want of confidence. The gentleman from New Orleans did not say that he had given evidence to the President of the U. S. and that the President had rejected it, if he understood him aright; he thought the gentleman said, that filing as he did an office of trust under the government of the United States, he had given that department of government with which he corresponded to understand that he possessed information of an important kind touching this character, and that he had received no intimation from that department of a wish to receive it, and had therefore been discouraged from communicating the information which he possessed. The knowledge which that gentleman possessed related to information which the House had not yet heard, and not to that which Mr. R. now held in his hand; to that information which he hoped the House would use its authority (but respectfully) to compel that gentleman to give—
If the House acted on this subject at this time, could it be said that they acted from information of the gentleman from New Orleans who had given none? If overtures to give information had been neglected, what had that to do with the information which Mr. R. had in his place laid before the House? The question was extremely simple.
Had they power (to which he was astonished to hear an objection) to make this request? If they had, had they seen sufficient ground on which the prayer of the request should be granted? If they had the right to make the request and he had laid before the house substantial ground for an enquiry, there was an end to all other questions on the subject. In the prosecution of the present business it would perhaps be found peculiarly difficult to adduce proof—and why? Because in taking possession of New Orleans, the commissioners; (and who were they?)—suffered the archives of the country to be ransacked; even papers relating to land titles were taken away; and it must be believed, and it could not be doubted, that if one of those commissioners found in the archives of the former government, in the Spanish bureau, evidences of his own guilt, he would not be so far lost to a sense of his own safety, as not to destroy such evidences as far as in his power. Fortunately, enough had been preserved to establish that point beyond all possibility of doubt; and it remained for the house to say whether it constituted a sufficient ground for enquiry or not. Whatever might be the decision of the house, said Mr. R. I shall respectfully submit; but be the decision what it may, I shall conceive a great object which I had in view in bringing this subject forward, to be completely answered.
Mr. Clark said that the information which he had heretofore attempted to convey, did not particularly relate to the subject now before the house. He then knew that various attempts had been made by the Spanish government to detach the Western country from the Union; he had thought it incumbent on him, holding a commission under the U. S. to state these facts to the executive. When first he had the honor of being presented to the executive, he had twice attempted to state these facts to him who either did not or would not understand him, and changed the subject; at this he naturally felt hurt, and had not renewed personal communication on the subject. Some time subsequent to this, when the French were preparing to take possession of Louisiana, believing that they would discover those who were before attached to foreign governments and secure them in their interests, he had thought it a duty incumbent on him to write to the secretary of state as the constitutional organ of communication, and had stated his grounds of suspicion. He had twice attempted to make this known, and had officially written to learn whether he was understood. Of these letters no notice had been taken. He had then stated that the proofs in his possession might not be sufficient for conviction, but if time were allowed proof sufficient might be procured.
Mr. Thomas asked, at what time these communications had been made?
Mr. Clark . To the President of the U. S. in 1802; to the Secretary of State in 1803.
Mr. Sloan said, that altho' he could not consistently with the rules of order impeach the motives of the members who brought forward this resolution, he could question the propriety of passing it; the papers now adduced in evidence in his opinion amounted to no more than what had long before appeared in newspapers. He said that Gen. W. had been formerly charged with misconduct before this house; Mr. S. said at that time he had declared that from what appeared, he considered Gen. W. as deserving well of his country; that he had not discovered any cause to change his opinion; but contrary-wise considered the various charges and insinuations as arising from malice or envy against him for having acted as the saviour of his country. From what the gentleman from Virginia had last said, it appeared that this resolution was to rest on the question whether there were sufficient evidence of guilt in that officer before the house, to require an enquiry to be made. W. did not the house by passing this resolution, say that this was the case, and would it not be throwing the whole weight of the house of representatives of the U. States against him? It undoubtedly would. As yet nothing had appeared to induce Mr. S. to change his opinion, and till there was, he should oppose every proposition of this kind.
MONDAY, January 4. Mr. Porter presented a petition from sundry merchants of Philadelphia, stating that they had obtained clearances for a number of their vessels, prior to the EMBARGO, and paid an advance of wages to the seamen, &c. and praying that the vessels may be allowed to depart, or that they may be otherwise relieved. Mr. Porter moved that the petition be referred to the committee of commerce and manufactures.
This motion gave rise to a short debate; when the question was taken by ayes and noes, and it was agreed to, ayes 91, noes 16.
[YAZOO LANDS.] Mr. Bacon presented a memorial from the governor of Massachusetts, (in pursuance of a resolution of both branches of the legislature of that state) addressed to Congress, in behalf of certain citizens of Massachusetts claiming lands in the state of Georgia, which had been since ceded to the United States; and inclosing a memorial from the said claimants on the same subject.
Mr. Bacon moved to refer the memorials to the committee of claims. Mr. Bibb moved that they be rejected. There were few cases in which he should vote for the rejection of a petition, but this was one of them. When a claim was brought before the house, evidently founded in fraud and corruption, he felt it his duty to vote for its rejection, and he hoped the house would also feel it their duty. The fraud and villainy of this claim had been so often exposed that he thought it useless to say any thing on it.
Mr. Troup did not know whether it would be more proper to move that the
memorial should be thrown under the table, or, as his colleague had done, that it should be rejected. It could be considered in no other light than as an attempt to torture the house into a compliance with the wishes of the memorialists. They were bound, it was true, to hear and listen to memorials couched in decent language; but it was an insult on the house to expect them to sanction a claim founded in fraud and corruption.
Mr. Bibb called for the ayes and noes on his motion.
Mr. Smilie said, that his sentiments on this business were well known; he was no Yazoo man—he had never voted for that claim, nor never would; but he hoped the house would not do any thing which would show a disrespect for the states.
Mr. Livermore was astonished to see any opposition to a reference of this memorial; whether the claim was reasonable or not, it would be indecorous to reject the memorial without any consideration.
Mr. Alston said, there had been a great clamor a few days ago, because a memorial from a few merchants had not been referred—and what was the case at present? one of the most respectable states in the union had petitioned the house—todo what? To give lands to the Yazoo speculators? No: but to be heard. He hoped the house would act consistently.
Mr. Nelson said, that as this subject was perfectly understood by the house, he could see no reason for consuming time about it. It was said, that a rejection of the memorial would be treating the legislature of Massachusetts with disrespect; but in a case of this kind, he should treat it with no more respect than if it had been signed by the members of the legislature in their individual capacity. This memorial had been sent on as a legislative act, in order, it would seem, to give it the more weight. If the house were not acquainted with the facts, it might be proper to refer it; but when they were in possession of all the facts, where was the use of referring it? The subject was as well understood now, as it would be if considered for 500 years. The petitioners ask, that we shall pass a law erecting a special tribunal to try their claim. This would be a new mode of legislation. We had already a judiciary competent to decide it. It would be absurd to comply with this request; we might as well have no judiciary at all, and pass a law to provide for every individual claim.
Mr. Holland observed, that as a bill had been formerly passed in the Senate, and been supported by a great number of the members of the house, to satisfy this claim, he could see no insu to the house in referring the memorial. This claim, instead of being so well understood, was of a complex nature. He was one of those who had voted in favor of satisfying the claim, notwithstanding the clamor which had been raised against it; and he would venture to assert that those who clamored most, had not taken three hours to consider it. He hoped the feelings of some gentlemen would not be so extremely delicate, as to feel insulted by a reference of the memorial.
Mr. Bacon thought the house ought to be consistent: they had this morning referred a petition, the object of which was to do away one of the most important provisions in the embargo law. The gentleman from Georgia had said, that the claim was founded in fraud; he would only remark, that whatever that fraud might be, the legislature of Massachusetts had certainly not participated in it. He, however, had no evidence of such fraud, nor did he believe a majority of the house had such evidence. It had been said that the memorial demanded something new, in requiring a special tribunal; but this claim had undergone a variety of changes. It was an extraordinary case, and demanded an extraordinary remedy.
Mr. Elliott said, that he had never heard before that a memorial from a state ought to be thrown under the table; it was reserved for the present day to broach such a doctrine. It was true, that gentlemen far above him in point of talents and information, were against this claim; but in this number he was far, very far, from including one of the gentlemen from Georgia. [Mr. Troup , in a very animated manner, here called Mr. Elliott to order. Mr. E. called him to order; but he persisted in warning the gentleman not to make any personal allusions.] Mr. Elliott said, that when in conclave a few days ago, the gentleman from Georgia had used similar expressions towards him, but he had not been called to order. He said he was not a representative of Massachusetts; but he could never, either on that floor or elsewhere, hear that state charged with being the patron of fraud and corruption, without calling forth his most ardent indignation. He contended that the citizens had a constitutional right to petition, and to be heard. He adverted to the claim of Eugene Beau-marçais, and observed, that the French government had no more right to demand a reversal of the decisions of the house, than had the state of Massachusetts.
Mr. Troup said, that he sincerely believed the gentleman from Vermont, (Mr. Elliott ) to be what he conceived the majority of the Yazoo legislature to have been! [The Speaker called him to order. Mr. Elliott said, he had not called him to order.] Mr. Troup then strongly protested against the Yazoo speculation; declaring that it was marked by fraud, injustice and villainy, and embellished with perjury and murder, and every other species of venality.
Mr. Bibb said, that he should at first have moved to throw the memorial under the table, but he understood it was out of order. It was true that in so doing, he should have treated the memorial with contempt; but he was free to declare, that he wished to treat it with contempt, because he thought it deserved it. He went into a detail of the Yazoo business, and contended that Congress had no right to enter into a compromise with the claimants.
Messrs. Quincey , Crowninshield and Chandler , spoke in favor of referring the memorial; and Messrs. Randolph and Alexander , against it.
Mr. Marion moved, that the memorial be referred to a committee of the whole. The ayes and noes were taken on this motion, and it was agreed to, ayes 71, noes 37.
Mr. Bacon moved, that it be the order of the day for Monday week.
Mr. Milner moved, that it be the order of the day for the second Monday in February.
Mr. Nelson moved, that it be the order of the day for this day.
Mr. Newton moved, that it be the order of the day for the first day of June.
The question was taken on the last motion, and lost, ayes 37.
Mr. Trigg moved that it be the order of the day for the first of May, and called for the ayes and noes on the motion. They were taken, and it was lost. Ayes 41, noes 66.
The question was then taken on making it the order of the day for the second Monday in February, and carried, yeas 35, noes 45.
Mr. Crowninshield presented a petition from John Brown of Massachusetts, stating that he had invented a system of TELEGRAPHS, &c. Referred to a select committee.
TUESDAY, Jan. 5. The House were this day wholly engaged in the discussion of the resolution offered by Mr. Randolph on Thursday last, in relation to Gen. Wilkinson.
The question at the last consideration was on its reference. It had been then moved to refer it to a select committee, with power to send for persons, papers, &c. and a motion made to amend this motion by striking out the words in italic was then under consideration and of course was first taken into consideration this day.
The motion for striking out these words was supported by Messrs. Lyon , Campbell , Milnor , Holland , Sloan , Dana , Fisk and Alston , and opposed by Messrs. Stanford , Gardener , and Elliott ; and was carried, by yeas and nays, 72 to 38.
The question was then taken on the reference of the resolution, and negatived, only one or two rising in favor of it.
The question then recurring on the original resolution, Messrs. Burwell , Troup and Quincy supported, and Messrs. Blackledge , Milnor , Campbell and Gardner opposed; when
Mr. Bibb said it was now a late hour (half past four) and several gentlemen who would wish to express their opinions had not yet had an opportunity; he therefore moved to adjourn. Carried, 60 to 43.
WASHINGTON CITY, Jan. 6. The SENATE have assigned to-morrow for considering the report in the case of John Smith.
FROM THE AURORA.
EXTRACT FROM THE EDITOR. Washington, Dec. 31. 1807. "Yesterday a message was received from the President of the United States, announcing the pleasing intelligence, that the Indians which had for some time embodied around Detroit, had, after holding several councils, determined to return home to their respective nations. At their last council, it was declared, that the British had persuaded them to take up arms against the United States, and that they must determine what course they were to pursue, as they were pressed to immediate war, and must either engage immediately or return home. The general sentiments of the chiefs, was, that the conduct of the British government of Canada, and the government of the United States, pointed out the path which they were to follow. The U. States, had greatly benefited the Indian tribes, and treated them as friends; they did not invite them to war, but endeavored to teach them all that they themselves knew. The British on the other hand, had excited them to war, and did nothing for them at home, but what was intended to employ them in war. The British now wish them to go to war with the United States; but the United States do the Indians no harm; the British do the Indians no good. The U. States do the Indians no harm, they do them a great deal of good, and even now they do not wish the Indians to go to war; they bid the Indians stay at home and be peaceful; and even if a war takes place, not to take part with either party. These points were dwelt on, and these inferences drawn from them. The solicitude of the British, to make the Indians go to war, shewed they had no confidence in their own strength, without the Indians. The advice of the United States, shewed that they thought themselves strong enough for the British, without Indian aid; a certain sign that they were so. Besides that, the U. States were friends of the Indians; prudence ought to teach them, that when one power was so strong as to do without them; and the other so weak, as to call upon them, and wish them to begin the war; that the Indians, if they took part with the weakest, would stand a chance of being exterminated. Both interest and prudence, then forbid their going to war against the United States; and they determined to return to their own homes. The facts are the substance of private letters, and of a public dispatch. The public document is ordered to be printed, you shall have a copy."
STORED with me the 1st of December last by Capt. McKnight, of the schooner Mary, from Norfolk,
Sundry Boxes, Marked I. D.—some Saddle Trees, and Black Smith's Tools. The owners are requested to pay charges and rake them away.
John Croddock. Rocketts, January 9. 1808 3t
NOTICE.
THE CO-PARTNERSHIP OF Jasper and Edmund Anderson , Was dissolved the first inst. by mutual consent. All persons having claims against said concern, will make application to Edmund Anderson for adjustment; and those indebted, will make payment to the same.
Jasper Anderson. Edmund Anderson. January 7th, 1808 2t
N. B. Having purchased my brother's interest in the above business, it will for the future be carried on in my own name. Edmund Anderson.

THE debates in the House of Delegates of this commonwealth have been for several days past, very animated and interesting; particularly on the subject of Mr. Gholson's amendment to the constitution of the United States, the discussion relative to which is not yet finished. The arguments on both sides are urged with great zeal and eloquence, and some of them are, in substance, as follows:
In favor of the amendment it is contended that the power of the Judges of the federal courts is enormous and dangerous; their jurisdiction extending "to all cases, in law and equity, arising under the constitution, the laws of the United States and treaties made under their authority; to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be party; to controversies between two or more states, between citizens of different states, between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states; and between the citizens of any state & foreign states, citizens or subjects;" and in addition to all this, they having usurped the power of declaring any act of Congress unconstitutional and thereby of annulling it; that their oath to support the constitution of the United States cannot be considered as a grant of power, but only as imposing a duty on them, in common with all the other officers of government who take the same oath, which duty requires their obedience to the laws regularly enacted by the constituted authorities, and cannot authorise them to declare such laws to be void; that if Congress passes unconstitutional laws the only check upon them should be the people. It was urged that in proportion to these extensive powers, legitimately exercised and arbitrarily assumed by the judges, should be their responsibility to the people; that, on the contrary, as the system now stands, they are scarcely responsible at all, the terrors of impeachment having dwindled to nothing, in consequence of the event of the trial of that "mammoth of delinquents Judge Chase," in which it was substantially decided that nothing but a conviction before the Senate of his having committed an indictable offence was sufficient to remove a judge from office; that other offences or immorality which disgrace the bench of justice, as well as a judge's entertaining erroneous and pernicious opinions relative to the rights of the states or of the people, ought to be sufficient for his removal; that the Senate of the U. S. on whose vote official appointments depend, is a very improper tribunal for the trial of impeachments; that the voice of the immediate representatives of the people, ought also to be heard on the question of continuing in employment, or removing from office, or dismissing their public servants; and that no oppression or unjust persecution of a judge could rationally be apprehended from the adoption of the amendment, since two thirds of both Houses of Congress would be requisite for a decision against him, and that regard for their own reputations, which the members must feel, as well as their fear of the indignation of their constituents would be his sufficient safeguards.
These were a few of the arguments in support of the resolution. On the other side, it was warmly contended, that the powers of the Federal Courts are essentially necessary as a check on the encroachments of the other departments of the government upon the liberties of the people; that the judges are the great barrier to protect the citizens from despotism and save the constitution from violation; that, placed in a complete state of independence by competent salaries, and free from the influence of corruption by executive favor, or of intimidation by arbitrary removals from office, they would have no motives to induce them to do wrong; that this desirable state of things ought to be accomplished by an amendment to the constitution very different from that now proposed, by depriving the President of the right of nominating a judge to any lucrative office, as had been very improperly done in the cases of Ellsworth and Jay ; that, at present, the judges are bound by their oaths, whenever a law passed by Congress is in conflict with the constitution, to obey the latter instead of the former; that this was not an usurpation, but an exercise of power necessarily conveyed and guaranteed to the judges by the constitution itself; that Congress had already frequently infringed the Constitution, of which the Alien and Sedition laws were plain and palpable instances; and that formerly one of strongest grounds of complaint against the Federal Judges was their carrying into effect the Sedition law, notwithstanding its flagrantly violating the Constitution; that if the power of removal now proposed was conferred on Congress, no judge would hereafter be hardy enough to declare any of their Acts unconstitutional, however iniquitous and oppressive they might be; that it is not true that a Judge cannot be impeached and turned out of office for offences not indictable, the contrary having been proved in the case of Judge Pickering ; that this odious doctrine was indeed contended for by Mr. Harper as Counsel for Judge Chase , but had never been directly sanctioned by the Senate of the U. S. that the only advantage, in favor of those disposed to prosecute a Judge, which would be obtained by the amendment is, that he would then be condemned without a hearing, and without a trial, whereas now both are necessary, and ought always to be so for the purposes of justice. Such is a short sketch of some of the arguments adduced in opposition to the measure, which continues undecided, it being expected that the debate will last several days longer.
THE bill to amend the act, passed at the session of 1805, entitled "an act to amend the several laws concerning slaves," was yesterday rejected by the Senate, the votes in that body being 8 in its favor and 10 against it.
In the House of Delegates the votes were 77 in the affirmative, and 68 in the negative. These circumstances prove the nice division of the public opinion on this subject. The object of the Bill was to permit the importation of such Slaves as are owned by the Citizens of this State in other States, their titles to which are derived from marriage, descent or devise.
Nothing of importance was received by last night's mail from Washington. The bill for continuing the Mediterranean fund, has been passed in the House of Representatives without opposition. Wednesday (to-morrow) is fixed by the Senate of the U. S. to hear the vindication of John Smith, by his counsel.
Extract of a letter from Washington City, to a gentleman in this city, dated 3d January, 1808.
The following lines relate to gen. Wilkinson; a man whose innocence and whose wrongs have commanded your friendship. I myself have felt, and still feel much for this injured soldier. His enemies have been unrelenting in their persecution, unrelenting in every source to discover his guilt; and every effort which they have made to establish it, has been in vain. Mr. Randolph has been the great adversary of his fame. He has displayed the most implacable hatred—he has been devoted to his ruin.
The recent rupture between these gentlemen, will be productive of an enquiry into the conduct of Wilkinson. Randolph refused his challenge, and immediately afterwards alleged in Congress, that the commander in chief of the forces of the U. S. had been in the pay of Spain. Congress will proceed with caution and tenderness. This attack of Mr. Randolph's, succeeding so directly the challenge, gives it at least the color of suspicion. It may spring from fear and revenge. Randolph, now, to wipe away the odium of cowardice, and to throw the egis of honor over his character, must establish the baseness of his enemy. He must destroy his character, to preserve his own. If he should fail in this—if instead of blasting, he should brighten the reputation of his adversary, he will fix the brand of cowardice and calumny on his own. I have not changed my opinion of Wilkinson from this accusation. There is a fascination in the name of virtue, that always wins me to its defence. The ignominy remains with him who persecutes unjustly, not with him who suffers unjust persecution. Recalcitrant at undique tuts. In this contest, I wish innocence the victory. I wish honor to prevail, foil and flourish over malice and aspersion. If Wilkinson is guilty, instead of pleading for, I shall detest him. If he is guilty, Mr. Randolph will deserve admiration for binding and dragging the traitor to the altar of justice. If he is innocent, Mr. Randolph must fall, covered with disgrace and ruin.
Virginia Legislature.
HOUSE OF DELEGATES.
THURSDAY, January 7, 1808.
A communication from the Senate by their clerk.
The senate have passed the bill, "Vesting in Elizabeth Michael the right of the commonwealth, to a certain tract of land therein mentioned."
They have also passed the bill, "To establish an academy for female education in the town of Lexington;" and the bill, "Establishing a turnpike over the South Mountain, on Rockfish Gap," with amendments, to which they request the concurrence of the house of delegates.
The house proceeded to consider the amendments to the said bills and the same being twice read were agreed to by the House.
The House, on motion, proceeded also to consider an amendment proposed by the Senate, to an amendment proposed by the House of Delegates, to the Senate's amendments to the bill, "To amend and continue the act, 'Concerning the James River Company' (which being upon the table), and the said amendment being twice read, was agreed to by the house.
An engrossed bill, "To amend an act, entitled an act, to amend the several laws concerning slaves," was read a third time and passed. Ayes 84—Noes 77.
A motion was made that the House should come to the following resolution:
Resolved, That the Executive be requested to have made a seal of the Commonwealth of Virginia, with the following engraving, viz:—Virtus, the Genius of the Commonwealth, dressed like an Amazon, resting on a spear with one hand, and holding a sword in the other, and treading on Tyranny, represented by a man prostrate, a crown fallen from his head, a broken chain in his left hand, and a scourge in his right.
In the exergon, the word Virginia over the head of Virtus; and underneath, the words, Sic semper Tyrannis.
On the reverse, a group.
Libertas, with her wand and pileus. On one side of her, Ceres, with the cornucopia in one hand, and an ear of wheat in the other.
On the other side, Eternitas, with the globe and phoenix.
In the exergon these words, Deus nobis Hec ostia fecit.
On motion, Ordered, That the said resolution be laid upon the table.
FRIDAY, Jan. 8.
A communication from the Senate by their clerk.
The Senate have passed the following bills, to wit:
A bill, "Authorising John M. Syme, to erect a toll bridge across Pamunkey river;" and
A bill, "Establishing certain towns therein mentioned."
They have also agreed to the address of the General Assembly to those citizens, who shortly after the attack made upon the frigate Chesapeake, voluntarily tendered their services in defence of their country, with an amendment, to which they request the concurrence of the House of Delegates.
The House proceeded to consider the said amendment, and the same being twice read, was agreed to by the house.
Ordered, That the clerk acquaint the Senate therewith.
The said address as amended is in the following words:
Whereas it has been represented to the Gen. Assembly by the Chief Magistrate of this commonwealth, that after the attack upon the Chesapeake when further aggressions were apprehended, a number of our fellow citizens, voluntarily tendered their services to aid our brethren near the coast, in their protection & defence, and so many as the occasion required were ac-
cepted, whose conduct while in service equalled the public expectation—The General Assembly deem it a tribute due to those brave and patriotic citizens, to present them their unfeigned thanks, for their laudable exertions in the cause of their country; and to assure them of the high esteem and affectionate regard which their conduct has inspired. The promptitude and zeal manifested on this occasion has afforded an example worthy of emulation; and while it cannot fail to impress their fellow-citizens with a desire to imitate their actions, presents to the nations of the earth, a specimen of the spirit which unites freemen to protect the rights, and revenge the wrongs of their country.
On motion, Resolved, That a committee be appointed on the part of the House of Delegates, to act with a committee from the Senate, to enquire into the state and condition of the Bank of Virginia; and that the President and Directors of the Bank, exhibit to the said joint committee, for their inspection and examination, a statement of the amount of the capital stock of the said corporation; of the debts due to the same, of the monies deposited therein, of the notes in circulation, and of the cash on hand, together with the book or books, containing the minutes of their proceedings.
And a committee was appointed of Messrs. Brooke, Barbour, Preston, Grigsby, Strickler, P. Johnston, Smyth (of Wythe), Wm. Foushee, A. S. Hooe, Mallory, Saunders, Randolph and Crutchfield.
Ordered, That the clerk acquaint the Senate therewith.
The house, according to the order of the day, resolved itself into a committee of the whole house on the resolutions proposing certain amendments to the Constitution of the U. States; and after some time spent therein, Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, and Mr. Johnston (of P. Edward) reported that the committee of the whole house had according to order, had the said resolutions under consideration, and had made some progress therein, but not having time to go through the same, had directed him to move for leave to sit again.
Resolved, That if this house will again on Monday next, resolve itself into a committee of the whole house to take into consideration the said resolutions.
Return J. Meigs, jun. is elected governor of the state of Ohio.
On the first day of the present month were lying in the harbour of New York, 135 ships, 94 brigs, 92 schooners, 284 sloops, and 1 petouagers, making all together the cabalistical number of 606.
Pursuant to an act of congress, which took place on the first inst. No slave can be imported into any state or territory in the Union: And, agreeably to an act of the imperial parliament of Great-Britain, the same prohibition, and at the same time, is extended to all her possessions and dominions.
Thus has terminated, on the same day, in two countries of the civilized world, a traffic which has hitherto stained the history of all countries, who have made it a practice to deal in the barter of human flesh.
From the Philadelphia True American.
Letters from gentlemen of the first intelligence at Washington, mention, with considerable confidence, an expectation of the seat of government being removed to this city.
One of the letters goes so far as to inquire what accommodations could be procured in a given time for Congress and Heads of department.—A majority of both houses are stated to be decidedly in favor of abandoning Washington. Mr. Gallatin, it is said, has demonstrated, that the concerns of his department alone, could be conducted in this city at a positive saving of nearly 200,000 dollars per annum.
The Aurora says—The rupture between gen. Wilkinson and Mr. John Randolph, was long ago foreseen—The affair is much to be regretted on every account, persons, time, and circumstances; we have no doubt that Mr. Randolph has thought and thinks he was in his conduct towards gen. Wilkinson acting right; we have, however, no doubt that the event will show that he was imposed upon, and that Wilkinson has been the injured man. This opinion is not formed upon light conjecture, nor partial information, but upon "a view of the whole ground," with the "best lights" of which the subject is susceptible.
THE TORY GAME RENEWED.
Some months ago we noticed the declarations made by certain persons in this city, that the non-importation law could not prevent the merchants from getting in prohibited goods—in other words that in defiance of the law, they would smuggle them in.
The same tune has been played for the last week, and we thought it best not to notice it before, in order that the public authority of the government might be left without a shadow of impeachment of any other influence, than that of public official duty.
During the whole of Sunday week our streets near the Delaware and the wharves exhibited a spectacle the most extraordinary—we note it particularly—because those who were the most active are marked by peculiar political features.
There were Tories who supplied the British.
There were those of that super-ducified class of zealots for the present administration—called guida .
There were exclusive federalists, men whose high ideas of native birth, elevates them too much to look down upon those who have been born any where but in England.
And more—there were connexions, and it is said parties interested, of officers in the federal government!
The drays and carts, the flats and barges, and all the carriage of land and water craft, were on Sunday all day and all night, as active in shipping off flour and provisions, as if instead of an embargo being laid on—the embargo had been actually taken off—the wharves were literally all alive—the busy hum of commerce was really astonishing—considering too the noted fury of many of the concerned!
Flour actually rose a dollar & a half a barrel, and scarce a barrel was to be purchased at the market price of the two pre-
ceding days, such was the rage produced by a sudden discovery.
The distant reader will be astonished perhaps to learn what this discovery was, that could have made such a piolos commercial commotion.
An accommodating lawyer found a loophole in the embargo law.
And through this loop hole, those piolos, guides, and federalists resolved to send their vessels to sea in contempt of the interest, honor, and dignity of the nation, in disregard of law, in disregard of civil character, in violation of that sacred duty which every man owes the commonwealth.
A lawyer was found who, whether through guid habits, or for the quid pro quo , gave an opinion, under cover of which the law for an embargo might be evaded. One means was by relinquishing the ship register and taking out a coasting license ! The first we heard of who took advantage of this base subterfuge, we have been informed was a connexion of an officer of the federal government, the officer himself said to be concerned; but as this must be a masked business, the fact is not perhaps susceptible of legal proof—though the connexion and the sailing of the vessels are matters of notoriety.
The second case was a quid acquaintance of the aforesaid; and their vessels also got to sea.
Others we have heard, but as it is not so remarkable that federalists should violate the laws and hold the government in contempt, we have thought it worth while to mark the connexion—between the lawyer—one officer— guidism —and violation of the embargo, under a barefaced lawyer's opinion.
We heard another anecdote. A merchant who during the revolution, was notorious for supplying the enemy with flour, by sending shallops into certain positions in Delaware, was one of the loudest of course against the embargo, and had a vessel on the way out; but it was interrupted; a person accusing this old tory , was informed that if any one dared to go on board his vessel—(that is any officer to enforce the embargo)—he would have him knocked overboard . The person to whom this was addressed, asked—“but, sir, suppose the barge should go along side with the United States colours?” Why said the tory —“pirates are as likely to carry that flag as any other.”
The time is coming when the people will have to attend watchfully to these folks .
We understand on last Friday night, two vessels went out from this port to sea, one of them we are told went for Jamaica ! And we are told that there are others going.
We further learn, that a scheme for supplying the enemy, similar to that carried on in the revolution, has been already begun; that vessels are sent to Morris river, Jersey, and to certain bays and creeks in Delaware state; there to be loaded with cargoes sent from this city and other places on the Delaware.
These things the governments of the union and of the states in question should look to; if these are the beginnings of an embargo what are we to expect, as soon as the hostility is active.
The people must keep a good look out—it is upon the people the government is bottomed; and if the people do not support their own government, against tories and perfidious citizens —they do not merit liberty.—Aurora.
FROM THE BALTIMORE AMERICAN.
The general topic of conversation at present is respecting the embargo, and how long it will continue. A knowledge of its duration would be very desirable for the mercantile world, upon which to calculate future plans for commercial enterprises. As the embargo is a precautionary step for the conservation of American property, and not a war measure, its duration can be calculated upon with some degree of precision by those who are acquainted with the lapse of time that is generally swallowed up in negotiations.
The American pulse beats high, and her hardy sons are willing to forego the momentary disadvantage of the embargo, until a final adjustment of our differences takes place with the belligerent powers of Europe, or until the sound of the alarm bell shall call them to arms, to assert their national rights, honor, and independence. The general period of time engulphed in negotiation, induces a belief that the embargo may have a duration of eight or nine months. This measure then will have a tendency to give the current of commerce a different channel—a channel forced upon us by the necessity of the case, & one which should have had a natural course, had it not been for our endeavors to grasp the carrying trade of Europe—a spirit which has entangled us in her concerns, and from intermingling in which our government has studiously endeavored to avoid.
As commerce is only the handmaid to agriculture and manufactures, the present state of affairs would warrant the monied capitals of our country to be drawn out of its hitherto course, and be applied to the establishment of manufactures. We are naturally an agricultural people. But since our embarkment as a commercial nation, that of becoming a manufacturing one will be forced upon us by the belligerent powers of the old world.
The rigid observer will discover, that in our commercial connexion with Great Britain, the balance of trade is greatly in her favor, and where are we to find its cause unless in the circumstance of her being a manufacturing people: the returns of the manufacturer are generally certain and sure, while those of the factor are exposed to a thousand hazards.
The snaring cause which has led Great Britain to the scheme of commercial glory will be found to exist in the immensity of her manufactures. The dilemma into which she has forced us by the iniquity of her ministry justifies us in grasping the golden moment to open the vein whence all her riches sprang. In order to enjoy all the advantages of commerce, and at the same time give employment to those who will naturally be thrown out of employ by the existence of the embargo, let the surplus capital of our country be immediately applied to the establishment of manufactures of articles of the first necessity,
which we have hitherto been in the habit of importing; where is the necessity of exporting our raw materials, and then receiving them in a manufactured state, at the hands of a foreign nation who finally swallow up all the profits of the planter and husbandman.
If government would direct her attentions to this necessary fountain of commerce, and bestow her fostering care upon the infant establishment of America, she would attach to herself the gratulations of myriad yet unborn, by freeing them from another thralldom.
The legislature of Maryland has it in its power to embrace the boon, by employing the immense capital she has now dormant in her treasury, which ought to be thrown into circulation, and for which her treasury would be amply reimbursed, besides the satisfaction she may enjoy of giving employ to numbers of her citizens, who by the pressure of the times, may otherwise experience the frowns of haggard want, or shake the cold hand of charity.
NORFOLK, Jan. 6.
In part of our impression of Friday we stated that the British line of battle ship, that had been in the bay, had gone to sea. The information we received proved to be incorrect; the Triumph, Sir Thomas Hardy, still remains in Lynhaven Bay—Ledger.
CHARLESTON, Dec. 28.
The legislature of this state adjourned at ten o'clock on Saturday night 19th inst. They have appropriated 80,000 dollars for arming the militia of this state.
By last night's Mail.
LATEST FROM EUROPE.
Extract of a letter from New-York, dated January 4.
The brig Jane, Danforth, has just arrived in 39 days from Cork. We have just time to inform you that we have received papers to the 20th Nov. containing London dates to the 14th inclusive. It is of importance to know, that there is not a word about the blocking decree of England. We wish that this may induce congress to raise the embargo. If it continues we shall all be ruined! Ten or fifteen respectable commercial houses in this city have failed!
Left at Cork, Nov. 24, ship Active, King, for Philadelphia, in 3 days.
By the arrival at New-York of the brig Jane, Cork papers are received to the 20th of November, and London news to the 14th. No information is received by them of the expected blocking proclamation, which was to have been published on the 14th.
Sir Sydney Smith's squadron had departed from Plymouth, consisting of five sail of the line. It is to touch at Cork, and the naval part of the expedition is to precede the military.
The British army at Alexandria had embarked, and are hourly expected at Messina to reinforce the army of Sicily.
The French have assumed the complete dominion of the Elbe, and capture all vessels from English ports, or with English property on board.
A Court of Inquiry is instituted by the desire of Gen. Wilkinson, for the purpose of hearing testimony in relation to said General's having been, or now being a Pensioner to the Spanish government, while holding a commission under the United States. At this court Col. Henry Burbeck will act as President, and Col. Thomas H. Cushing and Lieut. Col. John Williams, as Members, and Walter Jones, Esq. District Attorney, as Judge Advocate. It will sit in Washington City, on Monday the 11th inst.
Mr. Rose—The difficulties which have existed with respect to this gentleman are removed. We learn from unquestionable authority, that orders have been received from the government, directing that with respect to the frigate Statira , she is to be received with her officers and crew, as they would have been received and treated before the proclamation was issued. This was all that was required by Mr. Rose, who we understand sets out immediately for the seat of government.
TO BE SOLD.
To the highest bidder, on twelve months credit on the 25th inst. the dower of Mary Watkins dec (who was Mary Jordan)—consisting of
Four Negroes.
The sale will take place at H. E. Grove, in Hanover county. Bids with approved security will be required of the purchasers, to be given to each legatee or guardian.
George Street, John Kilby, Thomas M'Dougle, } Commissioners. January 5, 1808
Land for Sale.
WILL BE SOLD, at Louisa courthouse, on Monday the 8th day of February next, being Louisa court day, to the highest bidder, for ready money, a tract of LAND, lying in the said county of Louisa on the waters of Deep creek, adjoining the lands of Col. Thomas M'Ilwaine, (now Harwood Geo. Win and Laurence Minor,) and others, containing four hundred acres be the same more or less, whereon Col. James M'Ilwaine, dec. lived at the time of his death. This land will be sold by virtue of a deed of trust executed to the subscriber by the said James M'Ilwaine, dec. bearing date the 25th day of April, 1797, and admitted to record in the county court of Louisa, to secure the payment of a sum of money therein specified, due to John Poin Dexter, and the expenses of recording and carrying said deed into effect. A deed will be made to the purchaser conveying the title which the subscriber holds under said deed, which is believed to be indisputable.
January 4th, 1808 David Bullock.
Notice.
By virtue of a deed of trust, executed by Sally C. Richardson to Moses A. Myers, will be sold, at public sale, at the Bell Tavern for ready money, on Saturday 16th of January, 1808, at 4 o'clock one Negro Girl, named Amy, for a purpose of satisfying a debt due Charles Win-pendleton, & costs attending the Execution of this trust. Moses A. Myers, Trustee. January 5th, 1808.

THE subscriber received from the Post Office on the 24th instant, a note dated 22d Nov. 1807, in these words, viz— "The enclosed is supposed to have been dropped by C. Purdie, and that R. Campbell ought to see it." The enclosure alluded to is a letter from "A. B." addressed to "Mr. Charles Purdie," and dated the 11th November. The person who was kind enough to render this service will essentially contribute to the cause of justice by avowing his name to the subscriber, for the sole purpose of establishing the fact, as to the manner of his becoming possessed of that enclosure, so important in explaining others. ROBERT CAMPBELL. Richmond, 25th Dec. 1807.
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 elopement, 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.
For Rent,
THE House on the Main Street, next to Messrs Ellis and Allan, and now occupied by Mrs. Phelps. Possession will be given on the first of January next—apply to JOSEPH GALLEGO. Richmond, Dec. 27, 1807.
Notice.
By virtue of a decree of the county court of Albemarle, pronounced in the case of Micajah Chiles' executors, against Menan Mills, will be sold, for cash, on the first Monday in February next, on the premises, a certain LOT , together with the appurtenances thereto belonging, lying in the town of Charlottesville, and formerly the property and residence of Micajah Chiles, dec. which lot was conveyed to the executors of Micajah Chiles by the said Menan Mills, by deed of mortgage to secure the payment of a debt therein mentioned. Also, will be sold for cash, by virtue of the decree aforesaid, on the next day, being the 2d day of February, on the premises, a certain TRACT OF LAND , containing five hundred & sixty seven acres more or less, lying in the county of Albemarle, about ten miles above the town of Charlottesville, which land was conveyed to the executors of Micajah Chiles, dec. by the said Menan Mills, by deed of mortgage as aforesaid. Thomas Carr, jun. David I. Lewis Martin Dawson Charles Yancey Alex. Garet Commiss'rs. Dec 28th, 1807.
ST. MARY'S COLLEGE GRAND LOTTERY, BALTIMORE.
Authorized by the General Assembly of the State of Maryland, the scheme of which lottery is the most brilliant ever offered to the citizens of the United States, containing besides a large number of other good prizes. 1 Prize of 30,000 Dollars, 1 do. of 15,000 Dollars, 3 do. of 10,000 Dollars, 2 do. of 5,000 Dollars, 8 do. of 1,500 Dollars, 7 do. of 1,000 Dollars. Not two blanks to a prize, and the lowest prize twelve dollars. The scheme contains only 21500 tickets, 10000 of which are actually sold to a company of gentlemen in New York, to whom the managers have obligated themselves to commence the drawing in the city of Baltimore, on Thursday the 31st day of December next, and to draw 500 tickets per day. TICKETS & SHARES Are now selling in a variety of numbers and very rapidly at Ten and a half dollars each for a very short time, at G. & R. WAITE'S Truly fortunate Lottery Office, corner of Mark and Charles Streets, Baltimore. The Grandmaster of the Scheme of the above Lottery, together with an assurance from the managers that it will positively commence drawing on the 31st day of December next, have been a sufficient inducement for the subscribers to come to the city of Baltimore for the express purpose of facilitating the sale of the tickets. G. & R. WAITE. One of the above firm will personally attend the drawing daily, to take down the numbers correctly, as will also one of their clerks. The next New-York Lottery will not commence drawing till April next—Tickets of which Lottery may be had at Waite's Offices, Maiden Lane, New-York. N. B. Distant adventurers, accompanying their orders with Bank Notes of any description to either of Waite's Offices in Baltimore or New York, may have tickets and shares forwarded to any amount with the utmost punctuality, and the earliest advice sent them of their success. All prizes sold by G. & R. Waite will be paid by them.—A list of all prizes drawn will be sent to the printer of this paper, for the inspection of adventurers. October 14th, 1807.
For Sale,
MY Dwelling House, and Four Half-Acre Lots of Ground, in the Town of Manchester, as formerly advertised: On receiving a part in cash, I am disposed to give a considerable credit, on the balance of purchase, or I will take young Negroes at a fair valuation, and Land in the State of Ohio, Tennessee or Kentucky, on such terms as may be agreed on.—If the said property is not sold between now and Christmas, it will be leased to an approved tenant for a term of years. ARCH'D CAMPBELL. Manchester, Nov 30, 1807.
An Estry.
A YELLOW sorrel Mare about four feet eight inches high, blaze face, the near hind foot white almost up to the knee, long bob tail, hanging mane, several saddle spots, shoed all round when taken: judged to be about twelve or thirteen years old—appraised to twenty dollars. Mary Bass. Amelia, August 18, 1807.
W. COWAN. Watch & Clock-Maker; INFORS his friends and the public, that he has removed to the well known stand heretofore the Silversmith and Jewelers shop of Capt William Richardson—Where he repairs Watches and Clocks of every description. W. C. has on hand a general assortment of SILVER WARE and JEWELLERY of capt Richardson's manufacturing. Also a handsome assortment of PLATED WARE, which with his former stock, renders his assortment very extensive. Also warranted GOLD and SILVER WATCHES. He will furnish Clocks of the best quality—With every other article in that line, on the most reasonable terms. Richmond, January 4th, 1808.
WANTED, AN ASSISTANT AT THE RICHMOND FEMALE ACADEMY.
MRS. BYRD is desirous of getting a Lady of good moral character and capable of teaching English and Arithmetic, to assist her in tuition, and also in taking care of the young ladies entrusted to her superintendence. To such a person she will give a reasonable salary, besides her board, and lodging at the Academy, including fire, candles and washing. Richmond, January 4th, 1808.
20 Dollars Reward.
RUN AWAY about the 8th May from Richmond, JACOB, a very black fellow, about six feet high, twenty-eight years old, handsome address and very artful, has several scars on his neck, and one or two, I believe, on his left cheek, resembling small pox pits, a watermark by trade, and left his bateeu in the basin of the canal in the above city when he went off, at which time he broke open the store of a gentleman in Richmond and stole to a large amount, for which said gentleman has offered a reward of 50 dollars for apprehending said fellow (as I am informed)—he has a numerous acquaintance in the said city, the counties of Hanover and Caroline, in one of which he was raised, and where I expect he may be harbored. The above reward will be paid and all reasonable charges, for securing said fellow in any jail so I get him, or delivered me in Bent Creek, Buckingham, Virginia. Samuel Horsley. November 20, 1807.
Bank of Virginia.
THE President and Directors of the Bank have this day declared a dividend of four per cent. for the last six months, which will be payable on the 15th inst. JOHN BROCKENBROUGH. 4th January, 1808.
Notice.
By virtue of a deed of trust, executed by Sally C. Richardson to Moses A. Myers, will be sold, at public sale, at the Bell Tavern for ready money, on Saturday 16th of January, 1808, one Negro Girl, named Amey, for the purpose of satisfying a debt due Charles Winegardner, and costs attending the Execution of this trust. Moses A. Myers, Trustee. January 5th, 1808.
Young Negroes for Sale.
WILL BE SOLD, to the highest bidder, for cash at Durrell's Tavern in Petersburg, on Wednesday the 13th January next, 25 young Negroes. They are all young and likely, and consist of men, women and children. Should the above mentioned day be unlikely or a sufficient number of purchasers, from any cause, not attend that day, the sale will be continued from day to day, till the whole are disposed of. JAMES DABNEY. Gloucester Courthouse, } 19th December, 1807. } tds
Notice!!
THE Subscriber purposes leaving this City in the course of a few days, has determined to dispose of the whole or any part of his STOCK, now remaining on hand, at a very reduced price—which consist of a Large and Superb Assortment of Mahogany Furniture, Mattresses of all kinds and sizes, Paper Hanging, Window Blinds, Fringes, Tassels, Cords, &c. &c. W. Haight. Richmond, Jan. 1, 1808. N. B. Those who feel inclined to purchase, will apply opposite the City Tavern, on the Main Street. W. H.
LAND
In the state of Ohio—FOR SALE: THE subscriber wishes to SELL a valuable TRACT OF LAND, in the state of Ohio, containing 1,000 acres. This tract is of excellent quality, as the subscriber has understood from most respectable information. It lies on Deer creek, a branch of the Sciota, about 16 miles from Chillicothe, in a well settled neighborhood, and is very convenient to the trade of the Ohio. He will dispose of it for cash, or on a short credit, for notes negotiable at the Bank of Virginia; or will exchange it for property in the city of Richmond. An unquestionable title, with general warranty, will be made to the purchaser. WM. MUNFORD. Richmond, Sept. 24, 1807.
Advertisement.
TO BE SOLD, at New-Market, in Amherst County, on Thursday, the last day of Dec. next, to the highest bidder, SUNDRY PROPERTY, belonging to the Estate of Hector Cabell, dec. viz: about 40 Negroes, several valuable work Horses, about 500 barrels of Corn, 4 or 500 bushels of Oats, a large quantity of Fodder, and Sundry other Articles too tedious to mention—The sale will continue from day to day until the whole is sold. The Negroes consist of Men, Women, Boys and Girls, and are uncommonly likely and valuable; a part of them will be sold, for one third Cash, one third in six months, and one third in twelve months; the others will be sold on a credit of six and twelve months. Bond with approved security, will be required, to carry interest from the date if not punctually paid, and a deed in trust on the property, to enforce punctual payment. The Horses, Corn, Oats, Fodder, &c. will be sold in Lots, to suit purchasers, on a credit of six and twelve months—Bond with approved security to carry interest from the date if not punctually paid, will be required. Robert Rives, Adm'r Of the estate of Hector Cabell. Nov. 15th, 1807. N. B. At the same time and place, the Subscriber expects to sell 20 or 30 Negroes more—the terms of which will be made known on the day. Robert Rives.
Land for Sale! PURSUANT to a deed of trust executed to the subscribers by John C. Miller, for the purpose of securing the payment of sundry debts therein mentioned; will be sold upon the first Monday in January, 1808, for cash upon the premises, a TRACT OF LAND, mentioned in said deed, lying upon the waters of Lockett's and Harris' creek, in the county of Prince Edward, and supposed to contain between six and seven hundred acres. We shall make such title as is transferred to us by said Miller, saving all former encumbrances. The improvements upon this land are such as are usual upon snug plantations in this part of the country, but better fenced than usual. CHARLES WOODSON, } Trustees. JAMES MADISON, } Prince Edward, 16 Oct 1807.
ADVERTISEMENT.
Just Received, a General Assortment of Dutch Bolting Cloth, Of a superior quality. J. Darmsdatt. Oct. 22, 1807.
By virtue of a deed of trust executed to me by Archibald Cary Randolph of Goochland county, to secure the payment of a debt due Samuel Harris of Powhatan county, amounting to one hundred and fifty three pounds eighteen shillings, with interest from the date of said instrument, will be sold, the following PROPERTY, viz: one Negro Woman, Nelly, and her son John, and a Mulatto Girl, Priscilla, and her son John, to the highest bidder, for cash, on Friday the fifteenth of January, 1808, at Jefferson, to satisfy the said debt, together with all costs and charges attending the execution of said trust. Alban Gilpin, trustee. Nov. 9th, 1807.
Notice,
THAT the following articles, manufactured at the Penitentiary, with the prices thereof annexed, are constantly kept for sale at the store of Nicholas Hallam, agent for the commonwealth, a few doors above the Swan Tavern in the city of Richmond: viz: CUT NAILS.
  Wholesale. Retail.    3d. 13 cents. 14 cents per pound.  4d. 12 1-2 13 1-2  6d. 11 1-2 12 1-2  8d. 10 1-2 11 1-2  10d. 10 11  12d. 10 11  20d. 10 11  
  CUT BRADS.    8d. 10 11  10d. 9 1-2 10 1-2  12d. 9 1-2 10 1-2  20d. 9 1-2 10 1-2  
  WROUGHT NAILS.    6d. 13 14  8d. 12 1-2 13 1-2  10d. 12 13  12d. 11 1-2 12 1-2  20d. 11 12  80d. 11 12  
Spikes of all sizes the same price as 30d nails. Men's fine shoes from 12s to 13s 6d coarse do from 7s 6d to 9s Women's fine do from 7s 6d to 9s Boys & Miss's do from 3s 6d to 6s Negroes' shoes from 7s 6d to 9s Richmond, November 4th, 1807.
The Imported Horse, Bedford, So noted for getting capital racers, will stand the next season at my stable in Chesterfield county. Further particulars will be made known when the season commences THOMAS BRANCH 14th October 1807
Drugs & Medicines.
Daniel Wm. Sackrider & Co. Have this day opened a general assortment of DRUGS & MEDICINES, And a great variety of valuable PATENT MEDICINES, which they are determined to sell on reasonable terms. DANIEL WM. SACKRIDER offers his services to the citizens of Richmond and its vicinity as a practitioner of Physic, Surgery, &c. &c. He has every reason to believe his professional services will be satisfactory to those who will honor him with their confidence. Richmond, July 30th, nearly opposite Doct Fouhee's.
EDUCATION.
THE Subscriber, offering his unfeigned thanks to those gentlemen who have manifested their confidence in him as a teacher, proposes to continue his school at the same place the ensuing year. In this seminary, youth will be instructed in the Greek, Latin, and English languages; Geography & the use of the Globes; the Elements of Geometry with practical surveying—also the Elements of natural Philosophy. Writing and Arithmetic—Vulgar, Decimal, and Analytical. The price of board, tuition, washing, bedding, and fuel, will be an hundred dollars for the term, paid quarterly in advance, to commence on the fifteenth of January, and end about the tenth of December following. Thomas Nelson. Humanity Hall, Forks of Hanover. Dec. 16, 1807. } w4t*
A PROPOSAL,
FOR PUBLISHING BY SUBSCRIPTION THE STUDIES OF NATURE, And other works of JAMES HENRY BERNARD, D.D. PERNAS. Translated by HENRY HUNTER, D.D. author of Sacred Biography, and Translator of the Works of Lavater. CONDITION OF PUBLICATION. It shall be printed in three handsome Octavo Volumes, from the last London edition, embellished with five engravings, executed in the best manner, and be delivered to subscribers, handsomely bound, price eight dollars. It will be put to press immediately and published in the month of March next. Subscriptions received at S. Pleasants Printing-Office and Book-Store. Dec. 8, 1807. w4t*
LOAN OFFICE, State of Virginia, June 8, 1807. NOTICE is hereby given, That in conformity with the provisions of the act supplementary to the act, intitled "An act making provision for the redemption of the whole of the public debt of the United States," books will be opened at the office of the commissioner of loans for the state of Virginia on the first day of July next, to continue open until the seventeenth day of March, 1808, inclusively, the fourteen last days of each quarter excepted, for the purpose of receiving subscriptions for such parts of the old six per cent. deferred six per cent. and three per cent. stocks, as may, on the day of subscription, stand on the books of the said commissioner of loans. Those proprietors of the old six per cent and deferred stocks, who may subscribe, will receive in lieu thereof a new six per cent. stock, equal to the unredeemed amount of the stock surrendered, redeemable at the pleasure of the United States, under a proviso however, that no reimbursement shall be made except for the whole amount of any such new certificate of stock, nor till after six months previous notice: and the proprietors of the three per cent. stock who may subscribe, will receive in lieu thereof, a six per cent. stock, equal to sixty-five per cent. of the amount of three per cent. surrendered, redeemable in the same manner as the new six per cent. above mentioned, but not reimbursable however, without the assent of the holders, until after the whole of the new six per cent. (given in exchange for old six or deferred as above mentioned) as well as the whole of the eight per cent. stock of the United States, shall have been reimbursed. It is also provided that in every reimbursement which may take place, a preference will be given to those creditors who may notify their wish to be reimbursed; and that if the applications to that effect shall at any time either exceed or fall short of the sum then applicable to that purpose, the priority of payment shall, so far as may be necessary, be determined by lot.
The present stockholders who reside in any part of Europe, and may assent to that modification, may, at their option, receive the interest accruing on the new stock, either in the United States as heretofore, or in London, or Amsterdam, at par: in which last case the interest will be paid there by the bankers of the United States, six months subsequent to the day on which the same would be payable in the United States and subject to no variation; nor to any other deduction than a commission to the bankers, of one half per cent. on the interest thus paid. JOHN PAGE, Commissioner of Loans.
NOTE. Proprietors of 1000 dollars nominal six per cent. stock, subscribed before the 1st October, 1807, will be entitled to receive, 649 62 of new six. of subscribed between the 1st October, and 31st Dec. 1807, 644 37 If subscribed between the 1st January and 17th March, 1808, 619 93 Proprietors of 1000 dollars nominal deferred, subscribed before the 1st October, 1807, will be entitled to receive, 855 78 If subscribed between the 1st October, and 31st Dec. 1807, 853 62 If subscribed between the 1st January, and 17th March, 1808, 831 42 Being the unredeemed amount of the old stock on the 1st July, and October, 1807, and 1st January, 1808, respectively. Proprietors of 1000 dollars three per cent. stock will be entitled to receive 650 dollars of new six. W9m J. P. Com'r. Loans.
Books,
Just received and for sale at S. Pleasants Book-Store, Richmond. The Modern Supt. of Fools. The American Lady and Gentleman's Pocket Almanack, for the year 1808. Rousseau's Social Compd., or the Principles of Political Law. A Journal of the Voyages and Travels of a Corps of Discovery, under the command of capt. Lewis and capt. Clarke, of the army of the U. S. from the mouth of the river Missouri thro' the interior parts of North America to the Pacific Ocean, during the years 1804—5 & 6—containing an authentic relation of the most interesting transactions during the expedition—a description of the country—and an account of its inhabitants, soil, climate, curiosities, and vegetable and animal productions: By P. GASS, one of the persons employed in the expedition: with geographical and explanatory notes by the publisher. Simple Tales, by Mrs. Opie. Miseries of Human Life, or the Groans of Samuel Sensitive, and Timothy Testy; a work of very great celebrity. The Human Character of Jesus Christ, by William Austin of Boston, author of Letters from London, &c. Life of Charles James Fox, of William Pitt. Cumberland's Memoirs. Marmontel's Memoirs, written by himself Espagnole's Nisi Prius. Rutherford's Institutes. Pleasures of Hope, and Pleasures and Pains of Memory, in one vol. Conversations on Chemistry Ramsey's Life of Washington The Young Mill Wright's and Miller's Guide, by O Evans; a new edition A Portraiture of Quakerism—Taken from a view of the education and discipline, social manners, civil and political economy, religious principles and character, of the Society of Friends; by Thomas Clarkson, A. M. Dec. 18, 1807.
Partnership Dissolved.
THE dissolution of the partnership of J. W. DENNIS & Co. took place by mutual consent on the 24th day of November last. J. W. DENNIS, BENJ. DENNIS. Dec. 18, 1807. w4t
DEBATES
IN THE VIRGINIA CONVENTION. ** SUBSCRIBERS to the Debates in the Virginia Convention, who have not yet received their copies, may receive them in application at this office. (3w) JUST RECEIVED AND FOR SALE AT THIS OFFICE, SIMPLE TALES. By Mrs. Opie. (First American edition in 2 vols—Price 3 dollars.)
Lands, Negroes, Stock, &c. FOR SALE. To be sold, at Public Auction, on Monday the eleventh day of January next, if fair, if not, the next fair day, at my Plantation called the Goose-Ponds, and continue from day to day until all are sold—The following Property, viz: MY Tract of Land, on Pannunkey River, about one hundred acres of which are low grounds, lying partly in Caroline and partly in King William, called the Goose Ponds, containing 842 acres, more or less. The quality of the Land, the buildings, beauty of situation, water and neighborhood, renders it an object worthy the attention of any gentleman wishing to purchase; a crop of Wheat is sown thereon.—Also, a Tract of Land in the State of Kentucky, on the waters of Lewis's Creek, a branch of Green-River, about one mile from the same and about sixty miles above the mouth, containing 1803 3-8 acres, more or less, to which there is an undoubted title.—Terms of sale, one fourth in ready money, and three annual instalments for the balance, to be secured by deeds of trust upon the Land, with bonds and approved security, to carry interest from the date, if not punctually paid.—Also, two other tracts of Land, the one lying in Henry county, containing 2100 acres, and the other supposed to lie in Green-River county, containing 2000 acres, conveyed by Thomas Hooper to Wm. Morris.—Terms of sale and other information will be made known on the day of sale.—Also, about forty likely Negroes, about one half or two thirds for cash, the balance at twelve months credit, for which bonds and approved security will be required, to carry interest from the date, if not punctually paid.—Also, the Stock of Horses, Cattle, Sheep, Hogs, Plantation Utensils, the crops of Corn, Fodder, &c. for which six months credit will be allowed for all sums above twenty dollars, on receiving bonds with approved security—and for all sums under twenty dollars, cash.
Those having legal claims against me may perhaps find it to their interest to attend this sale. BENJAMIN TOLER. September 4, 1807. wids
Important to Militia Officers.
Just published by Wm. DUANE, Philad. No. 1. American Military Library, or, Repository of Modern Tactics. Adapted to the use of the MILITIA OF THE U. STATES. Illustrated with numerous Engravings.
CONTENTS OF No. 1.
  Chapter I. Of Light troops. p.    Their History 3  Discipline iv.  Duties lb.  Of Patrols v.  Traileurs vi.  Engagements vii.  Crossing Rivers ii.  Tactics of Light Infantry vii.  Attack of Heights x.  Manoeuvres xix.  Of Exercise by signals. xvii.  Musical signals xix.  Chapt. II. Of Rifle Corps 1  Discipline 3  Manual Exercise 7  Practice Firing 11  Target Firing 12  Manoeuvres 13  Advancing, Retreating, Skirmishing 16  Rifle Regiment 17  The Chain 20  General Observations 21  Evolution in conjunction with other infantry 23  Chapt. III. Lansquenets or Pikemen 25  Illustrations of Plates 27 & 28 23  Manual Exercise 32  Chapt. IV. Light Corps on service 36  Duties during retreat 40  As advanced guards 43  As main guards & cut posts 43  As Vedettes,claircurs, &c. 44  Duty of non-commissioned officers with vedettes 45  Of a commanding officer at an outpost 47  Military Dictionary.  
This work will be published in numbers, once within every fortnight, or more frequently if practicable; and will be comprehended in about eight or nine numbers.—Price 50 cents each. Subscriptions for the above work will be received and the copies delivered at S. Pleasants' Book-Store, Richmond. The first number is daily expected
This number commences the fourth part or division of the work. The three preceding parts contain—1. The history of the art of war, ancient and modern—2. The science of Tactics—3. The modern or French system of discipline and tactics. A greater number of plates is given with this number, than probably may be given with the subsequent numbers; but no number will be given without some engraved illustrations; if the work meets the necessary encouragement, the plates of the greater tactics will be ample and on a larger scale.
DEBATES
IN THE VIRGINIA CONVENTION. ** SUBSCRIBERS to the Debates in the Virginia Convention, who have not yet received their copies, may receive them in application at this office. (3w) JUST RECEIVED AND FOR SALE AT THIS OFFICE, SIMPLE TALES. By Mrs. Opie. (First American edition in 2 vols—Price 3 dollars.)