Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

eloquent. 0 The minstrel approached the window—she had not presence of mind, per chance not inclination, to close ttie blinds,— He took her hand and pressed it fervently to his lips—she did not withdraw it, and the kiss was repealed again and agun After a while it was the unspoken language of lips—kissing without asking. Such is the power of music—Mhe divine goddess alone inspired them; 'hey had neither Feen nor heard each other utter a word. At length the stricken damsel whispered softly: “Ah, prithee, gentle stranger, discourse to me thro’ your guitar. We are alone—father and mother are wrapped in the arms of sleep and you can sing ine into elysium.” At thia moment a torrent of water came fumbling from the ganet window upon the de voted head of gentle troubadour, and a shrill voice at the same time exclaimed—- “Ben, you brack varmint ?If you come here agin wid your banjo ’sturbin de neigh bors, I’ll have something ’bout your scours dat you won’t like so well, I tell.” It is said that the romantic lady made a sud den oetreat, not a little chagrined at finding herself the rival of her house maid. Bow Wow.— The Poughkeepsie Tele graph relates that a few evenings since a per son who is fend of a dram stepped upto tne bar of a public house, and called for a glass of brandy and water. Theie were two or three persons in the room at the lime, one of whom, Mr. Sutton, a ventriloquist of high reputation, was engaged in reading newspapers at the ta ble. The man took up the glass with an evi dent mark of satisfaction, and was in the act of potting it into his lips, when ‘how wow-wow, appeared to come from a whiffet dog, as if in the act of biting at his leg. The man kicked and cried “get out” most lusiilv, in the same moment in doing which, he sei down hig glass and looked for the dog. But no dog was to be seen, and this excited his surprise in an es pecial manner. However he shortly conclud ed to “go ahead” and take his dram, hut in the act of a second tune lipping it to his lips, “bow-wow-wow” barked the dog louder than before, and snarled as if in earnest. The man jumped aside, kicked again, and halloed “get out,” evidently alarmed. He then look ed about for the dog, but as none was to be s«*en, he set down his glass, declaring he would not drink under such circumstances, and walked out. Mr. Sutton ought to be al lowed a pension by the Temperance Society. L<we and Matrimony.— We attended Mc- Donald Clark’s lecture on these subjects, the other evening, arid would not have been ab sent for ten times the price of admission; it was throughout thickly studded with truth and beau ty. We have heard him called the mad poet; this is idle—or if not, there is more “method in his madm ss,” than in the conduct of thou sands who are counted sane. We subjoin the TOTmwinrr remarks of his relation to old bache lors, as a proof of what we assert : “ In the vast (lower field of hum in affec tion, the old bachelor is ihe very scarecrow of happiness, who drives away th? li’ile birds of love, that come to steal the hemlock seeds of loneliness and despair. Where is there a inorc pitiable object in the world, than a man who has no amiable woman interested in Ins wel fare I How dismal docs his desolate room ap pear when he cemes home at night, wet and hungry, and finds a cold hear h or barren table and a lonely pillow, that looks like the white urn of every earthly enjoyment ! See the sick old bachelor in the dark afternoon of life, when his heart is sinking to its sundown ! Not a solitary siar of memory gleams over the dusk of his opening grave—no weeping wife to bend like a blessing over his dying bed, no fond daughter to draw his chilly hand into the soft pressure of hers, and warm his icing blood, with the revning furs of (infilling affection, no manly boy to link his breathing name with ihe golden chain of honorable society, and bind his history in the vast volume of the wot Id he is leaving forever. He has eat —drunk— and died—and earth is glad she has got rid of bun; for he has d* nr little else, but crump his soul into the Circumtercnce of a sixpence, and n<» human but his wasiiei woman will breathe a mjh at his funeral.” A widowed lady of our acquaintance whose daughters were old enough to be sought after, was holding forth in their presence and ours, in a very edifying manner, upon the advanta ges and comforts of a single life. “.A hus band is by no means necessary,” said she, “to •he regulation and support of a family. I man mine, tor example, as well ns a husband could do.” We sat silent, knowing tho art of management which our female friend pos sessed; and wo accordingly looked across the bre place tn see how the argument operated with the younger friends, for whose special bo , hoof we were sure it hid been in ide. “ M .rna F may be ri’ht and I dire say that she is,” said one young lady; ** we sec hi her t.ow well a J.idy imy manage and main am a family with out a husband; but it appear* to me a nusband would be necessary in getting a family to gether.” AicA* Aames.— The Illinois Pioneer give, •he following list of nn’k nam ad .pt- d• • distinguish the ciliz ns <«t the '.Vr-.iem S at*** In Kentucky tbev are called Corn tn.a era. Ohio . • Buck* yes, Indiana - . Hoosiers, Illinois - - Sui kers, Mis souri . . Pukes, Michigan r. . WiKihertnea, T«» yankees are called Eels. In a case of assault and battery, where •tone had been throw n bv the defend «i»t, following valuable evidence was drawn u .t u Y >rksiure man: “Did you sec tho defendant threw . a’.jEsi” “I saw a stone, and Pze pretty sure defend ant t tiro wed it.” “Was it a large ston< •?” “1 should say it wur a ’argish stone.” “What was ns size?” “I should say a sizable stone.” “Can’t you answer definitely how big i was?” “I should say it were a stone of some big ness.” “Can’t yon compare it to some other ob ject?” “ Why, if I wur to comoire it, so as to give ' s >me noti >n of the stone, I should say it wer< as large as a lump of chalk.” From the Standard of Union. Did Georgia Nullify in 1826 and 7. As' we have shewn, there was no session of Con gress from the div 'he Treitv of the Indian Springs was ratified, until tin* first Monday, it being the 4th div of December thereafter— That there was during that year, an angrv cor respondence between the Governor of Geor gia and the officers of the General Govern ment, is well remembered, growing out of the opposition to the fulfillment of the Treaty by the Indians, the death of Mclntosh, and the special agency of Gaines and Andrews. Thus Matters stood it the meeting of Congress, in December, 1825. At the commencement of that session the controversy arising out of all these circumstances, constituted one of the subjects of most anxious solicit de—\ dele gation from the Creek nanon repaired to Washington City, at the opening of that ses sion, which was met by a delegation of the Mclntosh Indians. It is not out purpose in offering th'S exposition, to pdli.ite or justify the course pursued by Mr. Adams’ adminis tration in regard to the subject —Ta it co irse has already received our unqualified condem nation. ; We are dealing with the Georgia aspect of the question for the purpose of answering the interrogatory at the head of this communica tion. Whether from obstinacy, or from what other cause, it is not now necessary to enquire; it had been manifest from the date of the Se cretary’s order ><> the commissioners in May 1825, to pay over the $200,000 to General Gaines, th it it was not the intention of Mr. \datns to abide by the treaty of the Indian Springs. Shortly after the meeting of Con gress tn December. 1825, Mi. Adams set about making a ne v arrangement with the In dians, for the lands ceded by that treaty. The result was the formation of a treaty with the Creek delegation on the 24ih of January, 1826, winch was communicated to trie Senate of the United St ites for ratification on the 31 st of .• same month. Tins treaty was ref'rixd »i the same day to the Committee of Indian af fairs, of winch Col. Benton, of Missouri was chairman, and on the 17<h of March following that r-nrn mu wrt. .d -Adlww rtrg irsotu- tions : “ Resolved. That the Senate do not advise and consent to the ratification of the treaty, made at Washington on the 24'h of January, 1826, between the Secretary of War, <m the part of the United States, and the chiefs and headmen of tho Creek Nation, on the part of said nation.” Although the reason'-' on which this resolu tion was b tsed, are not stated in the executive proceedings of the Senate, it was understood at the lime, and ever smee, that the commit tee proposed till' rejection of >he treat' , be cause it did not etn >race ail the lands then oc cupied by tho Creek I idians within 'he limits ol Georgia. In consequence of <he forrt’om ’ resolution, and the fact just mentioned, the Creek delegation was indu ed to agree ■<> an additional article which was com hided on the 31-t of AI iron, 1826, winch was supposed bv many, to embrace all tlm lands included in the treaty of me 12th of February, 1825. The ireity of the 2 lili ofj muarv, and the addition al article of the 31st March, wis ratified by the Senate on the 21st of April, 1526. In all tliest transactions, it was well understood at the time, that Col. Benton exercised his pow erful influence to induce the Indians to make an arrangement which would satisfy all the chums of Georgia And it is believed that the impression on his mind was, that a || (bn hud claimed by her was included, m f ac t, t s nO i m brins, bi lo* addition d article .>f the 31st of Match, 1826- Not much ttm nad elapsed after it e conclusion of me 'oregomg anan.’n ments, before it was ascertained, mat all the ( reek lands within the limits ol (>. orgia, were not included, and the final adjustment seems to have been placed, bv the officers of the General Government, upon the ascertain ment of the bound try between the states of Georgia and Alabama—a matter which should not have been suffered to mingle with the sub ject, and which hit no necess-irv connection wi h the q .estton now .n d r consideration. la l oughout the year 18-6, ’h<« panics main t anted 11. e -talus quo, I >emgi, iusi-.iing <m me enlorcement ut the t.eaty of 1825, .ml \lt. Glams lusts.i.<g that ihd treaty wis tmpeise <ted by the arra .g»'m»*n c died the new treaty, w iid), with its addili m d article, wis i a ified •v the Senate on t: < 21-t of April. 1826. On 29 11 <>l January. 1827. too Se rotary of War .d !res-ed a cmnm >m an mn, t | ie Governor »t Georgia win i» wk ms vered by tile defi m* e so well remembered, and on which d fi rn i , i t» >s been attempted to set up he doe rs le o! nullifi .tio , as the d » < f ne „f Hl ,. • ernment of Georgia m 1825,6, and 7- Bv i short Hid imp irti >. ex iu> 11 ton ot tin? c<»r ..spondeuce tiet veen the Secretary of Gar id Goverum Troup, . .J the letter of th' 1 It - *' i > he members ot Cougresa from Georgia, i I >t:er referring to certain instructions • ch h id oeen g.ven by the Secretary of War he Viren agent, u wdl be seen that G'»ve- • Troup did not place the resistance of Gen. nullification, and that s«» ft n mKing Hie ground of u>dh i< a'mn. he ac "> ed in th new r .ty, awd thr c ntro.er- j w<Xa closed by the tre ity concluded ry Tho. L. MrKenny and John Crowell, with the hiefs and headmen of the f’reek nation, a he agency on the 15 h of November. 1827 V'd the article concluded by Crowell on th’’ 3d of December, and ratified by the Senate of he United States on the 26th of February •’at ion, of all the rßmnant of their lands within he Stale of Georgia.” Ina letter written bv Governor Troup to the Secretary of War on the 26’h nf January, 1827, he savs : “ I can not sufficiently express mV regret that I should on anv occasion, however, inno cently have misunderstood or misrepresented you—on the one to which von have referred in your last communication I was particular tn avoid if—it gives me much more pleasure I assure von. to refer it to an ohttiseness of in tellect, than to anv obscurity in the language you employed. I did think mvself justifiable by that language to conclude that it was lh“ intention of the President tn acquire by the instrument called the new ’Teatv all the lands within the Creek limits claimed by Geor gia. and it was the more gratifying to me, to come to this conclusion, because an opportu nity presented of placing the President before the people of in a favorable light in relation to a of deep concernment to them, on which they had felt sorely aggreved and wounded, and felt so because of their be lief, correct! vor incorrectly founded, that if there had been intention to do right, right would have been done” Jyc. The whole ten or of this letter shews Governor Troup’s a•- quiescence in ’he new treaty, and is filled with reasons why the whol ■of th- land claimed bv Georgia ought tn have been obtained by it.— This point is sufficiently shewn by he forego ing extract. In the same month, on the 31st of January, 1827. the Secretary of War issued an order to John Crowell, the Creek agent, o which the following is an ex ract ; “ I therefore enjoin it on ynu as a duty of great importance, to adopt such mode as may seem in your discretion to be best to obtain their consent to relinquish their hold on these pme barrens, which can be of no value to them, and thus restore that state of quiet, which it is so much the desire of the Executive to realize. On ascertaining the views of the Chiefs, you will communicate them to the Department; and also at the same time the amount of the consideration money, which they will be wil ling to receive for (hose lands.” In reference to the foregoing order of the Secretary, G >v Troup addies-ed a letter to the Georgia dele gation in Congress in the 21st February, 1827, of which the following is a part : “ Gentlemen—l was glad to learn by the m fil to d iv, that measures hid been taken by h President si’iseq to the comm mica ’i >i of the S- r-reiary " Wir of 'he 29th oh. to pr ic.ire te lands im on: ay the ins rumen! called the Nt w Treaty. I h ive nniform'y tir ged this rne S tro. <> ifhe G a. ri 1 G>. era mem C-...,, . m-»ni < press em wTTn'igTTess to adopt it, and in no part ot rny correspondence m »re strenuously, than tn my letter to the Se cret uy of War, of the 26tu of J tnnarv”—The letter from which the first quotation was made. In the same letter, after referring to the then recent menace of the President, and his defi ance, Governor Troup says, “ so far as a de termination was expressed to resort to the civil process, it was decided to resort to the like process, to sostaiM according to the con stitution and laws of the United Stales, and the constitution and laws of the State, the public officers of Georgia engaged tn the execution of their duties under the orders directly of its Legislature and Executive authorities.*’ He next proceeds to give his views of the proper mode of settling doubtful questions of sove reignty between a State and ’he United States, and exprea-.es the opinion that negociation is the proper mode. “ until a competent tribunal shall lie assigned by the Constitution itself, for the adjustment of them. lam not wanting m confi lence in the Supreme C >urt of the Uni ted States, in ail questions fallin.’ within their acknowledged jurisdiction —-as men, I would not hesitate to refer our cause to their umm iage”—again—“ The states cannot consent to refer to th? Supreme Court, as of right and obligation, qie lions of sovereignty between them and the United States, because the court being of exclusive appointment bv the Govern ment of the United Stales, it will make the United States judge in their own cause. This reason is equally applicable to a state tribun 4. H nee th? difficulties likely to arise even by a resoii to the Civ I : >r »ce»s—tnd thus you will perceive '<» infin-dy pr • rutile it is to car ry into eff i- mm 4*t»i?ly, '>><• mens-’r” on templafed by the instructions to the \gem.’’ These aie the itstriictions given by secretary of War to the Agen* above quo'ed, and bear ing dale the 31st of January, 1827. But, to leave nothing in doubt, we will quota the clo sing sentence in Governor Troup’s letter to the Georuia Delegation in Congress from which the foreg iing q .citations ar.' m d". “ H >p’ng that tl.e President wdl not tad in the cmitoini I ifed negociation, and that the matiers tn difference may be speedily nd ami cably mjusted to the enure sa istactmn of the parne* in toe controversy, i have not hesna t d to m »ke to you this frank disclosure and expi itiati<>n, that v >u may u-e it at y mr dis crti hi, o promote the peu-e and h<>r ixinv wliicn oiiifh ever io subsist-bei veen ihes ate md he Uon>'d Stales, and in which, I assure you. n uie can feel a deeper .'Oiiceru and inter rst man Y ours, Re-pectfullv. G. M. IROUP.” “ The lion, the Senators a d Kepresen i lives ol Georgia io the Congress of die U States. We hsvo now shewn, that so far from th. taci of Governor Troup’s navmg placed tti s'a’e on the pnn-'iple .if Nullifi' ,tion in 1825 6, and 7. he a.- ually oppos 'd the nullifies i of \L Aditns m 1825' md ilia after the'hr »t violence m 1827. ne U'ged the aece sits obtaining th? remaant of land, hot included in the New treaty, by a subsequent arrangeriic nt with the Indians—This was done as before stated by Thomas L. M< Kinney mid J >!, Crowell on the 15th November, and by John Crowell on 3d December, 1827, winch ar angemenl or treaty was communicated to the Senate of the United states, by Mr. Adams, or» tie 22d of January, 1827, in the following message, and ratified on the 26th of February, 1828.” “ To the Senate of the U. Slates : Washington, 22d J muary, 1827. I transmit to the Senate, fortheir consider ation and advice, articles of agreement, signed at the Creek Agency, on the 15th November last, by Thom is L. M Kinney a .d J >lm Cow ell, io behalf of the United States, and by the Linle Pi ince, and other Chiefs and headmen of the Creek Nation; wit!, a supplementary article concluded oy (lie said John Crowell, with tne chiefs and head men of the nation, in general council convened, on the 3d instant, embracing a cession by the Creek nation of all the remnant of their lands within the State of Georgia. Documents connected with the nogocialiou, the treaty, and the instructions under which u was effected, are also communicated to the Senate. JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.” Thus it was, that the President having suc ceeded in “ the contemplated negociatioii,” the matters in dtff rence” were amicably ad justed io he entire saiisfaction of tne parties in controversy,’’ and not by nullification m>r any oilier “ stne remedies,” as it has been so often and confi lentiy asserted. One question mo'e and we will close —Iftiie Union has n<> sovereignty, vvtiat “ questions of sovereign ty” can arise between it and the respective suites, to be settled by “ negociauon” or oth erwise ? A TROUP MAN OF 1825. From the Telegraph. Nullification and the Nullificrs. It is remarkable that the State Rights men, although they all insist upon the right ot a Si igle state to nullify, to resist the laws of the Um: d States ai pleasure; yei there is no two of them that derive the right from the same principles, from the same clause or provision of the constitution; or arrive at tho conclusion that the right which they claim is a conslition iil right from <he same process of reasoning. Though the same looseness of construction, me same disposition to base important princi ples on inference and implication, is common to them all; yet one takes his start from one point, and another from another, and by steer ing directly opposite courses, and by following a directly opposite rain ol reasoning, they all i.riv. it me appointed mud zvous ol nullifi cation at lust. Tne ultra null fiers of the Calhoun school, ba-c 'heir d<>cum. »p »ti tne . mac, mdtvi-üblr. sovereignty ol tne -dates. lut Slate giverii ments, say tney, ire perfect sovereignties, and me federal govermnuo is only their agent: and therefore mental) governments, as me princi pals, have a light to retuse obedience to all those ics of their federal agent, wiieietn they have exceeded their chartered instructions But it would seem to >s that if the state gov ernmeiils are the principals, and the federal government only an a_eucy, then it would tn ke no kmd of difference woollier an act of the federal government was consiitutiunai or not: me state government would tney nave equally Hie same right of resistance —a right based on their sovereignty could tie ex ercised ai discretion, and that discretion would be its only limit. But there are others again, such as Giliner, Foster, Gamble, who cannot go ihe length oi asserting that ihe states are pet feet sovereignties: they are forced to admit that ihe Uoitied States Government is really a govermnen : and cons'quendy they are diiven to seek lib right of iiuHiiic.mon from some otnei principle. As they have not cende sceiide 1 to expi im their mode of reason) ig, ot tne steps hy which ihey ainve at then con clusion, we ate ef> in ‘lie daiK on this head. Judge Beirien m Ins audre-s to the nullifi ers ot Savannah at tneir aimiversaiy celebr > non, and which is just now going tire rounos in tne newspapers, tus taken anoth r view of the subject. And as ms eloquence was in spired the “Thing of bine, wim iritige and tassels” which waved over mm duimg me les Dval, his ora'iot) tn iy be taken as me «*ie< d of tne blue school nulhficfs. lim judge does not in express words deny the government to h: a 1 rn>n r.t, though he l ibers to show by in fet’cuce, mat it is >my Yet he does no thence derive tn right to milhly. Nay, his reiH HKs on mis he >d very cieuiiy esiao lish the conti ary. “The p>wem (says he) which were confer red upon the hmciiotiari. s of die sta e govern ments, were so cotdeired by die people of cacti s;a e to ne governed. 1 (lose which were eiitrusied o ihe lederal agems, were con ferred by the people of ra< h state <>cl nz con jkiintli/ with- every other stale oj Ihe conjcaei a cy. fu either case me powei was revok <tde at me will oi those by wtmm it wad cumened; because in a Gee government, n is an admixed maxi ti, linii Hie sov< r igu'y resides wph the people. But in the application ot this prmci > pie lo l ose two classes ol agents, very enfi r ent circumstances would trn tumid lo exist- ; 1 tie pow< r» winch had b en cuidvired <m the late luuciionuriea, w<-uid ue H VoKabh at tne • ill ol tile people <d tuesta e conferring them, i ney alone had given, and were therefore oinpeieut to reclaim mem. But me powers Hiidi had been entrusted to tneir federal a _enls, had been conJ rred by ihe people ot ach stale, conjointly with those ot every oth r state. It was obviously competent to the >e< pie of any state, by their single volition, » reclaim that which had been thus conferred i / die joint act of all die sia es. It would n-relofe seem to follow that those powers nus conferred by the joint act oi all, ami con- ■ setjuently not revokable by the separate veil- j tion of any one slate could only be reclaimed u the manner pointed out in the constitution, ■>r agreement between the parties, that is, by the assent of three fourths of the states *’ Now after the admission of these broad principles; an effort to establish nullification, would no doubt, be a hopeless task wit h men »f ordinary capacities. But the judge is a practised metaphysician, and he has arrived at the proposed point over a track that seems to have excited the wonder and admiration of tho nulhes themselves. But if the judge is correct tn his reasoning and conclusions; if ins nullification is the true do trine, then, certainly, that of the uhr is must fie wrong —for nothing can be m>>re d>ff ‘rent. If it be true that the peonle of one state can. not reclaim powers vested in the United States government, because the instrument Conferr ing those p overs was a compact between themselves and the people of all the states— then what becomes of the doctrine of the en ure sovereignly of the stages, of the doc.nne that a state may rightfully do whatever the people in convention may choose to do ? What becomes of the doctrine of secession, and indeed of the whole catalogue of state remedies and state action ? But the Judge is a nullifier nevertheless.—. Though a state cannot annul! a contract made by all without the consent of all; yet she may throw herself upon her sovereignty whenever she pleases. She cannot break the contract herself—she is indissolubly bound by it. But she can at any time assert that congress, that the fedeial government, have usurped powers that do not belong to them, and by so dmng have violate, and consequently annulled the contract. She may at discretion assert that the contract is annulled by the other party, and ther-upon she herself is absolved from all its obligations ! A state may not break the con tract herself, she is inviolably hound by it; but she may at any time when it suits her con venietH'?, assume it to have be n broken by the o her party, and may thereupon herself act as though it were altogether abrogated ! 11— Now this is a quibble exactly after the judge’s own heart; and had it not been original with him, its congeniality with the constitution of his mind, would have ensured it a ready ac ceptance. But it would seem to u«, that a party to a ■ contract, from which she herself could not rightfully withdraxv, could no’, for the same reasons, assume ii to be violated, and conse quently annulled, by the other party. Gwe a party to a compact this right, and its sanction, its binding authority is a mere mockery. It has no sanction, no authority, other than the caprice of the parties. Bui the constitution of the United St ites docs not rest upon such pi incudes. Accord ing to the first position laid down by Judge Berrien, it is a cornu ct m winch ill the people <>f .11 ihe States are parties, from a inch people* of no one stale have a right to withdraw, with-* on the consent of the oi her. Nor has one pa*. iy any grea er right to assume it to have bees annulled by th'* other party, and consequently herself realized from its sanctions. 'This would le doing in an indirect manner, what she confessedly could not do directly, and the turpitude of the act would be increased,, by the exercise of ihe fraud and deceit. But tie Judge asks, shall we submit to (ho exercise of usurped powers? Wo ask in re turn, shall we resist constitution tl ones ? and ihis bring us to another, who shall decide for us? we answer, the umpire which all parties itawe agreed upon. In the formation of the constitution an umpire was established for the settlement of disputes arising under it; and that disputes should be thus settled, is a I part of the con’raci, which is as binding as any 'other part. Upon this head we wd| quote t* I paragraph from the Federalist, which from tho origin of our government has been the text ! book of ihe Ri publicans upon all constitution al questions. No. 39. “It is true that in controversies refilling io the boundary Detween the two JU nsdictioiis the tnbun il which is ultimately to dei-ido, is to be established tindor the general government. Bui ibis does not change the principle of (lie case. 'I i>e*decisi<in IS to bo impartially made, according to tne rules of the Coiis.itunon; and all the usual and inos effec tual precautions are taken to secure this un« parn ilny. Some su< h triuuti.il <s clearly es -eritial to ptevent an appeal to llie swoid, and a dissolution ot’ilie compact; <nd that it ought kj be esi dilished under th* General, rather han under ihe local (aovernmeiits; or, to speak more properly, that :t could no safely established under the first afirne, is a position not lik* ly to b« comb iti d.” If therefore the federal government, through an appointed agent, “claim*” “to decide final* Jy on the extent id Hs powers” it is in virtue of the contract to which all are parties, and which therefore cun only be revoked by the consent of all. And even though in opposi* tion to the will of one or more ol the states, yet according to J ffersori the will of the majority must prevail over that of ihe mmorov. and we have tiie au.hordy <>f Proup for saying that the billot box is the only mode of correcting lne decisi ms of tue majority. From this there i* no appeal but to furce, and force is revolu* tion. I —.... , Very late from JSTcw York— By tho fast sailing-ship Newark. Captain Foster, from N. Y <rk, *e n- ve received papers of that city to V\eoii< *day inmni it'Jasi, 10m mat. inclusive, (except Monday’.*.) and Putladelphli papers ot i uesday. I'ne Colum >u* fiom Liverpool X and tiie Cli.irlemagiie frmn Havre, arrived at New York on the evening of ths 5 h, with files oi English and French paper* to the Ist ulf. inclusive. They contain no news of tmpor* tance. The celebration of (tie three days had taken pla' e m Parts, without any disturbance. The King of the Frencn read his speech to the Chambers on the 31st of Juh. Tho Cholera in Madrid, which had A