Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE CONSTITUTIONALIST. JAMES GARDNER. JR. Tsr.ms, Duly, per »nram £3 00 Tri-Weekly, per axnura 6 00 If paid in advance 5 00 Weekly, per annum *> 00 it paid in advance 2 .30 i To Clubs, remitting ,yiU in advance. FIVE COPIES are sent. This will put cur Weekly pa per in tha reach of new subscriber, at TWO DOLLARS A YEAR. ID’S übscribors who will pay up arrearages. an< ! send four new subscribers, with the money, can get the paper at £2 00. KO*AH new subscription* must bo paid in ad ranee. (O’Poitage must be paid on all communications and l«ttcrs of business. TWM— II '■in II 11 ■ The Death of Richard Hoary Wilde BY A. B. M KtK. The harp that sang “ the Summer Rose,” In strains, so sweetly and -o well, That, soft as dews at evening’s close. The pure and liquid numbers fell, L hushed and shuttered! now, no more Its silvery chords their music pour 3 Hut. crushed by an untimely blow, Both harp and flower in dust lie low ! The bard! —alas, I know him well! A noble, generous, gentle heart, Which, as his br ave hand struck the shell. Poured feeling through the veins of Art. What radiant beauty ’round his lyre ! Pure as his loved Italian lire ! He caught the sweetest beams of rhyme,— The T asso of our Western clime ! , Nor this alone ; a loftier power. That shone in halls of High Decree, And swayed the feelings of the hour. As summer winds, the rippled sea. Bright eloquence: ! to him was given ; The spark, the Prophet drew from Heaven! - It touche 1 his lips with patriot flame, And shed a halo ’round his name 1 A* late I saw. I see him now ! Ilis stalwart form, his graceful mien, His long, white locks, his smiling brow, His eyes benignant and serene ! How pleasant ’round the social hearth, When listening to his tones of mirth ! What 1 essons of the good and true. The brave, tbe beautiful, he drew ! Droop down thy willows, Southern land! Thy bard, thine orator, is dead. He sleeps wherf broad magnolias stand, With “ Summer roses’’ o’er his head ! The lordly River, sweeping by, Curves ’round his grave, with solemn sigh, And, from yon twinkling orange stem. The “Mock-Bird” pours his requiem ! Bard of the South ! —the “Summer Rose” May perish with the “ Autumn leaf,” The “ footprints left on Tampa's” shore* May vanish with a date brief: But thine shall be the •* life” of fame, No winter winds can wreck thy name ; And future minstrels shall rehearse Thy virtues, in memorial verse ! [F/u/n the Athens Banner.l Slavery in tho now Territories—The Law ol Nations We publish, from, the New York Globe, in 1 another column, an article which appeared ori ginally in the New Orleans Delta, involving the application of the principles of intern-ition- j al law to the subject of slavery in the territo ries, which will probably be annexed to our domain, in consequence of tho war with Mex ico. Coming as it does from a Southern press conducted with great ability and located in the heart of the slaveholding region, it is enti tled to grave consideration, especially at a juncture like the present. Premising that “indemnity for the past and aecurity for tho future,” are among the uni versally acknowledged incidents of public war, we proceed to remark that there are but two methods of acquiring territory from other nations. Ist. Bv Conquest.. 2nd. By Treaty. These two principles of force or consent, lie at the bottom of all change of ownership in property, either public or private. As they are essentially different in their nature, so the consequences resulting from them are different. Hence the necessity of treating them separ ately. And first , of acquisitions by conquest. The article in the Delta is evidently treated upon this basis, and assumes the position that as slavery is forbidden throughout tho Mexican states, should they become part of our domain, the lex loci or state laws would prevail under the law of nations, until altered by Congress. We find this construction becoming very com mon throughout the Union, judging from leading journals, and we must admit that it is even recognized by Mr. Dallas in his Pitts burgh speech. We must also in candour ac knowledge, that it has heretofore been the pre vailing impression of our mind, to which to have given expression on more than one oc casion. Examination and reflection have how ever, caused us to doubt our first impression. Upon reference to a standard author (Vat teTs Laws of Nations) we find the following tales laid down in relation to “acquisitions by war.” “The conqueror who takes a town or province from his enemy, cannot justly acquire over it any other rights than such as belonged to the sovereign against whom he has taken up arms. War authorises him to possess himself of what belonged to his enemy; if he deprives him of the sovereignty of that town or province, ho acquires it such as it is, with all its limitations and modifleations.”— Vattei's Laics of Nations, p. 357, paragraph 190, BookZ, ch. 13. It was perhaps this rule which led to the first opinion formed by us; and it is also prob ably the foundation of that which is becoming so general. The error consists in not distin guishing between the territory of an enemy (if wc may use the phrase) not “an integrant part” of the nation, and that which is. For immediately succeeding, the author says : “Hitherto I evidently speak of a city or country which is not simply an integrant part of a nation, or which does not fully belong to a sovereign, but over which that nation or that sovereign has certain rights. If the conquer ed town or province fully and perfectly con stituted a part of the domain of a nation or sovereign, in possession the same footing into the power of the conqueror. Thenceforward, united with the new state to which it belongs —if it be a loser by the change, that is a mis fortune which it must wholly impute to tlie chance of war. Thus, if a town which made part of a republic or a limited monarchy, au 1 enjoyed a right of sen lidg deputies to the su premo council or the general assembly of tuc states, be justly conquered by an absolute monarch, she must never more think ot such privileges; they are what tue constitution of the new state to which she is annexed does nut permit.' ”—rlb, Still farther on he says; “He (the conqueror ) may, in imitation of the kings of France, unite and incorporate it with his own dominions. —Such was the prac tice of the Romans; but they did this in difl’er ept modes according to cases :m.i conjunc tures. At a time when Home stood In need of au increase of population, she destroyed the town, of Alba, which she feared to have as a rival: but she received all its inhabitants with in her walls, au I thereby gained so many new citizens. In after times the cun juered c.tie? were left standing, and the freedom of Home 11 a- M ven tc the vanquished LaUaV.tauls. \ ,c ! torv could not have proved so advantageous | to those people as their deteat.”— Vattei’s Lairs j of Nations, p. SOI paragraph 201, B. 3, Ch. 13. 1 Let us now apply tho above rules. The j Mexican States are “integral parts” of the ; "Bepublic" of Mexico, and if conquered may ; be “thence far ward united with the nsic state to | which they belong. Again: "The conqueror may ixcohporate in ! (the conquest) with his own dominion';.” We may then, as the Mexican States cunstl- | j tuted “an integrant part” of the Mexican na- ■ tion, “unite” them, when conquered, to our "state” or nation —we “may incorporate them j with our dominions.” When so united or in- ■ corpurated, they become part and parcel ol 1 ! our state —of our dominions —that is to say, of : the territory of the linked States, The ques- ; tion now presents itself, can they or will they ' be annexed in any other form than as territo- \ rins —territories of the United States? This 1 must be their character if annexed by conquest. \ I They must follow the law of the territories —in ! i fact the Wilmot Proviso, from which the ■ ; question springs so styles them. If territories I of the United States, and governed, of course, by the laws which govern existing territories j ; not organized—the inquiry next arises, what ; ! are those laws? Are there any prohibitions ex press or implied against taking slaves (proper ty recognized by tho constitution) into such territories? Clearly not. Both theory and practice con firm the right. Wc have been speaking of tbe first stag", or \ the one preceding organization. Let us now contemplate the question in relation to these -1 oond or organic state. When a bill s introduced ' in Congress to give the territory this form, the I 1 question comes up,has Congress the power eith- | i er to introduce or prohibit slavery? The two povr ■ ers are co-relative —the one necessarily implies ! the other —it is so, generally concluded. Con ! grass can certainly have no power to impose | slavery as a domestic relation upon those who !do not desire it. This would be monstrous, i The Restrictionist admit it. By parity ofrea- j ; sou, which defies contradiction, Congress has > , no power to impose tho non-slaveholding sys- ; I tern upon those who do not desire it. The \ | territories being the proj erty of the United j i .States, wo must view them in their united I 1 character as it is respests slavery. What is j that character? Clearly of a mixed nature — | compounded of slaveholding and non-slave-, holding states —of free and slave labor, with i equal rights of introduction and settlement j upon the common property (res communis) of the Union. These are undoubtedly the true; principles for the guidance of Congress, and before the territory passes into the hands of i the Territorial Legislature. The moment it ! falls into the custody of the latter, as there are I no local constitutional limitations, it becomes I sovereign in all cases not controlled by the ! constitution or laws of the Union. But we have seen that Congrees, has no right to in ■ terferfere either one way or the other in a ques i tion of slavery in the territories—and that the ' Constitution looks with equal regard upon the respective social organizations of the different states. The whole disposition of the subject must then be with the Territoral Legislature. Mr. Calhoun’s position which establishes slavery in the teeth of the Territorial Legisla ture, is absurd. The same argument would exc'tide it against their will. In fact the two I extremes of this question argue falsely, but I in tho same manner and to different results.— An unerring proof that both are wrong. We have now looked at tbe territories in ; two of their stages, first, in their primary or : unorganized state, and secondly, in their se j coudary or organized form, with the laws pe i culiar to each. Let us now contemplate them in their third j or transition character from territories to states. When they reach this stage of their existence, there are enthusiasms or fanatics who would pre vent them from establishing slavery, by their constitutions, preparatory to admission into the family of states. But we do not know of a single one belonging to the dcmocra ic party. WiTnot himself is particularly cautious to con cede the right. The New Yor/c Evening Post j does the same; and we may look upon it is a j settled point (among democrats) that on ap i plving for admission there can be no restriction as'to the domestic institution of slavery. Yet the forms of government mu-t be “republican’ ’ by the federal constitution. Right at this ’point the Provisoists aro foundered by their own admissions. A “ republican ” state is one thing, and a “free” (non-slaveholding) state is another. They admit a “republican’' state in the souse of the constitution, may also be a slaveholding state! and yet they shout “free dom” (non-slaveholding) Ur Lie territories In contemplating the powers of Congress under the constitution, and of the conqueror under the laws of nations, wc have spoken of ti e mere naked right (just mervm facultatis ) as contradistinguished from equity or conscience. Law, in the only sense applicable to our ques tion, is a rigorous rule upon which states may insist with impunity from others, although its exercise may be an abuse of liberty, condcmn ied in the courts of conscience. The question ' has bean, not what tne conqueror should , bi. what he may do—not what Congress ough* to do, but what it cannot do, without violating the external or rigorous rights of confederate states. Changing the aspect of the question, let us examine closely into the nature of the power ! granted by the constitution to Congress, “to dispose of and make all needful rules and rc ! gulations concerning the territory or other : property of the United States.” Wo shall j enter into no abstract disquisition whether i the power to regulate the property of the Uni j ted States in territories, include that ot estab lishing, prohibiting, or modifying the domes tic relations of their inhabitants. M c shall rely more upon the reductio ad absurdum, to reduce this castle of the Provisoists, from which if beaten, there is no alternative but i surrender. We now ask whether, if this clause, (as they say it does) confers on Congress the pow er to prohibit slavery, done it not confer equal ly the power to establish it? Wc desire an an swer to'ihe question. Wc challenge these equa ble and philosophic Proviso journals (especial ly the New York Evening Post, and the Globe, of that city) to combat in their chosen fields, j Will they be pleased to enlighten us why Congress cannot, under this clause, introduce, or toelrate, as well as prohibit slavery in the territories ? Clearly, if the power is operative in the one case, it is in the other;for it covers the whole field of legislation. But this would prove too much for the Post, the Globe, and the Provisoists. Should the slaveholding states, availing themselves of the open field ofacqusi tion to which they are invited beyond the equator to 3C>i degrees South latitude, whilst ! their Northern eons • leratcs arc barred on the North by the British and Russian power and I posessions, and thus become the numerical party in the ascendancy, (a thing at least with i in the range ot possibility) and then retort the power for the purpose of saddling slavery upon territories averse to it, would not the Provisoists be estopped- by the records How J could they dare to open their mouths against the converse of thier own proposition ? V* ould they dare to flinch from “eathing the leek which in the plenitude of their supposed pow ; er and actual numerical strength (seotionally considered) they now thrust to our noses? Wc have now done with acquisition of tcr ritoi v bv conquest and the in idciits resulting from it. i The remaining point to be viewed, is aquisi tiou by treaty. It is very certain that no treaty can or will lie ratified by the Senate, nor will anv b entered into by th* - present Kve utive • .which does not regard the regions transferred [ as territory of the united States —subject to the { | laic of the existing territories. The two-thinls i rale of ratification protects the slareholding states, which number considerably over a ! third. If territory be acquired at all, it must j in the nature of things come in under the gen j oral law applicable to the territories. We 1 have seen that this law either excludes the ex- j ercise of any power over the domestic relations ! of the inhabitants, or covers the whole field of I legislation, introducing as well as prohibiting ! slavery. The Provisoists must take one horn '■ or the other of the dilemma. If the tirst, their restriction falls to the ground. If the last, it may gore them, and that deeply. Do they 1 set up for the infallible and the invulnerable? : If they do, time may dissipate the delusion — ; the whole history and genius of our system ' laughs at them —and posterity will sanction the ju-Uce of the sentence ‘-thou hast sown j the wind and shalt reap the whirlwind.” Put thebe-t way to treat this question is as apruc ! tical question. The short and the long of the ' whole matter is that slavery toil I eventually go where it is needed—it will be excluded where it is , 1 not. A great deal will depend on the geographi j cal formation of the ne w Anglo-Mcxicau States. | The Terra cilitnte of the Gulf coast, and the : region of cotton, rice, tobacco and trypical ! fruits, will be cultivated by slaves—the table ; lands by free labor. The domestic policy of ! these slates will be regulated bv the above 1 r-n ° * physical laics. ihere is no political fiat of the \ present which can overrule than. Our temporary I struggles to alter the decrees of climate and race, are not worth the breath and pa-sion ex ; pended upon them. They are worse than vain, j Before concluding, we cannot forbear notic- I ing some wild propositions or rather notions of a democratic meeting in Hamilton county, Ohio, approved by the Sew York Globe. —The | Hamilton county meeting say ’-that territory which may he acquired as a result of the war, j is true territory; that under our constitution j I of few and specific powers, Congress cannot make it otherwise.” The truth is that Con ! gras can make it neither bond on fr.ee. That ; it is free territory at this time, no one doubts. I That it will be when acquired is denied. It will i be the common property of the States of the Union, as light and air is of mankind, and all may participate of it until its domestic rela | tions are adjusted by the people of the ter ; ritory, though their accr. dited legislative organ®. —What right have the North to say it will be “free territory?" Has not the South an equal right and as good reasons to affirm that it will be “ slave territory'” The true character, then of the territory, before local legislative j action,will be neither the one or the other: but : free admission to all with their property. But : the Globe says, “the people have made it free.” What people does the editor mean? The people ‘of the territoryf To at question is yet in the womb of time. Hoes ho mean the people of the \ United States? There is no such people, as an aggregate, having the right to xulc. Finally, as to the best method of adjusting this ques tion, \ve remark, that if the democrats of toe non-slaveholding states will come to Messrs Dallas', Dickinson’s, and Ca«s' propositions, leaving it to the territories, it is the true con st'tiilional ground. If they will not, for the sake of peace, of harmony, wo will meet them on the Missounr Basis. The best interests of the country demand that wo should keep opkx this door of con i ciliation. In a court of justi cwc agree with ! Mr. Dallas, there are no materials in the con i stitution which may be “bent”—but in federal council, we cannot subscribe to the maxim. We find no difficulty in compromising constitu tional question there. Independent of the nature of a federal republic, which implies the sovereign right of the members to judge of the compact for themselves, and of course to ad just all questions arising out of it, we have the highest authority in Mr. Jefferson’s letter to Mr. Cartwright, where, in speaking of con stitutional questions (“questionable ground”) he says: ••In cases of little importance or urgency, the prudence of both parties will keep them aloof from the questionable ground; but if it can neither be avoided or c l-ipromised, a con vention of the states must be called, to ascribe the doubtful power to that department which they may think best.” We pretend to no infallibility—wc construe the compact for ourselves—but we arc willing to concede the same right to others in this j case. If we differ honestly as brethren, why not settle our disputes as brethren, by mutually abating our extreme pretensions, and meeting ion middle ground? So did our fathers before I us in forming the constitution— so have we I done in three striking instances since—and so . we should do again, if necessary, for the pre servation of the democratic party and the ■ UNION. [ Correspondence of the Baltimore Sun ] Washington, Jan. 17, 1313. Trial of the Generals —Report from the Patent Odice —An exciting Debate anticipated in the j House —The President’s Refusal, <y-. Whilst Congress seems to be disposed cith er to refuse the supplies or to delay tue ap propriations to the latest possible period, the ; different branches of the government are vy ; ing with each other in the discharge of their respective duties. The report of the Honora ble Edmund Burke, the able and erudite Com , j mission?!’ of Patents, will furnish the most powerful proof of the physicial, moral and in i tellectual devclopements of our people, and from the mass of information which it will contain, will rank by the side of Mr. Walker’s, to which it nearest approaches, and be a most ■ valuable supplement to tho same. It will con tain, among other interesting subjects, the | probable wants of Europe in the shape of pro i duce, her supplies from all countries on the j triobc —the cost of production of produce here i compared with that of other countries, and hence our superior means of supplies—a trea tise on wool-growing, by Charles Fleischman, who was sent abroad by the Commission ers for this purpose—our internal trade, im provements in agriculture, and the various branches of mechanic arts, manufactures, &c. The report will contain from 600 to 700 pages, and I will endeavor to furnish you early with copious extracts. Brig. Gen. Bierce, of N. 11., arrived yester day from Charleston, S. C., and intends leav ing here for the North cither to-morrow or the day after. The debate which is to take place on Tuesday next, on the message of the Presi dent, refusing to communicate the instruc tions given to Mr. Slidell, and other matters relative to our negotiations with Mexico, is the leading topic of the day. We shall see wheth er the opposition is able to make out a case against "the President, remembering, all the time, that the communication he refuses to make is not intended only for the people of this country, but for Mexico and the rest of mankind. . p. S. As many gentlemen here are anxious to know who is likely to succeed Mr. Apple ; i ton in the Chief Clerkship of the Navy De partment, I feel bound to state for all whom it may concern, that Mr. Appleton’s place will . be filled by Dr. Young, of "V a., a gentleman I and a scholar, and in every way qualified for . | the appointment. Mr. Appleton will render • : eminent service in the State Department, (he i is qualified for any office in any department,) i barring always a direct mission to Mexico, which would ncitner suit his taste nor his substantial business habits. I see that some of the Mississippi papers are - out for the three D’s, Dallas , Davis and De [ //tocraey. The rumor is, that Mr. Dallas has been nominated for the Presidency by the Dc : | mocratio Convention of that State, and that General Quitman was nominated with him as | Vice President. X* ( Reported for the Sac aim A Republican.] Supreme Court of Georgia for Ist District- AT SAVANNAH, JANUARY TERM, 1848. DC, Levy & Mose- S. Cohen, ) Assumpsit a- Security on Ap'i, P.ff. in error, j gainst Deft, in vs. > cri’or as en- Solomon Cohen, Def't. in error, j dorser of u pro from Chatham Superior Court.) mis’y uo f e. Held by the Court, that where a note is en dorsed in Georgia for discount in Charleston at a Bank, the latter proposing to take the note with defendant's name and a Charleston endorsement, such first endorsement is a Geor gia contract, so far as to allow defendant to avail himself of the provisions of the act of 1831, and to require the holder to sue the maker within three months, or that on failure to do so, such endorser is discharged. De positing such endorsement in the Post Office at Savannah in a letter directed to the Bank at Charleston, is a consummation of the con tract, so far as such endorser is concerned. — j And even though such note should not have legal vitality until it reached Charleston, when it obtained such vitality, it would refer back I to Georgia, where such endorsement was made. The question as to where a contract is to be executed, is under the evidence a question of ; fact for the jury. Where the bill of exceptions docs not show that the non-residence of the maker in the jurisdiction where the holder resided, was made a question before the Court below, such question cannot be raised in the assignment of errors nor argued before the appellate Court. Judgment of Court below affirmed. William Law for Plt’fF. in error. If. M Charlton and M. 11. McAllister for Def’t. in error. James Taylor, ) Plaintiff in Error, J Libel—diction in C’rt vs. ( below in arrest nf The State of Georgia, ( Judgment *nd for new Defendant in Error, I T/iul. From Chat’m Sup. Court. J Where a defendant is charged with express ing, printing and publishing a libel, which ap pears on the face of the indictment to have been signed by a third person, it is not neces sary to charge in the indictment that such li bel purported to have been signed by such third person. In an indictment for libel, it need not be ex pressly charged that the libellous matter was “of and concerning” the prosecutor, if there are equivalent words. Where a witness for the prosecution, on the direct examination, proves the publication of the libel by defendant, it is not ground of er ror that such libel is read to the jury before the defence is permitted to cross-examine the witness to the fact of publication. The more regular practice is to permit such cross-e.xarn inaatiou before the libel is read. Judgment of Court below affirmed. Edward J. Harden, for Plaintiff in error. M. 11, McAllister, lor Defendant in error. Charles Spalding, Plaintiff in error') vs. ! Ann Grigg, Defendant in error. j toner. From Mclntosh Superior Court. J A'paper under seal which vests an imme diate interest in the grantee, cannot be testa mentary. Nor is the rule varied, where from parol evidence offered to explain grantor’s possession, it is shown that such possession was to continue until grantor’s death. A proviso in a deed that a grantee “after the said three slaves shall come into her possession will pay to each of said slaves the sum of two dollars per month, during their natural lives,” even if a part of the deed, is a charge upon the grantee and not upon the slaves or their labor, and therefore is not obnoxious to the several acts against manumission. It is not error in the Court below to charge a jury that declarations of grantor, in order to constitute adverse possession against grantee, must be brought home to the knowledge ol the latter, where the evidence shows a case of bailment between the two. Judgment of the Court below affirmed. Robert M. Charlton, for Plantiffin error. E.lward J. Harden, for Defendant in error. James Moody, ) Plaintiff in Error, j Mandamus to compel a vs - I Surveyor to certify to lion. W. B. Fleming, f survey of his Depu- Defendant in Error, j ty. F’m Liberty Sup. Crt. J In this case the petition to the Court below' showed that the relator claimed to have a sur vey under head rights of land certified, the same land having been already granted under a survey made by the surveyor of an adjoin -1 ing county, there being no charge that such | oliginal survey was fraudulently made or such | grant obtained by fraud. Held that the Court below did not err in re fusing to grant a Mandamus to the surveyor of the county where the land lay, to certify such second survey, and in deciding that such land was not vacant land. Judgment, of the Court below affirmed. William B. Gaulden, for Plaintiff in error. Mayor and Aldermen'l , . , ’ , . Mandamus to compel ot bavannau, 8c Com- ...... ' . , 1 taint 1 ns in Lrror miss is of Pilotage— , ■ . .. ° to appoint Commis- Plaintiffs in Lrror, - . . , ;■ sloners to run a line “V S • j n t ,7 rr , for iv/iarvss on tne TUOMAs GRLEN, j ' ? . / - , . - .. shore of Hutehiu- Defcndant in Error. , p, , T „ r,, ~ a n> 4. son s Island. I m Chatham fcup. C rt. J The Act of 1841, entitled “ An Act to make permanent the water line for certain wharves on the shore of Hutchinson’s Island, in the Savannah River, opposite the city of Savan nah, and for appointing commissioners to car ry tho same into effect” is constitutional. Held further that said act was not permissive, but mandatory to the Plaintiffs in error to ap point commissioners to run the line. Held also that the duty enjoined by said act to appoint commissioners was not such a trust as might be declined, but a part of the official duty of Plaintiffs in error. Judgment of Court below’ affirmed. John E. Ward and Wm, Law, for Plaintiff in error. R. M. Charlton, for Defendant in error. Walter S. & Ronaldo P. 'j Dudley, Plaintiffs in eiror | Dm for specific ds . Horace M.vllert & AVife, | i Defendants in error. ( From Effing’m Sup. C’rt. j Held that a paper conveying a particular estate to certain persons with a reversion to the grantor after determination of the paxticu • lar estate, and a disposition in the same paper ■ of that reversion to take effect after the death of the grantor —said paper is a deed as to the particular estate, and a Will as to the disposi i 4. tion of the reversion. Judgment of the Court below affirmed. John W. Owens and li. M. Charlton, far Plaintiffs in error. Henry & Ward, far Defendants in error. (Conclusion to-morrow. ) Expensive and Cheap Religion,—The fel i lowing immense sums have been admitted by , the reverend fathers of the English Church to i be their Yearly incomes: The Archbishop of Canterbury, £23,000: : Archbishop ofY*ork, £14,550; Bishop of Lon don, £14,550, and terraces of noble houses are T rising up on every portion of his property, which will ultimately raise his income tc l £109,000; Bishop of Durham, 22,000; Bishop jof Asaph, £3,650; Six other Bishop# enjoy : incomes w hich average upwards of $3,600. Mr. Horsman stated in Parliament, that 2,000 clergymen of the same church received less than £IOO each; and he knew some who had only £SO, and some as low as £5. Many of the working clergy were suffering privations, such as have never been heard ot in civilized communities; and some of them were obliged to a-k charity, and to borrow a coat to be able 1 to perform their duties. Post Office Robbery.— We learn from the Bangor (Me.) Whig, that a younghnan by the name of Charles E. Leighton, has been arrest ed in that city,charged with robbing the Post Office. Draits were found in his possession to the amount of $2,400, and he subsequently confessed that he had taken various letters from the Fust Office boxes, one of which con tained between two and three hundred dol lars. Arrest ok a Fugitive.—A man by the name of Daniel Fetier, Jr., lias been brought by i the police from New Orleans to New York,on a requisition from Governor Young, on a charge | of obtaining a bill of dry goods, amounting to SO,OOO from Mr. John A. Underwood, of Pearl ; street. He was committed to prison in default of bail. Melt a little isinglass in spirits of wine, add ing thereto about a fifth part of water, and j using a gentle heat; when perfectly melted and mixed, it will form a transparent glue, which will unite glass so fast that the fracture will be hardly perceived. i An Irish Compliment. — A lovely g ; rl was bending her head over a rose-tree which a lady was purchasing from an Irish basket woman i in Covent Garden market, when the woman j 1 looking kindly at the young beauty, said, I t axes yer pardon young lady, but if it is pleas ing to yc. I’d thank ye to keep your cheek away from that rose; ye’ll put the lady out of con.sait with the color of her flowers.” 51 «gits ta, ocor 3i a . 3IT J JDAy' MORNING, JAIL 22. We copy from the Chronicle k Sentinel of the ’ 20th iust. a portion of its comments on the 1 last resolution of the three offered by Mr. I ; llannegan. The following is the resolution : Resolved, That it may become necessary | and proper, as it is within the constitutional capacity of this Government, for the United States to hold Mexico as a territorial appen dage, or the condition of a province. Wc see nothing very shocking even to a * constructionist of the strictest sect in this reso lution. Mexico should be made fully to un derstand that this is the doctrine held by the American people. The comments which arrested our attention are as follows, and are more immediately in ; reference to the statement of a correspondent ; of the N. O. Commercial Times, that to sta tion 80,000 to 100,000 men in Mexico to hold it in military possession until our laws, cus i toms and institutions shoul I spread over it, i would be, in the opinion of a majority of our officers in that country', the best policy' that t could be adopted. “We have one hundred thousand men ’ too lazy to work, who are ambitious of fonn i ing an “ Army of Occupation in Mexico,” to ■ be fed and clothed at the expense of the pro ; during classes in this country for a few years, 1 and then return to fill all offices of honor and ; ; profit. This is the system marked out by the > ; union of demagogues, would-be-officers, an I , not a few who now belong to the army. Fight- , i ing in Mexico and governing the people at f I home, are hold to be the double duty of all j j military chieftains. No matter how great t e i i civil service and capacity of an American cit izen may' he, no matter h.o\v sound his learn ing, integrity' and politic-, if he has not par ticipated in the bombardment of cities, in the wholesale slaughter of his fellow men, his t claim to civil promotion will be nothing in the > United States for the next quarter oi a oen i tury.” j The sneer at the “ one hundred thousand 1 men too lazy to work" comes wdth a bad grace after the brilliant evidences given by our gal > hint armies, that we have men both regulars ' and volunteers who are willing to work, when ’ their country needs their services. It is a very , comfortable thing perhaps to sit by a warm | fire and indite squibs against our noble and - brave soldierv, and to assert that “fighting i . . JO in Mexico and governing the peo i lo at home i are held to be the double duty' of all military' chieftains.” This, too, comes from a Whig print. What party is trying to foist a milita • ry chieftain into the Presidency? We think 1 that the Chronicle, without intending it, has given rather a hard hit to its own friends. They have shown themselves rather more ? keen after availability candidates among mili ? tary chieftains than the Democrats. Supreme Court ; £j|p' Tho trial of Beach, Williams and Miller, ; we understand, will take place this day'. 'Theatre- The good old Comedy of “ The Soldier’s Daughter,” is to be produced This Evening, ! and from the cast, will no’doubt give general satisfaction. Mr. Bass and Mrs. Ward both I appear in this piece. The laughable afterpiece of “ The Attorney at Law” is to be repeated, in which Mr. Bass also appears. Ho is a sterling actor, and should f draw a good house. Mile. Vallee, also appears in two of her fa i voritc Dances. She is one of the most grace ful danseus that we have seen on the Augusta boards for many years. Our Force- According to the official reports, we have | now in commission 5 ships of the line. 1 ra j zee, 4 frigates, 13 sloops, 6 brigs, 11 schoon . ers, 4 bomb gun-vessels, 1 ordnance transport, r 12 steamers, 6 store-ships—total 63. Vessels i in ordinary, November, 1847, I ship of the line, 8 frigates, 10 sloops of war, 2 steamers — j total 21. The official estimates for the naval service r the coming year amount to over tea millions, ; beside six millions for the marine corps. Methodist Conference, The South Carolina Annual Conference of - the Methodist Episcopal Church, which has 3 been meeting at Wilmington, X. C., adjourn ed on Monday', The Advocate states that : there was an increase reported in the amount * of membership. The mb sionary collections e reached nearly $15,000, and SII,OOO were ap- c ’ propriated for the colored missions, under the - car** of the Conference. ? i [ From our Correspondent .] SOU 1 HERN PATRIOT- EXTRA,,) Fkiday, 9i A. M. \ By Telegraph [For the Petersburg Intelligencer.] THE NEWS BY THE CAMBRIA. The Cambria arrived on Tuesday. Parliament had adjourned over till after the holidays. Cotton is firm. Prices declined and again rallied, and the market became steady. Stock light. Flour —The finer sorts have advanced fully one shilling. The bullion in the Bank of England is twelve and a quarter millions. The Bank has reduced its interest to 5 per cent. Corn —A slight advance has taken place— from Ito 2 shillings per qr. General aspects favorable- Several failures have taken place, among them Messrs. Sands, Liverpool, Colesworth; Pryor and Howard Daran and McKenz. Wheat. —lias improved 2 to 3 shilling* per 70 lbs. Meal—lo shillings per lb. Kice. —2-3 a 23s Gd. Another Despatch. MORE OF THE CAMBRIA'S NEWS. Baltimoue, Jan. 19, 7 P. M. American Flour in Liverpool is quoted at 27 to 30 shillings per bbl. White Corn is quoted at 355. 6d. to 38s. per qr. Louisiana Cotton is quoted at sid, SJ, ; Cd, G-id, and 7£d. Upland ut 4£d, a 4-id, 4|d r 6d. to s\, the lowest prices within three I eights ever known, Philadelphia, Jan. 19 —4 30 P. M. J. W. Hornbeek, member of Congress from 1 Pennsylvania, died at Allowtown on Sunday last. The markets, generally, are w ithout change in any particular. The Foreign news has produced no marked change. The market is nominally as before. The Northern Telegraph is out of order. Dy Telegraph. [Reported fur the Constitutionalist ] CONGRESSIONAL. Washington, Jan. 19. IX SENATE. After some unimportant business, none of sufficient importance to telegraph, the Ten Regiment Bill was taken up, and Mr. Foote addressed the Senate in support of the bill, | the war, and the war measures of the admin istration. He did not conclude, as he was ’ frequently interrupted by questions from other Senators and incidental conversations and explanations arising therefrom. The de bate was interesting and the galleries crowded. Mr. Mangum submitted resolutions asking the President to state whether Order No. S7S bv Gen. Scott, was from instructions from the War Department, and if so to communicat# the same, and any opinions of Gen. Scott on the bill as to the military means necessary to carry the same into effect. Laid over. Mr. Ashly submitted a resolution concern ing the manner in which the public printing was done, and whether according to contract and correctly. 'ilic Senate then adjourned, MOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. Mr. Gayle o Tered a resolution calling on the Post M i-ter General for instructions giv en to the Post Master at Mobile relative to postages by steamboats in the employ of Gov c ament, which was adopted. Mr. Buts reported the bill from the Senate to provide clothing for the volunteers, which ! was passed. Mr. Burt reported a bill to increase the ef ficiency of the regular corps of the army—to provide for disabled soldiers, and to found a military assylum for invalid soldiers, which I was read twice. i Mr. Sevier reported a bill to amend the .set making appropriations for the naval servico f*r the present fiscal year, which was read twice, Mr, Stanton introduced a bill for the relief { of certain forward warrant officers of the nary. 1 Read twice, Mr. Farrclly introduced a bill to amend the act for the promotion of useful arts. Read twice, Mr. Vinton, from the Committee of Way* and Means, reported a bill authorizing a loan o $18,500,000, which was read twice and re ferred to the Committee of the Whole on'the state of the Union, j On motion of Mr. Brodhead, the House then went into Committee of the Whole, and took up the President’s annual Message. Mr. | Tuck addressed the Committee, and w'as fol- I lowed by Messrs. McLean, Tompkins, and Hall of Missouri. The debate was an exciting ono, and the galleries were crowded. The right of the President to withhold inform&t tion relative to the war, by the imperative re solution of the House, was the chief and ex citing of discussion. After Mr. Hall had concluded his speech, the Commute* rose, and the House adjourned. A New Invention for Making: Bricks* Jonathan W. Ward, of Cambridge, Mass,* a practical brick-maker, has invented a ma« chine for making bricks, which will work more wonders in cheapening the price of that essen tial item in Building. The Boston Post says:: —‘Ttis simple in its construction, is not lia ble to get out of repair, costs but little, and has been pronounced by practical brick-ma kers to be the best machine for the purpose j that has been invented. It will turn out twen ty-five thousand bricks a day, and the inven tor warrants it to answer fully the expecta tions of the most sanguine. Exports of Bread Stuffs During the past year, the exports of Bread stuffs shipped from the United States, is said to have reached the enormous sum of $53,- 202,437. The amount of specie exported from New York last week was $252,500; by the Patrick Henry to Liverpool $107,600; Washington. ’ j London, $140,000; Splendid, Havre, $5,00i0. The total since Istinst. is $996,996. The New York Tribune say-s—The Free Banks continue to retire their circulation rap idly, by returning it to the Comptroller’s of-'