Newspaper Page Text
A.
WASHINGTON CITY, June 22.
The dispatches received by the John Adams
‘corroborate the remarks we lately offered to 1
«the public, on publishing the note of tin
Dnc.defewlore, with the accompanying letters
*c;f general Armstrong. In presenting a fuller
•vie w of,the state of our 'foreign relations, they
tbcvr how little we ought to expect from the
<j'ts'icc of cither France nr England, and loud
ly call epon us to abandon all partiality for ei
, !ie 'r of them. We have long considered this
-evihe impe.rious duty of our count! y men. In
liie desperate game for wealth and power
Avlvch is playing on the continent of Eutopc,
■v/ehavc seen a-total destitution of principle
und disregard of the rights or interests cf
‘other?. The plea of necessity, ever the watch
word of tyranny, which has been so vehement*
ly urged, ought to have convinced us, t!
while the present storm continues, however a
treaty might have been patched up with both
-or either ot the belligerents, it would be cither
'of short duration, or-faithlessly, if not tieach-
ei-ously, executed. But-as credulity is the last
acquisition of an honest mind, which struggles
"against it until compelled by irresistible facts
to receive it, so to the honor of the American
'people, they have been slow to appreciate the
^motives of the leading governments of Eu
rope. Honest themselves, vith no ambition
'but that of fairly pursuing their own imeres's
•without invading those of oihcrs, they have
•Cherished the hope that the aggressions com
mitted from time to time upon their rights
■would be soon succeeded by a respect for them,
and by a renewal of political confidence and
•commercial intercourse. But they must now
be convinced that the carreer of ambition, and
the inordinate thirst Tor richc3, are not to be ar
rested by maxims of justice or laws conseciet-
cd by the Wisdom of ages. They must be sa
tisfied. that the greatest insult that can be offer
ed to the outstretched arm of power, is to at
tempt to arrest it by tirgutr.chtor.remonstrar.ee.
They must sec that England and France stand
in the same attitude towatds us, aud that the
assertion of our independence can only be cor
rectly displayed by ceasing to palliate or apol
ogise for the unjust conduct of either.
There was, for a time, a faint hope, that the
-propositidn submitted by our government that
the respective orders and deciees of the bel
ligerents should be chronologically revoked,
would be agreed to by them, aud something
like an accommodation be the result. But
even this hope, shadowy as it was, is now dis-
•pelled. England has refused to annul the or
ders of blockade issued by her, antecedent to
the date of the Berlin decree, and thereby neu
tralised the offer of the French government to
revoke that decree on condition of the previous
revocation by the British government of her
previous blockades of France.
As this is a point of considerable importance,
inasmuch as i< proves unequivocally the dispo
sition of the British govet'nfnent, and tests the
sincerity of its previous assurances, we shall
dilate a little upon it. If, in performing this
duty, fno facts stated, or the inferences dedu
ced from them, evince a want of good faith on
the part of the British government, \vc trust
we shall not, in condemning such conduct, bo
view* 1 as virtually advocating the conduct of
The French government. \Ve wish it to be
tH.tincily understood, that ivc can condemn
the conduct of one, without approving that of
the other ; that, in the strictures offered, we
uct the part of Americans ; that >ve are neith
er Frenchmen or-Englishmen, but Americans;
tjud that, although, as philanthropists, we wish
well even to our enemies ; yet, as patriots, we
consider it our duty to maintain, by all just
means, the rights and intetests of our own
country.
It will be recollected, that the violations of
our rights by France and England, have been
nll-along justified by each, cn the ground of
retaliation. Neither government has main
tained its right to originate the aggressions
committed by it, but each l^as insisted upon
its right to retaliare upon its enemy for her
Original violations of the laws of nations. Lt
ha, been in vain that 'we have denied the jus-
>■ ti.eeof this principle of retaliation, by alledging,
that a just retaliation could only fall on the en
emy of the offending nation, and not on neu
trals, who had maintained an inviolable impar
tiality. Having once taken their ground, bath
the belligerents have been deaf to our remon
strance's.
In the course of the numerous explanations
which those outrages gave rise to, both the
Engish and French ministers fieqncntly de
clared, that, as the measures taken by their
respective governments were entirely retalia
tory, either would, on the previous repeal cf
the orders of the other, revoke its own.
To put the sincerity of this assurance to the
test, we find that general Armstrong, in virtue
of an instruction from Mr. Smith, of the fitst of
December last, enquired cf the Due de Cadot e
“ what were the conditions on which his ma
jesty the emperor would annul his decree,
commonly called the Beilin decree; and whe
ther, iftireaf-Britain revoked her blockades of
ii date anterior to that decree, his majesty would
consent to revoke the said deerc.- ”
To this enquiry the Due de Gadore returned
for'answer *
« The only condition required for the revo
cation by his majesty the emperor cf the de
cree *>f Berlin, will be a previous revocation by
the British government of her blockades of
Ffi.nc.e, or part of France, (such as that from
the Elbe to Brest, See.) of a dale anterior to that
of the aforesaid decree.”
These blockades, it will be held in mind, are
flatter block ides, as contradistinguished from
actualblockades, which (the paper blockades.)
it is allowed on all hands, are not authorised by
the laws of nations.
tir'-gjsThis answer, then, of the Due de Cadore
■JSTtsight the pending case to a point. All room
for subterfuge was removed by it. The condi
tion oi the French government is simple and
trojijjsc. It docs not comprehend the wide
•cla'ft of ail edged or real violations of neutral
rights committed by England. It is made to
*
apply exclusiv. ly lo blockades, and not Jo those
at present in force," but only to tiios? of a dale
anterior to that.of the Beilin decree.
This written declaration of the French gov
ernment, solemnly made in the name of the
emperor, reached Mr. Pinkucy on the 12th cf
February. *
On the -!5rh of February Mr. Pinkney writes
to lord Wellesley, and enquires of him, in pur
suance c"f a previous intimation, “ whether any,
and if cfay, what blockades c.f Franee, instituted
by Gieat-JBritain during the present war, be
fore the first oi January, 1807, ate understood
by Lis majesty's government to berin force.”
In theprctloRs intimation alluded to, Mr. Pink
ney had explained to lord WellcSiey the proba
bility cffhtdiid by general Armstrong’s letter
that a declaration l y the British government
that no such blockades existed would be folloW-
* cd by the recal of the Beilin decree,
i To the letter of Mr. Pinkney, lord VVellesi
: ley replies, on the 2d of March, “that the coast,
rivers, and ports from the river Elbe to Brest,
both inclusive, vrere notified to be under the
ill
l'ram the Baltimore Whig.
s'psnsfecUTOHS
No stronger proof of innocen ce can bfe offer
ed to a candid observer than Vindictive*, perse
cution ; it is the sweetest attribute of mercy
and justice to weep over those frailties "of ohr
nature, which the laws have marked for con
demnation and punishment. What then must
be the man, who can piejudge a fellow creature
tinhorn c, and excitingly anticipate h>s guilt and
destrocticn ? Can he be sympathetic, benev
olent, generous, kind-hearted, charitable, just,
candid, or honest ? No 1 he is equally a stran
ger to the iten precepts ot justice and the
tender affections oft he heart. Himself a vil
lain in principle, and a savage in sentiment—
his pride and happiness consist in degrading
•evciy man to his cwn base level. I am led to
these reflections by a publication which I have
observed in a late paper of Relf of Philadel
phia, (who has a brother of the same name, in
the employ of Daniel Clark cf New-Orleans)
restrictions of blockade, with certain modifica- * purporting tc be a communication from a “cor
tions, cn the 16th of May, 1806; and that j respondent at Washington,” in which th3 con-
ihese restrictions were afterwards comprehend- ‘ dufet of the unconstitutional and inquisitional
ed in the order of council of the 7ih ofJanua- = “ ’ u '* " "*
. ry, 1807, which order is still in force.”
An explanation of this note having been ask
ed by Mr. Pinkney, lotd Wellesley, on the
26th of March, most explicitly answers as fol
lows :
j “ The blockade, notified by Great-Britain
in May, 1806, has never been formally with
drawn •; it cannot, therefore, be accurately stat-
. ed, that the restrictions which it established,
rest altogether cn the os dcr of council of the
1 7th of January, 1SG7 ; they are coutprcheud-
commissjon, which undertook to investigate
s the life and character of general Wilkinson, as
well as the conduct of that officer, are grossly
misrepresented.
The illiberal aspect of this communication
manifests an uncommon interest in the author,
to keep alive the prejudices which have been
excited against the general, in order to bias
' the public mind against him before he has
been heard, and in effect, to shut the door oi
justice upon this victim of policy and persecu
tion. From the intimacy of this informer with
cd under the more extensive restrictions of the actions and opinions cf the committee, a
that order. No other blockade of tire ports of ! confidential understanding may be fairly intpli-
France was instituted by Great-Britain be- ted, and if we may be allowed to draw an in-
.1 « — , V *1 n , r. - 1 . I V I* • .. a a ^ i.. s-\ n- f 1. /•.. * t rl m~* n nr Ant ft, a n — 1 , • m
tween the 16k of May, 1806, and the 7tH of
January, 1807, excepting the blockade of Ten-
ice, instituted on the 27th of July, 1-806, which
is sill in force}'
Here, then, is a broad and unequivocal ac
knowledgement, by the British government,
that some of her illegal blockades agaiist
France, of z dale anterior to the Berlin decree,
are still in force.
From these facts,-admitted by herself, the
following inferences are irresistible
1. That England was the original aggrcsior
upon neutral rights.
2. That she still persists in som'e of Her
original aggressions, enforced and extended
by subsequent orders.
3. That the pretext, that they are a retalia
tion upon France, is false.
4. That when brought to the point, and the
sincerity of her assurances are put to'the test,
it appears that she is unwilling to give validi
ty to those assurances, by revoking her paper
blockades,of date anterior to the Berlin decree,
as, if she were so disposed, she might revoke
them by a new order in the same summary
way in which they were originally passed.
Stolen
From the Gaol.'Gate, on THURSDAY
EVENING the 28th instant, from off the sub
scribers Horse, a SADDLE anci a PLATED
CUitB BRIDLE A generous reward will be
given by the subscriber if returned, or for any
information which may lead to the recovery cf
them.
William C. Barton.
June 30—a—78
Superior Court, Chatham County.
April Term, 1810.
The f .llowing Petit Jurors being summoned
to attend court at this term, and having made
default, to wit—James Rise, James Poultney,
Peter Mitch el, John Carnochan, James Cleland,
Abraham Scribner and Charles Clark,
Ordered, That they be severally fined in the
sum of Twenty Dollars, unless good and suifi-.
cient excuse be filed in the Clerk’s office with
in thirty days. Bx tract from the minutes,
Job T. Bolles, clerk.
June 23— —75
N otice.
AH persons indebted to the estate of the late
Andrew M'CxEriE, deceased, by bond, note
cr open account, are requested to come for
ward and discharge their respective obliga-
and liquidate their accounts. Since no
fet encc from the conduct, character and inter
csts of the parties, we should not overleap the
mounds of charity were we to carry our suspi
cions to Robert Newman, the deserter, or Dan
iel VV. Coxe, the partner of Mr. Clark—both
these gentlemen attended on the committee as
witnesses ; they both furnished much matter
to criminate the general ; they both bore wit
ness against him, elsewhere it is difficult to say
what proofs the committee may have received
or what may be satisfactory to them—but we
will venture to affirm that little more will ap
pear than the iabrications of Clark's book, and
as these are to be published, their merits will
ho doubt be tested by the evidence which we
understand genfcral Wilkinson is preparing for
the public. In the mean while, it would cer
tainly be more candid, and perhaps hot less
profitable, could Mr. Clark and his minions re
strain their impatience, Until they behold the
mass of extra judicial testimony, collected by
the enemies of general Wilkinson, refuted and
exposed by the irresistible force of the docu
mental proofs, both of the living and the dead,
which he has in his possession.
The author of the communication quotes
Mr. Pearson in aid of his misrepresentation,
and it is not impossible this gentleman may
have been the member who gave Mr. Coxe the
inaccurate statement which he quotes respect
ing the S?3,000—because the man who can first
accuse and afterwards agree to sit iu judg
ment, as Mr. Pearson has done in the case of
genet al Wilkinson, can be restrained by ro
sense of delicacy or propriety.
It is .somewhat singular thatu// at once so
much stress should be laid On ti e papers of the
court of enquiry, before which the accusers re
fused to confront the accused, and which has
been called by Clark and his agents, a mocke
ry of justice. But why should general Wilkin
son refuse the production of papers which Mr.
Clark and his agents were at liberty to meet,
and on which he was honorably acquitted ? Or
why should an inquisition, which on this occa
sion, absolutely repelled every idea ol receiving
exculpatory testimony, find such an imperious
necessity for that, which vindicated the gener
al before a constitutional tribunal ? Reader, at
tend to the following facts:—By the articles of
war, the party tried before a court martial, has
a right to demand and receive a transcript of
the proceedings had in the case ; and the prin
ciple and practice equally apply to courts of en
quiry. But the extent of the documents, in the
case before us, would have employed an extra
clerk many weeks to copy them, which time
I tl' - , ut.U 11 ab\,UUlU.. W1UW ..v. , 1 J. , - - .
I complaint can be made on the score of not' and circumstances did not permit-—they were
‘ having had sufficient indulgence, it is honed ■ necessary to general Wilkinson for the digest
property taken cWay, gives Wr. Randolph
claim to an important discovcry, on which wc
congratulate htnr, although it..might have been
more correct, and equally abusive, if he had
said “ the clerk witnessed,'and publicly per
mitted, tliis high-way refcbery of the comman
der in chief ”
With respect to the conduct of the Commit
tee, lei the following facts speak—they will, at
it
Notice.
tire same time, expose the shameless slanders
of the Washington correspondent, be it Ro
bert Newman, the deserter, or the simpering
Daniel W-. Coxe, the partner of Daniel Clark t
The general arrived at Washington cm the
I7th April, and was immediately apprized by
an anonymous note, of the extraordinary pro- *; ••;•.
ceedings oF the inquisitional commission which
was si ting in secret over his life and iame, and
rejected all but inculpatory testimony. He
was advised by seme to apply to them for m
hearing ; by others, qdt to acknowledge their
jurisdiction. He was assured that his arrive
had not been expected, and that bets had been ‘
laid (as in the case of liis attendance at Rich-,
mond on Burr’s trial) that he would never^iovr
his face in Washington.
General Root, one of the committee, internro-*
cd general Wilkinson, a few days afteri his
arrival, that the committee had made out a
subpCEna for him but had afterwards detcrpiin
ed not to summon him ; and soon
this
ger.tWman, it is confidently asserted and believ
ed, became disgusted by the proceedings of his
associates, retired from the committee, and left
congress. Mr. John Montgomery was appoint
ed to supply his place. He at the first meet
ing enquired whether general Wilkinson had
been subpoenaed to appear, and being answer
ed in the negative, immediately moved in form
that general Wilkinson be subpoenaed ,to ap
pear before the committee of investigation, and
(let it be recorded to his immortal honor) ora
the question, fie stood alone in the affirmative;
He instantly retired from the conclave, refusing
to mingle in the dark inculpatoiy councils of
an inquisition, set Qp against a defencless citizen,,
and accordingly he applied in his place to be
discharged from the committee—-for if such
things as these are permitted—if the authority
and purse of the nation can lie directed against
an individual—who is safe ? And yet, gracious
God l John Randolph will vociferate in favor
of the constitution, and blast Wilkinson with
his infectious breath, for touching the writ of
habeas corpus to save the nation'from civil war
and dismemberment.
On the 24th of April, the "general received
an order from the chairman of the inquifition
to “ produce or fend to them'* the papers ap
purtenant to the court of enquiry ; and on the
mornings of the 25th and 26th he tranfmitted
all he could find among thofe he accidentally
had with him, the refidue being at Baltimore,
where (mingled with twenty-two trunks of
public documents) they were landed. The
papers thus furnifhed the committee agreeably
to their command, were twenty-nine iu num
ber, as per list at foot, all of material impor
tance) and including every inculpatory docu
ment offe r ed against the general, on the .court
of enquiry, as well as sundry testimonials to
evince his integrity, and prove Mr. Glark’s
turpitude ; aod yet Newman, the deserter; or
Mr. Coxe, the partner, or the Washington
correspondent, has the audacity to assure the
public, that the general “ pi esented barely
five unimportant papers to the committee ;
that they returned all of ihem to the general
but Andrew Ellicot’s deposition, and that this
fact is stated in the report.” It is true, that,
on the morning of the 2d May, all these pa
pers, except Ellicot’s deposition, were return
ed to the general, by order of the committee,
in a note irom general Butler, the chairman,
and this is the only truth stated by Newman,
or Coxe, or the “ Washington informant.”—.
Proofs, as strong as holy writ, were contained
among these documents, of Clark’s associa
tion with Burr, and of Wilkinson’s innocence;
but these it did not suit Mr. Randolph’s pur-,
pose to send forth to the world under legisla
tive sanction. No. Wilkinson is marked for
his revenge, and he would embrace Clark, or
take Burr to his bosom to-morrow, to accom- -
plish the ruin of the man who is a living mo
nument of his dishonor—for, with all the base
malignity of a cowardly assassin, and the vin
dictive spirit of a ********, Mr. Randolph
knows how to estima'e the value of that man
ly attribute, which his nerves deny him, and
the miserable wretch will never enjoy tran
quility, whilst the man lives in repute who
stript him of his lion’s skin and unmasked the
bully.
But how will the committee reconcile this
3 for distant service. His papers, by his trans- J wm committee recon
' fer from place to place, were scattered from ; l u PP r . on °* trUL “ - Gan they jultify to their
I forwarn a.l perfons w.tatever, nat to tra^e for CarUsle t J Philadelphia, Baltimore and Wash- : conferences or to their country, the fending forth
Five Notes, given by me to Daniel Kirkland, . - { j before they were colle'-led the P OI ^ ons again ft the character of a fellow man,
January rift, for so dollars each, and figned C. B.shep- ,n g‘0n, ana be ore tney were coiieaed, the * . , , , ... ,, . . i
ard. and Thomas Kfng, Jun. as'the consideration, for
which faid notes were given, I since find not to be
agreeable to bargain and sale, and I am determined
not tc pay faid notes, unlefs compelled by law.
C. B. SHEPARD.
St. Mary’s, March S—2S
general received a sudden and. unexpected or- unaccompanied by the antidote which they held J[
J 1 -- . _ XT _l_ J _ T ) . i - in tliPlr n/\fTofTir\n ? TT *-/-* TV* f»vr»V» ”
Notice.
j ft'he subscriber has lost or mislaid two Notes
l of Hand, one for fifty, the other for one hun-
in their poffeflion r Fromfuch crying injustice/
good lord deliver this land—and let the citi
zens of the United States look to their righ*s
and guard them, by nipping the baneful pre
cedent in the bud, For let them bear in mind
—“ Patty is for a day—the conftitution is for-
to Ncw-Orleans, and in the hurry of the scenes ever—it is ;he tabernacle under which they arid
which ensued his orders, the necessary alien- their pollerity are to dwell and to find a refuge*’
lion of general \\ ilkinson to objects of superior againft ufurpaiion, tyrany 3nd oppreffion.
importance, the papers in question were over- ? The publication I have alluded to at the pre
looked and accompanied those of the general. j „ , r *.
der to repair to New-Orleans to defend that
city—liis baggage was afterwards brought to
gether at Baltimore; and to save the papers
from the hazards of the sea, they were confid
ed to capt. Pinkney, who crossed the mountains
and descended the western waters with them
dred dollars, drawn in Ins favor by Arthur i (n p 0rtancej the papers in questii
Sf payaMe e> ^ the r fim day'of Janaat’yT/t j !^? ked and accompanied those m me genera.. > fent moment , is ca l cil l 2ted> moft artfully and
past. Ail persons are cautioned against trad- | * ecircums ance, ow ve , aas urnis..eu him . w j c kedly calculated, (as many others have been,
thu nnf .c fhi. warned • an opportunity to autnenticate many of the let- j from the moment Wilkinson baffled Burr's trea-
iag for the notes, ‘and the drawers are warned
against paying them to any person except the
subscriber, or his older.
John Everitt, sen.
Canoutfiie, June 25—m|*—76
Notice.
,51
After the expiration of nine months from
the date hereof, application will be made to
the justices of the inferior Court of Bulloch
county, for leave to sell two Tracts of Land,
one containing 202 1-2 acres, in Wilkinson
county, the other containing 100 seres, in
Striven county, belonging to the estate of John
M. Burkhalter ; to be sold for the benefit of
the heirs and creditors of said estate.
Ethcldred Hagin, odm'or
Dccctnbcr 23—*§w—153
opportunity to authenticate many
ters he received from Mr. Clark, and other
documents, and the whole of them are safely
returned, and when collected together the gen
eral is bound to deposit them in the war office,
from whence they were permitted to be taken
for his use by the proper authority. The flip
pancy of Mr. Randolph’s imagination is fre
quently substituted for sound sense; his preem
inence as a senatorial blackguard, awes his au
dience more than his talents—his envenomed
temperament, furnishes him with an unfailing
torrent of gross and scandalous invective; an<!
the Washington correspondent of &V« jReli
takes delight in qufiiing his abused a man
whose tongue is privileged. The general’
commission however of a “felonious act” i
fonable projects) to excite the doubts and fuf-
picionsof the timid and the credulous ; tomake
conver s of the wavering; to confirm the jealous,
and to arm the hoftile; and by reprefenting
Wilkinfon’s case as defperate, to ilrengthen
Clark’s hands, to ex’end his corrupt influence,
and aid his subornation of testimony.^
ft he writer in .he Philadelphia Gazette ua-
dertakes tq fpeak the fentiments of the houfe of
reprefen tat ires, on the reception of general Wil- ■
kinfon's addrefs to the fpeaker, and then inflate
'hat body with indignation ; .but if 'his be true
why did they not throw the address under the-
•able, or treat it with indignity : On the cou
ntry it received the refpect practifed on.fimilar
the presence of the proprietor or keeper of the occafions, and a majority cf the body regre.ictj.