The Louisville gazette and republican trumpet. (Louisville, Ga.) 1800-1809, June 17, 1800, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE LOUISVILLE GAZETTE: A N D REPUBLICAN TRUMPET. VOL. IL] GEORGIA, LOUISVILLE:—PubIiIhed every Tuefday, by AMBROSE DAY & 7a\lKS mi v T*E payable half yearly Where Elfays. Articles of Intell, K ence. Advertifements LC • J''r*„ 3 doll,,rs l ,er ann -n j pl>! \T’T’r^v r* ■ n • • , • 1 ms » tvc. ate thankful v received aud PKIN I to all its var.ety, ts executed with neatnefs and d,(patch. To the PUBLIC. The Editor of the Louifvlile Gazette rejpeHfully informs fht public in general and his friends in particular, that he. has this day taken into co-partner fin p, Mr. James Bely, The hii/inefs will in future be conducted under the of J) \Y amd II EL Y, T Yhofe attentions will be cxe.rcifed ti render general fatisfattion — And they pledge themfelves Jor the ccnjlant exercife of their left judg ment in the d/fpofitionof fuch ejf'ays and intelligence as may he prejtnted jor publication • Ambrofc Day. James Hely, To the Patrons of the Louifville Gazette. C‘.r The Editor of this Gazette, reqwfh al thofe mho have any De mands againfl him, to prefent them f r payment ; and thofe Suhjcnhers who a>e. in arreais, are particularly cad'd upon to pay them as early as p r fj:!'U as it will he receffdry to cleft all accounts immediately, Jhe public and Suhfcrihers will fie of to accept the. expreffion of the mofl fnccre gratitude, as a jufl acknowledgment for the very kind jufport the Editor has received fince las commencement in bufmefs, Ambroie Day, Sprit 29, 1800. Jefferson Academv, jHE Commiffoners announce W} lk pie a Jure, that the Jejfer- I n Academy ts now open for the u '/’ cri c ‘ youth, under the direc• \ 11 |/ /' 7r - James Armour, *’ 7 w h°f e character and abilities I ' a tnil er, the Commiffi oners have gycaf (xptHaiions. Thofe whoentrufl i 0 ■ :IM the education of their chil 'f l- e a [fared that his uimofl be ufed for their im provement. JI having been nottfed fame time C T ‘at the exercifes of this Acade ''l begin, and a difappnint mZ l2m S taken place , the Com deem it their duty to fay, J lnt proceeded from the pounce of the. gentle man J ! ls c,l % a gements t who tk?y had L] u fid wuh the reciorpiip of l fn ccim y* ap d not from any \ VIX tie in filiation, or any cn *he part of the Commiffi -7ns c f tuition for Reading, j ■ ,:i £ ari d Arithmetic—three * P er garter, fZZi > matlcs all its branches— t ' ' ar * peer quarter . ktu Greek Languages— m per quarter. I fy order of the board, I ,»• '" >Pe * Roz eman, Clerk. ' 2 7* iBoo. 1 u E S D A Y, Iu N I J 7> ,8 0P> 110fi:rr is nrx motto — ytso truth our guide NOTICE. \JJ HERE AS my wife, Rhoda v Coleman, ha ß left my bed and hoardlncr at/a uft my will ; fj»efe are therefore to forwaro all pe.fona from dealings with her on my account, as I »m determined to be the difpofer of my own property, and to pay no debts, but thofe of my own contrattiugf. John Coleman, JefeTon County, Feb. 35, iR C o. Jetierfon Superior Court, October Term, 1799. Prefent the lion. Thomas P Carnes, Robert Watkins, & “] John E. Anderfon, j for toe uje of John )> Foreclofure . Eore, vs, Thomas Collins, j BL it known to all concerned, that a petition was prefented to the lono: able the Super 1 r court of he county cf Jeff rfon, held by his honor Thomas Reiters Carnes, one of the judges of the f did courts, praying the foreclofure of the. equity cf redemption to one lot cf land fitvate in the town of Louifville in the county of Jeffefion, and know n hy number two hundred and fifty two—he it therefore Cede red, That the fold Tho mas Collins do come info court within twelve months from the date hereof, and pay the fend Robert Watkins, and John E. Anderfon, for the ufe of John Fore , the prin cipal and inter eft together with the cofls , in tsrms of the [latute in fuck cafes made and prev'ded ; other-wife the equity of redemption will be forever from thence forward foreclojed. PETER ]. CARNES, Attorney, From the Pguohkjpsie journal, A LAW CASE. For the confederation oj men of all parties. THOMAS COOPER/was lately incli&ed for a libel on the adminiffraiion. The trial was under the a6l commonly called the ftdiiion law. According to a claufe in this aft, he was per mitted to juflify by (hewing the truth of the fa6b he aflerfed. To do this, it was ncceffar y, that certain witneffes fhould be called and examined, and that certain public papers fnould be fo authenticated, as to become evidence in a court of law. He (Cooper) accordingly requcfled that John Adams might be fum rnoned as a witnefs. 1 his re quefl was rejefted by the court He then attempted to procure authenticated copies of the pre fident's anlwers to fundry ad dreffes, See. &c. but thefe alfo were refufed. He then pro- cceded to read certain papers g*» nerally received as tbp anfwers of the pu f dent to the alorefaid addicOes and publifhed as fuch, but tlii v the court declared not to be legal evidence. Under tlieie ci i cum fiances lie was ern viaed t &c. &c. See Web (ley's Spcflator. An enquirer v ho has nothing < t heart but piftice, who has been uniformly attached to the confiitution, and who has every pofTiblc public motive and nii vate difpofition to think well of the admini ft ration—wifhrs to know, why, in a lull involving the liberty, property and rha raaerof a fellow-citizen. John Adams fhould not have hern called upon as a witnefs ? To fuppofe there was any legal dif ability weird he the height of (edition and calumny, nor will it, 1 believe, be pretended that he is exempted by his oftice from the obligations of t uth, juflice and humanity, which irnpolc jt upon every human creatine ro ter;vidi rlie guilty, orexculpafe the innocent, A they he railed upon to do fo. His competency therefore being un qutdionabie, what confederation could have governed rhe deci sion of the court ? Was it tho't indelicate to require from the bill magifirate of the country the cxercife of one of 1 the mod folemn duties which, as a man, he owed to il ? 'J his is inipofh hle—!t cannot he, that if Mr. Cooper had hern charged with i heft or murder, inflead of Edi tion, and ihat if he believed Mr Ad arr/s teftimony material or neceftary to his acquittal, that it would have been denied to him. By the confutation, 11 the accufcd (hall enjoy the rights of a fpeedy and a public trial by an impartial jury ; fhall be informed of the nature and caufe of the accufation • fliall be confronted with the wifnc.Tes againft him—and (hail have compulfoiv proccC lor obtain ing witneiles in his favor." In this clause, according to rny comprehenfion of it, Mr. Coo per's right to call upon the pre fident or any other perfon whole teflimony he fupnofed would operate in his favor, is clearly eflablifhed—nor do I frnd in any other part of our magna charta a (ingle fyllableto impair that right,. Whence then is derived the authority exercifed in this cafe by the bench, not certainly from the confiitution ? nor from any exifTing law of the United States; and it is quite improbable that it ftiould be among the un-enu merajfid authorities incident to n comf; for if it were, every ac cu fat ion would ncceffarily he a condemnation, at their more %vill and pleafure* J n other words, if a court has a right to pic-judge rlie extent or applica tion of a tcflirnony which never heard, and on that or anv othei ground (fave the fm/le one of the legal dif. bility) to fet afido one witnefs in a caufe, it his a tight to fet aGde all. and of rourfc, to compel 'he jurv to hting in a virdift of guilty.- I limiting as 1 do of ihe judicia ry of the United States. 1 con ceive it to he utterly impofTible. but that (nine tealon may he given for their conduft, which plain men, like mylelf cannot perceive. It is this latent and undifeovered reafon that I arrj now in i'earch of, and which r the reputation of our courts nnd thecaufe of fedcraltfm, I xycEt that lomc of the fn< rds (>f go vernment. better iniormed fh. n myfelf, will bo obliging enougu to afbguto the public. I fhouki like to know at the fame time how it happened that the pa pers required by Mr. Coope* to he authenticated, were not an thenticatrd, 'I he papers pur porting to he nnfwrrs of the pre bdent to binary addreffes, wric either written by Mr Adams, or they wcic not. If they were written by him, it is impoffihlc that they fhould contain any thing which couldjuflify a libel upon his conduft, and ofcourfe. the papers ought to have been acknowledged. If on the odier band the ta pers were not genuine, ihat is, if ihey have been falfely attri buted to Mr, Adams, where was either the error nr the danger cf openly difclairni/'g them ? As the hufmefs now Hands, it giver the opponents of Mr. Adams a plaufiblc handle againfl him. “ i i«s true (fay they) that Coo per has been convidled, but who we afk can be acquitted, if an executive will not authentic iis own a6ls—and if a court * ill prejudge tcflirnony, and reject witnefles, they have not heard? Such are the queftions that *rc afkecl—and I honeflly confefs that they are queftions which at prefent embarrafs me rot a little.. Like St. Paul, I do not think it enough to reply generally, that 1 believe all this to be righ*; I wifh to he able to give a >ealoti for the belief I profefs—because I generally find, that when I Cannot fatisfy rny own mind ful ly and completely, I always fail in my attempts to fatisfy the minds of others. J am yours, &r. AN ENQUIRER, [No. 72.