Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

FROM THi: AURORA. LETTER THE THIRD. TO JOHN MARSHALL, CHIEF JU i TIC E OF THE UNITED STATES. SiH—i'ou have supposed, (1 say unwarie. W.VJ that it was within the power of die ° CL ! col ‘he United States, not only to**' 0 C °,’ letted, hy means of its officers, prix an ovett a t of treason , but that it was / X Lave produced tit a proof at * ch ' Mnd ’ 0,1 the ■ 30 hos March, 1807. , , , 1 M il! admit, that th, lCt hc P'’° vcd h,aP pened (“ if ever j r -' ove, nber or Uecemlier last, or twdvr mon'* P’. <iVlol,s lo l “ tion in Rich nor- I will admit sufficient time to have f° r ~ie all the evidence ‘ ‘‘ c * l uS t,een Educed on the trial ir chief. Rut what will this admission a vj' l '’ Will it shew that the production of that evi dence could be reasonably expected on the ex amination in liichmund? Surely not—and for this plain reason, that the executive could not possibly know that Aaron Burr would he ex amined at Richmond, or that he ever would be in Virginia, until ten or twelve days previous to the examination. Il trr was arres'ed on the 19th of February, on the Tombigbee river, in the Mississippi territory, and arrived in Richmond on the 26'h of March. The president could not have been a -prised of kin arrest more than ten or twelve and iys pi evious to the examination. The neccs fei'y of producing the testimony at Richmond, could not exist until it was known that Burr Could be examined them. This was ten or twelve days previous to the examination. No v, sir, admit! ig the evidence of the overt act, which you demanded on the examination, to have be cwcollrcted, where shoul 1 we reasona bly expect that til s evidence was at that time ? I am as willing to utiibuic to the executive ary “rt niinn<\.:,” < neglect of duty as you professed to be on the examination, and there-, fore suppose that it ,y evidence of the overt a t had icached the executive, it had been t ilsmnte Ito the court where Aaron Burr was recognized to appear. Was not this the duty of the executive f The evidence then ought t have b ‘em and you were bound to presume it, ten or twelve days previous to the examina tion, at a place six or seven hundred miles di - tint from Richmond. It it was impossible, in the time intervening between the examination a id that point of tunc at which it was known, that Aaron Burr could be examined at Richmond to produce at that place, testimony of the overt art, wli it opinion ought we to entertain of u j‘ !gt who demands the production of that tes timony ? \Vhon Aaron Burr was in the western coun tTV, the theatre of his ticasou, recognized t< appear before a court, will you tell the men of America that it was reasonable to suppose tin t the president nf the United States could foresee bis./?yj,'if, his arrttl , his rapid tiunsmi.iuioi. t Virgin'a, and the propriety of examining him at Richmond ? Without all these monstrous and unwarrant able suppositions, how could you demand the production ol testimony on the examination in Richmond, which, without “ remissues* on Abe purt of those who prosecute,” ought to have been ten days before at the distance of six or seven hundred miles from tint place? In ten days a messenger must piss through the wilds of the western country, six or seven hundred miles, collect the testimony of an overt act of treason, return the same di ,tance, and bear it to the capitol of Virginia. Were the government gifted with prophecy, or possessed of thfr power to create a Mercury, you would venture to pronounce the probability of Burr’s guilt! It does not require an intimate acquaintance with the law. to know that it never demands the performance ol impossibilities in any case, nor even unreasonable exertion to accomplish im possibilities. But your reasoning upon the non-production of proof of the overt act is intended to lead di rectly to the conclusion th it no assemblage ever happened. For you sav, that ris “capa ble or proof, and when time to collect* this proot /; .•, !>■ i given, it ought to lie adduced, or suspicion becomes ground too weak to stand upon.’ Aou then say, “several months have elapsed since the fact dir! occur, if it ever occur red ; more than five weeks have elapsed since the opinion of the supreme court has declared the ndeessity of proving the fact, il it exists.— Why is it not proved ?” Will it be believed that your penetration could hot detect such wretched sophistry as this ? One Single question will tear in pieces the whole web. probable necessity of proving the ,act at HicfiT.oHd exist “ several months” be fore the examination ; did it exist “Jive weeks” before, when the supreme court declared the necessity of proving the fact ? I answer for you. wit hout fear of contradiction, it did not. It never did occur until 10 or 12 days previous to the examination. It was impossible that it could exist before that lime with any person not a prophet. ( l f who can believe that you had faith in ‘nc correctness of your own re soiling, and that the true point of tunc, at which the necessity of proving the. fact at Richmond (and from the late period of which you could not reasonably an e expected or legally requested the produc tion of proof ol the assemblage) occurred, no * M irk the sophistry of the sentence. Here it is lakeu for granted, that time not onlv t■’ c'Ht cr, bm toruufivci the evidence, had been i-tfcu. ’ • -‘f *0 your tnind, must feel e. presided iOV your understanding than I more They must do you the do lot yoy that .. our u ua eak ,n J usu 9i'm it wicked. a * sfft thcic Was no necessity that your mind ~ould be tortu cd, to make this discovery. The point of time wr.s advcited to by Mr. Hay, and Mr. Rodney, in their arguments. This must convince the most credulous, ol the illegality and partial tendency of the demand for proof of the assemblage. There could be therefore no unintentional forgetfulness of this material circumstance. You must have “ remembered to forge ” it. But the most sceptic; 1 shall be convinced— that there was an assemblage, is n.ost; true it lias been proved—that it happened a consider able time previous to the examination, and was ilicrefoic cafuiblc oj firoof at the /.lace where thr evidence wan, at the time oj the examination, is also true. Why then was it not proved on the exami nation ut Richmond ? Mot because there was any “ reriiissness” on the part of those wiio prosecuted, for you have said, *• 1 ought not to believe that there has been any t enussiicss on the part of those who prosecute.” Not because it did not exist—for its existence has been proven. Not because it was not ticasonable j for the character of the as emblage, whether treasonable or not, was mailer of subsequent en quiry and determination. I will again answer for you w ithout fear of contradiction. It was r.ot proved, localise, to prove the assemblage at the time the examiim 'ion took place at Richmond was impossible. Vou will not dare to assert that the attorney tor the United States would not have exhibited the pioot of the assemblage, which has since been introduced, had lie been possessed of that evi dence. In a part of vour opinion, you say, “ I will, however, briefly review the argumentn which hare been urged, and the Jact't now before me, in order to shew more clearly, the paiticlilar ope ration they have, on my own judgment.” Aow, sir, will you pointoutth-.it part ofihe opinion, which “ reviews” the testimony of ma jor I’ei kins, relative to the tune of arrest? W here do you mention the argument of Mr. Hay, grounded on live fact, that “ the govern ment could not have been apprized of the fact [ qfarrt morel ban ten days” previous to the examination, in what unseen, hidden corner of the opinion, do you state the “ particular operation” ol this argument ol Mr. ltodney on “ your judgment.” In the short time which has elapsed since the apprehension of colonel l!uir vv as known, there iuis been no possibility ol gelling tile p 001, which bis counsel content! is necexsai y.” ‘I here is a careful, cautious omission i I any •* review” of these observations, and arguments of the counsel for the United States, w hich justifies not only a suspicion, but a beiiet that you knew wiiui thiir weight ought to have been ; and thin, it they were stated in the opinion, theiefoie must.have been acknow ledged by a difieient decision. They would, too plainly, have answered your demaul for po siti.e proof ol the assemblage. It would then ii ve been manifest to every man, that you had requited a peifo matterc.fimpossibilities ; and tli a vi u refused to insert, in ine warrant oi i omniii men , ihe charge of true non, because the executive could not produce positive proof oi that, which you had admitted to have beoi\ already proven su.heiently, to induce you to commit the accused on ha charge. Common sense, and violated justice, cry a* loud a ;.nust such conduct, anu demand against you the ciifo:<c cm of those laws, which you refuse to administer. LUCIUS. iiilu oil New-York, At a sa i v i.,iu, *.n- saie er .li.iiics \v ii;iam December 1. i-Al Exchange on Boston, At Jiuoi't b.-j L, ivvji* s-iie by lie ary \V. Hills. Decemocr 1 Ff >K SALF, pieces COT TON BAv.UIMi ■> eas<\s i-ond ii drown otout i ;i h lu H hbert s C PORTER 10 ditto -M l.e is j AIADEIiiA \ViNE, in pipes, halfpipes and quarter casks SCIv ILY ditto in ditto hi sv. s M _a UUN-roWDRR; and v\ OuLEN.->, GROv EKIKh & PROVISIONS. Peter Mitchcl. December 1. 1.3+. Notice. All persons h wing anv demands against the Estate ot William W ilson, deceased, are desired to render them in; and those indebted, to make payment to Mr. Joel UHinci;. Jhbciiczcr Sttuk, Lx'r. December 10—138 REMOVAL. GEORGE BUCHANAN & CO. HAVE REMOVED TO THE STORE Adjoining \ ctuluc-Uoom, MLAU THE MARKET SQUARE, Where ihcv continue selling Their STOCK of GOODS, At Cost and Clutrgcs. November 19 ‘ .59 Plunk Warrants of Annrmscmcnt. Vor 3sic at ‘#!} office, 1 Tenth Centre*?'; of the United States. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES* Wednesday, November 25. Mr. Talmadge ottered the following resolu tions : Resolved, That the secretary for the depart ment of war be directed to lay b* n.re th -, house a statement ot the respective numbers ,-t ( tli eers, non-con 1 missioned < fth trs and soldiers composing the army c.f tj.r United States, no ting the numbers wanting 10 complete tiie pre sent establishment. Resolved, I hat the secretary fur the depart ment oi wav be dirtc ;;i to lay before this house, a statement of the respective numbers of volun teers, either oi artillery, cavalrc, or imantrv, whose services have beta offered and accented, in pursuance of the act entitled, “An nc*. au thorising the president of the United .States to accept the serv ice a number 01 volunteer companies, nctcxceedir.g 3u,000 men.” v* ldch being i t ad, Mr. 1 ainmdgc said, that it would be remem bered, when the president hud transmitted his message to congress at the opening of the ses sion, one part of it rc luted to what might be tivc probable situation of the countr , a.... to the necessity tiia* nv.ghr ~-xist for raising a regular arm;.. Mr.T. presumed that every gentleman on the floor felt the same sentiment with res pect to the 1 importance of tne preservation cf the honor of the nation, and in order that they might be prepared to meet any possible e ’ ent, it became essentially necessary to knew v. hat was our actual force. This was the object of the first resolution which he had proposed. I.e wish.ed to know not only what that force was, but how far it was deiicient. Another reason which operated strongly on his mind, was that the house never failed at each st ssion, to vote money for the support of the army and navy of the United States ; they certainly could’not make the exact appropriations required, w ith out knowing what the actual force of the army vvas. With respect to the second resolution, it would ae remembered, that an net was passed in February, 1807, authorising the president to accept ot tne . emices of any number of volun teers, not 1 acceding i.0.00u, which act was to remain in force two years. It became import- S ant to know how far volunteer companies had jj offered, and how far this force might be brought | into the held in case cf emergency. An act had * alxo passed in April, IHO'i, authorising the pre -5 sident tncall out 100,000 militia, to continue in force t vo years from its date*, and would of course expire next April. Tnexc were the dif ferent species of force on which the president could calculate on an emergency. Th; t the house might know the exact force of the union, and hovv far it might be relied on, were the rea sons which induced him to move these resolu tions at this time. A desultory conversation took place as to the ability ot the executive to give the information called for in the second resolution, i;i which Messrs. Talmadge, Thomas, ILnu, Quincy, | Chandler, Durell, Alston, Uplv.m and Sinilie I took part, when the resolutions were igrct-i to ! v. ithcat a divisi’ n. | On motion of Mr. Poindexter, the house w ent i into a committee of the whole on the bill to ex j lord the right ol suffrage in the Mississippi | territory, and for other purposes, Mr. Masters lin the chair. M” Troup withdrew his motion for striking out the first section of the bill, with a view to give tiie gentleman from the Mississippi terri tory an opportunity of making the bill less ob jectionable, and for that reason so’tdy. Mr. ih'indexter, to accord with the wishes of the representation from Georgia, moved an amendment which limited the right of suffrage to freeholders and holders of land by equitable tith-s ; which wits agreed to without a division. Mr. Bibb moved that the following provision ; be inserted in tin-bill : “ Provided, That this act shall not take ef fect t ill the assent of the state of Ge orgia shad have been signified thereto.” ‘ Which motion was negatived, 63 to IS. The bill being gone through, the committee rnv and reported it. -Vlr. Bibb wished the proviso he had moved in committee of the whole to be now added to the bill. The speaker said the house must first decide upon the amendment made in committee. Mr. I'oindrXter said, that as the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Bib!.) had declared an in tention to oppose the bill in toto, if his proviso w vs not agreed to, he should ncw.be opposed to the amendment which he himaeiffhad proposed, and which had been adopted in committee, as it had been offered with a sole view to the accom modation of the gentlemen from Georgia ; antt as even after this compromise, they were ktiil determined to oppose the’ bill. tic therefore wished it now to be decided on in its original shape, which was most agreeable to the wishes of his constituents. The question being taken by yens and nays on concurrence with the amendment of the rrmarittec cf the whole, there were Ayes 79, Nays 41. Gn each of the foregoing questions some de bate arose, in which Mevsi'c Poindexter, Quin cv, Bacon, Sloan, Smile, khea, (Ten.) Lvon, and Holland, generally supported the right ot congress to legislate on the subject without the consent of Georgia, and advocated the political expediency cf extending the right of suffrage ns originally contemplated by the bill, so that every free white rattle inhabitant, who had paid taxes for six months, and been a resident in the territory twelve months previous to the ejection, should be entitled to vote for represen tatives in the legislature. Messrs. Bibb, Troup, Gardenier, Gardner, and Rowan, generally denied the right of con gress to legislate on the subject in violation of the compact entered into with Georgia, at the time ot her cession of the territory • intimated that the territory would soon become a state, whvn she could fix the qualifications of iter own voters ; and added, that in the mean time, there was abundant evidence of her elections being properly conducted, from the talents and respectability of her representativ es. I’lie house adjourned without taking a ques tion on Mr. Bibb’s proviso. Thursday, November 26. \ Mr. Lewis, worn the committee to whom was re-rammlUt 1 the bill far erecting a bridge over the river Potomac, reperu and the bill with amendments ; the most rna* rial cf which makes the shares of the stock p*: on;.i instead of l e t! property, ut.d gives to the L ; ’ted States the right r t becoming pm it. . rs oi • in* bridge after a cert-in time. The was teierrv and to a c . mmittee of the whole tocrow. Mr. 1.1 vu ; resented a rr.rruriail pr:y. Ingthtt the mm mnent in boner of tiie offb-, ;s who fell in the attack of Tripcii, imported ls om ivin j.*: by tlteir brotltcr efiic.rs, be avlmitU'i lice of duty. Referred to the committee of'conituu as uiid manufactures. Mr. J. Clay presented ti c- memcrial r.f W. Davy, K. Ralston, A. M‘Cu!!, and A. M.Bue’ - iy, a conr.uittec appointed ;.t a meeting of thes merchants of Philadelphia, to tal into consid eration tiie causes of sundry merchants who could net obtain drawbacks from a misappre lit: -b 11 of the laws on the subject. The horse adjourned before the memorial was dispose:’ of. J'ridaif, November 27. Mr- J- Hay presented a memorial from sun dry merchants in the city ofl’hiladelphi t, pray ing f r the repeal of the r.on-imporUitica law. Mr. Clay moved to refer it to the committee of commerce and rr.anafuctin es ; o.: this unit’ ncf reference a long debate earned* The me lon for reference was finally rejected by yeu and nays, 80 to 50, and 110 order taken on the memorial. Mr. Randolph, from the committee appoint ed for the purpose, reported a bill to explain art act passed iast session, entitled “ An act to prohibit the importation of Slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States, from and after the IB si day of January, in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hun dred andeight;” Which was read twice and referred to a *om mitte of the whole on .Monday next. Mr. Blount moved for the order oi’ the davon the second report of the committee of aggres sions ; he ’.visited the house to go into committee cf the whole on the subject ap.d remain in com mittee (as it was then late) no longer than to give the business priority over any ether on the the next day cf meeting. Mr. Randolph enquired why the second’ re port shoul: ‘ uve preference over :ft.- first, and why both had net been referred to the same committee of the whole, ax one depended or* the other!* Why were they shuffled about in this manner? Why was the cart to be put before the horse ? Why was the second brought upon the tapis and the first reserved i M i .'Bloiu t stated that the first was merely de claratory of the nature of the art, and detailed that information which had been sc loudly mli ed for from some parts of the house ; the se cond contained resolutions for preparing for de tente, which he conceived should be. first acted upon. Mr. Randolph moved that the committee of the whole,-to whom the second report or i-econd part of the report was referred, should be dis charged from the Consideration of it, that it itrig it be referred to the same committee to whom the first part had been referred. Mr. Blount’s motion being that under.Cnnsi doearion, a considerable debate ensued, which, branched widely into the subject ; in the coarse of which, Mr. Blount stated that the gcfttlcman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) had desired Mr. B. to let him know when the report was to ne called up. He had told the gentleman this meriting fiat he intended to call it up to-day. ’lf the gentleman had then expressed a desire that both reports should be referred to the same committee of the whole, he would have accom modated him ; by making a motion to that ef fect. Mr. Randolph said he would take the gentle man.from n. c. at his word, and widwlraw the motion he had offered, trusting to the gentle man to renew it. Mr. Blount withdrew his motion for immedi ately t .ikii.a up tiie second report, and renewed Mr. Randolph’s motion, on which the debate was continued. The gentlemen who took part in the debate on this subject were Messrs. i< in dolph, Blount, Chandler, Dana, Epi cs, Tho mas, Rowan, Nicholas, YV. Alston, Lyon, Quin cy, G. W. Campbell, Burwcll, Taylor, and fimilic. The question being on the motion as renew ed by Mr. Blount, was negativedtf'7, toAQ. Mr. Kppes moved that the order cf the day on the first report of the committee of aggres sions pe postponed till this day week- Carried ; ayes 58, nays 47. A motion was made that whasr-thc house adjourned, it should adjourn till Monday. Car ried, 01 tc 43. Mr. Blount then rereved his original motion, that the house should,now go into a committee cf the whole on the second report of the com mittee of aggressions. „ . Mr. D. R. Williams said that it wanted but five minutes of five o’clock, and he hoped the house would adjourn. Carried 54 to 4*• Monday, November 30. Mr. Got)a said, that tiie house had been long in session, and had yet done nothing towards the purpose for which they were called toge ther. • For the purpose of coining to the consi deration ol the subject, and for obtaining the prom-.r information, he offered tlic following re sole Rons Ist. Resolved, That th* seer? tnrv of the navy he directed to lay before this’ home a statement of the frigates and other armed vessels composing the navy of the Univd States, distinguishing those in actual service from those in ordinary, and noting such as want repairs, with an estimate of the suras necessary to pre pare them for immediate service, andVac pre un.. U* time necessary to make such repairs. 2d. Resolved, That the secretary of the navy he directed to lay before this house, a statement ot the number of officers and me.-, ve peetivelv, belonging to th navy of the Uni ted St ires and the corps- of marines. 3d. Resolv ed, That the secretary of the r.xw pc directed to lay before this !.cv :v, ar. estimate, efthe number of officers and men, which would !, c necessary to complete th ■ manning the while ned entire navy cf the United States, including the gun-boats, with an estimate of thff expenditures, respective!- . ncce.isar;, for main taining them irt actual service duiinr or>e year. 4th. Resolved, Thar th - secretary of the navy pc directed to lay before tins house, asts‘emer. t of th - qu •-.ffiiy, quality present state of tiie