Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.