Newspaper Page Text
recommended any Rational Convent ion
that has yet been constituted. We have
adverted to it to show that whilst the
same power nominated which elected the
President, the'Sortth had some power in
the Federal Government, and some in
fluence in the Executive, whilst the Re
publican party continued to accumulate
strength instead of losing it, at each pre
sidential election.
To be continued.
y ©is mm
FfO'n llie Washington Spectator, 9th inst.
Votes of Executive Session.
The injunction of secrecy upon the 1
proceedings of the Senate in Executive j
session having been removed, we are cn- j
aided to present our readers with the
votes upon the following nominations : !
MR. HENSHAW’S NOMINATION. ’I
I
Upon the question of consenting to the
nomination of David Henshaw, as Sec
retary of the Navy,the vote was as follows:
YEAS.—Messrs. Colquitt, Haywood,
King, Semple, Sevier, Walker, Wood
bury—B.
NAYS.—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atch
ison, Bagby, Barrow, Brtes, Bayard, Ben
ton, Berrien, Breesc, Buchanan, Clayton,
Crittenden, Dayton, Evans, Foster, Hau
r.egan, Henderson, Huger, Huntington,!
Jarnagin, McDuffie, Man gum, Merrick, j
Mo rehead, Pearce, Porter, Rives, Tall
madge, Tappan, l r pham, White, Wood
bridge, Wright—3l.
MR. PORTER’S NOMINATION.
Upon the question of consenting to
the nomination of James M. Porter, as
Secretary of War, the vote was as fol
lows :
YEAS—Messrs, Haywood, Porter,
Tall madge—3.
NAYS—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atchi
son, Atherton, Bagby, Barrow, Bates,
Bayard, Benton, Berrien, Breese, Buch
anan, Clayton, Crittenden, Dayton, Evans
Fairfield, Foster, Fulton, Henderson,
Hiller, Huntington, Jarnagin, King, Mc-
Duffie, Mangum, Merrick, Morehead,
Pearce, Rives, Semple, Sevier, Sturgeon,
Tappan. Upham, VV r oodbridge, Wood
bit rv, Wright—3B.
MR SPENCER’S NOMINATION.
Upon the question of consenting to
the nomination of John C. Spencer, as
one of the Associate Justices of the Su
preme Court of the United States, the
vote was as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. Atherton, Bagyby,
Breese, Buchanan, Colquitt, Fairfield,
Fulton, Hannegan, Huger, King, Mc-
Duffie, Phelps, Porter, Rives, Semple,
Sevier, Sturgeon, Talhnadge, White,
Woodbury, Wright—2l.
NAYS—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atchi
son, Barrow. Bates, Bayard, Benton, Ber
rien, Clioate, Clayton, Crittenden, Day
lon, Evans, Foster, Haywood, Hender
son, Huntington, Jarnagin, Mangum,
Merrick, Miller, Morehead, Pearce, Sun
lnons, Tappan, Woodbridgc—2o.
MR. PROFFIT’S NOMINATION.
Upon the question of consenting to the
nomination of George 11. Proffit, as Min
ister to the Court of Brazil, the vote was
as follows:
YEAS—Messrs. Breese, Colquitt, Ful
ton, Hannegan, King, Semple. Sevier,
and Walker—B.
NAYS—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atchi
son, Bagby, Barrow, Bates, Bayard, Ben
ton, Berrien, Clayton, Crittenden, Dayton,
Evans, Fairfield, Foster, Haywood, Hen
derson, Huger, Huntington, Jarnagin,
Mangum, Merrick, Miller, Morehead,
Pearce, Porter, Rives, Sturgeon, Tall
madge, Tappan, Uphum, Woodbridge,
and Wright—33.
MR. HILL’S NOMINATION.
Upon the question of consenting to
the nomination of Isaac Hill, as Chief of
the Bureau of Provisions and Clothing,
the vote was as follows :
YEAS—Messrs. Colquitt, Fulton,
Hannegan, Haywood, Huger, McDuffie,
Rives, Semple, Sevier, Tall madge, and
Upham—ll.
NAYS—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atchi
son, Bagby. Barrow, Bates, Bayard, Ben
ton, Berrien, Breese, Clayton, Crittenden,
Dayton, Evans, Foster, Huntington,
Jarnagin, Mangum, Merrick, Morehead,
Pearce, Sturgeon, Tappan, Walker, and
White-25.
MR. WISE’S NOMINATION.
Upon the question of consenting to the
nomination of Henry A. Wise, as Minis
ter to the Court of Brazil, the vote was
ns follows :
YEAS—Messrs. Allen, Archer, Atchi
son, Atherton, Burrow, Bates, Bayard,
Berrien, Buchanan, Colquitt, Evans,
Foster, Francis, Fulton, Hannegan, Hay
wood, Huger, Jarnagin, King, Miller,
Phelps, Porter, Rives, Semple, Sevier,
Sturgeon, Tull madge, Upham, Walker
—3O.
NAYS—-Messrs. Bagby, Benton,
Breese, Clayton, Fairfield, Henderson,
Mangum, Morehead, Pearce, Wood
bridge—lo.
SPEECH OF MR. STILES OF
GEORGIA.
In the House of Representatives, Jan.
28 and 30. 1811—On the motion of
Mr. Black of Georgia, to amend the
motion of Mr. Dromgoole, of Virginia,
to recommit the report of the Select
Committeeon the Rules, by instructing
them to report to the House the fol
lowing rule, (the 25th) viz :
“ No petition, memorial, resolution, or
other paper praying the abolition of slav -
ery in the District of Columbia, or any
State or Territory, or the slave trade be
tween the States or Territories of the
United States, to which it now exists,
shall be received by the Hou.se, or enter
tained in any way whatever.”
January 28.
Mr. Stiles having obtained the floor,
sp*4<« as follows;
Mr. Speaker : Os all the evils which
beset our government, of all the dangers
which threaten our Union, net one can
be found, more speedy in its operation,
sure in its consequences, or fatal in its
results, than foreign interference with
tire domestic institutions of the South.—
Other divisions between the citizens of
this wide-spread republic, which consti
tute the ground work of opposing parties
and whose violence at times seems al
most to hazard the existence of the coun
-1 try, are but honest differences of con
struction as to the powers of the govern
ment. This variety of opinion is but
consistent with the variety of interest
education, and habit, by which we are
distinguished. It is wholesome, because
it is a difference based in reason, having
| for common object the support of the
constitution ; for its end, the preservation
of the liberties of the country. But far
different are suqji divisions, from that
which separates the true lover, of his
country from that band of deluded fana
tics, whose only reason is that “ the end
will justify the means,” and which end
is die desolation of the fairest regions of
the earth, the destruction of the most
perfect system of social and political hap
piness which has ever existed.
The danger is notoulv great, but it is
increasing. The spirit of abolition has I
adv?.nceu,andis advancing. It increases
by opinion ; it triumphs by deteat.—
Scarcely ten years ago, and the few ob
scure enthusiasts of the North, who ad
vocated the abolition of slavery at the
South, excited but the derision and con
tempt of the whole country. Abolition
was deemed by the enlightened and re
flecting citizen but an insignificant and
sickly flame ; that, if it sprung from our
own soil, it was but the “ ignis fatuus ”
which would expire when thegas which
gave it origin had been consumed ; or,
if dropped by some foreign hand, either
by accident or design, that there was no
combustible matter within its reach, and
that it must be extinguished by the first
breath which swept over it. But time
has proven the fallacy of these calcula
tions. The spark which dropped fell*
amidst inflammable materials ; and the
breath which it was supposed would ex
tinguish, only enkindled the flame. It
has shot with terrific rapidity through
the land. Stopped neither by patriotism,
principle or party, it is now causing the
very elements of our constitution to ‘melt
with fervent beat.’ and will, if not arres
ted by us in this hall, prove to our coun
try its ‘ last great conflagration.”.
The question now before the House,
which involve this important subject, is,
in substance, the retention or rejection
of the 25th rule, providing for the exclu
sion of abolition petitions. Being in
favor, of retaining the rule, I shall con
sider, with the limited opportunity; that
the hour rule allows, the objections to
such a course. Those objections consist
as the opponents of the rule contend, in
its being a violation of the constitution,
and an abridgment of the right of petition,
What part of the consltitution does it
violate, and upon what part do the op
ponents of the rule rest ? 1 am answered,
the first amendment. And what does
the first amendment prescribe l That
Congress shall make no law abridging
the right of the people peaceably to as
semble, and to petition the government
for a redress of grievances.” To nnalize
the clause ; first, Congress shall make
no law. Congress has made no law ;
this is but one branch of the government
and it can make no law. But it has
been said, that the rule accomplishes the
same object—it abridges the right of pe
tition ; it violated the spirit and intent of
the constitution. The letter ol the con
stitution, it cannot be denied, is not vio
lated by the rule ; and before it can Ire
violated, some law, some legislative en
actment to that effect must be passed by
Congress. But the spirit and intent of
the constitution ; let us look to that.—
To discover this, we must refer to its
history. What is the history of the first
amendment, and from whence was it de
rived? This point having been fully
discussed, and the acts relative to the
subject read by the gentleman from South
Carolina, [Mr. Rhett.] and subsequently
by the member from Alabama, [3Vlr. Bel
ser.J I may here be permitted to be brief
and to content myself with stating simply
the conclusions to which history irresist
ibly leads. Not to go father back in
point of time, it is sufficient to state that
in the thirteenth year of the reign of
Charles 11, an act of Parliament was
passed abridging the right of the people
peaceably to assemble and petition for a
redress of grienvances. This act crea
ted great and universal dissatisfaction
among the people, in prohibiting them
from assembling, preventing their peti
tioning, and punishing with incarceration
all who attempted its infringement.—
The oppressive operation of the riot acts
being sensibly felt in this country about
the time of the formation of the consti
tution, and the obnoxious statute of
Charles 11. being still offeree here, led
to the adoption of the first amendment of
the constitution.
“ It was the right of the people to as
semble and petition" which they held
most sacred, and to the invasion of which
they seemed most strongly opposed. It
was this subject, and hot the reception
of petitions, that elicited the thrilling elo
quence ol Fox to which the gentleman
from North Carolina, alluded. It wns his
opposition to ‘the proclamations of 1795’
against seditious meetings. It was be
cause the liberty to assemble was con
sidered the more important right, that
Fox contended for it, instead of for the
reception of petitions ; and not for the
reason stated that the “proposition to re
ceive petitions was never at that time
disputed.” Let me tell that honorable
gentleman, and also the member from
New York, [Mr. Beardsley,J who stated
that Parliament never rejected petitions,
lltat the “proposition was at that time
never disputed' that Parliament was poss
essed n(J and exercised fully the right of
receiving or rejecting petitions at plea
sure.
But the gentleman from Massachusetts,
[Mr. Winthrtfp,] not content with mere
•assertion, has endeavored to sustain the
position by reference to authoriiy.
But although assertion, in matters of
law or precedent, is the feeblest and most
unsatistactory aid which can be invoked,
yet,- from the result of his effort, it is but
too perceptible that those who preceded
him, and who relied upon his assertions
alone ptfrsued at least the more politic
and prudent course.-
After a laborious search (I have no
doubt) through Hatsell’s work upon par
liamentary precedents, he has succeeded
in discovering a single sentence which
seemed to sustain his point ; and it is
not surprising that heshould have grasp
ed at it with the avidity which he mani
fested, atid to have desired for it the en
viable distinction of a golden inscription
upon the pillars of this hall. This sen
tence, the mere dictum of the author, is
in opposition tothepractice of Parliament
as manifested in almost every page of his
work, and contradicted even by the sen
tences which immediately precede and
immediately follow it. (Mr. S. here read
the passage relied on by the gentleman
from Massachusetts the ones imtne,
diately before and after it.)
By the preceding sentence, then, the
“practice of refusing petitions” is clearly
acknowledged; whilst, by the subsequent
one, the ‘declining to receive a petition’
is ‘not considered a hardship.
From a hasty examination of the work
introduced by the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts himself, (and as to the merits
of which I will not dissent from the high
enlogiutn be has pronounced upon it) I
find a continued practice of rejecting
petitions not confied to the period refer
red to by that gentleman—l66B: but
extending from that time down to 1795,
commencing Hatstell, page 166, as fol
lows :
“ 9th April, 1694, petition against du
ties on tonnage rejected. .
“28th April, 1698, petition against du
ties on pit-coal rejected.
“29th and 30th June, 1698, petition
against duties on Scoth linens and whale
fins rejected.
“4th January, 1703, petition against
duties on malt liquor rejected.
‘2lst December, 1706, Resolved, That
the house will receive no petition for any
sum relating to the public service, but
what is recommended by the crown.
“11th June, 1713, this is declared to
be a standing order of the house.
“23d April, 1713, Resolved, That
thehouse will receive no petition for com
pounding debts, Ac.
“25th March, 1715, this is declared
the standing order of the house,
“Bth March, 1732, a petition being of
fered against a bill depending for secur
ing the trade of the sugar collonies, it
was refused to be brought up. A motion
was then made that a committee be ap
pointed to search precedents in relation
to the receivingor not receiving,petitions
against the imposing of duties ; and the
question put, it passed in the negative.
“28th January, 1760, a petition against
duties on malt liquor being offered, on
motion ‘that it be brought up, it passed
in the negative, mem. con.
“1 5th February, 1765, a petition from
Virginia, Connecticut, and Carolina, a
gninst the bill imposing a stamp duty in
America being brought up,’ it passed in
the negative.
“On the Ist July, 1789, a petition of
newsmen against a bill for granting ad
ditional stamp duties on newspapers, be
ing offered, it was passed in the negative.
“On the 4th of March, 1789, a peti
tion of certain importers and dealers in
foreign wines, praying against an aug
mentation of duties, on motion ‘that the
petition be brought up,’ it passed in the
negative, mem. con."
I am authorized, then, in stating, that
Parliament was not only in the practice
ot rejecting petitions, but, by resolution,
of excluding whole classes of them : and
that, too, upon matter of taxation—of all
others the most important to the subject,
and one upon which the right of petition
should be held most sacred.
Corrcspomloiicc of the Conrier.
WASHINGTON, FEB. 12.
In the Senate, to-day, Mr. Fairfield
presented resolutions of the Legislature
of Maine, in favor of the payment of the
claims of citizens of the United States
for French spoliations prior to 1800.—
Mr. F. made some remarks in further
ance of the object of the resolutions. He
added an expression of his deep convic
tion of the justice of the claims, and
urged them upon the early attention of
the Senate.
A message we received from the Pres
ident of the United States, transmitting
an application from the Territory of
lowa, for admission into the Union ; also
a report from Captain Stockton, in rela
tion to the construction of the U. S. ship,
the Princeton.
Several petitions were presented.
Mr. Allen called up the Jackson fine
bill in order to give it a place on the
calendar.
Mr. Henderson introduced a bill to
regulate the fees of officers of the United
States Courts in the south - western
States.
The report of the Committee of Fi
nance on the tariff was taken up. and
Mr. Huntington, of Conn., spoke two
hours without concluding, in support of
the tariff of 1842, and in reply to Mr.
McDuffie and Mr. Woodbury. He
dwelt particularly on the doctrine of
free trade, arguing that it was impractica
ble, and that the settled policy of other
nations was to protect and foster their
own industry by prohibitions and duties.
The policy of England was and ever
would tie to buy nothing that she could
make, and import nothing that she could
produce. The West could never rely
ou a foreign market for her produce, and
if ottr ports were open our manufactures
would be destroyed, and the home mar
ket for products of the West would be
lost. He contended that the act was a
proper revenue act. and that those who
opposed this system of revenue from du
ties were not prepared to offer any other
in lieu of it—such as excises, direct
takes, Ac.
The House is still occupied exclusive
ly with the uninteresting discussion of
tne validity of the elections by general
ticket.
The Supreme Court Room was throng
ed to day by those who were attracted
by Mr. Webster’s argument in the Gi
rard will cease. It is said to be one of
the greatest forensic efforts he ever made
in his life. He may be rewarded by
fame, but his contingent fee of a hundred
thousand dollars he will never touch.
The impression is that the case does not
present sufficient legal ground to induce
the Court to touch the will.
Mr. I rise will go out in the frigate
Constitution, Capt. Percival, about the
first of April. The frigate is undergoing
repairs at Norfolk.
It appears to be now settled that Mr.
Gilmer, of Va., will take the Navy De
partment, and Mr. JFilkins, of Pa., the
liar Department.
POLITICAL.
From the Lyi.chlmrg Republican.
Political Catechism.
Who opposed the United States Bank
in 1811 as an institution, unconstituti vnal
inexpedient, and dangerous ?
Henry Clay.
Who has been foremost in denouncing
and abusing Gen’l Jackson for putting
down that institution ?
Henry Clay.
Who, shortly after our last war with
Great Britain, spoke of Gen’i Jackson as
one ‘who has shed so much glory on our
country —one whose renown constitutes
so great a portion of the moral property
of the nation 7
Henry Clay.
Who has been endeavoring for nearly
twenty years past to tarnish the hard
earned reputation of the patriot Jackson
‘wh ise renown constitutes so great a por
tion o f the moral property of the nation?’
Henry Clay.
Who declared that he would rather
war pestilence and famine should visit
our shores than that a military chieftain
should be elected President of these U.
States ?
Henry Clay.
Who afterwards told his friends that
they would do him a particular favor by
voting for General Harrison, a military
chieftain ?
Henry Clay.
Who was held up by his friends as the
father of the high protective system ?
Who declared that he had cherised that
system with paternal fondness? Who
quarrelled with Democratic Senators be
cause they consented to a reduction of
the high taritfin 1832 7
Henry Clay.
Who now endeavors to convince the
Georgians, through Dr. Bronson, that he
regards, and has always regarded a high
tariff as eminently “ dangerous ?”
Henry Clay.
Whodisputed the patriotism and ver
acity of John Q. Adams, a little upwards
of twenty years ago ?
Henry Clay.
Who helped to make John Q.. Adams
President, and then accepted an office
under his Administration with the ques
tion of veracity between them still unset
tled ?
Henry Clay.
Who joined a Masonic Society in very
early life, and continued a member of it
for thirty years, attending its meeting
qoite frequently, during his membership
going through about six degrees and on
one important and interesting occasion
acting as orator for the lodge to which
he belonged ?
Henry Clay.
Who has recently written a lejter to
the anti-masons declaring that, in early
life, he became a mason through youth
ful curiosity, and that he never had a
taste for the mysteries of the order ?
Henry Clay.
Who spoke of F. P. Blair, the present
editor of the Globe, as a personal friend
with whom he differed in political senti
ment with the deepest pain ?
Henry Clay.
Who afterwards, without any addition
al opportunity of finding out Mr. Blair,
spoke of hint as a man covered with in
famy ?
Henry Clay.
Who declined visiting Indiana previ
ous to the State election in 1842, iqion
the ground that it might be construed
in an electioneering movement on his
part ?
Henry Clay.
Who visited Ohio on the eve of her
State elections the same year, for the pur
pose of addressing two hundred thousand
citizens of the Buckeye State ?
Henry Clay.
Who has fiercely denounced Mississip
pi repudiation ?
Henry Clay.
Who was the Champion of the late-
National repudiation act, alias bankrupt
law? Who was the most active and
efficient in favor of the annulment of
Messrs. Blair & Rives’ contract with the
Senate ?
Henry Clay.
Who made a beaut ifnl speech in favor
of the Christian Religion during the days
of the Cholera.
Henry Clay.
Who was afterwards the chief adviser
in the duel which resulted in the deatli
or murder of Jonathan Cil ley ?
Henry Clay.
Who is held up by the Whig party as
the most consistent, honest, and patriotic
public man in the nation ?
Henry Clay!!!!!!
The l»c Cabin. /< ■'
It will he seen that the Whig Club of
Richmond made a tender of their Cabin
to the Democratic Convention. On mo
tion of Mr. Banks of Madison, the insult
ing courtesy was promptly declined.—
The whigs knew very well the fate of
their proposition, and the rules of genu
ine courtesy would have been more hon
ored in the breach, than the observance”
of such civility. Wo are very glad tha
Democrats kept clear of that ’coon-trap;
if Richmond cannot furnish a room of
sufficient capacity, they had far better
have adjourned to Old Tamany, than to
have trusted either their bodtes or their
souls in that rickety temple of rickety
principles. Let Whiggery consecrate
her own temple to what god she pleases
—to Janus, Bacchus, or any other deity
of duplicity and rowdyism; but let all
Democrats shun alike, the deity and its
altar.
“On the F. nee.’*
The withdrawal of Mr. Calhoun
from the contest for the Presidency, and
the recent action of the Loc-Foco major
ity in Congress on the subjects of the
Tariff, Abolition, Ac., have forced us to
take no active part in the present contest
for the advancement of men, and indu
us to climb to the top rail of Uncle Sam’s
fence, and coolly look on during the ap
proaching crisis. We care not whether
the Coons destroy the Cabbages in the
Kinderhook garden, or the Log Cabins
are set fire to by the loco focos. In eith
er case we have nothing to hone, and
everything to fear. If the fight between
the two parties results as did that be
tween the Kilkenny cats, who eat each
other up, leaving nothing but their tails,
the country will be a gainer by their
loss. Parties have now become so cor
rupt, that the sooner they are destroyed
the better. We must confess, our “arm
ed neutrality" does not suit us well, and
when the time comes for effective action,
we doubt not we shall be found in the
melee, fighting on one side or the other.
In the meantime, we retain our glorious
motto of “Free Trade ; Low Duties ; No
Debt; Seperation from Banks ; Econo
my ; retrenchment; and a strict adher
ence to the Constitution ;” and whichev
er party proves, by its acts, most friend
ly to these principles, to that party we
will freely lend our feeble aid ; but in
the meantime, ire are on the fence !
Farmers' Gazette, ( S. C.)
GENERAL INTELLIGENCE.
Pninfnl Disclosures.
A man named Judd has been for some
time officiating as a minister of God over
a congregation whose place of meeting
is at the comer of Tillary and Barbarine
streets. The basement of this bnildi
is composed of several departments used
for purposes connected with the church
One of these apartments has written over
the’Moor “ the Rev. Judd’s study.” It
was the practice of this man to pass
much of his time in his study and fre
quently even had his meals brought
there. The little girls connected with
the Sunday school on certain days in
the week were in the habit of visiting
their pastor in his study for the ostensi
ble purpose of reciting lessons in cate
chism. We cannot stain our paper by
publishing the details of the revolting
conduct of this impious villain towards
the children thus entrapped into his in
famous den, suffice it to say, many }>a
rents are also heart-broken at the horrors
inflicted oil their children, and many lit
tle children of too tender an age fully to
comprehend the enormities practised up
on them, are trembling with fear at the
distress which so bitterly saddens their
parents.
Judd has left Brooklyn, and, we are
informed, has gone to New Brunswick.
We shall despatch to that place some
numbers of this paper, that the citizens
there may understand the character of
the individual who is about to inflict up
on them his contaminating presence.—
Brooklyn Adv.
The rumors implicating the Church
are entirely unfounded. His pastoral
: connection with that church ceased two
| months ago, and his crimes were instant
-1 Iv on their discovery reported to the Pres
-1 bytery of Newark (to which alone he is
! ecclesiastically amenable) for decisive
action. Judd himself immediately fled.
This Judd was formerly settled at Pa
terson, and was connected with the New
ark Presbytery, to which he addressed a
confession of his infamous treatment of
the children above referred to, but not of
the seduction of a servant girl before be
absconded.
It will be seen by the annexed procee
dings of the Presbytery, (which we find
in the Newark Daily Advertiser of yes
terday) that Judd has been deposed from
the Ministry and excommunicated from
the Church:
DEPOSITION.
Minutes of the Presbytery of Newark,
Feb. 7, 1844.
Mr. Russell J. Jndd, in 1841, was in
troduced to this Presbytery, by Rev.
Charles Fitch. He was then laboring ir.
a free church at Paterson, and presented
a certificate from the Trumbull and
Geauga Association, Ohio, and requested
to be received as a member of this Pres- j
bytery. After some examination and
discussion his request was granted.. Mr.
Judd seldom afterwards met with the
Presbytery. In 1542, having left Patera 1
son he applied by letter for a dismission
front this Presbytery, which request was J
ultimately granted to join the Congres- !
sional Association of New York, and his
name was stricken from the roll of the
Presbytery.
No further knowledge of him has come
to this Presbytery until the 3d instant, !
when a communication was received
from the officers of a free church in |
Brooklyn, stating that Mr. Judd had been
officiating as their minister for about two
years - that recently facts had been dis
closed deeply affecting his moral
ministerial character—and informing
this Presbytery that Mr. Judd had con
nected himself with the Congressional
Association of New York. A letter was
also received from Mr. Judd, stating the
same fact, and confessing himself guilty
of grossly lascivious conduct, which he
also afterwards acknowledged to one of
the members of this Presbytery.
Whereupon, after deliberation and
prayer, it was unanimously resolved, that
Russell I. Judd be, and he hereby is, de
posed from the gospel ministry, and ex
communicated from the church.
EBENEZER SEYMOUR,
Stated Clerk.
American Ingcuoitr.
We noticed some months ago the com
pletion of a large nnd very powerful Lo
comotive Steam Engine, constructed
by ottr ingenious townsman, Mr, Ross
Winans, under an order of the Russian
Minister, to be used on the great rail
road now constructing iu Russia, be
tween the cities of Petersburg and Mos
cow. This engine was taken to Russia
by Mr. Thomas Winans, son of the man
ufacturer, and after various trial-exhibi
tions in competition with numerous Lo
comotives from England, the superiority
of Mr. Winan’s engine over all others
was acknowledged. This gratifying re
sult, we are pleased in being able to state,
enabled Mr. Thomas Winans, in connec
tion with Mr. Joseph Harrison, of the
firm of Eastwick A Harrison, of Phila
delphia, to secure the contract for fur
nishing Locomotives and burthen cars
for the use of the road. This contract
is the largest of the kind ever made in the
world, and was secured by these gentle
men in competition with some of the
largest and most influential manufactur
ers in Great Britain. The number of
Locomotives to be built is 162, with
duplicates of such parts of the machin
ery as may require to be renewed. Thir
ty locomotives and one hundred burthen
cars are to Ire finished by the end of the
year 1845; forty locomotives and one
hundred burthen cars in 1846 forty loco
motives and fifteen hundred burthen cars
in 1847; and the balance, 42 locomo
tives nnd 3600 burthen cars, in 1848.
The whole cost of the machinery here
contracted for will Ire more than four mil
lions of dollars. A pretty correct idea
may be formed of the extent of this con
tract when we state that the whole num
ber of locomotives owned by the Balti
more nnd Ohio Rail road is thirty three ,
and the number of burthen enrs, of four
and eight wheels, between seven and
eight hitndred.
The Rail road between St. Petersburg
and Moscow will be about four hundred
miles in length, nnp will be a perpetnal
monument of the enterprise nnd munifi
cence of tiro Emperior Nicholas, The
roadis new in the course of construction
under the superintendance of our coun
tryman Major George W. Whistler; and
al though the Emperor docs not hesitate
to avail himself of the talents nnd servi
ces of our countrymen, the contract for
our machinery to be furnished by Mess.
Winans A Harrison expressly stipulates
that the whole is to be manufactured in
Russia, for which purpose the most ex
tensive facilities are afforded them, the
workshops being granted to them free of
rent, the pay of the workmen to be no
higher than that which they have been
in the habit of receiving, and a judicious
system of police established under the
direction of the government for safety
and preservation of the works. This
strong evidence of the appreciation of the
talents of our countrymen, nnd especially
of our young townsman, cannot fail to
afford tiie highest gratification.
Perhaps it may not be amiss, in con
nection with this matter, to state that the
Emperior of Russia last year ordered
from Mr. Ross Winans three powerful
steam pile driving machines, which Me
used in the construction of parts of the
great Petersburg and Moscow Rail road,
where the country is marshy. These
were found to answer so well that Mr.
W. is now constructing a fourth one for
the same mad. We also learn that the
Russian Minister is now, and has been
for some time past, tinder the orders of
the Emperior, purchasing for Russia va
rious agricultural implements of appro
ved construction, besides other machin
ery that may prove serviceable in the
Russian Empire.— Balt. American.
T -inn Friaioners in Mexico.
The unfortunate Texans, confined in
the cold, dreary and unhealthy Castle of
Perote,are rapidly being released from
all earthly troubles—death is liberating
them from a confinement the most cruel.
We have been permitted to copy the fol
lowing extract of a letter from one of t!*
prisioners, dated
PE ROTE, Jan. 13, 18-: t
Leonidas Saunders, of Montgomery
county, Texas, died last night of the pre
vailing epidemic. Mr. S. was Chief
Justice of that county when he left if
and I will venture to say that no one can
be found in his district more worthy to
fill the office—in short, he was a well
informed, amiable gentleman. There
are many others yet sick in the hospital)
many of them dangerously.
Yours. Ac.
Is there no way—can nothing be done
for these unfortunate men ? The Mexi
can Government may have the right to
retain, at least a portion of them prison"
ers of war; but it vs contrary to the usa
ges of civilized nations to incarcerate
those, whom the fortunes of war may
have thrown into their hands, in a place
where the climate, combined with scan
tiness of raiment, must soon bring prema
ture diseases and death.
N. O. Picayune.
He that putteth a bible into the hands
of a child, gives him more than a king
dom ; for he gives him a key to the king’
dom of heaven.