The enquirer (Richmond, Va.), 1809-12-28 00:00:00

Published by Thomas Ritchie, nearly opposite the Globe Tavern, Richmond, Virginia.
CONDITIONS.—Five dollars a year, to be paid annually in advance. Those who wish to be considered as annual subscribers, must hereafter designate it at the time of subscribing, otherwise their papers will be discontinued at the expiration of the first year. No paper can be stopped until all arrears have been paid off—Good acceptances, in Richmond only, will be received in payment. The same rule as to Advertisements.
FOR SALE AT THIS OFFICE: The 5th Volume of the ENQUIRER, compleat, bound in boards.
VIRGINIA DEBATES, in the Convention, bound in calf, sheep and boards.
BURRS TRIAL, for Treason and for a Misdemeanor, in boards—By D. Robertson.
LETTERS on the Subject of THE CATHOLICS—By Peter Plymley—from the 11th London Edition.
BLANKS, for Lawyers, Clerks, Sheriffs, Constables, Merchants, &c. &c. which will also be printed according to any form exhibited, at the shortest notice.
THIS DAY IS PUBLISHED,
A New Theory,
OF THE DIURNAL ROTATION OF THE EARTH: Demonstrated upon Mathematical Principles, from the properties of the Cycloid and the Epicycloid.  WITH AN APPLICATION OF THE THEORY, To the explanation of the various Phenomena of the Winds, Tides and of those Stony and Metallic concretions which have fallen from Heaven upon the surface of the Earth.  By JOHN WOOD, Author of Elements of Perspective, printed in London, in 1799. December 14.   VENI, VIDI, VISI. THE Fair & the Brave, the Statesman and the Philosopher having already unanimously acknowledged the unrivaled exertions of A C D'LA VIGNE, Imperial Artist & Comptroller General of Fashions, whose astonishing performances have perfidiously whole hosts of puny opponents, and caused even Esau to bow reluctant at his Shrine; Has the world that he continues his operations at the TEMPLE OF APOLLO.  Where the inestimable partners of Mankind, may establish those charms which enslave the world and man, the lovely master of created beings—display all the loveliness of masculine beauty—but "Let Hercules himself, do what he will, he may." "The Cat will mew, and Dog will have his Day" December 26.  WILLIAM W. DICKENSON has received, and offers for sale 25 Crates Earthen Ware, 4 Cases English Glass ware, CONSISTING OF Decanters, Porter, Wine and Champagne Glasses, Liverpool Salt, loose and in Sacks, Also 15 Casks N. E. Rum, 200 pair coarse shoes, Seal Leather &c. &c. December 25.  WANTED TO MIRE for the ensuing year, a Female SERVANT who has been accustomed to the house, and is a good Seamstress. A recommendation of character will be required. Apply at this Office. December 26.  NOTICE.—In a former advertisement, I requested all persons indebted to the estate of Mr. Thomas Nicholson, dec'd, to pay off their respective debts, and I invited all persons who had debts due to them from that estate, to make them known to me and receive payment—I intend at the expiration of one month from this date, to divide among the residuary legatees of Mr. Nicholson's last will, all the money in my hands belonging to that estate—I therefore earnestly request, that if any one now has a claim for debt against the estate that they will exhibit it to me forthwith and receive payment, and I beg and inform all of those indebted to the estate to pay off their respective debts without delay. C. COPLAND, Executor. Richmond, December 23, 1809.  ANOVER COUNTY.—The subscriber intends to continue his SCHOOL in the neighborhood of Col. Wm. Truett, Mr. Edward G. Sydnor, &c. the ensuing year; where he offers to teach the English Grammar, Reading, Rhetoric, Writing and Arithmetic. The price for the term will be $15 payable at the expiration of the term; which will commence the 8th of January, and end the 15th of December. The term population of the neighborhood does not warrant an expectation of getting a full school without boarders, he is therefore authorized to say that Mr. Sydnor who resides on a healthy station & very convenient indeed to this school, will take boarders at $6 per annum. The utmost attention will be paid to the moral conduct of the children, as well as to their advancement in learning. The number of Scholars shall not exceed twenty. BOWLING STAKE.  We understand that willingly declare that so far as we have seen or heard, that Mr. Bowling has conducted his school with a great deal of attention and propriety. Given under our hands this 21st of December, 1809.  Given under our hands this 21st of December, 1809. Wm. Truett, C. Littlepage, Wm. Sydnor, John Gardner. December 26.  THE subscriber intends to continue his school at Mr. William D. Taylor's in the Forks of Harrow, where he will teach youth to Read and Write the English, Latin and Greek Languages, and will also instruct them in Geography, History and Arithmetic. Mr. Taylor will furnish board for ten pupils at seventy dollars each for the term, to be paid quarterly; but where the pupil finds his own bed and candles, a deduction of five dollars will be made. The price of tuition alone will be twenty dollars for the term, to be paid quarterly, which will commence the 8th of January, and end the 15th of December. JAMES ROBINSON. December 21.  REPORT.  The Secretary of the Treasury, in obedience to the directions of the act, entitled "an act regulating the currency of foreign coins in the U. S."  Respectfully Reports— That assays of the foreign gold and silver coins, made current by the act aforesaid, have been made in the course of the present year, at the mint of the U. S. the result whereof is shown in the annexed letter of the director of the mint, dated June 29, 1809, which is prayed to be received as part of this report.  All which is respectfully submitted, ALBERT GALLATIN, Secretary of the Treasury. Treasury Department, Dec. 8, 1809.  MINT OF THE U. S. June 29, 1809.  SIR. I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 31st ultimo, and have, according to your desire, caused as says to be made of the several species of foreign coin made current in the U. States by act of Congress; having particular respect to coins of the latest date and importation, so far as these could be procured and discriminated.  The result of these assays, according to the assayer's report, is as follows:      I. Gold Coins of Great Britain.     No. 1. made from 10 pieces of promiscuous dates prior to 1806. 22 0   2. 5 pieces dated 1806. 22 0   3. 4 ditto dated 1808. 22 0   II. Gold Coins of France.   No. 1. made from 10 pieces of promiscuous dates prior to 1806. 21 2 1/2   2. 2 pieces dated 1806. 21 2 1/2   3. 2 ditto dated 1807. 21 2 1/2   4. 5 ditto dated 1808. 21 2 1/2   III. Gold Coins of Spain.   No. 1. made from 10 pieces of promiscuous dates prior to 1806. 20 3 3/4   2. 5 pieces dated 1806. 20 3 3/4   3. 5 ditto dated 1807. 20 3 3/4   4. 5 ditto dated 1809. 20 3 3/4   IV. Gold Coins of Portugal.   No. 1. made from 10 half joes of promiscuous dates prior to 1806. 22 0   2. 5 pieces dated 1806. 22 0   3. 2 moedores, old dates, 21 3 3/4   4. 2 ditto dated 1805. 21 3 3/4   V. Silver Coins of France.   Made from 10 crowns of dates prior to 1806, 10 oz. 18 dw.   VI. Silver Coins of Spain.   No. 1. made from 10 dollars of promiscuous dates prior to 1806. 10 15 06   2. 5 pieces dated 1806. 10 15 00   3. 5 ditto dated 1807. 10 15 12   4. 5 ditto dated 1803. 10 15 12   5. 4 ditto (Fed. VIII) dated 1809. 10 15 06   6. 9 parts of dollars of several denominations and dates, 10 15 12     From the foregoing report it appears:    That the gold coins of Great Britain, and the half joes of Portugal, being of the same quality with those of the U. States, viz: 22 carats fine, 1 1/2 part alloy, are, by act of Congress, rated at their true intrinsic value of 27 grains to 100 cents.  That the moedores appear to be of some what inferior quality, and according to the average of the foregoing assays, would require about 1 1/2 of a grain more to the 100 cents, than the legal weight.  That the gold coins of France, averaging 21 c. 2 3/8 grs. would require about 11 1/2 of a grain to the 100 cents, more than the legal weight of 27 2 5 grains.  That the gold coins of Spain, averaging 20 c. 3 9-32 grs. would require about 1 13 100 grains to the 100 cents, more than the legal weight of 27 2 5 grains.  It may however be observed, that the Spanish gold coins of 1806, both by the assay of the present year, and by that made in 1807, appear to be considerably inferior in quality to those either of former or subsequent dates; and therefore taking the average from the other dates, 23 47-100 grs. would be equal in value to 100 cents; that is 1 7-100 more than the law requires.  That the silver French crown, quality 10 oz. 18 dw and weighing 18 dw. 17 grains, compared with the standard and weights of the silver coins of the United States, would be equal in value to 109 39 100 cents, nearly 14 1/2 of a cent less than the value established by law.  That the Spanish silver dollar, the average quality of which is 10 oz. 15 dw. 8 grs. if of the full weight of 17 dw. 7 grains, would be equal in value to 100 3-10 cents nearly; or 3-10 of a cent more than the value established by law.    It may, however, sir, be remarked, that very little foreign coin, except Spanish dollars and parts, is now circulating in the United States; and therefore any further regulations of our government on that subject, would, I presume, be now unnecessary. I have the honor to be, &c.  R. PATTERSON. Hon. Albert Gallatin, &c.  FROM THE AURORA.  It would be amusing to observe the hypothetical cant of the tory part of the federalists, with regard to the conduct of Jackson, could we look at them with indifference. I have read the correspondence over, says one, and I cannot find the insult. I have read it over twice with great attention, and really, says another, I do not see any thing insistent on the part of the British minister. Another, with the appearance of the utmost candor, declares, that he began it with a prejudice in favor of our own government, and with a certainty that they were right; but alas! he is woefully disappointed. And a fourth publishes, through the tory conduct, Bronson, how mortifying a thing it is for one who feels for the honor of his country, that there is no foundation for the charge  made by our government, &c. &c. I say, it would be amusing to observe how men can believe their own convictions and have the hardihood to avow it, were it not, that we are daily suffering the evils which have been brought on the country by wretches like these, who aid and encourage foreign tyrants in their aggressions upon us.  For the consideration of such beings, we will relate a small history. Two gentlemen lived on the opposite sides of a public high-way, which they had both been in the habit of using, from time immemorial, for the transfer of their commodities to each other, and to the city. One of them, whom we will call Lupus, of a turbulent, unruly disposition, delighting in war and blood shed, and having about him a band of desperadoes, issues orders to his myrmidons to place themselves along the hedges and hills of the road, and to seize upon the property of the other, going to the city, until he pays him a tax. The other, named Aquila, being a peaceable man, though as strong and as courageous, but having a good deal of the Quaker in him, is in principle averse to war, stops for a time passing the road, whereby he disappoints Lupus of his toll, and deprives him of some articles which he cannot raise, and which are necessary to the maintenance of his desperadoes.  In a short time, Lupus finding himself in want of bread, ammunition, &c. for his bullies, and being able to get it only from his neighbor Aquila, bethinks himself of some plan to accomplish this, and still continue his piratical practices.  He, therefore, sends an agent to Aquila, who comes over the road to him, and says, my master is willing to restore things to their old state. If you will allow your carts and wagons to carry your produce to him, he will never more obstruct you in your passage to the city. I have full powers to make this arrangement: you may send out your carts, and rely upon my master's honor. Well, Aquila trusting to the known character of the agent, and believing Lupus to be sincere, agrees to the offer, and gives full liberty to his tenants to carry out their produce. Large quantities go to Lupus, his barns and houses are filled with what he wants: his buildings are supplied, and he is merry and joyful.  Now, however, his language alters—He reprimands his agent.—He tells Aquila, "true, my agent had full powers.—But I gave him secret instructions: and he has not acted according to them.—Therefore my orders remain the same, and you shall not pass the road without paying me a tax: I have wives and sons, and sons' wives and sons, &c. &c. to maintain, and I want the money, my necessity shall be your law."  Aquila is thunderstruck at this. He had never heard before, in the whole history of the country, that such a contract was not binding. Particularly, as the agent himself told him, after all this, that those instructions which Lupus spoke of, were not the only ones he had, and assured him, that he had authority from Lupus for what he did.  Lupus, however, having posted his myrmidons and way-laid the road as before, sends another agent to Aquila to employ his attention and amuse him, while he fills his pockets with plunder. The agent is pompously sent out as the messenger of peace, and is the healer of all grievances; and Aquila impatiently expects and politely receives the new agent.  And now a new plan of the arch-contriver Lupus, is disclosed. Nothing less than to establish, aye and more than that too, to make Aquila himself confess, that Lupus was perfectly innocent, and that Aquila had cheated him!  For this purpose the agent begins by slyly insinuating that Aquila knew when he made the contract that the agent exceeded his powers and that he could not complain it was set aside. By which means if Aquila did not deny this, he would admit not only that the contract was rightfully broken by Lupus, but that he, Aquila, had tried to cheat him by duping his agent!  But Aquila was aware of the trap intended, and too shrewd to be entrapped in truth and honesty to yield to such an infamous reproach, particularly as the first agent had himself avowed that he never gave such information to Aquila.  Aquila, therefore, expressly and solemnly denies what the new agent had insinuated. The agent, however, in the pursuance of his plan, does not yield here. Tho' he has the solemn denial of Aquila, supported by the former agent, with impudence unparalleled, he now asserts it in express terms, that "the instructions were at the time of the arrangement made known to Aquila, (wherefore no reason need be given why the arrangement was set aside by Lupus. Nay, still more insolently he says that Aquila himself had confessed this, although Aquila had expressly denied it!  Between two individuals a grosser insult cannot be conceived, than a man to tell me when I have denied a thing solemnly, that I have confessed it! and if any thing could justify an appeal to arms it would be this.—But Aquila, having the interests of many desirous of harmony, was not willing to give way to feeling. He tells the agent that his allegations were irrelevant and improper, and that such conduct cannot be allowed, gently calling direct assertions "insinuations," so that, if the agent were really desirous of harmony, he might waive the point, and a negotiation proceed.  But the agent, true to the purpose for which only Lupus sent him, and resolved that Aquila shall, whether or no, confess himself a cheat, so far from waving the assertion by disavowing it, in a tone of high insolence says, "that it was no insinuation, but as a fact, and that he could substantiate it!"  What was a fact? That Aquila was a cheat, that he knew the secret instructions of the first agent, and therefore had no right to complain! and that he himself had confessed it!  Mr. Jackson to Mr. Smith, 11 Oct. 1809. Mr. Smith to Mr. Jackson, 19, Oct. 1809. Mr. Jackson to Mr. Smith, 23, Oct. 1809. Mr. Smith to Mr. Jackson, Nov. 1, 1809.  Aquila may feel at the instance of Lupus, vexed at his perfidy, and irritated at the barefaced insult of creating him as a liar and a fool, breaks off all correspondence with an agent so little disposed to peace, & so grossly insolent, and fondly (perhaps foolishly) hopes fair dealing from Lupus and his time.  And yet there are some of Aquila's tenants who are so far seduced by Lupus, as to see no insult, no insolence, no perfidy, no injustice, in the conduct of the agent, and to profess a crooked mortification that Aquila did not allow himself to be made a liar, and a fool by Lupus, without uttering a word of complaint!  OH TIMES! OH MANNERS!  BOSTON, Dec. 16.—The ship Columbus is below from Liverpool. A passenger who came up, brought one London paper of November 11. Also below, ship Avon, from Tunningen. She was left there Nov. 7. The Mary and Eliza, Stanwood, has arrived here in 70 days from St. Petersburg, 60 from Elsinore and 52 from Gotteborg.—There is a report, that an American schooner, passing out of the Baltic, has been fired upon and sunk by the Danish batteries.—The Horace, with Mr. Adams on board, was spoken within 8 hours sail of Petersburg.—The Emperor Alexander had heard of, and appeared pleased with the mission.  BOSTON, Dec. 16.—By a decree of the [Portuguese] Royal Court of Brazil, Lord Wellington (Sir A. Wellesley,) has been appointed principal member of the regency of this kingdom, Commander in chief of all the forces, and principal of the Department of War, Trade and Finance. [15] This appointment probably occasioned his Lordship's visit to Lisbon. It makes him Regent of Portugal. Before this appointment, Marshal Beresford was commander in chief of the Portuguese troops.  The Marquis De Vrajo, whose appointment as Minister Plenipotentiary from Ferdinand 7th, to the Court of Brazil has been announced, has informed His Catholic Majesty's Consul in Boston, by letters dated Rio Janeiro, 11th September, of the dignified manner in which he had been received by that government, and the many polite attentions shown him on the occasion.  Phil. Gaz.  The Governor of Gibraltar, by proclamation, dated the 22d September, 1809, has announced that the importation of American tobacco is not prohibited, but the transportation of American tobacco from American ships in the bay, for the purpose of carrying on a contraband trade with the coast of Spain, is prohibited.—16.  Congress.  FROM THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.  HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.  DEBATE.  ON THE JOINT RESOLUTION.  Approving the conduct of the Executive in relation to the refusal to receive any further communication from Francis James Jackson.—(CONTINUED.)  TUESDAY, Dec. 19.  Mr. DANA. A solemn legislative decision is proposed by the resolution now before us from the Senate.  As it regards a public minister accredited from one of the great belligerent powers of Europe, our relations with that power may be considered as within the fair range of discussion.  This country has claimed the privileges of a neutral power, one of whose eminent duties is a conduct strictly and truly impartial between the respective parties engaged in war. Of course, the purport of this resolution may be compared with the tenor of our conduct respecting the great rival belligerent, and our relations with this power may be properly taken into consideration. The question therefore is open to a discussion of our affairs with Great Britain and France.  The resolution proposes to declare a determination to employ the full force of the nation in a certain event. To execute this declaration may require various means, and means highly interesting to our country.—When therefore we are considering the propriety of making a declaration so serious, we may enquire respecting our naval and military means to enforce it. We may enquire, what augmentation of our naval and military forces would be necessary—what is contemplated, and what are our pecuniary resources for meeting the extraordinary expenditure which may be requisite.  The resolution has reference to a public minister of the highest order ever sent from this country. We have in our statutes provided for sending abroad no minister of a higher grade than that of minister plenipotentiary or envoy extraordinary. As it respects the intercourse with the foreign world and the rules established by the maxims of public law and the general usage of civilized nations, this is not a question which concerns only the United States and which we can determine by our separate vote. It is a question to which the whole civilized world is party, because implicating principles which it has sanctioned; and in our proceedings upon it we should not act in a manner which would make us blush, if the whole civilized world were present to witness our deliberations.  These general considerations are connected with the resolution, in addition to another interesting enquiry, whether the terms of the resolution are warranted in point of fact by the transactions which have taken place, as they appear in evidence before us.  The subjects which I have mentioned are so intricate and so various and so vast, that a complete discussion of them is what I do not here adventure to undertake, but to a part of them I propose to direct some observations.  Before I particularly examine the resolution, I request permission to state certain positions in which I agree, so that gentlemen may know where we agree and where we differ; because in this case, as in others, I would diminish the grounds of controversy.  Without going back to the full extent of our wrongs from Great Britain and France, I recur to decrees affecting neutral commerce which have been issued by the dictator of continental Europe, and to orders issued by the British king in council. Omitting a particular discussion of them, I wish to be distinctly understood as avowing that I do not approve either the one or the other; and from the most deliberate judgment which I have been able to form, on such examination as I have given them, I express my disapprobation of both. I consider them both as replete with inconsistency with the rights of the United States, as guaranteed by the principles of public law. And I utterly disclaim the whole doctrine of belligerent blockade without a blockading force.—The principles on which these opinions are founded, I will not detain the House by stating at the present time.  Further, I agree that the conditions stated in the despatch from Mr. Canning to Mr. Erskine of the 23d January, 1809, especially the two last of them, are such as ought not to be admitted explicitly or by implication on the part of this government.—I admit not only that we ought not to stipulate that the British navy might take our vessels, but that we should not even by implication concede the principle itself. Of course, therefore, I do not admit, when any vessel of the British under their orders in council, should have taken one of our vessels violating a law of the United States, that it would not be perfectly competent for the United States to take cognizance of the question whether she had violated our laws or not; for it would be a question solely between our government and its citizens. To leave a law of the United States to be executed by the British navy under the cognizance of their admiralty, would be to relinquish an attribute of our sovereignty, and to abandon the precious duty of executing judgment in mercy.  I further agree that the privilege of a foreign minister here accredited does not extend to charging the government of my country with the detestable turpitude of intentional falsification in a matter of fact.—And on this subject I do enquire whether the charge be well or ill founded. It is not admissible within the principles of diplomatic intercourse. If the government submit to it in terms, intercourse on the principles of equality must cease.  I agree further that the immunity of a foreign minister here accredited, does not extend to entering a public appeal against the Executive administration. Whether the appeal be well or ill founded in point of fact, it is not for the foreign minister to put the administration of this country upon its arraignment at the public bar; it is not for him, through the medium of the press, to profess peace towards the people and proclaim war against the palace.  I agree further that the President of the United States has the constitution's competence to receive ambassadors and other public ministers, and that in the power to receive is included the power to refuse for reasonable cause, and that he is constitutionally the judge of this reasonable cause. Whenever therefore a foreign minister has committed an offence for which he ought to be refused liberty to communicate with the administration, the President may refuse it.—If an offence more gross has been committed, for which the minister ought to be required to depart from the United States, the President may order his departure. If the minister has committed an atrocious crime for which he ought to suffer corporal punishment, the President may order him to be sent home that he may be punished by his own government. And the gentlemen of the sword are the proper officers to be employed for this purpose. As the minister has a rank of high public trust, let him be treated with public decency! But in a case of atrocious criminality, let the proceeding have the character of decision, that he may be duly punished! Such I admit to be the power of the President of the United States without any statute whatever existing on the subject.  Having made these admissions, I may hope gentlemen will acknowledge that I am not solicitous to extend the points of difference between us.  The inquiry arises, whether the language of this resolution is warranted by facts as they appear before us? On this point I am willing at this time to waive dispute; not that I admit the resolution to be warranted in point of fact, for the documents laid before us together with the messages of the President of the United States, afford matter for much, very much observation interesting to the country. But on that subject I will not now occupy the time of the House. For in the view which I take of the resolution, I propose to consider it on the basis of what is contained in the letter of the 23d of November from Mr. Smith, the Secretary of State, to Mr. Pinkney, our minister in London, and the message of the President communicated to Congress at the opening of this session. I am not at present about to dispute whether an adjustment of differences was probable; I may even admit that after the irritating and disgusting circumstances attending the correspondence between the Secretary of State and Mr. Jackson, it was not probable that they would have come to any definitive adjustment. And I am willing to admit that Mr. Jackson may have waited for proposals to be made to him as proposals were made to France, without his power's having first made proposals to us, if I do not misapprehend the President's message.  Taking up this resolution, and the letter from the Secretary of State to Mr. Pinkney, I ask in the first place, what is the import of the resolution? Is it merely approving the conduct of the President of the United States and a manifestation of respect and decorum towards him? For myself, if it be merely the language of approbation of the conduct of the President of the United States,

I am not making objection to it on the ground that we ought not to pass a vote of approbation. I am afflicted with no scruples of that sort. If gentlemen who opposed a resolution of approbation at the last session chose now to support this resolution on the principle which they then opposed, it is not for me to object to it for such cause. If they are disposed to consider their former arguments as so many collections of straw, it is not for me to deny to the gentlemen the privilege of returning and destroying such works of their own hands. Nay—farther—If this resolution is to be considered as having the nature of a joint address to the President of the United States, I make no objection on that account. Some gentlemen may heretofore have seemed to be afflicted at the manner of addressing the President of the United States as being too adulatory. I am not troubled with their past scruples on the subject of addresses, and, considering this as a joint address to the President, should make no objection.
(To be continued.)
Europe.
From the Courier, a London paper, of the 9th November.
We grieve as deeply as any men at the result of the war between Austria & France; the more, because we confess we cannot buoy ourselves up with those hopes of better things, of brighter prospects, which some of our contemporaries seem to do. They consider that Austria is still left, by the peace of Vienna independent and formidable, and that Bonaparte has not realized those threats which he set out with; that he has left the Emperor still Emperor of Austria; that he has left him his capital, and that he has not executed his menaces with respect to Hungary. He certainly has not; but it is in the nature of Bonaparte's policy to begin by making larger demands & bolder threats than he feels he can execute, or means to attempt, in order that when he comes to negotiate, he may appear to have more moderation, and also that he may furnish the power, with which he is negotiating, with some pretence, palliation, or excuse, for conceding to his terms, because they are less severe than those which he threatened. Thus he began the late war by issuing a decree in the nature of a command to Hungary, and in speaking of the House of Austria, he affected to call their only princes of the House of Lorraine. It was supposed then that nothing would content him short of stripping the Emperor of the Imperial title, and of rendering Hungary independent. But this intention he never seems seriously to have entertained—By making peace, however, without accomplishing either of those objects, he affords an opportunity to those who believe that he really had them in view, to say that he has failed in attaining them, and that therefore the peace is less disastrous than their apprehensions led them to expect it would be. Bonaparte has given back to the Emperor of Austria his capital; he knows the pride that is attached to such a possession; he knows also by experience the little obstacle it has been to his operations. The capital stopped not his march in the war with Prussia; it checked not his career in the war with Austria. In giving back the capital, he gives only that which would fall before him the moment he could reach its walls, and hence he did not demand Berlin in his negotiations with Prussia, nor Vienna in his negotiations with Austria. But he has concluded a treaty, we are told, with the Emperor, as Emperor of Austria; he has left him still the Imperial dignity. By the great stress laid upon this point, it may by some be suspected that the retaining the title was deemed a sufficient equivalent for large territorial cessions. We trust such a suspicion is ill founded; because the policy that should have advised such a measure would be most censurable. The mere possession of the title could not reconquer the territories that were ceded for it, tho' the possession of the territories might regain the title that was ceded in preference to territorial cessions. We should think the preservation of the title of Emperor of Austria dearly purchased indeed by the giving up the Tyrol, or the abandonment of Salzburg, Berchtesgaden, and part of Upper Austria. It may be, however, that Bonaparte did not press this point. The title of Emperor of Austria indicates only the sovereign authority over a territory in the actual possession of the Emperor. But it was different with the title of Emperor of Germany; that title signified that the possessor of it was the supreme chief of the Germanic Body, the abandonment of it therefore was pressed by Bonaparte, because having placed himself at the head of the Members of the Confederacy of the Rhine, under the name of their Protector, he had virtually assumed the station of the House of Lorraine, and was desirous of being considered as Emperor of Germany, combining in that character all its ancient privileges, with the energy peculiar to a newly formed and revolutionary government.
Great sacrifices Austria has certainly been obliged to make by the peace of Vienna; she has been driven from all Maritime connection and intercourse, and is more closely pressed on three sides by powers under the absolute control of France. The loss of part of Carinthia, of Carniola, and of Salzburg shuts her out entirely from all contact with Italy, and by the loss of Trieste and Fiume, she is rendered an inland power, not being able to send her produce by sea without the consent of France, or of powers dependant upon France. But still it may be doubted whether the peace, as far as it relates to territorial cessions, is by any means so bad as we had reason to expect from the manner in which Austria had placed all her strong holds and important positions in the hands of France by the armistice of Znaim. By that armistice she had absolutely deprived herself of the power of communicating freely between one part of her territories and another. Bohemia was cut off from all correspondence with Hungary by the interposition of a French force in Moravia. The French possessed the key of Hungary, they had Gratz and Brunn; they had Villach, they had Vienna, they had the command of the course of the Danube, the Muhl, the Drave and the Save; Prague was almost the only strong place in the hands of the Austrians. An armistice that surrendered the keys and holds of the Empire to France would have justified a belief that harder terms would have been demanded; that Bohemia & some of the Austrians would have been wrested from the Emperor.
But upon more mature reflection our reasonings, perhaps, will be of opinion that it is not so. The information we have to date is that
for a time at least, it is his policy to keep some kind of Balance between the different Powers; to have some check upon Russia, and to be able to render each of them subservient at pleasure to his views. We have seen how he has bent Russia to his designs against Austria—and if Russia evinced any refractory spirit, he would spirit up and support Austria against her—thus Austria is kept as a check upon Russia, and Saxony is more than a match for Prussia, while he preserves a position, with his satellites of Bavaria and Wirttemberg, and Baden, and Westphalia, and the other German Princes, that enables him to overawe and intimidate them all—a great extent of territory and power is certainly left to Austria; she has Bohemia and Moravia, nearly all the two Austrias, and Hungary: Against Russia her means are formidable; but against France merely powerless—Bonaparte therefore having no serious opposition to dread from her, is content to leave her for the present in possession of an extent of territory much larger than it was supposed he would surrender to her—For had he insisted upon greater cessions, had he demanded Bohemia, had he insisted upon having Upper and Lower Austria, he would have been obliged to have kept a large military force, and his attention and his means would thus have been in part directed from the south and West of Europe, from Portugal, Spain and ultimately from Great Britain. The first desire of his heart is to make Great Britain feel his vengeance—His dreams by night, his thoughts by day, are all directed to that end. He hates us with a hatred which is incapable either of increase or diminution; and never will he abandon the design of bending us to his will. Spain and Portugal, he thinks, will facilitate the execution of that design, and he hopes that by the possession of those countries—by the vast population he could then command, by the long line of coast he could control, extending in an unbroken line from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, that he could be able to pour such a mass of force against us as to overwhelm us. It is with the view of prosecuting that design, to which the possession of Spain and Portugal are so necessary, that he has granted better terms to the Emperor of Austria than he would have granted, and we have little doubt that he owes the preservation of one or both the Austrias to the consent he has given to recognize whatever has been or should be done either in Italy, Portugal, or Spain. It may be said that the Emperor could not possibly prevent the execution of Bonaparte's projects against those countries—Very true—but it was not necessary on account of that impossibility to rush into direct unqualified recognition and sanction, a recognition and sanction that are to have no limits of that system of usurpation and oppression which the Emperor of Austria, in one of his manifestoes at the commencement of the contest, had made a great charge and ground of war. This moral cession, this cession of character on the part of the Emperor of Austria, we consider as much more disgraceful, as big with consequences infinitely more disastrous than the territorial cessions he has made. It breaks the heart of loyalty, it kills the spirit of fidelity, and of patriotism; it gives the death wound to legitimate authority—it has more humbled the house of Austria than the loss of a province or a kingdom.
FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE.
By the King.—A Proclamation for pardoning all seamen and marines who may at any time have deserted from his majesty's service.
George R.—Whereas we are desirous to mark the fiftieth Anniversary of our Accession to the Throne, by extending our pardon to all Seamen and Marines who may at any time have deserted from our service previous to the issuing of this our Royal Proclamation; we have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to publish this our Royal Proclamation, and do hereby accordingly grant our most gracious Pardon to all such Seamen as may at any time have deserted from any of our ships or vessels of war; And we do hereby further grant our most gracious pardon to all Marines who may at any time have deserted from our service; and we do hereby declare that all such seamen and marines, whether surrendering themselves or not, or who having deserted, are now belonging to our ships or vessels of war, or are at the head-quarters of our royal marine forces, or are belonging to recruiting parties of the said forces, shall be released and discharged from all prosecutions, imprisonments and penalties, commenced or incurred by reason of such desertion; and that all such seamen or marines who have not before the issuing of this our Royal Proclamation, surrendered themselves, nor entered on board our ships or vessels, nor joined the head quarters or recruiting parties of the royal marines, shall, nevertheless, receive our free pardon without condition of further service, or being required to join any of our ships, or the head quarters, or recruiting parties abovenominated; but that such pardon shall not entitle the said deserters, whether seamen or marines, to any arrears of pay, or to any prize money forfeited by such desertion; and we do further declare that such free pardon shall not extend to any seamen or marines who shall desert from any of our ships or vessels, or from marine quarters or recruiting parties, after the 24th day of this inst. October.
GIVEN at our Court, at the Queen's Palace, the 18th day of October, 1809, in the 49th year of our reign. GOD SAVE THE KING.
Proclamation for pardoning Deserters from His Majesty's Land Forces.
WAR OFFICE, Oct. 24, 1809. Whereas it has been most humbly submitted to the King, whether, on the joyful occasion of his Majesty's entering into the 50th year of his reign, it might not be desirable to distinguish so memorable an epoch by an act of Grace to all deserters; and his Majesty having graciously approved of his free pardon being extended to all such deserters from his Land Forces as shall deliver themselves up within two months from the 25th inst. these are publickly to declare his Majesty's benevolent intention; and to direct that all deserters surrendering themselves to the Commanding Officer of any Regiment, or to any of the Superintending Field Officers of the Recruiting Service, whose stations are mentioned in the margin hereof; to the Commandant of the Army
Durham, Carlisle, Leeds, Manchester, Newcastle, Ipswich, Shrewsbury, Birmingham, Hereford, Bedford, Maldon, Gloucester, Exeter, Plymouth, & London.
Depot in the Isle of Wight; or, where there is no military post, to a magistrate, shall be pardoned, and they are hereby pardoned accordingly.
Such deserters, if from the regular forces, being able-bodied men, and fit for service, shall be sent to the regiments from which they deserted, or be appointed to such regiments in the United Kingdom as his Majesty may be pleased to command—and when so placed, shall not be liable to be claimed by any other corps to which they may formerly have belonged: and if from the militia, shall be sent to the regiments to which they respectively belonged, &c. &c.
His Majesty has further been pleased to direct that deserters now actually in confinement as such, shall have the benefit of this his Royal Pardon.
By his Majesty's command. GRANVILLE LEVESON GOWER.
From the Boston Palladium.
STOCKHOLM, Sept. 22.—By the peace between Russia and Sweden, the ports of the latter were shut against British ships of war, but merchant vessels of that nation, freighted with salt and some other commodities, are allowed to enter.
GOTTENBURGH, Oct. 16.—Colonel Burr returned from Stockholm about a month since and left this place yesterday for Copenhagen, which he will leave as soon as he obtains a passport for Paris. He appears dejected. It is said, his reception at Stockholm did not meet his expectations.
PHILADELPHIA, Dec. 22. FRENCH FLEET OUT!
By Captain Sherman, of the ship Stranger, we learn, that on the 15th November, advices were received at Lisbon, from Admiral Collingwood, announcing that a French fleet, consisting of 16 ships of the line, and as many frigates, had passed the straits of Gibraltar, destination unknown. Admiral Collingwood, not being of sufficient force to engage them, had dispatched cutters with the information, hoping to be reinforced so as to bring them to an engagement.
NEW YORK, Dec. 21.—Arrived, British armed schooner Hunter, O'Brien, Halifax, 10 days, with two bags of letters, and dispatches for Mr. Jackson.
Arrived, ship Pekin McKibbin, River Jade, 40 days. Left, ship America, Lear, for Philadelphia, in 20 days, was loading with gin; ship Anacreaon, Peterson, of Newburyport; Nov. 19, lat. 42, long. 20, was boarded by a new French brig privateer just out of Bordeaux, and was robbed of some spars, oars, a sail, some sugar, &c. and let the Pekin pass, as she was in ballast—if she had had a cargo, they said, they would have captured her. The privateer, the day before, captured an old English brig, in ballast, but released her, as they said, they did not wish to be troubled with her crew.
FRANKFORT, Dec. 2. Extract of a letter from Shelbyville, December 2.
I have just seen a gentleman immediately from Natchez. He left that place on the 2d ult. at which time 1500 of the troops had arrived at Washington in the neighborhood of Natchez. About 200 had died between New Orleans and the place at which they now are, and almost every one that has arrived, is incapable of doing duty, owing to sickness. He states that of 1500, there are not 60 who are perfectly free from some disease or other, although the officers are generally in good health. When he left Natchez, 3 gun boats were about 20 miles below, containing artillery and riflemen, who are passing on to head quarters: Gen. Wilkinson was still there, waiting as he understood for the arrival of Gen. Hampton. This last gentleman, my informant adds, he met between Nashville and Franklin in Tennessee, on the 24th ult. hastening on to take the command of the army.—Before Wilkinson left New Orleans, he ordered out a detachment of soldiers to put him a sugar plantation in order for cultivation, in the swamps, upon which expedition about 40 died. The disturbances at Orleans have considerably abated. The yellow fever has been particularly fatal to the Frenchmen lately imported from St. Jago.
VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.
EXTRACTS FROM THE JOURNALS OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES.
THURSDAY, Dec. 21st. An engrossed clause, by way of rider, to the bill "concerning certificates," was read a third time and passed.
A report from the Committee of Propositions and Grievances (which lay on the table,) was taken up and read in the following words:
The committee of Propositions and Grievances have, according to order, had under their consideration sundry petitions to them referred, and have come to the following resolutions thereupon:
1. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the counties of Loudoun and Frederick, praying that a law may pass incorporating a company for the purpose of constructing a turnpike road from the western extremity of the Little River Turnpike, by the most direct practicable route, to some point on the Shenandoah river next beyond Snicker's gap, and in the most direct route from the top of the Blue Ridge in that gap towards Winchester, is reasonable.
2. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the counties of Loudoun and Fauquier, praying that an act may pass incorporating a company to establish a turnpike road from the western extremity of the Little River Turnpike Road to Shenandoah river, through Ashby's Gap of the Blue Ridge Mountain, and to erect a Toll Bridge across Goose Creek, over which the said road will pass, is reasonable.
3. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Loudoun, praying that an act may pass establishing a town on the land of Charles F. Mercer, at the western extremity of the Little River Turnpike Road, is reasonable.
4. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Pittsylvania, praying that an act may pass for preventing obstructions to the passage of fish in Pig river, is reasonable.
5. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Charles Yancey, William Watkins and William Womack, Executors of Nicholas Cabell, praying that
an act may pass, for reviving an inspection of Tobacco at Swann Creek Warehouse, on the land of Charles Yancey, in the county of Buckingham, is reasonable.
6. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That so much of the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Charlotte, as prays that certain amendments may be made to the penal laws, as they respect free negroes and mulattoes, be rejected.
7. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That such other parts of the said petition as prays that certain amendments to the laws, as they respect runaway slaves, be rejected.
8. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That such other parts of the said petition as prays that certain amendments may be made to the laws as they respect public roads, is reasonable.
The said resolutions being severally read a second time, were agreed to by the house.
A report from the Committee of Propositions and Grievances (which lay on the table) was taken up, and read in the following words:
The committee of Propositions and Grievances have, according to order, had under their consideration the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Loudoun to them referred, have agreed upon a report, and come to a resolution thereupon, as follows:
It appears to your committee, that at all times, but more especially in disastrous times like the present, it becomes the duty of the Legislature to give every practicable encouragement to home manufactures, consequently to encourage the increase and improvement of our flocks of sheep is of the utmost importance, as thereby one of the most important materials for manufacturing is produced.
It further appears that the progress in so desirable a pursuit is greatly impeded by the daily depredations committed upon that useful animal, by useless dogs, wolves and foxes.
It is therefore the opinion of your committee, that it would be good policy to impose a tax on dogs conformable with the prayer of the said petitioners, and the money arising therefrom to be first applied as a bounty or reward for killing wolves and foxes, and the balance if any, to the purchase of Merino sheep for each county where the tax exists.
Resolved therefore, as the opinion of this committee, that the said petition of the inhabitants of the county of Loudoun, praying that a law may pass imposing a tax on dogs is reasonable.
The said resolution being read a second time, was, on the question put thereupon, disagreed to by the House.
Mr. Madison, from the committee of Propositions and Grievances, made the following report:
The Committee of Propositions and Grievances have, according to order, had under their consideration sundry petitions to them referred, and have come to the following resolutions thereupon:
1. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Harrison, praying that the said county may be divided by a line running from the mouth of Peck's run, including the waters thereof, down Hacker's creek, to the mouth, including its waters, thence down the west fork to the mouth of Isaac's creek, then up the same, including the waters thereof to its head, from thence to the Wood county line the nearest point thence with the same to Mason county line, thence with the lines of Kenawha and Randolph counties to the head of Buckhannon river, and down to the beginning, is reasonable.
2. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the petition of Joseph Eggleston, Richard N. Venable and Edmund Harrison, managers for the Upper Appomattox Company, praying that their individual responsibility for the money already drawn from the Treasury, on account of the said company, may be taken off, and the company alone be bound for the said money; and that such indulgence may be given as to the time of payment, for money already drawn, and for such additional sums as may enable the company, with their other funds, to complete their undertaking, is reasonable.
3. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Cabell, praying that the seat of justice for the said county, as fixed by the commissioners appointed for that purpose, at the mouth of Guyandotte, may be removed to the land of Thomas Ward, be rejected.
4. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, that the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Cabell in opposition thereto, is reasonable.
The first resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same, by striking out at the end thereof the words "is reasonable," and inserting in lieu of them the words "be rejected;" and the question being put on the proposed amendment, it passed in the negative.—Ayes 70—Nays 97.
The second resolution being read a second time, was agreed to by the House.
The third resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same by striking out at the end thereof the words "be rejected," and inserting in place of them the words "is reasonable;" and the question being put on the proposed amendment, it passed in the negative.—The question being then put on the resolution as reported, it was agreed to by the House.
The fourth resolution being read a second time, was agreed to by the House.
A petition was presented and read from Robert R. Livingston and Robert Fulton, native citizens of the United States, and residing in the state of New-York (represented by N. J. Roosevelt, their agent and attorney) stating that they have discovered a certain method of propelling boats by steam; for the use of which, agreeable to certain principles stated in the petition, they have received the patronage of the state of New-York; & praying that to encourage the immediate use of steam boats in the waters of this state, and particularly on the Ohio and Mississippi, the legislature would grant them the exclusive right of this state with boats moved by steam or fire, on the following conditions:—First, that within three years from the time of passing the law, the petitioners will build a boat, on the Ohio or Mississippi river, to move by the force of steam, which shall be capable of carrying seventy tons of merchandise, produce or materials, and move at the rate of at least three and one half miles an hour, in still water; if they do not comply with these conditions, the law to be null—Second, that in all cases they will not charge more than three-fourths which is now usually paid for carrying merchandise or materials of any kind on said river, to any given or equal distance which the boats now transport them.—Third, that they will perform the voyage in less than three-fourths of the time which is now usually required by the meagre boats, to navigate said
river to any given point where steam boats can go with safety.—Fourth, that on establishing the three persons to report on the performance of the boat, and if they find that the petitioners have complied with the terms of the contract, the law to be confirmed in favor of the said Livingston & Fulton;
Ordered, that the said petition be referred to Messrs. Stevenson, Johnson (of Isle of Wight), Bent (of Stafford), Noland, Harrison, Young, Wilson, Lunsford, Beeson, Prunty, Meriwether, Arcene (of Powhatan) and Pendleton.
FRIDAY, Dec. 22.
Mr. McFarlane, from the Committee of Claims, made the following report:
The Committee of Claims have, according to order, had under their consideration several petitions to them referred, and come to the following resolutions thereupon:
1. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Henry Savane, praying that he may be allowed compensation for his services as a jailor for the Sweet Springs district court, from October 1808, until the operation of the act abolishing district courts, is reasonable.
2. Resolved also, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Andrew Lewis, stating that while acting as sheriff for the county of Montgomery, for the years 1801 and 1802, executions came into his hands against Anthony Haden, collector of a revenue due from the county of Botetourt, for the year 1793; that he made a return of the process by post, which lay in the post-office, at Richmond, until after he received notice for not returning the executions, and was fined in two sums amounting to upwards of 150 dollars; and praying the legislature would remit to him the fines aforesaid, he having paid all costs, is reasonable.
3. Resolved also, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of William Powell, of the county of King William, praying the legislature would authorise the auditor to grant him a warrant on the treasury for the sum of twenty dollars, on account of repairs done at Aylett's warehouse, be rejected.
The first and third resolutions being read a second time, were agreed to by the house.
The second resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same by striking out at the end thereof, the words "is reasonable," and inserting in their stead the words "be rejected;" and the question being put upon agreeing to the said amendment, it passed in the negative.
Mr. McFarlane, from the Committee of Claims, made the following report:
The committee of Claims have, according to order, had under their consideration several petitions to them referred, and have come to the following resolutions thereupon:
It appears to your committee, from the petition of Augustine Slaughter, that he purchased a small part, supposed to be forty-two and a half acres, of the estate called Gosport, belonging to Andrew Sprowle, a British loyalist, for twenty four shillings and six pence the acre, which was confiscated and ordered to be sold under an act of assembly, passed in December 1790; that shortly after his purchase, he sold the said land to George Kelly, deceased, for twenty eight shillings the acre, and guaranteed the title; that twenty-eight of the said forty-two and a half acres were claimed and taken possession of by Thomas Edwards, that colonel Thomas Newton, deceased, in his lifetime, as guardian to the heirs of George Kelly, deceased, instituted a suit in the district court of Suffolk, for the purpose of dispossessing the said Edwards, which suit was decided in favor of him, the said Edwards, and that in consequence thereof, the said Slaughter has paid to the heirs of George Kelly, deceased, the sum of 273 dol. 70 cents principal and interest on the purchase money, besides costs of suit;
1. Resolved therefore, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Augustine Slaughter, praying the legislature would reimburse him, at least the first cost of the land with interest, if not what he sold it to George Kelly, decd., for, be rejected.
2. Resolved also, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Benjamin Edwards Browne, praying the legislature would allow him the sum of 422 dollars 37 cents, expended by him in defraying the expenses of certain negroes, supposed to be runaways, who were placed in his care as jailor of Surry County, by order of a magistrate, be rejected.
The first resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same by striking out at the end of it, the words "be rejected," and inserting in their stead the words "is reasonable;" and the question being put on the proposed amendment, it passed in the affirmative;
The question being then put on the resolution as amended, it was agreed to by the House.
The second resolution being read a second time, was agreed to by the House.
Mr. Madison, from the committee of Propositions and Grievances, made the following report:
The committee of Propositions and Grievances have, according to order, had under their consideration sundry petitions, to them referred, and have come to the following resolution thereupon:
1. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the county of Dinwiddie, praying that that part of the said county lying within the jurisdiction of the superior court for the said county of Dinwiddie, be rejected.
2. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the remonstrance of the mayor, aldermen, and others, of the town of Petersburg, in opposition thereto, is reasonable.
3. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Samuel Poin Dexter and Lodowick M. Daniel, inspectors at Black Water warehouse, near the town of Lynchburg, praying that a law may pass increasing their salaries to an amount equal to those of the other inspectors in the said town, is reasonable.
4. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of sundry inhabitants of the Parish of Southwark, in the county of Surry, praying that an act may pass, authorising the sale of the church plate in the said parish, and directing the proceeds thereof to be applied to the use of the poor in the said Parish, is reasonable.
The said resolutions being read a second time, were agreed to by the House.
Mr. Cabell from the committee for Courts of Justice, made the following report:
The committee for Courts of Justice has, according to order, had under their consideration several petitions to them referred, and have come to the following resolutions thereupon:

Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That so much of the petition of Benjamin Winslow, as prays that the damages on a judgment recovered on behalf of the complainant, against Winslow Parker and the petitioner, as Securities for Rowland Thomas, a former sheriff of Orange county, for the balance of taxes due therein for the year 1784, may be released, the principal of the said judgment having been paid by the petitioner, is reasonable.
2. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That so much of the said petition as prays that the interest recovered by the judgment aforesaid, may be released, is reasonable.
3. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That so much of the said petition, as prays that some provision may be made by law, whereby the petitioner may be enabled to collect or recover the arrears of taxes due in the said county of Orange for the year 1784, aforesaid, be rejected.
4. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the residue of the aforesaid petition, praying that the petitioner may be allowed for delinquents and insolvents for the said year, is reasonable; and that he ought to be allowed therefor at the rate of five per cent, on the amount of taxes accounted for by him for the said year 1784.
5. Resolved, as the opinion of this committee, That the petition of Henry St. John Dixon, George W. Dixon and John Richard, who intermarried with Polly Dixon, in his own behalf and as the guardian of Geo. Dixon and Rosanna Dixon, infants and children of John Dixon, deceased, praying that an act may pass, authorizing the sale of a certain tract of land lying in Hanover county, to which the petitioners, and the children of the aforesaid John Dixon, have become entitled by the death of Samuel Dixon, deceased, and directing the proceeds of such sale to be divided amongst the petitioners and the said children, in such proportions as is directed by the law of descents, be rejected.
The first, third and fourth resolutions being read a second time, were agreed to by the House.
The second resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same, by striking out at the end thereof, the words "is reasonable," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "be rejected;" and the question being put on agreeing to the proposed amendment, it passed in the negative.
The fifth resolution being read a second time, a motion was made to amend the same, by striking out at the end thereof, the words "be rejected," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "is reasonable;" and the question being put on the proposed amendment, it passed in the affirmative.
The Enquirer.
RICHMOND, DECEMBER 28, 1809.
VIEWS OF THE CORRESPONDENCE, &c.
We propose in a series of numbers, to review the principal points which are to be found in the late correspondence, submitted to the people of the U. States—touching on the policy and plans of the British government—to expose the insolent despotism of Francis James Jackson—and what is more material, to "vindicate the ways" of our administration, and to expose the glosses, the tricks, the subtleties of the Federalists and their adherents. This task of refutation would be almost endless, if it were to extend to every misrepresentation or mistake. The press, in the cause of the British Ex-Minister, are playing off an incessant fire of artillery. Three federal prints in Boston—four in New-York—two in Philadelphia—two in Baltimore—&c. &c. are all enlisted in this honorable service. Some that gave way to the first blush of the occasion, and spoke the sentiments of Americans, are now creeping back to their holes. Woe be to the unfortunate being who is not ready to sign it—Shibboleth of the British Creed!
Maj. Jackson, of the Philadelphia Register, for bearing himself independently on this occasion, has been arraigned for apostasy and irreligion. Mr. Relf, Editor of the Philadelphia Gazette, for publishing the letter of Ganganelli, has been denounced by the Federal Republican, as unfit to remain in "those ranks which he has dishonored," and proved himself unworthy of it.
Though we may not be able to grasp every error that is published, we shall, at least, pass the principal of them in review—in the progress of the following structures.
THE THREE CONDITIONS, AS STATED IN THE DESPATCH OF 23rd JANUARY.
This despatch was the first germ of Mr. Erskine's arrangement, its disavowal, the insolent insinuations of Jackson and his dismissal. It therefore deserves to come first on the tapis.
Whoever may wish to see the tricks and subtleties of that arch-taker, Mr. Canning, the British Ex-Minister for Foreign Affairs, has only to turn to these three conditions—and to see in what way they arose, and how from the most harmless beginnings they have been changed by the magic wand of Canning into a shape that is offensive to the rights and independence of this country—and how some of the Federal party, relying more on these misrepresentations of Congress, than on the presumed innocence of their own government, have, instead of resenting the insolence of the British Cabinet for offering such propositions, been hardly enough to lay these propositions at the doors of our own government. It is of importance, therefore, to unwind the tricks of the punster on this occasion.
These three conditions are stated, to Mr. Erskine in the following terms:
"From the report of your conversations with Mr. Madison, Mr. Gallatin and Mr. Smith it appears:—"
"1st. That the American government is prepared, in the event of his majesty's consenting to withdraw the orders in council of January and November 1807, to withdraw contemporaneously on its part, the interdiction of its harbors to ships of war, and all non-intercourse and non-importation acts, so far as respects Great-Britain, leaving them in force with respect to France and the powers which adopt or act under her decrees.
"2nd. (What is of the utmost importance as precluding a new source of misunderstanding, which might arise after the adjustment of the other questions.) That America is willing to renounce, during the present war, the pretensions of carrying on in time of war, all trade with the enemies' colonies, from which she was excluded during peace.
"3rd. Great Britain, for the purpose of securing the operation of the Embargo, and of the bona fide intention of America to prevent her citizens from trading with France and the powers adopting and acting under her decrees, is to be considered as being at liberty to capture all such American vessels as may be found attempting to trade, with the ports of any of these powers; without which security for the observance of the embargo, the raising it nominally with respect to Great Britain alone, would, in fact, raise it with respect to all the world.
"On these conditions, his majesty would consent to withdraw the orders in council of January
and November, 1807, so far as respects America. As the 1st and 2nd of these conditions, are suggestions of the persons in authority in America to you, &c. &c."
Thus Mr. Erskine is made to say, that as the conditions of withdrawing the British orders, Messrs. Madison, Gallatin and Smith, had in conversation expressed themselves prepared to continue our interdictions against France—and willing to renounce during the present war, all the colonial trade, not open to us in times of peace. Let us then see, how far Mr. Canning has stuck to the text of Mr. Erskine's despatch—or how far he has thought to pervert these statements of Mr. E.
As to these conversations, all that we have known concerning them, is derived from Mr. E's reply to the Secretary of State, requesting "such explanations as his condour would at once suggest in relation to these imputed conversations." Mr. Erskine with the highest candor and frankness that do him the highest honor, proceeds to lay before Mr. Smith an "abstract of the communications," which he had made to his majesty's government, on the 3d and 4th Decemr. 1808, relative to these "informal conversations" with Messrs. Madison, Gallatin and Smith.
As to the 1st condition—Mr. Madison then Secretary of State, is represented as urging "various arguments tending to prove that the United States had exerted all their efforts to persuade the French government to withdraw their unjust restrictions upon neutral commerce, and that recourse might have been had to measures of more activity and decision against France than mere remonstrances, but that in the mean time Great Britain had issued her orders in council"—that "as the world must now be convinced that America had in vain taken all the means in her power to obtain from Great Britain and France a just attention to her rights as a neutral power by representations and remonstrances, that she would be fully justified in having recourse to hostilities with either belligerent, and that she only hesitated to do so from the difficulty of contending with both! But that she must be driven even to endeavor to maintain her rights against the two greatest powers in the world; unless either of them should relax their restrictions upon neutral commerce." In which case, the United States would at once side with that power against the other which might continue its aggressions." Mr. E. concurred in these and other observations to have been made to him by Mr. M. with a view of leading "to a re-consideration," on the part of his majesty's government, of the propositions made through Mr. Pinkney for the removal of the Embargo as respected Great Britain, upon condition that the orders in council should be withdrawn as respected the United States—but that he "never considered," as Mr. Canning has made him most explicitly to state, that "Mr. Madison meant that the government of the United States would pledge themselves beyond the propositions respecting the embargo, as above stated, because that was the extent of the power of the President of the constitution of the U. States"—which propositions did not pledge the U. States to "leave" our interdictions "in force with respect to France, &c. &c." Thus it is Mr. C. guilty of the perversion of making Mr. E. state a proposition on the part of Messrs. Madison and Smith, which Mr. E. has not dated. He could never have put it into his despatches, because it never was in his consideration. But this detection will be still more apparent, when we come to sum up, in the words of Mr. Erskine, his own conclusions from these unoffical conversations.
As to the 2d Condition—Mr. Erskine goes on to state his private conversation with Mr. Gallatin—in which that gentleman, without any particular mention of the orders in council, is made to say, that the non-intercourse law, "then likely to be passed by the Congress, might be considered as removing two very important grounds of difference with G. B." viz. the non importation act and President's proclamation respecting armed vessels—though "he did not pretend to say, that this measure had been taken from any motives of concession to G. B.; but as, in fact, these consequences followed, he conceived they might be considered as removing the two great obstacles to a conciliation." Mr. G. is then made to advert "to the probability of an adjustment of another point of dispute between the two countries, as he said he knew that it was intended by the U. States to abandon the attempt to carry on a trade with the colonies of belligerents in time of war, which was not allowed in time of peace, and to trust to their being permitted by the French to carry on such trade in peace, so as to entitle them to a continuance of it in time of war." As to what "trade with the colonies of belligerents," was in Mr. E's conception meant by Mr. G. to be abandoned, Mr. E. avows at once, that he supposed the allusion was only "to the trade from the colonies of the belligerents direct to their mother country, or to the ports of other belligerents, because the right to such trade had been the point in dispute; whereas the right to carry on a trade from the colonies of belligerents to the U. S. had never been called in question, and had been recognized by his Majesty's Supreme Court of Admiralty, &c. &c."
Thus, "it appears," to make use of Mr. C's expression, that he had perverted two other points in Mr. E's despatches, relative to this 2d Condition—For Mr. E. did not state, that the U. States were "willing to renounce all trade with the enemies' colonies," &c. because he himself limits this concession to the direct trade with the mother country—nor does Mr. E. state that this concession was to be looked upon as one of the preliminary conditions for the withdrawal of the orders in council, because in the words which will presently be quoted, as well as in the following expressions in his reply to Mr. Gallatin's letter, he expressly contradicts such a supposition: "I never supposed, that you intended to convey an opinion that the government of the U. States would make any arrangement respecting the colonial trade as a condition of the revocation of the Orders in Council, the two subjects being altogether unconnected; nor have I ever represented to his Majesty's government, that such PRELIMINARY PLEDGES would be given."
But every doubt vanishes, when Mr. E. comes to sum up his ideas of these conversations, in relation to the two first conditions. It is then we see how shamelessly Mr. Canning has perverted the despatches of the minister, by ascribing propositions to our government, of which they had never dreamt.
"Such was the substance, sir, of the unofficial conversations which I had held with Mr. Madison, Mr. Gallatin, and yourself, which I did not consider or represent to His Majesty's government as intended with any other view than to endeavor to bring about the repeal of the Orders in Council by showing that many of the obstacles which had stood in the way of an amicable adjustment of the differences between the two countries were already removed, and that a fair prospect existed of settling what remained; since the U. States had exhibited a determination to resist the unjust aggressions upon her neutral rights, which was all that Great Britain had ever required; but I certainly never received any assurances from the American government that they would pledge themselves to adopt the conditions specified in Mr. Canning's instructions as preliminary; nor did I ever hold out such an expectation to His Majesty's government; I have always stated to them that in the event of His Majesty's thinking it just or expedient to cause his Orders in Council to be withdrawn, that the President would take off the embargo as respected England, leaving it in operation against France and the powers which adopted, or acted under her decrees, according to the authority which was vested in him at that time by the Congress of the U. States, and that there was every reason to expect that a satisfactory arrangement
might be made upon the point of the colonial trade which had been so long in dispute between the two countries."
Here Mr. E. most distinctly states, that he never held out "an expectation to his Majesty's government," that the U. S. "would pledge themselves to adopt the conditions specified in Mr. Canning's instructions as preliminary"—that all he had stated to them was, that "the President would take off the Embargo as respected England, leaving it in operation against France, &c. &c. according to the authority which was vested in him at that time by the Congress of the U. S.; which law gave him no sort of authority to stipulate in any event for the continuance of our restrictions against France, and much less as a condition of withdrawing the British Orders—and as to the colonial trade, that there was every reason to expect that a satisfactory (general) arrangement, not of course connected with the Orders in Council, as Mr. C. states it, "might be made upon the point of the colonial trade, which had been so long in dispute between the two countries,"—and not, as Mr. C. states, "all trade with the enemies' colonies," &c. &c.
This statement reflects no disgrace on our government—Here is no perfidy fair and legitimate—Here is no concession to the British orders in council—we give no pledges to one government to defend our own rights against the aggressions of a third—here is no proposition to sacrifice any part of the colonial trade as the price of the British orders,—and much less that part of it which we have so vehemently claimed—the President merely proposes the exercise of the powers vested in him by law, to remove the trade with G. Britain, leaving the restrictions in force against France—there is no pledge for this continuance—though they were to be left in force agreeably to the law, yet this was not as a condition offered to the British government, and so far as it was to have any effect upon them, it was only to be in the light in which Mr. Gallatin represents it in the following words to Mr. E. "It is sufficiently evident from the proceedings of Congress, both previous and subsequent to the unratified agreement of April last, that the U. States intended to continue the restrictions of the commercial intercourse with France, whilst such of her decrees as violated our neutral rights continued in force—and to remove those restrictions in relation to G. Britain, in the event of a revocation of the Orders in Council. But that state of things, so far as it related to France, was to result from our own law known or anticipated by your government, when they authorized an arrangement, and it was not proposed by us that the continuance of the non-intercourse with France, should be made a condition of that arrangement." Such appear to be the facts, as stated by Mr. E.
When touched, however, by the magic wand of Mr. Canning, these harmless propositions—these frank and honorable suggestions of our "men in authority"—are magnified at once into frightful and abominable monsters. This diplomatic magician—this profound player upon words, who shifts them at his will, like the wand of a necromancer, turning black into white, and white into black—this most ingenious punster has not hesitated to play off his usual ingenuity upon the communications of Mr. E. And hence it is, that Mr. C. Words are strained from their most obvious meaning—terms are perverted—what is meant in one sense is taken in another—what were found honorable suggestions from the lips of Messrs. Madison, Gallatin or Smith, are changed into propositions which they would blush to acknowledge. It is thus, that ideas have been ascribed to our government, which are the mere creatures of Canning's ingenuity—and that such propositions, as it would have been an insult in the British cabinet to have originated, have been shamelessly suggested under the pretext of their being of our own invention—Such are the tricks of George Canning, Esq.!!
As to the 3d Condition—this Mr. C. represents as the suggestion of Mr. Pinkney, "who (said he) has recently, but the first time, expressed to me his opinion, that there will be no indisposition on the part of his government to the enforcement by the naval power of G. B. of the regulations of America with respect to France, and the countries to which these regulations continue to apply; but that his government was itself aware, that without such enforcement, those regulations must be altogether nugatory." On this subject, there seems to have been a misapprehension , if not a perversion on the part of the British minister; As the Secretary of State observes in his letter to Mr. Pinkney, of Nov. 23, 1809, "This condition appears to have had its origin in a mistake of your meaning in a conversation with Mr. Canning, as noted by yourself, and in an inference thence deduced as to the disposition of this government"—thus giving rise to a "double mistake."
It is clear, that on this subject, very many misapprehensions have arisen on the part of Mr. Pinkney or Mr. Canning, or both. The correspondence of the former with his government, is now before the world.
Now, and by whom this proposition was first made, seems even to be a matter of doubt. Mr. C's despatch of the 23d January, states that "Mr. P. has recently, but the first time, expressed his opinion &c."—from this, it would seem that the first hint of it is meant to be given to Mr. P. Whereas in Mr. P's letter to the Secretary of State, the suggestion is wholly and unequivocally ascribed to Mr. C. Again, in the despatch of May 28th, Mr. P. concaves Mr. C. to have said, that Mr. E. had stated it as one of the things to which our "men in authority" would not object—and that Mr. P. had only confirmed this representation. In the next despatch (of June 28th) Mr. P. states that Mr. C. had told him, that "the conversations detailed in Mr. E's letters did not, as Mr. P. supposed, suggest that the government of the U. S. would acquiesce in this condition—that they had only suggested, "that the U. S. would side with the power revoking its edicts against the power persevering"—and by the way, it is most likely that Mr. E. has misunderstood this suggestion, & most certain that when Mr. C. tendered it as a condition of negotiation, he knew that the President of the U. S. could have nothing to do with it—and that "this, Mr. C. says, he considered as comprehending what (Mr. P.) thought he had represented the actual suggestion to be—and what he supposed, I had said to him in an informal conversation &c." "It will, I am sure," continues Mr. P. to the Secretary of State, "occur to you, as the fact is, that the little I may have thrown out upon this occasion did not look to the admission of Mr. C's object into any stipulation between the two countries, and that I viewed it only as a consequence that might and would, if France persisted in her unjust decrees, grow out of arrangements similar to those offered by us in August last." Mr. C. however, was for making this one of the preliminary conditions to an arrangement—in the next despatch Mr. P. repeats this misapprehension of his meaning—as well as of his having ever meant to say to C. that the "American government was aware itself" of the necessity of this enforcement—in which particular he asserts he has been misapprehended. On the whole then, "it is apparent," that Mr. C. has been guilty of gross perversions, as relates to the two first conditions, and of a mistake as to the 3d.—The last would have, perhaps, deserved the same name as the former, if like the despatches of Mr. E. the words of Mr. P. had been before Mr. C. in black and white—and not
* Mr. E. says in his letter to Mr. Smith of 14th Aug. that the 3d condition was "for the first time, presented to his consideration," in the despatch of January 23d, "in which that idea is suggested and is stated to have been assented to by Mr. P." If, says Mr. Gardener, this proposition did originate with the British, I consider it in the light of an insult.
feeling word, which the worst may pervert, but the best may mistake.
The Feds have raised a hue and cry, against an article printed at Paris, and ascribed to "a member of the senate"—in which are the following expressions: "The Americans do worse—they have rejected the English minister, Mr. Jackson." Is not the hand of Napoleon in this thing—it was not known in Paris, 3000 miles off, that Jackson was dismissed—here is French influence for you—the British minister is discharged, because Napoleon had ordered it so—we are governed by the bureau of Paris.—Such is the Federal Cry.
Let us pass by the liberality of the compliment which is paid to our government, by this imputation—is it not strange, that any man should be so "moon struck" as to believe this incredible rumor? In the first place, such a thing might have been talked of in Paris or any where else, after such a man had been sent to the U. States and the loud cry of opposition, had sounded from our priests. Again—there is an anachronism in the story. Mr. J. was not dismissed at the time, that the writer avers it—so that the President deserves some credit at least for not obeying instanter —Besides—the story proves too much—if the orders respecting Jackson, were issued from Paris, how came Mr. Madison to thwart the evident wishes of his master, by promising at the very time Mr. J. was dismissed, that a "ready attention will be given to any communication, affecting the interests of the two nations, thro' any other channel that may be substituted?" Mr. J. will be cashiered, for disobedience of orders.
Besides, is this extract a forgery, or a fact? Is it a fair or false translation?—Were there not similar whispers in some of the English prints? Was there no offence on the side of Jackson, not possibly to be foreseen by the prophetic seer of Paris? which provoked this catastrophe? Must not that politician, be lost to all the charities of man, who loses sight of these considerations, and overlooks probability itself, in order to ascribe the meanest of motives to the government of his country? If you tell a lie, it is a rule, that it should look at least like the truth. What say'st thou, Mr. Coleman?
FOR THE ENQUIRER.
I understand, that our judicial system is undergoing a revision by the legislature.—That one plan is to restore to the court of appeals the former number of judges. That another is to amalgamate the courts of chancery, and the general court; and that a third is to district the present courts of chancery; and to put the chancellors upon their circuits. These are important plans; and if I can be indulged with a place in the Enquirer, I will submit to criticism, a few sketches of my ideas, upon each.
As to the first: It is entirely proper; but it proves, that old systems should be touched with great delicacy; for it has not been much more than six months, if that, since, by the death of judge Lyon, the court of appeals was reduced to three judges; and already it seems to be agreed, that the reduction, at first, was improper. This should be at least a caution as to other innovations.
As to the second: By the Constitution it is provided, that the legislative, executive and judiciary departments shall be separate and distinct, so that neither exercise the powers properly belonging to the other; and also, that the two houses of Assembly shall, by joint ballot, appoint judges of the supreme court of appeals, general court, and judges in chancery, to be commissioned by the Governor, and continue in office during good behavior.
In conformity to these provisions in the Constitution, the legislature, long since, appointed distinct judges to the court of appeals, courts of chancery, and general court, and they were commissioned accordingly; and still hold their commissions.
The question now is, not, what could the legislature do, in a new organization of the courts, if the judges were all to resign their commissions; but what can the legislature do, as the judges all hold their commissions? and the answer is a very plain one: that they hold their commissions during good behavior:—as independent of the legislature as the legislature is of the judiciary:—so that these courts, as now established, cannot be amalgamated by any legislative act, without the abolition of them directly or indirectly for that purpose; and it is evident, that the abolition of a Constitutional court, by the legislature, is as much out of the question, as the abolition of the legislature is by the judiciary: since it would fix the principle of dependence upon each other; and of course destroy one of the fairest features of the Constitution—namely, the independence of the judiciary; and the consent of the judges, as it seems to me, would not alter the case; as they have no right to give their consent, to fix a principle, that might inflict an irreparable wound upon the Constitution; and subject them to the reproach of deserting their station and betraying the most sacred interest of the people, entrusted to their hands—to wit; to MAINTAIN the Constitution: a duty equally incumbent on both the legislature and the judiciary, and I am perfectly satisfied, that neither mean, intentionally, to violate it.
The facts, that as these courts have been established, conformably to the Constitution, their jurisdictions cannot be united now, in the same judges, admitting it might have been done at first, unless the judges will resign their commissions,* and say to the legislature, we have put all difficulty out of our way, organize these courts again, as may be thought proper, for the best interest of the people: and there can be no doubt, but such an act of patriotism would meet with its just reward, in other appointments, under the new order of things; and this the judges, it is presumed, will do, whenever it shall appear to them that both necessary and Constitutional; and not before.
This is not like the case settled by Congress. The courts in that case were created by the legislature; whose right to establish them, tho' derived from the constitution, depended upon the necessity of such courts for the benefit of society; and when that necessity ceased to exist, or, if upon enquiry, it was found not to exist at all, their creator, the legislature, was bound to abolish them. This was done. But, no one ever contended, that Congress could exercise such a power over the supreme court: no: no more: nor over the legislature of this commonwealth: nor over the court of appeals, courts of chancery, or the general court; and, yet, they might over the superior courts of law, as they did over the late district courts, be.
* As was done on a former occasion.
cause "esse a legislative, and not constitutional court."
The fact is, that it cannot be done—and we should disturb our constitution, which I consider the very best in the world; as it secures to us the benefits of free government without the possibility of subjecting us to any positions.
As to the third; there are some objections to this plan; but it is what the legislature have the right to do; and it may be well to try it; for, if it is not found to answer, it will only be a harmless experiment, like that which has been made upon the court of appeals; and can be put back; but if it should answer, it will certainly be attended with many conveniences to the people: for, as three courts have been found more convenient than one, it would seem to follow as an undeniable truth, that eight more would greatly increase that convenience.
The districts might be so arranged as that chancellor Brown should hold three courts west of the side for all that country; Chancellor Taylor four in his district; and Chancellor Tyler four in his; so that the whole state would be divided into three chancery circuits, and eleven chancery districts, which would certainly be a sufficient distribution of these courts for all convenient purposes of equitable jurisdiction. It would certainly be so below the ridge; and if not so above it, add another Chancellor, and let there be four courts in the western country; two to be attended by each Chancellor twice a year—which should be perfectly satisfactory to our brethren in the west; and those in the east should be among the first to afford them such relief.
I will now subjoin a statement of the cost of each plan:
 1. To two additional judges of the court of appeals. $ 5000  2. To Chancellor Brown & Tyler (if put on circuits) $ 500 in addition 1000†  To chancellor Taylor do. do. 3331 3  3. To another chancellor for the western country $ 2000†  To the other chancellors (in addition) 13331 3  4. If the courts could be amalgamated the cost would be as follows:  To 15 judges of the Gen'l Court $ 5000 as chancellors $ 6500  To 3. Chancellors $ 500 each as judges of the Gen'l Court 1000  To 1 do. do. 3331 3  $ 7833 1-3   
I take it for granted that the reform will take place in the court of appeals; and that the system of amalgamation will be abandoned for ever, and therefore I shall say no more about the expense of it.
But, if to carry the courts of chancery more convenient to the people, be an object, then I apprehend, the district plan will be adopted with or without another judge:—without another judge the cost would be equal to a capitation tax of less than the fifth of a cent, agreeably to the last census; and with the addition of another chancellor, would be equal to a like tax of less than half a cent; if then, either of these plans be desirable, the cost can be no objection: for the people would willingly meet it; and much more, for the benefit of the experiment.
A. O.
THE TIMES, No. 3—In our next.
There were no papers from Washington, her yesterday morning's mail.
Our readers must excuse the absence of the paper, as one of our pressmen is absent.
DIED—Mrs. MARIANNE SAUNDERS, the amiable Consort of R. Saunders, Esq. of Williamsburg.—How delightful to the liberal mind is the contemplation of a Being so nearly approaching perfection! Her exquisite beauty was refined by the countenance of an Angel, truly indicative of her heart, as evinced in every duty of life—Death, for years, was approaching her with slow and steady step—So far from being alarmed, she could not be even discomposed at what to others would have been a terrific approach—Her piety and fortitude enabled her to the last moment to support her cheerfulness, and to carry her through the tender details of maternal attention to two lovely cherubs, too young, fortunately, adequately to feel how great their loss—Not so with her other connections and acquaintances! If they feel more acutely; may their Religion and Reason more matured in time, teach them acquiescence at least, if not to sorrow like those who have no hope!
Richmond Theatre.
On Friday Evening, December 29, 1809, will be presented the celebrated Comedy of the
Soldier's Daughter.
To which will be added (for the first time here) the Grand Burletta of
MIDAS;
OR, THE ASSEMBLY OF THE DEITIES.
FOR SALE a tract of Land, containing about 500 acres, lying in the county of Hanover, and within ten miles of the City of Richmond—adjoining the lands of Capt. John A. Richardson, Mrs. Whitlock, the tract of land whereon Washington Henry Academy has been long established, &c. The peculiar and favorable situation of this tract of Land together with the many valuable qualities attached to it, will render it an object worthy the attention of any gentleman, who may be inclined to purchase a valuable seat convenient to the metropolis of the State—any person inclined to purchase, may obtain information of the terms, by application to Maj. Robert G. Payne, at the Globe Tavern, or to the Subscriber living in Fluvanna county.
SAMUEL RICHARDSON. Fluvanna County, Dec. 28. w384
THE Subscriber contemplating a removal thither to the City of Richmond, or some other place for the Education of his Younger children, wishes to lease for three years the Fluvanna seat with such parts of the adjoining lands as may be agreed on.
Wm. MAYO. December 28. w385
ONE hundred dollar BANK NOTE retained from a servant; the owner may have it on proving his right, paying the expense of advertising and applying to
SKWALL OSBOON. December 28.

SIR,
It is not time that Virginia shall step forth
and emulate her sister states in objects of im-
provement and great national importance. Small
narrow prejudices and local considerations prevent
a great and respectable state from pursuing a
course which would promote patriotism and
interest itself so plainly point out and prescribe?
Virginia heretofore foremost in patriotism, and
distinguished for her zeal in promoting the po-
litical rights of the people of America, is now to
into a fatal lethargy upon subjects which relate
to her own domestic economy and policy, or to
rise superior to the contracted views and petty
interests of some of her blindfolded citizens. Some
attempts, it is understood, have heretofore been
made to introduce a tax on dogs, which have
always been hated from the mistaken opin-
ions of some of the members of the Assembly,
and because it is supposed to interfere with the
pleasures of others, I mean the pleasures of the
chase. If it is an object worthy of the legislature
as it relates to revenue, surely it could be be-
lieved that such a law would tend to promote the
permanent interests and independence of our
state, an independence upon foreign powers, we
should not for a moment hesitate. It appears to
me, that in the present state of our country, it
behoves us to extend every encouragement to the
improvement and raising of sheep. It cannot,
would seem, be doubted by any intelligent, re-
flecting man, that whilst we have such a number
of dogs whose mischief can in no way be re-
strained but by the interference of the legislature,
that the end proposed is impracticable without
their aid. When it is considered that night is the
time for the depredations of these animals, that
they are extremely sly and difficult to detect, and
that when detected, it is too late to prevent the
greatest injuries, since whole flocks will previ-
ously have been taken before them. It must be evident
that a diminution of their numbers is essential to
destroy the evil, that such a diminution would
take place in the event of such a law, can be as
little doubted. The interest of the sheep-holder
will be immediately promoted, and all descrip-
tions of society will ultimately be benefitted, even
the fox-hunter himself not excepted. How des-
titute of patriotism must that man be, who a
slave to pleasure or to avarice, who, rather than
pay a few dollars to go into the treasury of his
own country, would be willing to sacrifice the in-
terest and portion of the independence of that
country! In justice, however, to fox-hunters, it
must be remarked, that there are some of the most
independent among them, who would approve of
such a law, and who think that a man who can
afford to keep a pack of hounds, may afford to
pay a tax on them, when the interest of the public
requires such a sacrifice. It is true, that many
of these gentlemen of fortune are so accus-
tomed to the luxury of foreign manufactures that
they would be ashamed to appear in the domes-
tic garb of their own country. How different
were the sentiments of our forefathers, who chose
rather to subject themselves to every privation,
to forego the luxuries to which they and their
families were accustomed, to brave the dangers
of the tented field, and to leave the traces of the
blood which trickled from their naked feet, than
to give up a particle of that independence so dear
to their hearts! But alas! we are enervated by
luxury, we are corrupted by our habits, and the
men of the present day are inferior in courage
and fortitude and hardihood, to the women of
those times. This remark is to be confined to
those who have been raised in that luxury and
ease and effeminacy, so inconsistent with that
hardy life to which the soldier is inured, and
which makes us feel so sensibly our dependence
on foreign powers. The patriotic Mr. Living-
ston, whose name will be mentioned with honor
by the future historian of our country, has en-
deavored, by a plain statement of facts, to prove
to our sister states of the east, that even as an
article of commerce, the profits of their wool may
be made equal to the immense profits derived
from the cottons of the south. Is there any
thing in the climate or the soil of Virginia, which
would prevent us from deriving equal advantages
from this prolific source of wealth? It is to be
feared that there is something to be found in our
sacrifice of solid advantages to pleasure, in our
love of the pageantry of foreign countries rather
than plain homespun, which has acquired an as-
cendancy over our enraptured minds. I have
seen some time past in some of our newspapers,
a proposition from our sister state, Maryland, to
exempt sheep from the payment of debt, in or-
der to encourage domestic manufactures. If this
subject should be taken into consideration by
our Assembly, they in their wisdom will decide
how far the latter measure may come in aid of
the former, or whether the latter alone is suffi-
cient. I am not so attached to my own opinions
but that I should be ready to adopt those of o-
thers, who wished to attain the same great end.
I am aware that the latter measure may ex-
cite the indignation of merchants, &c. particu-
larly British merchants, who would raise a cry
against anything American, especially, that
which should encourage our manufactures.
But we have the happiness to live in a country of
freemen, whose primary interest is in the soil,
and whose legislators represent the holders of
that soil. Whatever their interest and their
will require, it is their solemn duty, if in their
power to accomplish, and that will, expressed
through its proper organ, becomes the law of
the land. There are a number of citizens who
would procure merino sheep, and others of an
improved kind, if there was not so great a pro-
bability of losing them. It is even believed that
some have advertised, and have lost the value
of their purchase in less than a week by the ra-
pacity of dogs. We only want a little encou-
ragement to induce us to bestow our attention on
this most valuable stock. And after all, it is
thought a tax on dogs, would be more effectual
than any other means that can be devised,
to accomplish the proposed end. It will be at-
tacked by the wilfulness of the day, with all the
aspersion of ridicule, which they seem to con-
sider as the only test of truth. But this is a test,
in the infallibility of which a good christian will
not confide, since the most holy of all institutions
has been tried by the same standard, and has
remained unshaken for ages, whilst the greatest
states and empires have fallen into ruin.
A FREEHOLDER.
ARCHER'S RESOLUTIONS.
The following is a correct copy of them, as amend-
ed and adopted
BY THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES OF MARY-
LAND.
Dec. 15, 1809.—Whereas the present relations
of the U. States of America with the belligerent
powers of Europe, give us but little room to hope
that they will seriously abandon those unlawful
measures of retaliation on each other, and of vio-
lent and indefensible aggression and encroach-
ments on the rights of neutral states, which they
have adopted, so inimical to the laws of nations
and the free navigation of the seas, and our coun-
try free, flourishing and independent, and resting
on the basis of its existence, upon the industry,
public spirit and disinterested patriotism of its
citizens, contains within its bosom the seeds of
almost every comfort, convenience and luxury of the
Eastern hemisphere, which, if by careful and
tender hands they be nurtured and cultivated,
will flourish in maturity in the midst of a grate-
ful people grown by their assistance, and con-
ducted by their prosperity to a proud state of
perfect and enviable independence on the com-
merce and manufactures of the nations of Eu-
rope.
And whereas it is the indispensable duty of the
representatives of an enlightened people who are
resolved to live or die freemen, to propose such
measures and enact such laws as will be necessa-
rily conducive to effectuate so desirable an ob-
ject, and to place themselves and their constitu-
ents above the odious necessity of surrendering
their dear-bought and high-priced independence
at the altar of foreign usurpation, or of bowing in
humble submission to the lawless and inault-
ing orders in council of Great Britain, or the
unauthorised and illegal decrees of the French
emperor;
And whereas no measures, which a state legis-
lature could adopt, would so effectually tend to
rear these commendable intentions into actual ex-
istence, as a strict attention to the encourage-
ment and promotion of domestic manufactures;
Therefore Resolved, by the general assembly
of the state of Maryland, That they will make
use of all means in their power constitutionally
to further, protect, encourage and promote the
growth and progress of domestic manufactures.
Resolved, That for this purpose, liberal and ef-
fectual measures should be taken to encourage
the raising and improving the breed of sheep.
Resolved, That sheep under the number of
twenty, shall be protected in the hands of every
individual from execution or attachment.
Resolved, That if forty men, or more, in any
company of militia or troop of horse within this
state, shall clothe themselves in full uniform of
woolen cloth of the manufacture of this state, to
be certified to the governor and council, by the
captain of the troop or company, and command-
ing officer of the extra battalion or regiment,
to which such troop or company may belong,
they shall be completely armed and accoutred
at the expense of the state, provided that sufficient
security be given to the governor and council
for the safe keeping of such arms, and their re-
turn when required.
Resolved, That each member of the general
assembly, who shall appear at the next session in
a suit of woolen cloth, of the manufacture of
this state, shall have his name enrolled on the
journals as a patron of domestic manufactures.
Resolved, That it be recommended to the good
people of the state to clothe themselves in the do-
mestic manufactures of this country.
By order,
JOHN BREWER, Clerk.
Resolution has been offered in the House of
Commons of North Carolina and ordered to lie
on the table, to expel John Clark, a member of
that House from Petersburg, for cohabiting
with the daughter of his wife. It was after-
wards taken up and referred to a select commit-
tee.
Message from the President of the United States
transmitting a copy of the correspondence with
the Governor of Pennsylvania, in the case of Gid-
eon Olmstead.
To the Senate of the United States.
Agreeably to the request in the resolution of
the 15th inst. I transmit a copy of the corres-
pondence with the Governor of Pennsylvania, in
the case of Gideon Olmstead.
JAMES MADISON.
December 16, 1809.
LANCASTER, April 6, 1809.
To his Excellency the President
of the United States.
SIR,
In discharge of a legislative injunction, I
transmit you the proceedings of the general as-
sembly, on the long litigated cause of Gideon
Olmstead and others, versus Elizabeth Sergeant
and Esther Waters, executrices of David Ritten-
house, deceased, late treasurer of Pennsylvania.
Believing it will tend to a more perfect under-
standing of the subject, I take the liberty to add
a copy of an act of the General Assembly relative
thereto, passed the 4th instant; and also beg
leave to refer you to two other acts, the one pas-
sed February 1st, 1801, and the other, April 2d,
1803.
While I deeply deplore the circumstance which
has led to this correspondence, I to this correspondence, I am consoled
with the pleasing idea, that the chief magistracy
of the union is confided to a man who merits, and
who possesses so great a portion of the esteem
and the confidence of a vast majority of the vast