=i : Augiift 12. AUTHENTIC. Jon* RtjyLEDGE, of South Carolina, is ap pointed Chief jyftice of the of the United States. The treaty h»« betrt iondcraried by a rrteetin§>ift. Sa vannah —which alio burnt Mr. Jay and Mr. Ounn irt Effigy. A rtieeting iA Christ Church pari#), 8. C. Jvtve re fo]ved that r hcapprove ol" t!ie rorwiiiet of then teilo'V ci'i-zens m Cliarlefton, ill oppottHg the impending treaty. Our latu'} adyLcis fto»n* Spain art' f» the middle! of June, %_a Captain fon-.-s, via Clarlc'ion—peace hail scot tl.e.* been a-nouftced at Cadiz, but was daily etf- pe&fed: L->rd Bdt», tile net*- TVitilK AmbaTadtfr to tlie court bf "Soon arrived -it Cadiz while Joiles v. as there ami let off in jpr»-.at Jiafte for Madrid. BeSs are r'.-"V laid, that no treaty will ever b'; feed between the United States and Great-Britain. Fro n GsfrffyoildenlS, Tlie art? employed to irritate the public m : nd are is wicked as the enemies of oar peace arc vindictive and Unprincipled —In A Bollon paper, and the-article has been publiflied in .nore than one Gazette in this city, it is aflerted without artv Qualification—" That the Bruiih had revoked fhiir orders [to Capture American vefleis] until they had his [John Jay's] permiflion to renew them." It ought to be remembered fafs a correfpondetit that our intelligent dirrct from from France has tor some time p ift anticipated that received by the way of Eng land—The ac.<iums> of the fete of liie Fr-nch linances have been tranflatcd from P;irispapers — Fhejalt d > Tee on this impdrtarif fubjeA exited but nine day;, it was the mth ivTav, and fnrnendel the 7th J'tne — but act ording ro the debates in the Convention, that was fli'fkient lime to produce great mifchie'f, and di lan latidn of the satl-rrut property. it is rorli'f/Tcd by many ;>f the printers of this coun try at .ntich ialVr, a.rl n -re for their inrerelt to ahufe the .>.'u* erri.neiit of t'tK- United State , thro' the majority, lr; ii' 1 , :jy■! nuiKni'cf'ntjtii.i.Sytiian even to tell the truth r fpe.Ti.. l the minority. On .'mildly lalt a valuable hoffe wa» said to be drowned at flamilton's wharf—and in the morning of ;er ill to water was drove by Ifiat .my, ar. ier c! Itecl Vim with ft ones", into the iTO'ri which heWas fjve<i with difficulty —The which is nobecome frequent, os-boys co'lcci n.7 to'fwi n 0:1 Sabbath days, at one of the molt public wharves, in the -center ol the city, reflects no 2 n : .l.'(l:' gre.it honor on its gu 'rdians. ft his beiu mentioned as a great aimfe of the pri vilsEje of fratifc}:! jln this country, that fume mem bers of Corgrefs ihoutg have sent by a (ingle mail, from nn to four iui'idr;. beea said t!!?( fliiris, handkerchief?, tea, &c. have been Franked—but all fur prize will ' when it is known tti.it S>odle» of Verifon were ior merlv. under over of lids tr.mfmitred through the iinidilh po(t-ofßcc. Mr. Dent, a number of the B'i-ilh' House of Coinm.ii.s, i:i a deb ■.!,■■ ti'ion the f.ibjfcl of frank I *!', April 13, 1795, I'dicl, " That Veniion lihil paHcd as nimbly by post, as it run when all re in its native park, ar.d there yet remained many limi'ar iniljnces which re qnii fcd a remedy." Mr. Ffc-NNO, The Ailrdra of this momirig informs its readers, that .-re are only t'vo writer* in favour of th; treaty — PKe readers of I'j/ri paper only,are really obliged to fo~ne b.-i; for this information—judging from what they had been indulged in reading, they muff have concluded that the treaty had ho advocates whatever.—But is it poiTibie that the writer did not know that there were more than two defenders of the treaty ? - it is hardly credible —-The treaty has been ably< defended hy a great number of writers. A series of papers entitled the Teok.r a list, is .i-.'ibhfhfd in the Centinel, which 1 liope to f.;e repub'liihed is a mafteriy perfor mance. —Befidet all this, tho* thai Aurora writer may nht know ft. a!' the world hefides knows it, that the treaty has defenders in all parts of the union ; perhaps the Aurora is the only paper 91 the United States which doe- not afford feme evidence of ?hi3, and from justice to the public I «xpc3 that the Editor of that papei will r'epublifii thi:. OB'fRVTR. r,r .tkeVAZETTS of the UXITED STATES MR. Ft;sNOi ■ IN reading your of I?.!l evening, I was 3ntck 'with the letter tigne 1 George'. Lux, (1 Bal timore tr.ercha t) a'ddiefled, 1 suppose, to the PreiVd.Ci't. He fays, '' Mr. Jay's treaty in the niain met my approbarioti ; but Ico ifefs elaufe admitting Ci Britons and American: to h'jld property in'otir "•'rxfpetftive countries, fills me with anguifli and "-alarm." It is the 9th article of the treaty which ha 3 pro duced this fad efleft on the mind of that gentleman : A > J as r.t my otiit rs, not yawing this fuhjeiSt in its true li,'ht~ ar.v.i Cdnfequences, h t vc alfj been alarm ed, I .will p.vferit y>>u with rr.y opinion tioon it, and lias a relation to the fame fubje'dt, the hold fig of land) in the 2d article. ■It is well known, that before our revolution, ■Ci-ften we were British fubje&s. man/ of out fellow fuhje&s;. in other parts of the British doWn'nicris, held-lands in what are now tlie Uiiited States.— It is also well knovvii, that many Americans, who firaliy adhered to theßriiijn in the revolution, heid landed property. A large proportion of these lands were confiscated, by the laws of the fevcral ftatcs; b;:t by the titaty of peace an end was put to all f fther cbnfifcatior.S. I would now afl< Mt. Lux, whether the lands thus secured by that treaty a giitlfl confifcatiotii ought not to remain the pro perty of British fubjeds until they find it for their irtereft to fell therrt ? For the treaty of peace pre fcrihes no limits to the time of their holding them. Since the revolution, some fiates have passed la\Vs to enable foreigners, and of coUrff . British fti ! jests; to purehafe and hold ISndi. I again ask, whether British fubje<3s, who have ptlrchafed lands ti ider ft;ch laws, ought not to.be fectued in the enjoyment of them ? H ere iheri we fee what lands are held by Btitifh fiih;e<Ss :—-tHey ate fucb only as were guaranteed so them by the treaty of peace, or which the laws «jr particular states have authorised them to pur chase. And what hotrefl man would deny their ht Iding what they have thiis hcnefUy acqtiired ? Further, let it be particularly, noticed, that the words of Mr. Jay's treaty are, " British fubje&s who noio hold lands in the territories of the United States that i?, at the time of signing the treaty. But how are the British fubjedts to hsld these rati- J letters—it has also :.e uons away lands ! The treaty informs us, " according to the " nature and tenure of their respective estates and " titles therein ; and'may grant, fell, or devise the fame to whom they please, in like manner as if "they were natives; and that they nor " their heirs or afllgns, fhall></» / far as may rcfpcS " the / "aid lands and the legjl remedies incident there " to, be regarded as aliens." Let us consider the effects of this provision, and we shall fee casttins nothing to excite " an gujfli ' -Ttifc.fmt part of the provision feciftes to Britilh fubjefts only the property honeltiy and lawfully ac quired, in the nrtannrr before ment-iorie'd. Their • eiUtes may be bv moitgage, by leales-ior lives or years, or in fee iimple. Whatever thi fe are, the treaty feeures them. But " they may fell or de vise tiieTaine io whom they please true'; but to wl om are they likely to fell ? To actual settlers. And who will be these actual ft tilers ? Either citi zens of the United States, or emigrants from so rifign countries for the pnrpofe of becoming actual fetlleis, and Consequently American citizens. To' the latter finely there will be no objection, when 1 all the (fates having vacant lands are continually inviting and receiving foreigners among them.— But Mr. Lux is quite in the horrors left " foreign ers'of affluence ihould fettle on our frontiers, with mvriads of tenants and other dependants."i Pray, Mr. Lux, what at that time will be these foreign ers of affluence and their myriads of dependants ? When t'iey lhall have fettled on owr frontiers, will they (fill be foreigners, or inhabitants ol the United States ! If inhabitants, with their families and iliterefts here, what mifchief is to be apprehended from them, m ire than from the foreigiwrs whom Maryland, Pe nfylvania, and other llatesf are year ly admitting by thousands ? Or do you imagine, that after ehooling and fettling in this land of liber ty, as their home, they will obstinately maintain the interefls of their former countries, in opposition to this—that they will refufc to take the benefit of our acts of naturalization—that they will refufc to receive the privileges and rights of citizens ? Are not the real objedts of all fucli emigiants to obtain here more comfortable settlements, inheritances for their children, and the full enjoyment of the rights of in .1:1 ? Suppose the Britifla fiibje&s, their heirs or as signs, holding lands in the United Slates, fhouid not emigrate hither and become fettlcrs, what will be their co dition and their rights ? Why, by Mr. Jay's treaty, the jujl property in the lands hon ftly acquired as before mentioned, will remain theirs ; but in all othe'r iefpefts, tbcfe land holders will remain aliens. Their lands will be liable to taxes, in common with the lands of our own citi zens. They can deiive no benefit from them but by the rife in their value or by rents. The latter (rents) will not for many generations merit atten tion in the Unit« 3 States j for every landlord knows that here, where lands are so plenty, re:its will not generally yield above two or three per cent, on the #alue of the lands ; which, therefore, will not be leafed to tenants, but fold to freeholders. If these observations find a place in your paper, I will fend you those 1 pvopoled to mrtke on the 2d article of the treaty, relative to thrf Briti'h fuhjects who hold lands within the present jurifdiitions of the British posts. A FREEHOLDER Philadelphia, Auguil 11, 1795. Mr. Fenno, I cannot agree with Mr. Bache, (in the Aurora of this day ) that you a e the author.of the infinite variety, both in Itile and sentiment, with which your paper abounds ; hut I draw, I hope, * fur conclufian from his hint, viz. that he is chargeable with all the illib.raiitf and invective which the Au rora lias levelled againfl you and everv other con fifteilt fed-ralift, as well as with all those p *-"?s in his paper in favor of- a government by democratic societies, to the exolulion of a government by the people: lilt;wife with ill thofc {peculations agaitift the doings of a majority in Congrlfs, in every in fiance important to peace, government. It is said that Mr. Bache is now tacking about : he has nothing to fay against addreflers, courtiers, &c. as on all former occasions In lhort, he has become at lall a mod violent Hickler for pre rogative, What can all this mean ? Is he really a convert to order and good government, oris there a snake in the gtn S ? The addreflers advise the President to reconiider the treaty which he handed to the Senate, altho' the fame has been ratified by two thirds of that body : and this, altho* the said editor knows, that there were repeated communica tions between Mt. Jay and the Secretary of State, during the negotiation, and that the treaty was de layed for a long time on account of these commu nications. This is the det.nier hope of the ar.ti junto : they know that to destroy the treaty would leave them a hope for war and confufion, for a ja cobin goverm.Vnt, for a guillotine, and all other charging appendages of disorder and confulion. If thde facts are admitted, the President will not tharik this editor, or any other new fangled friend, who, like the addreflers at Richmond in Virginia, advise the President to undo what they fay the Se nate has t citified. If the Striate had the power to ratify, there is ctmjlilntionally an end to the business, or I do not nnderftand the meaning us tfec word. As two thirds of the members of the two branches of Con gress make a law without the confent'of the Preii dent, there can be little doubt of his fanftioning, so far as is requisite, what two thirds of the Senate have confirmed, in a treaty received throngh him. Yours, CHRONUS. August jo. brum the Argus Citizen Greenlpaf, TO expatiate on the justice, power and refourcei of Great Britain ; to jufttfy all her acts however wantoh and unjust; to depreciate his own country, and to place her its the wrong upon every occasion are favourite themes with CAMILLUS. Hence it was ro matter of surprise to find him in his third number, attempting a formal vindication of Great- Britsin far carrying away the negroes, and ridicul ing our claim on that fubjefV. As this is the firft number that contains any thing like argument, it ought not to pass unnoticed. By &e,treaty of Pa ris, his Bntaanio majesty agreed, "not to carry a w y any negrogi from the United State»." This, fays Camillas, m'uft mean either negroes which had been, or which at the ceflation oF hostilities continued to be American property. When the meaning of ar. instrument is doubtful, there cannot be a fafer or fairer way to obtain its true, sense, than by con sidering its circumltances and views of the parties at the time of making the contract, and that they ailed with good faith to each other. To appl/ this rule during the latf war many negroes had been taken by, or had voluntarily joined .he armies or gone into the garrisons of Great Britain. Tu reclaim them, and prevent their being carried away, was an obje JJ which our commiffioneis had much at heart, and it is not easy to conceive how this objedl could have b en expressed in plainer or less ous terms It will be remembered, that Franklin had an agency in that treaty, and perhaps no man ever excelled him in perspicuity and pertinency of exprSlfion ; that those negroes and thole alone Were in the contemplation of both parties, results from the very nature of the cafe. It could not be neeef fary to guard against new depredations of this kind —peace being made all hoililities of every kind ceased. As well a clause have been inserted, to prohibit (hips of war,' of the different parties, from makingprizeSdtlring the peace, as the captains of such v tile Is would have been treated as pirates, f<> nyght every negro, or his value been recovered by a legn ar course of law, from any peifou who had taken him after the peace, without any ihpulatiaii in the treaty for that purpose. To confine this ar ticle, therefore, to an engagement to abstain from further plunder it rendering it altogether negative and ufeleis. which is never to be supposed and can not be prefum d to have been the intention of either party. The reasoning of Camillus is conltrained and contradictory ; in one breath he likens the ne groes to " horses, cattle, and other nmvcables, and as such liable to become booty in the next con liders tiicm " as rational beings, and as entitled to liberty under British proclamations, he concludes it would have been odious and immoral io let them pals again into slavery." Lpt ns belkow a moment, for a m tnent will fuffice, to detedt the sophistry of each of th.de arguments. Admitting that flavcs may become booty, and , that their property becomes veiled in the captor, has he not a right to reltore them if he pleases at a peace? Did not this city belong ta the king of Great Britain by conquest, and did he not agree to evacuate it, rather than continue an unequal war ? Did not the American artillery which he found in our forts belong to him by the lame right, yet he agreed to leave it behind? when He find* how «bly his infradlions of t'*e treaty are defended byeurown citizens, he will, no doubt, regret that he evacu ated New-York as soon as he did, for the fame ar gument which will be used by Camillas in his next number, Vo juftify his detention of the Western- PtilU, would apply equally strong to his having kept gsrrifons till this time in our sea ports, the prompt evacuation of which this writer coafideis : rtither as a matter of grace in his majesty, than of ' obligation on his parr. To return—as the j negroes which were taken, belonged to the king, J he might prefer refloring them to their former own ers, rather than be incumbered with their mainte nance, which would probably have been theconfe- i quence of gi'-'ing them iVetdom ; to have fold them, would have ill comported with his dignity. It mull beConfideitd also, that in refloiing them to their 1 mailers, he would take care to receive an equivalent for such conrcfii n. What this equivalent was, stone but the eommiflioners can know, perhaps they j agreed to recommend the tories to mercy ill confide, j ration of his majesty's reftorirtg the oegrois : what- | eves the inducem -nt may h*ve been, he promises by j an cxpreffion as iatitudinary as can well be devised not to carry away any of them, that is, he will kate ! them all whether acquired by capture or enticed a- ] way by his royal offers. If an exception had been j intended, in favor of any class, it would have found ! its way into the treaty : none being made, the de fciiption mud either be nugatory, or icxtend to all the blacks, who were then living, and in the pow er of his troops, arming them againil their mailers, and not in makin j amends for such an abominable warfare, by fending them home again ; but if such promises were really made, or if a treaty of amity and alliance, offensive and defenlive, a£luaily exitt,' ed between his Biitannic majefly, and who bad not been a&ually carried from the continent before the treaty, The other position cannot be supported without charging the king wi'h tlie greatest duplicity and want of good faitli, which I lhall not offend Camil lus so much as to suppose his majelty capable of. It would be odious and immoral, fay* he, :o return to theii former mailers, negroes who had joined them on a promise of liberty, Any other hut Ca m.illus would have thought the immorality conlilt ■ ed in alluring them away, and thefwavthy domeltics ; of America, why not be explicit, and explain with ! good faith, to the plenipotentiaries, the fok mn en gagement he was under j initcad of ilipulating a j fpecific return, an equivalent might then have bten j agreed upon ; or if faith mult be broken, either ( with the negroes, or,with the United States, would it not have been a less reflection on Great-Britain, ;t P g' ve U P the former, whom (he was no longer able ;to protest, (as (he did the tories) and to whom she was probably under no other than immoral engage ments, contained in proclamations, issued upon the sole authority of fo'/ne lavage officers, than to break _in the very moment of signing a solemn com pad, formally and deliberately entered into with the lat ter ? Was she not under at solemn engagement to the tories who had espoused her cause, and received protections from her generals; yet their persons and properties were abandoned, or, > which was the fame things placed upon the precarious, footing of a recommendation on the part of Congreftj for favor and pardon the legislatures of the different States. Not ajnan of this description who had been banished, could return without a law for the pur pole. > Does Camillas imagine that the interest of these Africans lay nearer the heart of their gracious monarch; whose virtues and hnmanity he takes so much pleasure in blazoning, than those of his own deluded fubje£ts, who. notvfrkhlta tiding his dclibe rate facrifice of them, continue as firmly as everdc. voted to him ? But if his majesty be really ( what no one biit Caraillus will fufpeft) to scrupulous about doing a« odious a&ion, or breaking his plighted faith to his black allies, why juftify him for keeping his word at our expence ? If he be as juji, uu gnanimeas ami Icucvelent as our envoy has rep refer, sod Kim, why does he not pay for the liberty which he thought it his duty to confer on our Haves ? Will Camillus pretend that his majesty's abhorrence of fl.iwery in duced him to carry the-fe people away ? The Weft India I(lands wiil teltify againfi htm—his majesty, like some people amu'ig ourieives (I do not mean the Quakers, for I really believe ttttrtl to aft from principle) if a great advocate for manumission, when hij own interells or those of his fubjtCfs n re not >£- fe&ed by it, or when the United States (notwith ttanding his Unbounded affuSion lor them) are a lone injured by it. As fooil then as the Britilh king foUnd that his recent engagements with this country could not be executed fpecifieally without violating his anteced ent prnmifes to the negroes, rnttead of qiiftjßlTSg and putting on hifr agreement a eordlrudiou which rendered it a daid Utter, lie would' have aited mure confillent with ascribed ro him by the fiiends of the present treaty, by candidly commu nicating his embari ailments t-> our government. We (ll«uld readily have cOfcfented to a pecuniary com pensation ; Camillus, it is true, ajerts that " when, a party pritmifes afpecitk tiling, nothing but the thing itftlf will fatisfy the proinile."— Jr Camihuj be a lawyer he certainly knows that jiothiagis ma»c" common thip-a-fetitfadiion in damages torike brcach of a promise to do S\ fpecific -hing'siid that in a great variety of cases it'is the only fatiifadiion to which the law can or will compel the dali lquent parry, ar,d that such damages being paid, the proir.iie is as completely faiisfted as by doing of the Ipec ifie thing. Thus if a person contract to deliver me a ihip, or a horse which he afterivards-fells to another, or to come nearer co the cafe before us, je cup ago to rc ftort me a negro which fwt away, and thus puts a (pacific performance uiit.uf his pow er, my only claim againil him is for ajcompenfation commensurate to the i .jtny jfiitlaiited by his $teach of promise. It would be absurd i« tbeex-tWme tor America, at this time, to iiihtt upon a retain of those negroes. Many are dead; i.id those who tu.- vive, the greater part inu't be in the decline of lite, and would be ot lntle tile to their f inicr nia'lns. A com|ienf»uon then is all that ca) be.asked ; this is precisely the controverts- between* the tw.j gov ernments. The United States (an i Camiihis will not contend agatnft their right so to do) ifkafe CI. Britain from a fpecific compliance, and iniilt upou an equivalent in money. With what o!he*r view then, but to deceive, d.>e» Cam llus oblerve, thit " the party to whom a promise is made, cannot be required to accept in lieu of it an equivalent ? Did he not know that the United Sntes were willi. g to teceive, and asked for nothing more than an equi valent, so that there- could be 110 -uecetfiiy of eisqui- ring into the light of Great Bniaiu 10 loice thcia to it. It is proper to fuhjoin, • bat the cuti ft Million cf thigarficle by Camillus ii oppokd toilie interpreta tion which our government have uniformly put upon it, is contrary to I lie explanation yf- it by Mr. Jcf ferfon, whose correfpomicncc with Mr. Hammond is recommended, as the belt antidote againlt the raif chievous and humiliating do&rincs, f<> warmly in culcated by this writer. Every American will turn with pleaiure from a lab.ored panegyric of the Bri tish government, a ttrcnucus and uncandid vindica tion of all its arbitrary proct'ediiijjs towards this country, and frtVm the degrading reprcLatation of the United States, winch hll lo many columns of Camillus, to the manly, energetic, (dignified and vet fcandid examina ion of Jettetloii. in the writings of this invaluable ftatefraan, he wilt dileovtr the true fwurce of eontroverfy between the two couiHtirs. He will be (hocked at the petlidy and duplicity of Creat Britain, and will be aftuitiffced at the forbear ance of the United States, under, the nn It aggra. vated and unprovoked iiifulls and i: juries. It is a work which should be in the hands of every man. It will teach us tu loYe aud relptdt .our country, a duty which cannot be too motivated, when pains aie taken to'inftife a contrary fentimeiit. 1 shall only a fit, if Camillus is right, how hap pened rt that a majority of tht Senate, a; their late session, agreed to advise the Piefidcnt o jxpew ne gociations with his majcjty tor a ompenfation for the negroes who had been arried away contrary to the 7th article of ihe treaty of peace ? When so many refpedtable authorities concur rcfpc£tipg this aggrefiiou, it would evince a becoming rnodefty in Camillus to retradl an opinmn which ought to find advocates only in the Brinfh Cabinet. CINNA. " From the DAILY-AD/iRTfbER! ' CATO.—No. V. I AM tt Tome lois to underhand what is intended by the following words m the 3d article—« And in Jjke manner a:I goo<.s and raierchandize, whose impor tation into the United States fhal! not he wholly prohi bited ; may .reely, for the purposes of comrwrct, be tarried into t - e fame in manner rtfore/aid t by hitna* jefly'j fubjetis ; a-ndtlie fame fhal I be fubjeA to no higher > 0/* other duties than would be payable by the citizens of the United States on the importation of the lame in American veflels into the atlaotir ports of- the laid states. The manner afarefard» alludes to the former part of the article,, which g-rves the Brfcifc a right to navigate our rivers from the sea to tiictogkcft ports of entry for foreigners, and from thence by land into the Indian country, jhe only natural corftrue tion of Chefe words is, that the British fhallknve a right to import into the United States upon the fa roe tern* as Americans, and yet 1 can hardly conceive t\ zt Mr* Jay could intend in *he face oi a law oi* tKe Ufiited States (a<sl mak.ng further proviilon p. ;y*n<ent of the debts of the United States, chap. 39 . fc. S.) which imposes an additional duty of ten per trait, on articles imported in vefiels not of thetffHMd Sutts; I fay I should hardly conceive that he wottld prH&yraie to enter into such stipulation dire<sMy in the fr e* c? law of the United States, and that too in favo-ijr ©f a nation wliofe navigation.a&, is at war w.th merce ; did it not brtathe the fante spirit wi'Ji "fc;e nth, 14th and 15th articles, all of wiich di rectly at the navigation of thefa flakes, Nor &> 3 know any other lonllruclion that can paiQbly be- pttt on the words whidt 11,avc ftatcd'at large, (hat „v w Jeader may judjje ior himfett. Jt ithow* Mr*
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers