Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

FOR THE EVENING LEDGER. No. 11. Tt is a political axiom, which is difficult to be refuted, that opposition and jealousy afford an important security for the preservation o) civil liberty. Ihe power and patronage, which are necessary concomitants of the ad ministration of government, while they pro duce jiopular influence, will also produce its counterpoise. In fee and enlightened nations, the public expression of opinions, in opposi tion to political measures, is a piivilcge gener ally enjoyed, without any question as to the right ; but those governments in which this privilege is enjoyed may be, and olten are, placed in such situations as will render its lice exercise dangerous and imprudent, if not cri minal. It sometimes happens, that a nation, bv its relations and intercourse with foreign powers becomes involved in contests, immedi ately affecting its interests, Us rights and its independence. Ihe contest in which the United States are now involved with Great* Britain appears to be of this description. The writer, in a few remarks lately published, coi - sidered this as a case in which, if the govern ment and tire nation are faithful to themselves and to each other, they must be in perfect unison. Under this impression, he could not re -1 iin from expressing Iris disapprobation of a Ute editorial paragraph which appeared in the Augusta Herald. In a reply, which discovers much impatience of rebuke, the editor charg es the author of these remarks with want of candor, in selecting a part and omitting o,her parts of his paragraph. If the smallest degree of allinity in sentiment, or consistency in prin ci|>le. ha'! been apparent between the sentences quoted and those omitted, the writer would have been justly chargeable with having adopted an tmcaiidid mode ofdiscussion ; but the former beingin direct hostility with the latter, it was not possible to treat the whole paragraph as the reasoning of the same man on the same sub ject. The Writer does not, therefore, consider himself charge rble by the editor in any other respect than with want of charity , in not hav ing adopted, as the editor’s real sentiments, those contained in the same para ruph, w hich breathed so much of the spirit of patriotism, and in not having rejected the opposite opi- , tiions as mere words of sound, not intended to ; make any impression. The editor next charges the author of these ■ remarks with a perversion of fact, in stating, that the allegation of ** four mutinous and deserted ) British seamen having been received on board of the Chesapeake,” rests on “ a mere asset - - j tion t f the man who committed the outrage.” j The extract from the Norfolk Ledger,(whence the Augusta editor professes to have derived; the intelligence) mentions them asseamen be longing to a British ship of war, who rose up on their officers, &c. ivven il this extract does ! inrplv that they were real British seamen and deserters, on what other basis could the Nor folk editor have rested his statement than the allegation of the British commodore. But the Norlolk statement implies no such fact ; nor could it admit of such const ructions especial ly when it is recollected, that the newspapers published at the scat of government, within tlnee days after the date of the Norfolk Led ger referred to, positively announced that they •were native American citizens. But the question between the two govern ment is entirely a question of principle, The degree of injustice, the extent of enormity wuli which the late aggressors are chargeable, can only be ascertained by the decision of an abstract question, not subject to be controled by any particular facts respecting the national character of the persons who were taken from the Chesapeake. Li has been uniformly insisted by the government ol the United States, dur ing the iate and present wars between Greal- Bi ituinand France, that a belligerent has not, bv the law of nations, any right to enter the territory or ships of a neutral nation, for the purpose of searching for and seizing any persons whose allegiance or services thev claim. That upon this inviolability of neutral sovereignty anil jurisdiction depends, in the present state of things, the existence of the Unfed Slates as a nation, and on this alsode pends those immunities which are guaranteed bv the constitution to all within their limits.— Upon this principle the government of the United States has uniformly, (as was before remarked) disavowed any obligation to banish from its territory, or deliver up to a fo reign power, any person over whom such con trol may be claimed. One exception only to this general rule exists, tinder the law of na tions, which is undeniable—l mean that of an open and public enemy in arms. The 27th ar ticle of the treaty of 1794. while in force, formed a partial exception. It was limited as to the objects, and qualified as to the mode of execution—lt was limited in its operation to persons charged with murder or forgery, with in the limits of the nation claiming them ; and the surrender of such person could only take place “ on such evidence of ?riinin<*lity as, according to the laws of the place where the fugitive or person charged shall be found, would justify his apprehension and commit ment for trial, if the offence had Iteen there committed.” It is therefore extraordinary that the learned editor should have been so unacquainted with the subject, as to have imagined that this arti cle of the commercial treaty had any bearing on the question in contest, or tnat the period of its limi ution was the criterion by which to as certain whether the. United States were still bound to the performance of a duty in this /lur- . tiiuiar case. Rome of our political sceptics have attempt ed to deduct from the enormity ol the late ag gression, by supposing that those men had vo luntarily enlisted and leceived the British boun ty, and by pretending that this conduct has here tofore been acquiesced in by our government, and that it was improper to enlist four deser ters, knowing them to be such, whether Ame rican citizens or British subjects. Is such an allegation capable of a decision—by whom, and in what manner ? bhall a British court of ad miralty, or any other tribunal ol a foreign na tion, extend its jurisdiction to the United States, for the purpose of deciding whethet an .Ame rican citizen has voluntarily forfeited his light to the protection of his government ? However anxiously this proud nation may aspire after universal maritime dominion, and however hold her Lte sti ides have been towards the attainment of that end, yet Iter govern mentnever can claim a right,or complain of an injury, on tht ground last stated. Ihe duty of perpetual allegiance, which originally was a mere incident to tenures of land, under the feu dal system, has since become a principle of their tivil polity. According to their doctrine, a British subject cannot, by withdrawing and becoming a citizen of another nation, divest himself ol the obligation to allegiance and obe dience which a subject owes t<> bis monarch, much less can lie enlist himsell for the purpose ol bearing arms in foielgn service. How then can the British government claim the personal service ot an American citizen, under the pre tended sanction of a contract which that govern ment would treat as fundamentally void ? Tho’ the United Sta'es do not recognize the absurd doctrine of perpetual allegiance, and tho’ they deny to no man the right of expatriation, yet this right, to be effectual, must have been consummated by an actual bona fide lcmoval and establishing a domicil in another com try. Our government dv.es not admit the. right of a citizen, either native or naturalized, to with draw himself for the mere purpose of engaging in foreign service ; arid no contract of enlist ment, under such circumstances can be any more binding on the United Stales than it would be on the government of Great-Britain. If this view of the question is correct, the aggression cannot he better justified by the pretence ot seizing men who had voluntarily enlisted in Iheir service, than by asserting a right to retake, by violence, men who had been originally impiessed into their service by vio lence. Ibe writer lias been drawn into a more copious discussion of this subject than he had contemplated, by a uaiii of reflection to which the Augusta editor's reply tended. It is a sub ject winch lias long intcicsied the American people. from the commencement of their neutial relation to Great-Briiaiu, as a nation at war, her navy has exercised a most ctuel and lawless system of tytunny toward American citizens on tne ocean. ft* , beets have now produced an a wiui crisis. May Heaven avert I the issue winch we at present appieheiulas be ing almost inevitable. A FEDERALIST. TRIAL OF COLONEL BURR. federal court. Richmond, Wednesuuy, August 5, 1807. Present, the Chief Justice of the United States, and t irus Griffin, judge ol the uis trict of Virginia. 1 ne witnesses on behalf ol the United States, were again called ovei ; when it appeared that commodore Thomas Truxion, general \\ il liam Luton, William Duane, Pe.er Taylor, Charles Willie, John Graham, Samuel Swart wout, Julien Dupcistrc, Paul Henry, Mallet Prevost, Israel Miner, George Morgan, Tho mas Morgan, Nicholas Perkins, Robert Spence, George Harris, Cyrus Jones, Simeon Poole, Dudley Woodbritlgc, Edmund B. Dana, John G. Henderson, Alexander Henderson, Hugh Pheips, general James Wilkinson, Chandler Linsiey, John Mulholland, James Knox, Wil liam Love, David Fisk. Thomas Hartley, S.e phen S. \\ elcli, James Kinney, Samuel Mux ley, Ambrose D. Sinim George Peteis, Abner L. Duncan, John A. Fort, James M-Dovvell, Morgan Neville, Hugh Alien, Israel .Miller, and Henry Philips were pi esc in. Serjeant Ja cob Dunbaugh was understood to be in town, but prevented by sickness from attending. Mr. Hat then moved for a postponement of the trial lor a few days more, on the ground that witnesses deemed to be impo taut were still absent. He said the utility of the delay Hitherto, hail appeared from the ct: cumstaiice that a number hail ai rived situ e the couit was opened, and therefore, from a farther delay, the arrival of others might be expected. The Chief Justice observed that it was in different to the court. | Alter a shot t conversation between the conn-’ sel oil both sides, it was agreed that a list should be furnished of the witnesses, and of their places of abode, so far as they had heen ascertained ; and that a postponement should take place until Friday. Mr. Hay pmpoed an arrangement, us to | the movie of conducting the trial ; the object of which was to save time. He said that the course pursued in Great-Brilain on such occa sions is, for the counsel for the prosecution to open his case and examine all his witnesses, before any thing is said on the other side ; for the prisoner's counsel, afterwards, to state the case on his part ; to proceed to examine his witnesses, and to make such observations upon the whole of the testimony as he should think proper; and for the counsel for the pro secution to terminate the argument bv a reply. This, he said, was a convenient and expedithtis method. But) in Virginia, the practice it ai follows ; the attorney for the United States, or for the commonwealth, states the case on the pai l of the prosecution, and the counsel for the accused also makes a statement on his pait : after which the evidence is gone through on both sides, beginning with the witnesses against the prisoner. This being done, the counsel for the prosecution commences the argument, is answered by the counsel lor the prisoner; and then concludes the debate. Mr. Hay ob served that this mode was much more tedious than that which pievatls in Gteat-Biitain ; and therefore ought particularly to be avoided in conducting the trial of Aaion Burr, in which the number of attornies employed, and of wit nesses to be examined, is so great; especially as other trials equally tedious are about to take place; Herman Blar.net hassett being now in custody, and Jonathan Dayton known to he in this neighborhood. Mr. Wickham wished time to consider the subject ; not being prepared to deter mine whether the counsel for colonel Burr would ac cede to the proposal; as this was anew mode of proceeding, to which they were not accus tomed, and they wished to consult their client, who, on this day, was not in court. Mr. llay said he did not think this a matter of consent; but the court oughttofix the prac tice. The Chief Justicf, observed thrt it would be better to bring on this question oij Friday ; since gentlemen, in the mean time, might set tle it among themselves ; saying, moreover, he should feel a difficulty in departing from the settled mode of practice in this country ; though he thought the Engl sh mode better than out’s. The best mode appeared to him to be this ; that the case should be opened ful ly by one of the gentlemen on the part of the United States ; then opened fully by one of tne dounsel on the other side ; that the evidence should next be gone through ; and the whole commented upon by another of the gentlemen employed by the United States ; who should he answered by the rest of the attornies for co lonel Burr; and one only of the counsel for the United States should conclude the argu ment. Mr. Hay, looking forward to other trials, re gretted this decision, as it would occasion so much labor and fatigue, in conducting so many prosecutions, that he did not think himself ca pable of undergoing it. He observed too that the counsel for colonel Burr would have a de cided advantage by this arrangement ; since only one of those on the part of the United States would have to reply to the speeches of live or more gentlemen on the other side.. Tne Chief Justice said, that although the gentleman who concluded should have to reply to five or more speeches, yet those speeches, would probably not contain more arguments than would, if one only of the attornies should speak, be condensed into one. The number ol speeches would not increase the number of ar guments. He said, however, that the course he had mentioned was only recommended, not determined by the court. Air. Hay said it would be a very difficult and laborious task for one gentleman to answer the many objections which would be started by the ingenuity of so many able counsel. He shi uld wish therefore, at any rate, if the course re commended bv the court should be adopted, that two of the counsel for the United States might he heard in reply. Mr. Bo its observed, that probably an ar rangement might be agreed upon by the next tlav ; and proposed an adjournment until then. After some unimportant conversation on the subject, the court adjourned to sit again on F ri d..y, twelve o’clock. Friday, August 7. The witnesses were again called over, and several who had not been present before, ap peared, and were recognized to attend until dis mal ged by the court. The connsei tor the United Slates, however, not being as well prepared to go into the trial as they expected to be on Monday, (many ot their witnesses being still absent) the trial was iurther postponed, and the court adjourned un til Monday next, twelve o’clock. In the course of this day, a difficulty was sug gested by major Scott, the Marshal ol the Vii giuia district, as arising out of the order of the court, by virtue of which colonel Burr Had been removed horn the penitentiary house to his present lodgings. He stated that he had been informed from good authority, that the secreta ry of the treasury had declared he would not allow itis charge of seven dollars per day, for thegmtids employed for the sale keeping of the pisoner; and iheiefore he might lose that sum, ivhicli he had hitherto been advancing out o. his own pocket. The Chief Justice declared the firm con viction ot the court that the order heretofore made was legal and proper—that the payments made in pursuance thereof would be sanction ed by tne court, and ought to be allowed by the secre ary of the treasury. He could not believe that the secretary would finally disal low those items in the marshal’s account. But as the officer ot the court ought not to be sub jected to any risk in obeying its directions ; anti, if the secretary should refuse to allow him credit lor the money paid, the court had no power to compel him to do so ; and the si tuation of the marshal was such that he dared not to enter into a controversy with the secreta ry ; the court was disposed to rescind the or der, unless some arrangement could be made by colonel Burr and lus counsel for the indem nification ol the marshal. Colonel Buhr declared that an offer had already been made on his part to indemnify the marshal; and.that he was still ready ant! willing to give him satisfactory security, that t!he money should be paid him, ir. case the cv cretary of the Treasury should itiuse to allow the credit. After some desultory conversation, noihi g positive was agi eed upon; but it appealed to be understood, that security was to be given to major Scott, and that colonel Burr was to - mam in his apartment near the Swan! avern. Herman Blannc;hacsctt is now in cmd'ce ment in the Penitentiary of this city. lie .t - rived here on Tuesday last, front Lexingt* Kent, wheie he was apprehended, and conont: - ed to this place by Mr. Meade, deputy mat ski,l of the state, under a guard ; aid conveyed i . mediately to the Penitentiary by the marshal of Virginia. It is mentioned in a Philadelphia paper, that the celebrated William Lewis, of that place, is to be added to the number of colonel Bun’s counsel. Extract of a letter to the Editor of the Aurora, dated Niagara, July 23. “ I am, in common with yourself, a friend to the United States, and its government, and as great an enemy of British turpitude, insolence and injustice. Our neighbors of Upper Cana da ait not thought as well of with you as they ought to be—and as for the news-papers of Upper Canada, infer nothing liom what you see m them. There is one printed in Yoi k, Upper Canada, which is remarkable for nothing else than a servile adulation of the present ex ecutive of that piovincc—in one of its late num bers it had the following false and execralie paragraph : “ i be diabolical machinations of a desperate cabal have split the United State, that late ficurElnng and happy country, into such facti ons, that an invading cm my would be and partially resisted.” “ Such sentiments are no doubt collected from the language of some emissaries in our towns' —but they maybe well assured, that how ever divided the citizens (I speak of the fron tier*) of the United States may be on local po litics, to a man they will be united in repelling and chastising foreign invasion or foreign inso lence ; let them look to it, for they know rfot how soon the hour may come. I bis frontier has long been sensible, that in the British go vernment it has no friend—and the spaiks of indignation and resentment are prevented, from bursting into a blaze, that vvouid destroy the British power arid influence in the Canadian provinces, solely by a firm reliance upon the magnanimity and justice of the administiation of the United States ; on whom, and on the spirit of their Atlantic brethren, they rely frir redress for the recent outrage committed on board the Chesapeake.” 1 ‘m+tm When vve read the federal papers, it cannot be doubled whether we have a British faction in the bowels of the body politic. The city .if London does not furnish so many advocates of British outrage on Americans as the town of Boston. That is, there are not so many write, s in that city to vindicate the British navv for searching our vessels, as appear in the pupe.s of this town. The suppiession of the commu nication from Norfolk can now he accounted for ; when it was first received, the tory fac tion had not got their lesson ; but within a lie >v days, all the federal papers are put in requisi tion, to vindicate the British, and condemn the American administration. The Essex junto have had time to rally and issue their orders. They have their cue; and the junto are now acting under their orders to help their old friends. We are willing to set out fair in the present controversy. We do suppose that the main body of the federalists a - e good friends to their country ; but they have been deceived by a few men who are enlisted in the service of the Bri tish nation. These leaders are suspected, and will be watched....and, once for all vve declat e, if war does take place, vve will designate them to the public as clearly as the tories were for merly. If vve go to war, let us not make play of it.— Boston Chronicle. The British at Halifax —If vve may rely upon the advices from Halifax, they are preparing furnaces for red hot shot at that place, the pu - pose of which is to burn some of ou.r sea-port towns. 1 hose who are preaching up security and moderation, had better iook about them— and hide their faces for shame*.— lurora. Nothing so shortly displays the spirit ofo”r country, as the large mass of volunteers who have slept forward to her defence. It is believe and ■hat the number who have tendered their servic es ;o the executive will in a few days exceed the <;u a of 18,563 men who are to be drawn from Virginia.— Enquirer. f The governor of idassachusetts issued his orders to major general Biickctt, of the second division, to designate 900 men, near the harboui s within the lines of the said division, to hold themselves in readinesss to assist the civil au thority in carrying into execution the presi dent’s proclamation against the British navy. Captain Townsend, of the Arthur, arrived at Providence, corroborates the account of the affray at Canton, and further informs, that dis patches had been sent to the emperor of Chi na, at Pekin, and his orders on the subject were expected to be received in two days after the Arthur left Canton. In the meanwhile, all bu siness with the English was suspended. —New York paper. Admiral Berkeley, itis said, is fitting ou*the frigate La Yilie de Milan, ai Halitax, with the intention of proceeding in her to the Chesa peake.