Newspaper Page Text
i'rtm the Savannah Georgian,
To the Editor of the Georgian :
Diah Sib ;—1 hope you will finJ room for the
enclosed beautiful lines, from the pen of Miss
Mwy E. Lee, of Charleston, which appeared in
the last Southern Rase. Miss Lee is the author
of “ The Lone Star," &c. in the Southern Lite
rary Journal, and a constant contributor to the
Rose Dud, under the signature of M. E. L. The
fast number of the Now York Mirror, in speak
ing of M. E. L. aays, “ At some future time we
will oiler evidence to our readers that we do not
overrate this young lady in predicting for her, if
she proceeds as she has begun, great cminence.-T.
THE BRAVE VOLUNTEERS.
A voice from the South tells o sad mournful
atory,
Os ruin, and carnage, and war’s dread alarms,
And the Angel of Freedom moves by in her
glory.
And summons Columbia’s proud patriots to
arms.
Not in vain docs she call, for the pure (lame is
gushing
Like the sun when it breaks lliroug the mor
ning's soft tears,
And the light of true courage is joyously flush
ing
The unclouded brows of the bravo Volun
teers
Think not that they part without feelings of
sorrow,
Prom friends that are nearest and dearest on
earth;
Ob I no, but they trust from the future to bor
row
Some meed of high valor, to double their
worth.
Each bright, sunny spot of their childhood seems
pleasant,
And warmer than evar its hearth-stone np
paars,
But affection itself, cannot weaken at present
The chivalrous truth of the brave Volunteeis.
Each father looks proud, and each mother sur
renders,
With kisses and blessings the son that she
bore,
While with quick kindling ardor each fund sis
ter tenders
The well burnished weapon, then struggles
once morn,
To hide the foul trailors of grief that will gath
er,
And hush in her bosom its torturing fears,
For who indeed wuultl nut u thousands times
rather
Give all than dishonor the brave Volunteers 1
For their country they strike ! and a fair con
stellation
Os beauty looks on ns they mount the sea
car,
While there comes like the cry of a union
bound nation,
Frqrn the hind of their sires a loud parting
hurrah !
They go, but amid that wild shout of commo
tion,
That like music unrivalled bursts full on their
ears,
What heart doth not odd in the voice of devo
tion,
"God prosper the cause of oun bravo Vol
unteers!" M. E. L.
Charleston, A. C,
FALSE PACKING. '
•fit a General Meeting of the Liverpool
AmKIUCAN CIIAMIIKII Os CoMMEUCE,
held 9,7 th of November, 183.5 f0r the
purpose of taking into consideration
and adopting the most effect aa I men-
Hires for the prevention of Frauds in
the packing of Cotton in the United
States: 1. 11. Barclay, Es»t. Pitksi
dent, in the Chair ; A Memorial
was read from the Association of
Cotton Brokers, cmerino: into de
tail of the grievances complained of.
It was
Hesolved, That (he same be printed
and appended to the present proceedings.
It was also
Resolved, That it be respectfully sub
mitted to the Factors and Merchants at
the shipping Ports, lo consider (he expe
diency ol applying to the Legislatures of
their respective Slates fur the enactment
of Laws, to make it imperative on each
Planter to have his name and residence
written or stamped on each package; the
effect of which would be to stimulate him
to increased care in the packing of bis
Cotton, so that bis reputation might be
established and preserved; anil whereby
those having claims to redress might be
enabled more readily to substantiate
them.
It was further suggested, that in the
meanwhile the Planters should be reques
ted voluntarily to affix their names on
the packages,lt being the opinion of this
Meeting, (hat Cotton so distinguished
would command a preference in the sale
in this market.
It was also observed, that as the frauds
are not generally discovered until (he
Cotton is opened at the Factories, from
whence the damaged part, or the whole
package, is returned to the Importer with
expenses, he is frequently called upon
to pay losses long alter his accounts have
been settled with the Shippers or Owners
of the Cotton ; who again have in such
cases at a still more remote period to seek
fur redress from the Factors or Planters.
Hesolved, That these Resolutions be
signed by the President, ami printed, and
that (he Members of the Association be
desired to transmit them to their corres
pondents in the United States, with a re
quest that they will adopt such measures
as may appear to them most likely to ac
complish the object in question. (Signed)
T. U. BARCLAY, President.
COTTON BROKERS’ ASSOCIATION,
•r#v Ijlvr spool, 6lh Nov. 1835.
ro HIE AMERICAN CHAMBER
OF COMMERCE.
\\ e ( ), e undersigned
Members o the Cotton Broker’s Asso
ciation beg leave to call the attention of
the American Chamber of Commerce to
a subject of considerable importance to
Hie Cotton I ratio in general, but particu
larly to that part of it connected with the
Sale and Import of Cotton from the Uni
ted Stales, viz. (ho fraudulent practices
in the packing of,Cotton.
This species of fraud has long been (he
source of much inconvenince and vexa
tion to all concerned in the Cotton Busi
ness ; but whether from the infrequency
wl the occasions, when distributed
amongst so many or from the smallness
«f the loss tn the scale of mercantile
transactions, no measures have hitherto
been taken to arrest its progress. F„,
the same reasons, to which may be added
the difficul'y of ibr.iinnig - lr- ~ ,
Claims arising from this cause are Ire-j
fluently demanded rather as a matter of
form, and often are altogether abandon
ed, and if allow ed on this side of the wa
ter, are seldom (as we understand) suc
cessfully prosecuted against the parties
on (he other. This impunity, as might
have been expected, lias operated as a
direct encouragement to such dishonest
practices, which, commencing with the.
lessor fraud of introducing Seeds, Waste,
Stones, and Sand, into the interior of (lie
bale, have at length extended to a whole
sale anil systematic plan of decqition and
plunder by means of “ False Packing .”
The ordinary mode of effecting this is,
by a plating or thin layer of good Cotton
on the two sides of the bale usually sam
pled, the inside being wholly composed
of a very inferior quality, in some cases
however (lie outer layer consists of a
quality differing only a few degrees front
that in the inside, which is again parked
in layers of various qualities, but all of
them worse than the outside ; the obvious
intention of which being to render the
fraud more secure by adding (o the diffi
culty and uncertainty of detection. The
experience of the present year furnishes
abundant proof ol the increase of this
practice. It is not now as formerly con
fined lo an occasional bale er two, but it
is extended to whole parcels of one or two
hundred bales in a lot ; and when it is
considered that the difference between
(lie real and apparent value of the Cotton
r may be three or four pounds sterling a
hale, some idea may he formed of the
magnitude and dangerous consequences
of the fraud.
Having now brought (he subject un
der the notice of those who are the most
deeply interested, as we conceived it to
he our duty todo, wc leave it to their
wi«dum and experience to provide a rente
tly.
Amongst other motives for our interfer
ence. is the desire wc feel to preserve un
impaired the confidence which has here
tofore subsisted between (be buyer and
the seller, and to maintain iluil character
for honour and fair dealing which has
ever been the the pride and boast of the
Cotton Trade.
[Signed by 59 Mercantile Houses.J
THE “ SUPPRESSED LETTER.”
Translated fur the Journal of Commerce,
Paris, 17th June, 1835,
•Sir: There no longer exists on our
pan any obstacles to the entire accom
plishment of the treaty concluded on the
4th of July, 1831, between France and
the United States. The project of law
relative to the indemnities reciprocally
stipulated in that treaty, after having
successively passed (he two Chambers,
lias received the royal sanction.
I say on our part, for every tiling now
depends on the Government of (lie Uni
ted States: it belongs to them to remove
the only obstacle that still subsists. By
virtue of a clause inserted in Art. Ist, by
the Chamber of Deputies, the French
government must defer making the pay
ments agreed upon, until that of (he Uni
ted Slates shall have explained the true
meaning and real purport of divers pas
sages inserted by die President of the
Union in his message at the opening ol the
last session of Congress, and at which all
1 Prance at the first aspect was justly of
fended.
The Government having discovered
nothing in that clause at variance wi'h
its own sentiments, or the course which
it had intended to pursue, the project of
law, thus amended on the 18th of April
by the Chamber of Deputies, was carried
on the 27th to the Chamber of Peers.
I herewith annex the expose which ac
companied it. The document will show
you, in a few words, in what light we con
sider the respective positions of the two
countries. 1 also annex the report of
the committee, presented by the Cham
ber of Peers, on the sth of June. , You
will thereby see bow far the House con
curred in the opinion of the Chamber of
Deputies.
Mr. Livingston has led Paris, without
waiting for the vote of the Chamber of
Peers, 1 caving Mr. Barton as Charge
((’Affairs. The letter by which lie accre
1 diled him to the French Government, is of
the 28th of April. You Will find a copy
i of it subjoined.
In a note dated 28tli, Mr. Livingston
assigns as the cause of his departure, the
■ silence observed by the French Guveru
■ merit in relation to a previous note of the
18th, in which that Minister, agreeably
: to orders from bis Government, deman
ded (he explanation of an expression
t made use of bv Mr. Serrurier, in a note
> he passed to Mr. Forsyth at the time he
I left. That explanation, sir, we will show
: ourselves very willing to furnish, if it
should be asked for again, when we our
i selves shall have received those which we
» have a right to expect,
t Annexed (lie copies of the two notes
j of the 18th and 27th.
t On the 23th, Mr. Livingston has ad
i dressed to me a third note or great length,
; in which, whilst he forbears making allu
t sion to the amendment introduced bv the
t Chamber of Deputies, be fully enters in
i to its principal and probably conseqtten
. ces, as you may ascertain by reading that
• paper. As long ns the amendment was
I but a simple project, the initiative of
• which did not even belong to the Govern
■ meat, I thought proper to abstain from
■ entering into any controversy on the snli
> ject with the Minister of a foreign Go
vernment. Now (hat the project has
) become a law by the concurrence of the
two Chambers,'ami the sanction of the
King, it is my duty to justify it against
objections wbloh are utterly goundless.
I shall first recall a few facts.
The project of law relative to (he exe
cution of the treaty signed on the 4th Ju
ly. 1831, had been presented three times
to the Chamber of Deputies, viz : (be 6th
of April, 1833 ; the 11 (It of June of the
same year, and the 13th of January of the
year following, when it was rejected bv
a majority of eight votes, on the Ist of
April, 1834.
JFlte news of its rejection was known at
M ashington on the 6th of Mav, through a
packet which sailed from Liverpool on
the 6th of April.
On the 4th of June, Mr. Serrurier in
formed the Secretary of State, that the
Kings Government had determined to
present anew (he project of law at the
"r rnT ” r the Chambers. The loss
of the bill having occasioned the resigna
tion of the Minister who had si-ned it
| "nd tins circumstance having caused dlf
feretit changes in the Cabinet, the Go
i 'eminent could not difinitivelv adopt
I that determination until the Bth of April
The brig Cuirassier, boarer of new in- t
structions lo Mr. Serrurier, had moreo
ver met with a long and stormy passage.
At the express request of Mr. McLean,
then Secretary of Slate, Mr. Serrurier
communicated the next day, in writing,
the declaration which he had already
made verbally. His note is dated lhcs:b
of June.
The reply of Mr. McLean is of the
27th. In Ibis reply, Mr. McLean states
in.cxprcss terms, in the name of his go
vernment, that the President of the Uni
ted States will rr.li/ on the assurance Mr.
, Serrurier has been instructed to give him,
i and will wail hereafter with confidence.
for the appeal that is lo be made lo the
1 new Chamber.
i Mr. Serrurier, in Ids note of the sth of
i June, had incidentally observed that it
i was the intention of the. French Govern-
I men! lo present again the rejected law at
I as carl;/ a period as our Constitution
i would permit. That intention was read ;
■ our desire was sincere, hut it naturally
■ followed from the very nature and terms
J of the engagement, that it referred to no
t particular and fixed period ; that it was
5 left dependent either upon the different
exigencies of our internal situation, or
i upon the object which both Governments
> were equally anxious to obtain,
s In the month of August, the Chambers
i were assembled, bat merely for form, and
t fur (he sole purpose of complying with
t the provisions of the 42d article of the
: charter. No project of law was either
s presented or discussed.
Mr. Livingston at Paris, and (he Pre
■ sident of the United States at Washing
t ton, having seemed to regret that the op
i porlimity of this accidental meeting had
1 not been embraced, to place again be
• fore (lie Chambers the project of the law
relative to the treaty of the 4th of July, it
was easy to make them understand, that
in acting with that precipitancy, we would
not only have departed from all establish
ed usage, hut coinpromittcd, instead of
• securing the passage of the law.
1 The same considerations were very
1 nn ( it rally opposed to the request made at
a subsequent period by Mr. Livingston
for a special session in the Fall. That
Minister must, no doubt, have urged
them with his Government, since the lat
ter showed itself entirely convinced of
their validity and justness.
The new Secretary of State, Air. For
syth, said in the month of October to
Mr. Serrurier. The President readily
understands why this business has not
been taken up at the opening of the ses
sion in dlugual', he cun now account for
the fact, that the demand made by Mr.
Livingston for a special meeting in the.
Pull was declined. Mr. Forsyth, it is
true added that the President could nnl
understand why the convocation of the
Chambers Jtad hern delayed until the last
dayt of December, instead of the begin
ning of that month. But that observation
falls before circumstances on which it
would be useless to dwell, this meeting
of the Chambers did in reality take place
mi tire Ist of December.
Nothing, consequently, could prepare
■ the French Government for the language
-‘ of the Message sent by the President to
1 Congress. We were aware that that
■ message would contain a statement of
the transactions connected with the Irea-
I ty of the 4tb of July. Mr. Forsyth had,
ion the 19th of November, given notice of
i it to Mr. Set-rurier. But Mr. Forsyth
had at the same time informed that Min
ister, that the President would simply
advise Congress to wait for the decision
of the Chambers.
What must then have been our aston
ishment when the message reached this
side of the Atlantic! And could it he
• expected that the French Government,
after having fulfilled the double duly of
satisfying its own dignity by recalling its
Minister from VVashington, and of re
deeming the faith of treaties by obtaining
from the Chambers the appriations neces
sary to the completion or the Convention
of the 4tlt of July ; after having tendered
to the Minister of (be United States bis
■ passports ; could it be expected, I repeat,
that the French Government would not
wait, before it resumed any communica
tion on the subject, with the Government
of the Union; and before it renewed
i with it the interrupted relations, that the
‘ latter would come forward and express
- itself in terms calculated to dispel the
.■ unfortunate interpretations to which thev
r Message had given rise ?
Such is in fact and in substance (he
i course which the amendment introduced
■* by the Chamber of Deputies has pointed
' out to the Government; such is the
' course which the Government intended
1 to have pursued, even if the law had not
■ made it (heir duty.
' Nevertheless, It is against this course,
so simple, so reasonable, that Mr. Li
s vingston seems to wish to protest before
hand.
Mr. Li vingston fully admits, in his
, note of tlie 27th of April, the right of
- foreign Governments, to take proper ex
' ceptions to the nets and language of (he
- Government which he represents.
( “Should the President,”he observes,
“do an official exective act affecting a
j, foreign power, or use exceptionable Inn
-1 guage in addressing it, through his Min
• ister, or through theirs; should a law be
1 passed injurious to the dignity of another
nation, in all these, and other similar ca
ses, a demand for explanation would be
' respectfully received, and answered in
the manner that justice,, and regard to the
dignity of the complaining nation, would
1 require.”
But he maintains that these principles,
the wisdom of which is evident, are not
applicable to an act by which the Presi
dent. sole representative of the nation to
• wards foreign powers, gives to Congress
i an account of the situation of foreign rc
• lations.
' “ The utmost freedom,” says Mr. Liv
’ ingston, —-“the utmost freedom from all
I restraint in the details into which he is
obliged to enter, of international con
cerns, and of the measures in relation to
them, is essential to the proper perfor
mance of this important part of his func
tions. He must exercise them without
having continually before him the fear
of offending the susceptibility of the [low
ers whose conduct he is obliged to* no
tice.”
“ Were an y foreign powers,” contin
ues Mr. Livingston, “permitted to scan
(he communications of the Executive i
their complaints, whether real or affected'
would involve the country in continual i
controversies; for the right being admit- i
ted, it would be a duty to exorcise it, by
demanding a disavowal of every phrase n
lliey might deem offensive, and an expla- t
nation of every word to which an impro- e
per interpretation could be given. The t
principle, therefore, has been adopted, e
that no foreign power baa a right to ask i
lor explanations of any thing that the i
President, in the exercise of his functions, j
things proper to communicate to Con- j
gress, or of any course he may advise |
them to pursue.” t
We cannot, sir, admit such a princi- ■
pie; \yc cannot admit it, at least without (
condition or limit, in an absolute, gencr- >
al.and peremptory sense. 1
It does not depend upon a nation, from i
(lie mere fact of its having adopted such t
or such a form of G ivernment, to acquire i
with regard to foreign powers, more right ]
than it would have hail, or to arrogate to i
itself other rights than those ffhieh it
would have enjoyed under any other form
of Government.
Nations are free to choose, without any
constraint, the Government they please i
—precisely for this reason, and under i
this condition, that such a choice con- i
cerns them exclusively,and that whatever '
that choice may he it cannot effect the
rights, or injure the legitimate interests
of other nations.
Now it is the acknowledged right of
every Government, when the legal rep
resentative, or when the official organ of
another Government, expresses himself
publicly in reference to it, in language
which is deemed offensive, to demand an
explanation of it. Such a right the Con
stitution of flic United States can neither !
abolish, modify nor restrict, ft is an in
tentional right (undroit international.) :
It. suits the people of the United States to
divide the power of the Union be
tween the President and a Congress.
Ise it so. It suits them to oblige the 1
President to give publicly to Congress
an account of the state of foreign relations.
• That right is unquestionable. But that 1
die President of the U. States, (he official
organ, the legal representative of the
Union towards foreign nations, thereby
acquires the right to press himself pub
licit) upon foreign Governments in lan
guage offensive to those Governments; .
that he should, in asserting the liberty,
the freedom necessary for such communi- 1
cations, dispense with all reserve in his
language, ami with all responsibility to- i
wards the powers whom that language
concerns, is what we cannot admit.
Irresponsibility (I’iuviolahilitie) wheth
er it relates to persons, to acts, or to
words, irresponsibility when it is legally
established, is a pure national insiitu
tion, a purely internal regulation, and
can never be used as an argument in the
intercourse which Governments hold
with each other. If it were otherwise,
and if we were disposed, after the exam
ple of Mr. Livingston, to carry the argu
ment to its extreme consequences, it
might be maintained that the President
of the United States has the right, provi
ded it be in a Message to Congress, to
impute publicly to foreign Governments
and to foreign nations the most odious
acts, the most perverse intentions; to
bold them up publicly to the animadver
sion of the world, without these Govern
ments or these nations having the right to
manifest the slightest resentment, since,
according to this very strange doctrine,
they would not even be allowed to lake
official notice of it.
To state such a doctrine, is to refute
it.
However, Sir, we do not wish to
exaggerate any thing. Mr. Liviim-
UO|S is perfectly right when he says
that thecause which he supports is, ;
in a general sense, common to all free
countries.—That all Govern incuts,
founded on the division of power,
and on the publicity of debates, have an
interest in repelling, on the part of for
eign powers, and inference with the com
munications which the Prince and his
Ministers, in constitutional Monarchies,
and in republics the magistrates entrust
ed with the Executive power, are called
upon to make to the Legislature. And
that is the reason, as Mr. Livingston ve
ry judiciously observes, that in France 1
ami in England, the language of the roy
al speeches is so reserved in every thing
that concerns foreign relations ; and it is '
the same motive, as you will observe,
Sir, in the Cabinet of Washington, that ;
has directed the conduct of France in ;
relation to the message of President
Jackson.—ls the expressions contained
in that Message had been inserted in a
Proclation, or any other act of the Exe
cutive power of the Union, we would
at once have called for an explanation.
Out of respect for the very nature of the
act, the French Government deemed it a
duty to manifest the sentiments it felt on
that occasion by instantly recalling its
Minister, and stating in a communica
tion, the motive for that recall; but it
did not ask for explanations; it was con
tented to expect them from the justice of
the Government of the United States,
and from the ancient friendship of the
American nation, not doubting that the
Government of the United States would
appreciate the difference in such cases,be
tween answering ami interpellation,ami
preventing, by a spontaneous determina
tion, by explanations readily offered, a
misunderstanding always to bo regret
ted. °
The amendment of the Chamber of
Deputies is conceived in the same spirit
of reserve and conciliation. It does not
make it the duty of the French Govern
ment to ask for explanations; it merely ,
supposes they will receive them.
M e are not mistaken, sir, in believing i
that (lie Government of the United States |
would appreciate that difference, since i
Mr. Livingston, as lie himself observes, ;
hastened as early as (lie 29th of January >
last, whcnithe Message of President Jack’- i
son had been only known a few davs, to >
offer us explantions at great length, of (
every passage of that Message which s
treated of (lie relations between the Uni- s
ted States and France ; and since that i
step and the explanations contained in his ,i
note of the 29thof January have receiv- \
ed, as he inform ns by his note of the a
29th of April, the entire approbation of
the President. i
Mr. Livingston was not astonished that
those explanations, as long as (hey were v
presented only upon his own personal re- v
spossibility, did not produce us the effect ti
he intended: but he supposes that beum fl
now clothed with the approbation of the v
President, they must satisfy all that the «
nicest sense of national honor could de- s:
sire. t]
He therefore makes it a point in his g
note of the 25th, to repeat and develope
them, in the hope that the French Gov
ernment by examining them anew, under :
the impression that they had become the
exuression of tfie sentiments of the
President, would deem them sufficient,
lie is so much (he more anxious to im
part to us his own conviction on this sub
ject on this subject, as he deems it im
possible for the Government of the Uni
ted States lo go any further. He even
seems to be apprehensive that future
events, which he need not specify, de
signating thereby no doubt the adoption
of the amendment of the Chamber ut
Deputies bv the other two branches of
the Government, may hereafter render
improper any allusion to explanations
presented under tiie influence of differ
ent circumstances.
We sincerely, wish, Sir, not to add to
the difficulties of the situation in which
i he two countries are respectively placed.
The question of date, to which Mr. Liv
ington seems, in this case, to attach an
importance which it belongs not to us to
appreciate, does not in any way alter eith
er (he nature or the extent of the duties
which are prescribed to us. If satisfac
tion had really been given to the just
susceptibility of the French Nation, as
early as the 291 h of January, (the dale
of Mr. Livingston’s first note,) and there
fore previous to the adoption of the a
mendment under consideration by the
Chamber of Deputies, or as early as
the 27th of April, (the date of Mr, Li
vingston’s second note,,) that is to say,
before the adoption of this same amend
ment by other two branches of the Le
gislature, we would be sincerly gratified,
i’he more the Government of the United
States would have shown a willingness
to explain itself, (he more we should be
ourselves to find the explanations satis
factory, and to view the solicitude of
that Government as a testimony in favor
of the intentions which had dictated the
Message of the President.
We will simply observe, before we
proceed:
First, that even supposing the explan
ations, given by the note of the 29th of
January, to have been such as we might
have wished them, they were, on the
eighteenth of April, the day of the
passage of the amendment in the Cham
ber of Deputies, nothing more than the
simple expression of the personal senti
ments of Mr. Livingston. This is an
observation which did not escape his no
tice.
We will also observe that by the pub
lication of Mr. Livingston’s correspon
dence, the Government of the United
States had excited against him such a
feeling of irritation, that it would have
been out of our power, even supposing
that we had considered that correspon
dence as containing nothing but what
was right and proper, to avail ourselves
of the document bearing his signature,
to repel the one or the other of the Cham
bers, the amendment under consider
ation.
I will now proceed to (he examination
of (he explanations which have been of
fered to us.
Mr. Livingston is right in thinking
that our objections to the Message of the
President are confined to these two
points.
Ist. The Message impeaches the good
faith of his Majesty’s Government.
2>l. It contains a threat to secure the
execution of (lie treaty by the fear of re
prisals.
It is indeed under this double point of
view that the Message of President Jack
son excited in France (he greatest indig
nation. The Cabinet of Washington
will readily admit that if the allegation
tone true the indignation would be just.
No Government, no people would for one
moment bear without itself either to the
direct or indirect imputation of a want of
good faith, or the idea of another Govern
ment or another people endeavoring to
obtain from it through menace, what
could only be granted by it to justice. It
must equally be admitted that when the
impression produced by the appearance
of any document is general; when that
impression is felt, not only by the whole
nation whom (he document concerns, but
even by foreigners, by uninterested peo
ple* by persons the least disposed to take
a part in (be contest, the vary univer
sality of that impression is a sufficient
evidence against the general tenor of the
document.
If we examine in detail the Message
of the President of the United States,
(I mean that part of it which relates to
the relations between the United States
and France,) it will possibly be found
that passing successively from phrase to
phrase, none will be met with (hat
cannot bear an interpretation more or
less plausible; none, of which, strictly
speaking it cannot be said that a simple
expose of such or shell or such a fact
true in itself, or the assertion of such a
right which no one one contests, or the
performance of such or such an obligs
lion imposed on the President by the
very nature of his functions. There
will certainly be found several in which
the idea of impeaching the good faith of
the F rench Gov era ment, or of acting u pon
it through menace or intimidation, is
more or less disavowed.
\ et when the whole succession of facts
is taken into view; when we perceive
the care which seems (o have been taken
to present (hem in an unfavorable light,
without milking allowance for circum
stances which explained them, without
paying any regard to considerations which
the Government of the U. S. itself had
previously admitted ; when we see at the
end of this uninterrupted series of alle
gations, which have (he appearance of
wrongs, for the sole reason that they are
made to rest on isolated and incomplete
statements, (he unexpected proposition,
the extreme position to say the least, to
seize upon Feench property, it is impos
sible at first view, it is even difficult af
reflection, to escape (he thought that
all this part of the message had been
written for the double purpose stated
above.
. 18 n °f so > however; at least we hope
it is not.
Rut to banish entirely, such an idea,
wlmt would be necessary ? Nothing but
what is very simple. We do not here con
tend about this or that phrase, this or
that allegation, (his or (hat expression;
VVfi contend about the intention itself,
which lias dictated that part of the mes- 1
«ge. If it he true that the President of '
the United Stntes, in presenting to Con- <
jress a statement of the facts connected <
with the treaty of the 4th of July, had i
no intention to cast any doubt on the t
£ood faith of the French Government;
if it be true that the President of the
United States, in proposing to Congress i
to decree the seizure, by force of arms, I
of French properly, had not the inten- :
tiun to assume with regard to France, a
menacing attitude, we cannot see how he ;
could-find any difficulty in declaring it. i
Is such a declaration really contained
in Mr. Livingston’s note, addressed to i
the i'rench OovertiiMp nt on the 29;h n(
January, or in that which the same min
ister left at his departure on the 27th of i
April ?
W e would be equally at a loss to af
firm or deny it; —and for this reason it
is evident that neither the one nor the 1
other can be considered sufficient. The 1
note of the 29th of January is intended
to discuss, contradictorily, with the ’
French Government the correctness of i
facts asserted in the Message of Presi- I
dent Jackson. It is intended to prove ;
that the view taken by him of these facts
is at least plausible. It is in the midst
of this disquisition that two or three
phrases are incidentally thrown out, on
the just confidence which the Govern
ment of the United Slates has always
entertained in the sincerity of (he French
Government; confidence which Mr.
Livingston had always made it a duty to
foster, and which according to him, is
not in contradiction with any of the ideas
or allegations expressed in the message.
The note of the 25th of April, is chiefly
intended to make an indirect and antici
pated examination of the amendment in
troduced by the Chamber of Deputies.
While upon this examination and with a
view to prove that any demand for ex
planations would in future be useless in
fact and inadmissible in principle. Mr.
Livingston refers to the testimony given
by him in his first note, to the good faith
of the French Government; he refers
to subsequent sanction given by the Pre
sident to the contents of that note; he
dwells on the paragraph of the message
of the President, in which all idea of
threat is, he says, expressly disavowed.
You will easily conceive, sir, and the
Cabinet of Washington will, we think,
understand it also, that such phrases inci
dentally inserted in documents, the pur
port and tenor of which are polemical,
and surrounded, in some measure by de
tails of a controversy which is besides not
always free from bitterness, cannot dis
pel sufficiently the impression produced
by the perusal of the message, nor strike
the mind as Would the same idea express
ed in terras simple, positive, direct, and
unaccompanied by any recriminations
concerned facts or incidents no longer of
; any importance. Such is the motive,
which among many others, has placed
the French Government in (he impossi
bility of acceding (o (he wish expressed
by Mr. Livingston towards the conclu
sion of his note of the 25th of April, by
declaring (to the Chamber of Peers pro
bably) that previous explanations given
by the French Minister of the United
States and subsequently approved by the
President, had satisfied it,
■ The impression produced by the peru
; sal of the message was deep. It was so
i in France, in Europe, and even in the
United States ; the debates in Congress,
and public notoriety snfficienlly prove
the fact. Under the weight of this im
pression the French Gocernmcnt did not
hesitate to place itself in a situation to
meet the engagement contracted in the
name of France. In pausing there for
the present, and waiting for the fulfil
ment of those engagements to be claimed,
or expecting them to be claimed, in terms
consistent with the regard which is its
due, it is not alraid of appreciating na
tional honor by any nvmber of millions
which it could withhold, as a compensa
tion for tin injury offered to it. Mr.
Livingston is the first to repel such an
idea. Far from it; the French Govern
ment will consider as a fortunate day,
the one in which it will he able to deliv
er up honorably the trust that lies in its
hands, but each State has duties to per
form towards itself—each situation has
its exigencies. Mr. Livingston objects
to the idea of seeing the President of
the United States give a new testimony
to the good faith of the French Govern
ment, lest such a step, reasonable and just
in itself, should not appear to be exclu
sively dictated by justice and by reason.
He will not be astonished if the French
Government, on its side, attaches an
equal importance, to show that in ac
knowledging openly, a legitimate debt,
and declaring itself ready to discharge it,
it has exclusively consulted reason and
justice.
You are authorized, sir, to read the
present despatch to Mr. Forsyth; and,
if he desires, let him take a copy of it.
Accept Sir, &c.
(Signed) V. BROGLIE.
—Q ©♦**—
From the Columbia Telescope.
ABOLITION IN VIRGINIA.
The lower House of the Virginia Le
gislature, after a long debate, attended
by various disreputable party efforts to
defeat or weaken the proceedings, has at
lust adopted the following resolutions.
At the first report, which spoke of
them as a result of a compromise between
the Whigs (who had introduced strong
resolutions.) and the Van Burcnite.s (who
hail been trying every indirect inode of
defeating them,) we took it for granted
that they must be exceedingly feeble.
It seems, however, that some new and
strange counter-march must have been
made: for the resolutions appear to us
substantially good, and decidedly strong
er than (hose to which the Van Burenites
had already refused to accede, as too
violent.
1. Resolved, That this Commonwealth
only has the right to control or interfere
with (he subject of domestic slavery,
within its limits, and that this right will
be maintained at all hazards.—(Unani
mous.)
2. Resolved, That the Slate of Vir
ginia has a right to claim prompt and ef
ficient legislation by her co-states to re
strain as for as may be, and to punish
those of their citizens, who, in defiance
of their obligations of social duty and 1
those of the consti tulion, assail her safe- '
ty and tranquility, by forming assoocia
tions fur the abolition of slavery, or
printing, publishing, or circulating thro’ 1
the mail or otherwise, seditious and in- 1
cendiary publications; and that this f
right, founded as it is on the principles 1
international law, is peculiarly forti
tified by a just consideration of the inti
mate and sacred relations (hat exist be
tween tie Stales of this Union.—(Ayes
108, Noes 7.)
3. Resolved, That the non-slave-hold
ing States of the Union, are respectful- 1
lv, but earnestly requested, promptly td
adopt penal enactments, or such other
measures, as will effectually suppress all
associations within their limits, purport
ing to be, or having the characterof Abo
litim Societies; & that they will make it
highly penal to print, publish, or distribute
newspapers, pamphlets, or other publica
tions, calculated or having a tendency to
excite the slaves of the Southern States
to insurrection and revolt.—(Ayes 125,
Noes 1.)
4. Resolved, Flint this General Assem
bly would regard any act of Congress,
hating for its object the abolition of sla
very in the District of Columbia, or the
Territories of the United States, as af
fording just cause of alarm to (he slave
holding Slates, and bringing the Union
into imminent peril.—(Ayes 122, Noes
5. Resolved, That it is highly expedk
ent for the slave-holding Stales, to enact
such laws and regulations as may bi 3
necessary to suppress and prevent thu
circulation of any incendiary plfblica*
thins within their respective [units,—*
(Unanimous.)
6. Resolved, That, Confiding in (he jus*
ticc and loyally of our Northern breth
ren to the principles of the Union, en- -
forced by the sympathies of common
dangers, sufferings and triumphs, which
ought to bind us together in fraternal
concord, we are warranted in the etpcc
lion, that (he foregoing requests will be
received in the spirit in which they are
made, and complied with.—(Yeas 125.
Noes 1.)
7. Resolved, That Congress has no
constitutional power to abolish slavery in
the District of Columbia, or in the Ter
ritories of the United States.—(Ayes
105, Noes 13.)
8 . Resolved, That (he Governor be
and is hereby requested to forward a co
py of these resolutions to each of our
senators and representatives in Congress,
and to the Executive of each of the
States o( the Union, with a request that
the same may be submitted to their res
pective legislatures.
The New (Georgia Justice,
Just Published and for sale.
APPIA to Thomas Purse, Savannah, Thom
as Richards, Augusta, William Lumpkin,
Athens, or the subscribers at Millcdgevillc : price
$4. R. A. GREENE,
J. W. LUMPKIN.
Feb. 3 35
ExccuJor’s Notice.
ALT, persons indebted to the estate of Howell
D. Burke, late of Burke county, deceased,
are requested to make immediate payment; and
those having demands, will present them duly
authenticated.
BENJ. E. GILSTRAP, Ex’r.
Jan 9, 1836 6tw 30
Executor’* Sale*.
On the Fourth Saturday in February next,
WILL be sold, at the Court House, in the
town of Wayneshorough, Burke county,
all the perishable properly belonging to the estate
of Howell D. Burke, late of said county, deceased,
for the bonellt of the heirs.
BENJ. E. GILSTRAP, ExV*
Jau 9, 1830 wtd 80
itluiiiiitifi'aior’tj Notice.
ALL persons having demands against lire
Estate of Joseph Barnes, late of Columbia
County, deceased, are requested to hand them in,
duly attested, agreeably to law ; and those indebt
ed to said Estate, arc desired to make immediate
payment.
GABRIEL JONES, Adm'r.
Deo. 20, 1835 6tw 26
Georgia, Columbia County:
WHEREAS, Reuben Grimes applies for
Letters of Administration on the Es
tate of George A. Tindall, late of said county,
deceased.
These arc therefore to cite and admonish all
and singular the kindred and creditors of said de
ceased, to he and appear at my office within the
time prescribed by law, to file therein objections, if
any they have, to shew cause why said Letters
should not he granted.
Given under my hand, at office, in Appling,
this 29th Dec. 1835.
GABRIEL JONE 3, Clerk,
• Dec. 30 4tw 25
Georgia, Columbia County:
WHEREAS, Thomas J, Short applies for
Letters of Administration on tbs Es
tate of Dorothy G. Jones, late of said county,
deceased.
These arc, therefore, to cite and admonish all
and singular, the kindred and creditors of said
deceased, to be and appear at my office, withia
the time prescribed by law, to file their objections,
if any they have, to shew cause why said Letters
should not he granted.
Given under my hand, at office, in Appling,
this 10th of January, 1836.
GABRIEL JONES, Clerk.
Jan 13 4tw 30
Exccutoi-’s Sale.
On the first Tuesday in March next,
WILL he sold at the Court House door, in
the Town of Wayneshorough, agreea
bly to an order of the Justices of the Inferior
Court of Bruke county, when silting for ordinary
purposes:
A tract of Land, containing One Hundred and
Thirty-five (135) acres, more or less, adjoining
lands of M. Wiggins, and James Bell. Sold for
the benefit of said estate.
MICHAEL WIGGINS, Ex’r,
Dec 31 1835 wtd 28
Administratrix’s Sale.
On the first Tuesday in .fipril next,
WILL be sold at the Court Honsc door in
Waynesboro’, Burke county, agreeably
to an order of Honorable Inferior Court of
Jefferson county, while sitting for Ordinary pur
poses, one hundred and fifty lour acres of Land in
Burke county, on the waters of Eight mile
Branch, adjoining lands of Samuel Clarke, Green
Roberts, and Jesse Allen. Sold as the property
of Elizabeth Foyle, deceased, late of Jefferson
county, for the benefit of the heirs and creditors
of said deceased.
MARY STEPHENS, Adm’x.
Jan. 16 31
Burke Sheriff’s Sale.
On the first Tuesday in March next,
WILL bo sold at the Court bouse door in
the town of Wayneshorough, between
the usual hours of sale, the following property, to
wit:
Twelve hundred acres of Oak and Hickory
Land, adjoining lands of Moses Johnson and oth
ers, levied on as the property of Edward Hughes,
to satisfy sundry fi. fas. in favor of Moses John
son.
ALSO,
Three hundred acres of Pine Land, adjoining
lands of Henry S. Jones and others; levied on as
the property of W infiled Moore, to satisfy sundry
fi. fas. in favor of Alfred J. Lester, vs. said Moore ;
levied on and returned to me by a constable, this
27th of Jan. 1836.
JAMES A. STRINGER, D. Sheriff.
Feb 3 wtd 35