Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

■■■J.'JM I l * iMf.. I CHRONICLE AND SENTINEL. AUGUSTA. SATURDAY MORNING, APRIL 11. No Mail North of Charleston last night. C. J. Jenkins. The false positions in which this gentleman had been placed by the Constitutionalist, and the Hon Edward J. Black in hi* letter to Governor McDonald, demanded at ,th(; Hands of Mr. J. a ▼indication, which will be foiin|! in this days pa per. It is due to’Mr. J. to atkv that his article has been prepared some days; and was unavoid ably deferred by us, in conscience of our ina bility to procure compositors, j Concert.; The lovers oi Song, we an* quite sure, will be particularly delighted to leajrn, that a Concert will be given this evening, at {VTr. Parsons’ Music Saloon, which will unite the jeombined talents of those masters, Messrs. Seu j’ilK, Houncastle and Latham, aided by the enchanting and me lodious warblings of the acctjr-iphshed Mrs. Se ouin. It is the last opportunity that will he af forded our citizens to witness-the powers of these distinguished vocalists, and rve trust will embrace it not oniy as a sourcte of inefable delight to themselves, but as a just ui jute to merit and high attainments. f \ Theatre. | \ To-night the ever comic, and eccen tric Lapsing, and his amiabljj Lady take their benefit, in a bill of rare attraction. They have high claims upon the of the drama in this city, which we are confideiij. will be acknow ledged this evening by a crowded audience. New IfbHK, April 5. Three days later fronj England* The Columbus, Capt. Gr»i|ipi>r, arrived this morning early, with dates to tb# 7th ult. from Liverpool, and the 6th from ; London—having made the passage in twenty-eigliit days. Anoth er vessel, the Brooklyn, is below probably two days still later. The papers on China are laid before Parlia ment, but ne debate has yet taken place. It is now nearly certain that England will make war in China. The London Tory papers are furious against Capt. Elliott and the American merchants in China. The repeal of the Corn Laws are agitated ter ribly throughout England. Some descriptions of their effects are horrible. Loxnoir, March 6. Monet Market. —The following is an ex tract of the chief part of the preamble, sent down to the Stock Exchange, by the Exchequer Bill office, this morning: Exchequer Bill Office, 7 White hall-yard, March 6, 5 “The Lord Commissioners of her Majesty’s Treasury, have determined that the Exchequer Bills, dated the month of lane, 1839, February and March, 1840, charged in aids, and supplies now outstanding, or about to be issued, and also the Exchequer iJills, carrying out public works and fisheries, shall on and after the 16th of March, 1840, bear interest of 2Jd per diem. On the above being published at (he Stock Exchange, in the early part of the morning, it was considered unfavorable to the funded inter est; but the financiers looked upon it in a differ ent light, as it established an undeniable confi dence. The raising of the Exchequer Bills to 2sd per day, is calculated at the rate of interest per an num £3 Gs sj:d, and the difference between Three per Cent Consols at the present price is is. 9d. interest less than the former. In the Consol Market scarce any business of consequence has been done during the merning ; but in the Foreign Market there was a strong disposition to sell Spanish in the early part of the morning; expecting they would have come lower-from Paris. A good deal of dallying still ciMUinues in the Spanish market. We still re main in the dark respecting future operations of the Chancellor of the Eqchequer to raise the wind, either by funding Exchequer Bills, or by a loan. Money in the early part of the day was rather wanted in the house. Consols have improved since the morning, and may be quoted 81$ to $ for account; Money 965; Exchequer Bills [new] 12 to 16; Bank Stock shut; India Stock shut; in India bonds nothing done. In the Foreign Market Spanish Active reached 295; at present 295; Portuguese a§ ; three per Cent s 23$ ; Brazilian 78. In Spanish De ferred and Passive, nothing dine. STATE OF TRADE. Masthesteh, March 6. Cotton Trade.— -No person's judgment as to the future prospects of parties engaged in the spinning and manufacturing of cotton would seem to be, worth any thing, for prices still keep com ing down in away that has become quite alarm ing, for since this day se’-nnight, hand loom cloth has declined fully lsd and power loom fabrics 3d per piece, which on die former is about 3s, and in the latter 5 per cent. Twist, for export has been sold this week quite as low as it was ever known to lie in 1837, whilst weft, from some cause not very intelligible, sella from 5 to 7$ per cent, above its supposed value, when compared to the present prices of yarn. There is, however, a very considerable business doing for the east— Calcutta, Bombay and Madras; in grey and blea ched calicoes, and shirtings; but still owing to many other important markets being closed to our trade at the present moment, that, until re-open ed, to expect any decided improvement would seem to be visionary. Hlmidirsfield.— We have nothing new to state in reference to this market; at any rale no thing more favorable Every week seems to add to the gloom and perplexity: and for the most, part, the goods that find a market are sold at a ru inous loss. In some styles of i*ew fancy wool lens, a small profit may with difficulty be obtain ed; but in plain cloths, and ia all other fancy goods, the trade is altogether unprofitable and, withont a speedy change, the most disastrous re sults will be experienced amongst merchants, manufacturers, and shopkeepers. The operatives also suffer much, and we fear their severe trials are not even near at end. Brandford. —The market to-da[y was, if any thing worse in all respects than the preceding one. Almost literally no demand, and vrith prices, as low astbey are, with a downward tendency ; al tbings are most gloomy. Itarna: There is no thing new in this trade to report. The prudent course which the spinners have for a long time pursued in reducing their productions the real demand has kept prices for a long while past, very steady, and to-day there is Wood; There is a decided giving way on life part of sta plers as with the anxiety to quit stacks. Prices rather lower. Halifax. —The demand continues pretty good for those descriptions of goods to vffiich reference was made in our last, and of such [he market is, in consequence, much bearer ot s ; .ock than for some time past. There was no li: r e in any other department of trade, and on the wl c le things are still dull. Wool is fully as easy 4 buy. I ~ Tax New ‘Transatlantic Steam Saie U.vitei) States. —This vessel, the largest steam er ever built at this part, and intended for the N. York Line, will be launched this day, at half past 12, at the yard of Messrs. Thomas Wilson & Co., the builders, near the battery. North Shore.— During the last few weeks she has been visited by a great number of respectable persons of both sexes. The following are her dimensions : Length from stem to stern, over all, 235 ft. Length of keel, 215 “ Breadlh, including paddle boxes. 60 “ Breadth of the deck between the pad dle boxes. 38 “ Depth-of hold from the upper deck, 3S “ 6 in. Height between the decks respectively, 7 “ 6 “ Length of the principal Saloon, about, 70 “ Breadth of Saloon, including the ad joining bed rooms, 42 “ Second, or fore Saloon, nearly of equal size. Capacity for stowage, beyond her coals, 800 tons. Total admeasurement, 1400 “ Mr. Editor, — Public attention has recently been directed to the Resolutions of the Legislature of Georgia, introduced by me, proposing an amend ment of the act of Congress, which provides for the delivery of fugitives from the justice of any one State jf the Union, when found in another. Enter taining no desires, whose fulfilment depends upon popular opinion of my political orthodoxy, and con tent that my own conscience and judgment ap prove my course as a Representative of the County of Richmond, I should not thus have troubled you and the public, but for certain allusions to me, more pointed than just, more specious than true. — In a late number of the Constitutionalist, (which appeared during my absence from the city, and was therefoie not sooner noticed,) the editors re mark that after having introduced, I voted against, those resolutions, for what reason they know not; thus substantially charging me with inconsistency. It appears that the senior Editor of that print, al ways at his post in Milledgeville, during the ses sion of the Legislature, and usually quite conver sant with the movements of parties and individuals in both houses, was cognisant of ray vote, but un luckily for me, failed to hear, or hear of, the rea - Isons assigned in my place for that vote. Again, whilst other Representatives of Georgia in Con gress, when communicating to the Executive their reasons for declining to present the resolutions, have contented themselves with a discussion of their merits, it has pleased ihe Honorable Edw’d J. Black, in a passing notice of ray connection with them, to place me in a false position, and then in a self-sufficient, Sir Oracle tone, to read me a lecture for indulging in “ hallucinations ” In the first paragraph of his letter to Governor M’Donald, he speaks of “ resolutions relative to the controversy with Maine, introduced into the last Legislature by Mr. Jenkins, and ultimately passed by that body in lieu o f more decided and appropriate measures,” &c. In a subsequent para graph, be enquires, “ What fond hallucination could have influenced the author of these resolu tions, to hope, or to ask, at the hands of abolition ists, justice, by the enactment of a Law, to the penalties of which, Philbrook and Kelleran would be submitted, when these individuals were but en gaged in accomplishing the very object to which the law makers themselves have been so long and so entirely devoted ?” The writer assumes, Ist, that I am the author of those resolutions, which is true. 2ndly, that 1 had introduced them in lieu of more appropriate measures, proposed by my col league, which is untrue, inasmuch as they were not introduced until after I, in common with one hundred and forty others, had voted for the mea sure es my colleague. 3rdly. That in proposing them, I had in view' a remedy for the case of Phil brook and Kelleran, which is also untrue —Ist, be cause the whole scope of the preamble and resolu tions, indicates that the amendment they propose was intended for general operation in future cases ; “ two recent occurrencts” (not the Philbrook and Kelleran case,) being only alluded to as evidence, demonstrating the insufficiency of the existing law. 2ndly. Because I voted against the resolutions for the simple reason,assigned at the time, that by the action of the Senate, they had been adopted in lieu of a measure more decided and appropriate to the controversy between Georgia and Maine. Previous to the introduction of those resolutions, a bill (receiving my cordial support) had passed the House of Representatives, by a majority exceeding one hundred, and had been sent to the Senate, which, in my opinion, renewed the pledges of the General Assembly in 1837, and provided a remedy for the wrong done by Maine to Georgia. That it would pass the Senate by a majority equally deci ded and triumphant, was the prevailing opinion.— Knowing that the close of the session was near at hand, fully assured that by the passage of the Bill, above mentioned, the honor of my State would be maintained, and the controversy with Maine provi ded for, I felt at liberty to propose such an amend ment, of the vary defective act of 1793, as would give effect to the Constitution of the U. States, and prevent future collisions of like disgraceful and dangerous character. When,however, the Senate, by yeas and nays, laid the bill of the House upon their table, and immediately took up and passed resolutions similar, in most respects, to those in troduced by myself, evidently substituting the one measure for the other, I felt that Georgia was about to descend from the high ground’assumed in 1837. I remembered a passage in her history, when her destiny were in other hands—when her favorite son, holding the reigns of executive authority, de clared that he would maintain her sovereign rights, despite the loud menaces, and the strong arm of Federal power. I remembered, how, when the storm lowered, the minions of power execrated, and the timid trembled at, his noble daring ; and, how, when the cloud had passed away, and disco vered —the Patriot-Governor erect —triumphant, in his position of peril, execrations gave place to pan egyrics, and timorous doubts, to proud exultations. I felt that the Glory was Troup’s, and Georgia’s, and I perceived thal the latter was about to be des poiled of it, bj the cringing policy of another Dy nasty. Thus impressed, I was the first to suggest to my colleague, the necessity of opposing, and, if possible, defeating the resolutions introduced by myself, rather than see them prostituted to the ignoble purpose indicated by the action of the Se nate. This I did by argument, by protestation and by vote. In one word, (considering, per se, the proposed amendment to the act of 1793, the resolutions had, and have ray entire appioval; but as the ultimate redemption of Georgia’s pledge, to “ provide” (against the State of Maine) “ protec tion for her own people, in her own way,” I did and do regard their adoption, as her deep and last ing humiliation. Having now explained the relation I bear to that measure, I must crave your indulgence, while I present succinctly my view of the constitutional question involved in this discussion, and briefly no tice the argument of the honorable gentleman. It wlil be borne in mind, that the resolutions under consideration, propose to amend the act of 1793, by authorising the demand, contemplated in the 2nd sec. Ih Article Const. U. S., to be made upon the ■ of the U. S., having jurisdiction in the Wwherein the fugitive may have taken re ’ fuge, of the Governor of that State, as new j authorised. This legislation, it is said, would be , unconstitutional, because the Constitution confers upon the Federal Legislature no such power. — Such grant, it is conceded, must be sought for among the powers vested in Congress, and specially enumerated in the B*h sec. Ist Article, or it must be proven to be necessary to the exercise of some one of those, or of a power “ vested by the Consti tution in the Government of the United States, or some department thereof .” I derive it under the latter branch, and point for the grant to the 2nd clause 2nd sec. 4th Article, which is in these words: —“ A person charged in any State with treason, felony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another State, shall, on de , mand of the executive authority of the State, from f which he fled, be delivered up to be removed to the State having jurisdiction of the crime.” , It was perfectly apparent to the framers of the , Constitution, that the facility of escaping from ®ne State to another, and the great reluctance, which must be felt, in numerous instances, to surrender a citizen of one State, to the jurisdiction of another, would lead to frequent collisions among the States, and jeopard the peace of the Union. To prevent a result so deplorable, this clause was insert* d, which, it will be perceived, designates the source whence ’ the demand shall emanate, but is silent as to the modus operandi, and the functionary upon whom -1 the requisition shall be made. Nor was this silence 1 the result of accident or want of foresight. It is ■ not the province of constitutional law to regulate , details These, requiring such occasional changes ; as experience may suggest, are the appropriate subjects of ordinary' legislation. Argument is un necessary to prove that unless these omissions be supplied, the clause must be inoperative. Demand, and delivery there might be, but by national comi i ty, not constitutional compulsion. How then shall they be supplied ? By separate State legislation ? Certainly not, because any State might impair, or evade, the obligation by imperfect legislation, or by omitting to legislate ; and because want of uni formity in those important particulars, (an inevita ble lesult from separate ligislation) would produce inequality in the benefits to be derived under that provision of the constitution. Shall they be sup plied by conventional arrangements among the States ? Certainly not, for by the tenth section of the first article, each state is prohibited from en tering “ into any agreement or compact with any other state.” The only re naming mode of sup plying the omission is by the legislation of Con gress. Either then the states intended by the adoption of this clause, to “ vest a power in the government of the United States,” or they intend ed to insert a dead letter in the supreme law of the land, or they did not know what they were about. Had they intended that the state authori ties alone should be competent to make the sur render, how easy, how natural, to have said so; especially in connection with the declaration that the demand should be made by the executive au thority of the offended state. The Constitution emphatically declares that the thing shall be done , and there can be no security that it will be done, in any case, save by the ac tion of the Federal Government. Hence, it is abundantly clear, that this power was thus “ vest ed in the government of the United States,” and that by virtue thereof Congress has the power to legislate on the subject. The idea seems to have possessed the mind of the honorable gentleman, and perhaps may have occurred to others, that the passage of such an act as is recommended by the resolutions, would in volve the usurpation of a power, or right, reserved to the states. If asked to define it, the answer would probably be, the power or right of deliver ing up fugitives upon demand. The inquiry would then arise, to what extent has this prerogative been reserved ? Will it be maintained that it has been reserved in all the length and breadth in which it was possessed, anterior to the adoption of the Constitution ? We shall see. Then the au thorities of a state had unqualified discretion in Ihe matter ; they might comply, or refuse, with, or without a reason. But did the constitution leave them in this regard as it found them ? Does not its emphatic language, “ shall be delivered up” sweep from the states every vestige of discretion ? It would be idle in the extreme to address argu ment to a man who would deny this proposition. Upon a careful analysis of this boasted prerogative, the candid mind will perceive that the discretion thus suirendered, is its essence, its very soul. — Pursue this train of thought a little farther. The entire proposition contained in the clause of the constitution under consideration, presents to the mind two opposite ideas ; the withholding, and the surrendering of fugitives. The former is a power or right, prohibited to, or taken from, the states ; the latter a duty, enjoined for practical purposes. Enjoined upon whom ? Necessarily upon that agent in whom the federal constitution lives, and moves, and through whom alone it acts. In these United States, the delivery of fugitives from jus tice, is now resolved into imperative duty, solemn obligation, resting somewhere. All else apper taining to the subject is gone. Where then is that inestimable reserved right, whose threatened usurpation has awakened in the honorable gentle man’s breast such fearful forebodings of federal ag gression ? In the practical operation of the proposed plan, how is it possible that State sovereignty can ever be wounded ? Now any citizen of a state, who violates a penal statute of the United States, on the soil of his own state, may be arrested by a ministerial officer, under a warrant issued by a judicial officer of the Federal Government. Is the state thereby degraded, or her sovereignty impair ed ? Then wherefore, when another citizen is ar rested by the same agency, for having transgressed, the penal laws of another state, on her territory ? The ren edy, on the proposed plan, is susceptible of being made absolutely certain, so far as it de pends on official action, and so it should ever be. No case can be supposed wherein, the demand being regularly made, any question can arise as to the propriety of responding to it promptly? The intimate relation existing among the states of this , Union, cannot be preserved without a rigid enforce ment of this salutary provision of the compact. . Nay more, the South cannot otherwise be secure i in the enjoyment el her peculiar institutions. Should it ever become the settled policy of any I other portion of the Union, to use it for the over - throw of those institutions, as the gentleman sug gests, why let our glorious Constitution be con • signed to the archives of the past, to moulder with : other records of fallen Republics—let history re -1 cord that our Government, which sprung from per secution, was destroyed by perfidy. Passing over the rhetoric of the honorable gen : tleman, I propose biiefly to examine his Constitu ' tional argument. His proposition is ** that the power of the Stale of Georgia id act (a this matter , is expressly reserved to, and enjoined on, her by the 2d sec. 4th art. of the Constitution. That sec tion is in these words—“ A person charged in any state with treason, fe’ony, or other crime, who shall flee from justice, and be found in another state, shall on demand of the Executive authority of the state from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the state having jurisdiction of the crime.” “ Here then is positive written proof that the right to demand a fugitive from justice, has not been granted to the General Government, but has been reserved to “ the state from which he fled,” which state is clearly recognised in the same sec tion as“ having jurisdiction of the crime.” If then the Constitution which spoke into existence the Federal Government, clearly yields up and reserves to the states this important right not only to de mand but to try the fugitives from justice, I ask by what process of reasoning, do you arrive at the conclusion, that Congress has the constitutional power “ to prescribe the forms which would give authenticity to ihe demand.” It appears then that the gentleman’s constitutional scruples do not at tach to the actual arrest and delivery of the fugi tive by the federal government (which was dwelt upon in his argument upon the impolicy of the measure) but to its exercise of the very dangerous “ power , to prescribe the forms which shall give au thority to the demand He regards this latter power, as an essential ingredient in the right to demand. He would claim for each slate, the right to prescribe the form in which she will make all such demands, and of course to designate the func tionary upon whom she will make them, not allow ing to the state, upon whom the demand shall be made, nor to any common arbiter, any voice in set tling these preliminaries, nor any discretion to re fuse the demand. This proposition is even more absurd than the converse, that the settlement of all these preliminaries rests with the state upon whom the demand may be made. But is the form an essential ingredient in the de mand, which, being prescribed by another power, destroys the right ? Does not the discretion, ihe sovreign volition to demand, or not, still remain ? If the form be reasonable, and not difficult of ob servance on the one hand, and guard against ca pricious, causeless action, on the other, neither party can complain. The framers of the Constitu tion, well knowing that the federal government was the only competent authority to do this, wise ly imposed the whole duty upon it. In support of this view, we have, in the act of 1793, passed only six years after the adoption of the Constitution, a contemporaneous exposition. The ground assumed in the preamble and resolu tions is this, that in the event of an offender against the penal laws of a sovreign state, escap ing to another, the former has the right under the Constitution, to require of the common agent of them both, the arrest and delivery to her of the offender, that she may in the exercise of her sov reignty, bring him to trial, and if found guilty, to condign punishment. Throughout, the part as signed to her is becoming the dignity of a sovreign, and that to the federal government, is but auxilia ry to the exercise of her sovreignty—it is not a privilege, but a duty—and a subordinate one. The doctrine of the state rights party (as under stood by me,) has always been that, that govern ment, was the agent of the states, and the federal constitution its power of attorney. The principal has a right to exact of his attorney the discharge of his w'hole duty. When the power of attorney de clares that a certain thing, connected with his agency, shall be done , failing to do it, shall the agent be justified under the plea that he had no author ity ? But if this analogy (again and again insisted on by the founders of the state rights school, of politics,) be apt, we have the precise case under discussion. Yet the simple proposition that this common agent of the 'states, is bound to perform the humble office of arresting felons fleeing their justice, presents to the terrified imagination of the honorable gentleman, the spectacle of a collossal, consolidated government, rising upon the ruins of state sovreignty; whereupon he betakes himself to the melancholly task of “ gathering up the frag ments of a shattered Constitution,” which bestrew the pedestal. Strange confusion of ideas ! Unpar alleled “ hallucination ”// Lamentable political mono-mania !! ! In conclusion I wish the gentle man all the consolation that a blind devotee may de rive from the pious work of collecting and pre serving sound relics. CHARLES J. JENKINS. From the New Orleans Bee\th inst. Mexico. The brig Kenhawa , which arrived yesterday, brings information that on the 20th March the federal army had surrounded the town of Cam peachy, both by sea and by land. The federal squadron consisted of three vessels, and they had sent a messenger to obtain aid from the Texian navy. It was supposed they would succeed in capturing Campeachy. Letter from Gen. Scott. In the House of Representatives on Thursday, the following letter from General Scott was sub mitted : Heap Quarters, Eastern Division, Elizabethtown, N. J. March 23, 1840. Sir — l have the honour to acknowledge your letter of the 6th inst. covering a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 9th, referred from the Department of State to the Department of War, inquiring “whether the Government of Great Britain [has] expressed to the Govern ment of the United States a desire to annul the arrangement entered into between the two Go vernments in the month of April, 1837 respec ting the naval force to be maintained upon the American lakes ; and that, if said arrangement be not annulled, whether there has been any Vio lation of the same by the authorities of Great Britain Confining myself to the latter clause of the re solution, which I have underscored, and which you have referred to me, I report the facts with in my knowledge connected with that inquiry, presuming that I have not had time to verity my own impressions by those of more than one offi cer [Col. Worth] who has recently held a com mand under me on the frontiers of the British North American Provinces. I do not know, nor do I believe, that the Bri tish authorities have had a single armed vessel of any description on the lakes, above Detroit, in many years. But in the summer and autumn of 1838, whilst I was absent to the South, I under stood from our officers on my return, that the au thorities in Upper Canada had employed one or mare armed steamers, hired for the purpose, and manned wih a certain number of troops, to cruise on Lake Erie against apprehended invasions from our side on the part of the people called Canadi an patriots. The season of 1839 having been a tranquil one, I did not here of a single armed British ves sel on that lake. In the month of January, 1838, at the time there was a considerable number of those patriots in possession of Navy Island, in the Niagara riv er, seeking to make a descent on the opposite Canadian shore, the British authorities hired two or three lake craft, [schooners,] and armed and manned them for tire purpose of frustrating that threatened invasion, bat it is believed that those vessels were never on Lake Eric whilst so armed and manned, and that they were discharged as soon as that particular danger had passed away. Down to the burning of the British merchant , steamer, the Sir Robert Peel, on the St. Lawrence, • in 1833,1 cannot learn that the authorities of the Canadas had any armed vessel of any sort, in ac tivity, whatever they might have had laid up in port.) either on Lake Ontario or on the river St. Lawrence ; but up to that event, and up to the 1 close of navigation in 1838, I learn from Col. ’ Worth, who returned from the Cherokee country . to the Canadian frontier several months before my 1 return, that those authorities had employed sev eral hired steamers, besides barges, all armed and manned, cruising against parties of the same pat ' riots, principally on the St. Lawrence and confin ed to their own waters. During the past season (of 1839,) and up to i the close of navigation, two steamers, (owned or hired by the British authorities.) one schooner and a number of barges, were in like manner em ployed on the same lake and river, as a security against an apprehended renewal of the troubles of the proceeding year. I have the honor to remain, sir. With high respect, Your most obd’t. serv’t., WINFIELD SCOTT. Hon. i. R. Poinsett, Secretary of War. From the Albany Evening Journal. Will the re-election of Martin Van Buren bring back prosperity to the country or advantage to the citizen? Will the rich be made poor or the poor rich by it 1 This was promised four years ago. On the contrary have not “ the rich been made richer and the poorer?” Who has gained by the revulsions in business—the derangement and depreciation of the currency and the general prostration of enterprise and honest industry du . ring his ascendancy ? Houses and lands—farms and produce have diminished in value—but so has the price of labor—so have the calls for labor. The debtor owes as much —the creditor receives more than he did before. Is it the poor or the rich that hold in their hands the balance of credit? Labor is the source of wealth to communities as to individuals. Can a nation prosper that drives its people into indolence and vice, hy withhold ing the natural stimulants of adequate reward to virtuous industry ? Sin is the legitimate offspring of wretchedness. 1 Fas not Van Buren brought misery enough upon the country already ? The People wronged themselves when they suffered him to become ■ their ruler. But they were promised unnumber ed benefits for the transgression. The benefits have not come—but retribution instead. The blighted hopes and gloomy homes of thousands attest its seventy. Will they wrong themselves still further by repeating the transgression ? The signs of repentance every where abroad tell us that they will not. The spectacle of impover ished classes and injured interests every where presented tells us that they will not. The indig nant spirit of an intelligent people every where aroused assures us that they will not. A case of som to merchants was de cided last week in one of the Courts of Phil adelphia. It is thus reported in the U. 9. Gazette: This was an action of replevin to recover certain goods and merchandize, enumerated in the Writ of Declaration, valued at $919 36. The plain tiffs were merchants of New York, and the de fendants were common earners between the cities of New York and Philadelphia. The facts of the case, as detailed in the evidence, • were briefly as follows: In the month of Septem ber, 1835, Isaac Campbell, of Alton, Illinois, went to the city of New York with the view of purchas ing goods. He represented to the plaintiffs that he was a member of Isaac Campbell & Co., which firm, he said, consisted of his father, brother, and himself—that the firm was free from debt—that his father was in affluent circumstances, and that the capital of the firm was about SIO,OOO. Upon the faith of these representations, the plaintiffs sold him the goods in question. It was in proof that he brought goods of many other persons in New York, by means of similar repre sentations. The goods sold by the plaintiffs, as , well as ot hers, were packed up in cases and hales, • marked “Isaac Campbell & Co. Alton, Illinois,” p and delivered to the defendants, for conveyance to Philadelphia, thence to he forwarded to Illinois. On the arrival of the goods in Philadelphia, they were seized under processes offoreign attach ment ; by pire-existig creditors of Isaac Camp i bell, whose debts amounted to several thousand dollars. Campbell absconded upon the laying of the attachments. It was afterwards ascertained that he was largely in debt in Philadelphia—lhat he was wholly insolvent, and that no such firm existed as Isaac Campbell & Co. Campbell after wards fled to Texas. This replevin was issued to take the goods out of the hands of the defendants, who were stake holders for the parties entitled, either the plaintiffs or the attaching creditors. . The plaintiffs’ council contended, Ist, That they had a right to stop the goods in transitu, between [ New York and Illinois, in consequence of the I insolvency of the pretended purchaser, James i Campbell. ! 2d. That the contract of sale was anullcd and rescinded by the fraud and falsehood which were practised to obtain the goods, and that no property passes where a purchase is brought about by mis representation. ’ His Honu*, Judge Strouds charged the Jury, that if believed the evidence they must find for the plaintiff—lhat the contract was violated by the fraud, and no could pass under such circumstances. Verdict for plaintiffs. a I From the New York Mirror, t Female Courage, f A striking trait of courage in a lady forms the - subject of conversation at present in the French 3 metropolis. Madame Aubry lives in a solitary - chateau, not far from the town of . The - family consisted only of M. Aubry, his wife, and b a child about a year old, and one maid servant, t In the little town, every light is out by ten o’clock, - and of course the most perfect softude reigns at t that hour in their house, which lies off the road, and is completely hidden by trees. One night - last winter, Madame Aubry was sitting alone, i reading. Her husband had left her in the morn - ing to visit a friend some six or eight miles off, , and, as he expected to bring home a consid j erable sum of money, he had taken the unusual - precaution of arming himself with a pair of pis - tols. At about six o’clock, the lady went up to i her room to put her child to bed. Her apart ment was a large room on the first floor, filled - up on one side by an old-fashioned chimney, and f on the other by a deep and spacious alcove, near i which stood her infant’s cradle. The night was f a gloomy one, cold and dark, and every now and - then a dash of rain beat against the gothic - windows. The trees in the garden bowed to the r wind, and their branches came sweeping against 1 the casement; in short, it was a night in which > the solitude of Jhe mansion was more complete i and melancholy than usual. Madame Aubry sat - down on a low chair near the fire, which by its sudden flashes, cast an uncertain light over the I vast apartment, throwing its antique carvings and - mouldings by turns into brighter relief or deeper shade. She had her child on her lap, and had j just finished preparing it lor the cradle. She i cast her eyes towards the alcove, to see if the • cradle was ready to receive its UMe occupant, • whose eyes were already closed. Ju*| then, the fire flashed op brightly, and threw a strong Ijaht on the alcove, by which the lady distinguished a pair of feet, cased in heavy nailed shoes, peeping out under the curtain in front of the bed. \ thousand thougths passed through her mind i an instant. The person hidden there was a perhaps an assassin—that was clear. She had no protection, no aid at hand. Her husband wag not to return till eight at soonest, and it Wa * now only half past six. What was to be done* She did not utter a single, cry. nor oven start on her seat. The servant girl probably would not have had such presence of mind. The robber probably meant to remain quiet where he was till midnight, and then seize the money her husband was to bring with him ; but if he should find he was discovered, and lhat there was no one in the house but two women, he would not fail to leave his hiding place, and secure thtir silence by mur dering them. Besides, might not the girl be the robber’s accomplice ? Several slight causes of suspicion occured to her at once, and all these re flections passed through her mind in less time than we take to write them. She decided at once what she should do, which was, to send the girl out of the room. “ You know that dish my husband like*,” said she, without betraying her alarm by the least change in the tones of her voice, “ I ought to have remembered to have'it got ready for his sup per. Go down stairs, and see about it at once.” “ Does not madame require my help, as she generally does?” No no, I will attend to eveivtlilng myself. I know my husband would not he pleased, if he was to come home after his ride in such bad weather, and not find a good supper ready.” After some delays, which increased in the ladys mind that suspicion she was forced to conceal, the girl left the room. The noise of her steps on the stairs died away gradually, and Madame Aubry was left alone with her child, with those two feet peeping out under the curtain. She kept hy the tire, her child in her lap, continuing to caress it and sing to it, almost mechanically. The child cried ; it wanted to be put to bed, but its cradle was near the alcove—near those dread ful feet, how could she find courage to go near them ! At last, she made a violent effort. “Come, my child,” said she, and got up. Hardly able to stand erect, she walked towards the alcove • close to the robber. She put the child in the' cradle, singing it to sleep as usual. We may imagine how much inclination she had to sing. When the child feel asleep, she left it, and re sumed her seat by the fire. She did not dare to leave the room ; it would arouse the suspicions of the robber, and of the girl, probably his accom plice. Besides, she could not bear the thought of leaving her child, even if it was to purchase her own safely. The clock pointed to seven. An hour yet, a whole hour, before her husband would come ! Her eyes were fixed on those feet, which threatened her with death at any moment, with a sort of fascination. The deepest silence reigned in the room. The infant slept quietly. We do not know whether even an Amazion, in her place, would have been bold enough to try a struggle with the robber. Madame d’Aubry had no arms; beside, she made no claims to valour, but only to that passive courage founded on re flection, which is far the rarer of the two. Every few minutes, she would hear a noise in the gar den. In that noise, a ray of hope shone on her for a moment—it was her husband, it was deliver ance! But no—it was only the wind and rain, or the shutters creaking. What an age every minute seemed to be. Oh, heavens! the feet moved ! Does the thief mean to lea' e his hiding place? No. It was only a slight, probably in voluntarly movement, to ease himself by changing his position. The clock strikes—only once, it is the half hour only—and the clock is too fast, be sides ! How much anguish, how many silent prayers in these trying minutes ! She took up a book of devotion and tried to read, but her eyes would wander from the page to fix on those hea vy shoes. All at once a thought arose that chil led her to the very heart. Suppose her husband should not come! The weather is stormy, and he has relatives in the village he went to. Per haps they have persuaded him it was unsafe to travel at night with so large a sum of money about him : herhaps they have forced him, with friend ly violence, to yield to their urgent invitations to wait till morning.—It is srtiking eight—and no body comes. The idea we have alluded to, ap pears to her more and more probable. After two hours of such agony, the unhappy lady, whose courage had been kept up by the hope of final rescue, feels her strength and hope fail her. Soon she hears a noise under the window, and listens, doubtfully. This time she was not mis taken. The heavy outer-door cracks on its hin ges, and shuts with clamour; a well-known step is heard on the stairs, and a man enters, a tall stout man. It is he, it i» he 1 At that moment if he had been the worst of all husbands, he would have seen perfection in his wife’s eyes. He had only taken off his wet cloak and put away his pistols, and delighted at again seeing what he loves most on earth, opens his arms to embrace his wife. She clasps him convulsively, but in a moment recovering her self-possession, puls her finger on his lips, and points to the two feet peeping out under the curtain. If M. Auhiy had been wanting in presence of mind, he would not have deserved to be the hus band of such a woman. He made a slight ges ture to show he understood her, and said aloud, “Excuse me, my dear, I left the money down stairs. I’ll he back in two minutes.” Within that time he returned pistol in hand. He looks at the priming as he walks to the alcove, stoops, and while the fore-finger of his right hand is on the trigger, with the other hand, he seizes one of the feet, and cries in a voice of thunder, “ Sur render, or you’re a dead man !” He drags by the feet into the middle of the room a man of most ill-favoured aspect, crouching low to avoid the pistol which is held in an inch of his head. He is searched and a sharp dagger found on him. He confesses lhat the girl was his accomplice, and had told him M. Aubry would bring a large sura of money home that night. Nothing remains now, but to give them over to the authorities. Madame Aubry asked her husband to pardon them, hut the voice of duty is louder than that of pity- W hen M. Aubry heard from his wife all she had gone through, he could only say, “ Who could thought you so courageous!” but in spile of her courage, she was attacked that night with a vio lent nervous fever, and did not get over her iero ism for several days. An Improvisitor. Edward Merlin was charged with being drunk and noisy in a house in Cross street; and it was also intimated by the complainant that Ned was in all probability, a little cracked. Mr. Merlin was considerably out of the knees and elbows, and his shirt seemed as if it might be the identi cal two napkins, sewn together, which belon?e to the second most fortunate of Sir John staff’s country troopers. In short, Ed. Mer in appeared to be a regular loafer from bis p.mp le cover, to his shanks mares, with this sole excep tion, that his tongue went like a perpetual motion, whereas it is one of the peculiarities of the fra ternity that they are too lazy to talk. The roost interesting feature, however, of Mr. Merlin 0 c racter is lhat he’s a poet and that too of so dulterated a complexion, that whatever he runs into rhyme, as naturally as if it was be»po and paid for at a penny a line. j r|g f, Mrs. Donovan, the complainant is a wa n” woman who keeps one of those “hole shanties, where they purport to sen good liquors at three cents a glass, eV . pcared in evidence that Mr. M er j‘ n a „ but had ery justice to her “best of good hquoro ventured no farther in her favor, i began to remind him of the “thieo cen