City Dancing AfTembly. THE AfTcmblies will commence for the Season, on ThurfJiy Evening, the 19th inft. Jos. Redman, ~j ■n. Sam. Stf.rrett, 5- Managers. N .. . THO. IV. Francis, J November 4. dti9th. l v" IVANT ED TO PURCHASE, Or to take on a Lease of about 3 years, to commence on or about ift of April next, A small Farm, FROM 30 to 60 acres, with fuHicient building for farm ing the fame, and a deccnt house for a genteel family— an equal proportion of meadow, arable, and woodland, and:i short distance from Philadelphia, Trenton, or Wil mington, will be the more durable. AppljPto No. 187, fcutli Thixd-ftreet. Nov. 6. §6t. A COMPLETE PRINTING-0 F F 1 C E FOR SALE, Gonfifiiirj of ißoclb.of Type, well affrrted ; one ele gant Press, and every other article suitable for a:i ex tf'.ilive business—the whole nearly nsw. The terms of payment will be, a fourth, calh; a fourth, at three months; ami the remainder, to accommodate the pur chaser, will be taken in printing work. The amount is about i zoo dollars. For particulars apply to the Editor. October 13. 3aw2 m. N°. 116. Diflricl of Pennsylvania, to wit: , , it remembered, that ,on the ninth (Jay f 5E^L 7 ) JD of November, in the twentieth year of L J Ihe Independence of the United States of A * ' ir.erica, Samuel Harriion Smith, of the said Biftrifl, hath deposited in this Office the title of a book, the rij'it whereof he claims as Froprietor, in the words following, to wit: " A Vindication of Mr. Randolph's Relignation," in conformity to the Act of the Congret of the Uni ted States, intituled, " An aegi eat trouble and cxpenee which would attend a renewal of the Certificate., m confe quenae of the said reimburftment of I'rincipal, it has been determined that no renewal (hall be made: And further, that the Coruscates which may be ifTuid dur ing tht year One thuufand seven hundred and .linety &x, in consequence of any transfers of the iVid fix per cent. Stock, fliall notwitliflanding the reimburj'eHieni of two per centum, as aforementioned, be expreflcd for the rcfpexflive sums of the original Capital Stock. AH persons who may negociate the Funded fx per cent. 3 tocU if tbt United States, hearing a pnfcut intere/l, are therefore cautioned to observe, that during the year One thoufaud feveu hundred and ninety-fix, the value oi true amount of Principal unredeemed of fai l Debt or Stock, will be ninety-eight per centum of the sums cr.prcfTcd in the Certificates Given under my hand, at Philadelphia, the day and year beforementioned, pursuant to di rections of the Scrretary o£ tr e Treasury, SAMUEL MEREDITH. Trujuter of the United Steles. Aug. 24. L _ lawr j 1 FTve Dollars Reward. STRAYED, on the 31-t of October, froia Tenth- Street, near Mulberry-Street, a roan HORSE, abouf seven y-ars old, has a white spot on JiU forehead, white feet and cut tail. Any pcrfon who can give information cf the fame, will rt ceive the above reward, and expcnces, by applj to 5c Co. No, 12, south Fhird iaect. ° November 14. §iw. FROM THE ARGUS, THE DEFENCE—No. XXIV. However uniform may have been the law of Eu rope in relation to their colonial elL.bhihtncins, wo pains have been fparetl to create an opinion thai France has been guided by a more liberal policy than the other colonizing powers, and that the re gulations of her colony trade wete ellcntiui!y cliiTiin!- lar from theirs ; Moreover that her liifinterelieduefs was so gre»t, that (he not long since proposed to our Government to eftablilh by Treaty, a trade bet ween 11s and her Welt India coleuius equally free with that which prevails in her own intercourlewilh them. The objeit of theic attempts is readily per ceived. As there was no probability, tbatOrett Biifain would consent to our trading wither Welt-ludia colonies on the fame terms as she herfelf docs, us it was forefeen that limitations and conditions would accompany any agreement that should be made on this fubjedf ; to extol the liberty of Fiance, and exclaim againtlthe monopolizing views ot Gieat Britain, were deemed suitable means to excite a ■ prejudice agiiinit the exped\ei adjustment of the commercial iiitereourfe between us and the Biitifli Well India Colonics. A comparison of the footing by which onr trade Itood with the French and Britilh Well-India Co lonics, after tlie completion of our revolution, and before the present war 111 Europe, with a concise exposition of the real views of France on thefnbjjdl of a new commercial traaty, wiil belt demonltrate the want of candor and paciioiifm in Ameri cans, who have fubmittcd to beccme agents 111 propagating thefc eirors. France like England has endeavored to fecut e the greaielt possible poition of advantage to her felf, by her colonial laws, and the conCcflions yield ed to foreigners have been only such deviations from an entire monopoly, as her own interelt has render ed iudifpenfable—l'ranee in imitation of the Englilh Navigation Law, as early as 1727, eHabli/lied an | ordinance, confirming to the mother country the monopoly of the trade to her colonies, and exclu ding thereby all Foreigners—Experience proved the necefilty of moderating the rigor of their ordi- ; nance, and relaxations in favor ofa limited foreign ! intercourse exilled at the time when our commer- i cial treaty with France was concluded, by the 1 thirtieth article of which, it is agreed, that France 1 will continue to the citizens of the United States, the fiee ports, which hate been and are open in j their Welt-India Iflandr, to be enjoyed agreeable : to tV.e regulations which relate to them—i\fyftenr of regulations relative to the trade of Foieignerj » iththe French Iflauds, was promulgated in : This ordinance edablifhed one free port at St. Lu cie, another at Martinique, another at Guadaloupe, anpther alTobago,and three others at St.Domingo, to which Foreign vcffels of the burthenof sixty tons and upwards might carry for f?.le,woods of all forts, pit coal, live animals,fatted beef,failed tilh,rice, In dian corn,vegetables,green hides, peltry, turpentine and tar—This was followed by the arrets of Sep tember 1785, which by imposing heavy duties oa foreign failed fifli, and establishing large bounties on those of the National or French fifliery, mate rially affected the foreigiiCQmißcice with tire FrencJi islands in this impoitant article of supply and ean fumpUon. Such were the duties on the Foreign, and the premiums on (he National fifli, that together they would been equivalent to a prohibition of the for mer, had the National fifhery been able to fuj.ply the confumpiion. I:i return for these articles which alone were per mitted to be imported by foreigners into the Fiench Islands, and which it will be observed excluded fotne of our principal (taples especially four, tlity were allowed to purchase and bring away of the produitions of the islands, only molafTts and rum. All cotton, coffec, sugar, and other produflions (rumar.d inolalfcs excepted ) were prohibited ; and we could, except occalionally by local relaxalioas of the general law, rightfully obtain noil* of their fiom the French Weft India Iflauds—This was the footing of our trade under our treaty and ihe ihnding edict which preceded the French Revolu tion, and even this was liable to still further limita lions, whenever France should think proper t.) im pose them ; ihe treaty fecuiinq only n light to j>s Free a commerce ai Franee Hicjjld grant :o other | foreign natums. G eat Britain has peimittrd ihe importation in to her w. I. colonies of all the foreign articles, al lowed by France to be imported into ber islands, (failed Gfh and filled beef exctpted) and flie more over permitted ihe importation of foreign tobacco, flour, meal, biscuit, wheat, and various other grains which Fiance prohibited—ln return for these commodities, Great Britain permitted the expor tation from hei jflands !o our country, of rum and moialfcs, a;id moreover of sugar, coffee, cocoa, ginger, and pimento, together with such other ar ticles as are allowed to be camied from their islands, to any other foreign cAilnlrv. Great Britain prohibit') the importation and ix; crtation of m«.l of these art Met to and from nil foreign nations, except the United States France permitted the intercourse with her colonies, under Ihe fame limitations to us in common with all f »lher foreign nations. The aitides reccivej from us by Great Britain, for the supply cf her Well India Iflanth, exceeded in vaiie'y tiiofe received frorp us by France for the supply of her Iflar.ds, the Britilh Weft Indies weie theiefore in the ordinary and eltablilhed couife. more exrer.five customers to us than tile French Welt Indies. Again ihe ai tides which we receiv ed from the Britilh Weft Indies and which we were prohibited from receiving from the French Weft Indies, were among the molt valuable of their pro diySions and from the force of inbit fomeof them are included in the catalogue of"articles of the firit necessity in our consumption. "l n point of supply therefore the Britilh were better furniftiers, tbe'r colonial laws being much less reftiiftive thin those of Francc. Though $ie regulations of the British Weft In dia more faveu:ablc to our agriculture than those of France, and tho' the? articles with which we were fupphed fr m the Brit'.fh Islands w'crc mure numerous and valuable tha i ihufe ob tained from the IHaiids of France, thecoluny sys tem of the la'ter was preferable to (hat oi the* former in relation to our navigation. Fiance per mitted our veflcls of and above lixty tons buuhen, to carry and bring away the Articles, not prohib ited in the foreign trade with her Ifhuids, while- Great Britain confined the tiade to her own vclitis and excluded those of all foreign nations. Difference of Situation, and not of principle produced this vaiiety or dillinftion in the colony lytlem of the two nations. France being able from her releurces to fu'-ply most of the articles it qui fit* for the confnmption of hei Weft Indies and from h»r great population having a proportionate de mand for the productions of her Island, she h i been caiefully reftri&ive in the trade between her colonies and foreign countries as to the articles of import and expoit. All the productions of her Islands, mud go to the mother country, except rum aud molasses ; these articles were not confined to France, because they would hive directly interfered with the valuable manufacture of her brandies. On the other hand Great Biitain, being less able from her internal resources to supply the articles utceflary lor the coufampiion of her Welt Injies, and her popula tion, or home demand, not requiring the whole productions of her illands, file his been more liber al in the tiade allowed to be earned on betwem her colonies and foreign countries as to the articles of import and expoit. But htr navigation being adequate to the whole trade of ail her dominions, while that of Fiance required the addition of for eign bottoms, G. Britain has excluded entirely from her colony trade the foreign vessels of all na tions, while France has admitted them to liiare in the foreign trade permitted to her Weft India Islands. Both France and Great Biitain relax their co ' lonial laws, in times of oceafional scarcity and when 1 ; they are engaged in war ; during which, the inter- 1 ; course with their Weft India poffefiionsis laid more i open to foreigners. The catalogue of supplies is 1 sometimes enlarged, and Great Britain as well as i France duiing these relaxations, permits American < vefTcl. to resort to, and engaga in the commerce of < their Islands. i It i*3 notlnvithfianding from the permanent laws i alone of these nations, that wc are able to infer | their views in relation to their Colony trade ! the t , exceptions and detiations that become necefTary by i reafen of Accidental Scarcity or the embariaff- 1 : ments of war, fcrve only to explain more clearly ' ; the Principles of the Permanent fyllem. I ! The result of this comparison affords no support 1 j for the alien ion that France has been less exclusive, < j or more liberal in her colony system, than Great j Britain—both these nations have in the establish- I ment ef ihtir colonial laws alike disregarded the iu-' t terefts of foreign nations, and have been equally ] under the conttoul of the principles of felf-intercft, ; which ever have, and ever will govern the affairs of < nations.* ... - ( Nothing can be more erroneous, than tTre opi- t nion that any nation is likely to yield up its own I interest, in order, gratuitously, to advance that of ' another. Yet we frequently hear declarations of t tjjw kind, and too many honest citizens hare sur rendered themselves to this delusion—Time and ex- ( perience will curc us of this folly. < Equel artifice has been praflifed, and no less i credulity difplnyed, on the fubjedtof a new Treaty 1 of Commerce, which it is boldly asserted, France 1 from the most d'tftnterejlcdmotives has offered to us. I It fiiould be rccollcdted that France ulrcady ha 3 a t Treaty of Commerce with us, a treaty that is not I limited to two years, nor twelve years, but one that 1 is to forever—This treaty is as favorable to i France as (he can desire, or we in our utrr.oft fond- < ness be disposed to make—lt fecvires to her our ac quiescence in an excltiiion from her Asiatic domi nions, and in frefh regulations as her inteieft fliall « dictate relative to our intercom few it h her Will. India pofi'tfTions—lt excludes us from her filheries on the banks of Newfoundland, which fi:e was un willirg to fliare with us, and it gives to her every commeieial favor or privilege winch by treaty we may yield to any other nation, fieely when freely granted, and when otherwise on yielding the fame equivalent—her productions, her manufactures,her merchandize!, and her fliips mJycoroe into all ot'.r ports to which any other foreign.productions, ma mffafiurcs, merchandizes, or ships may come, — they are fcveially to pay only the duties paid by any oiher nation, and no other nation in its in- ! terccurf* and trade with us is in any inflar.ee to have a preference over her—A vaiiety of other ' regulations aie infeited in this treaty ufeful \o ! Frartce and not particularly diffeiviceable to us. 1 This treaty has been religiously observed and executed on our part ; France has repeatedly vio- ' lated it in the article which makes enemy goods 1 free in neutral bottoms, *hile it is underllood flit ' has faithfully observed it in the article, that makes neutral goods lawful prize w hen found in enemy 1 botto.Ts. It it be true, that n-atiors in jultice to themselves 1 are bound to decline the abandonment of their own ' in Whit, for the pnrpofe of promoting at their own ' e:;pence and detriment, the iuter.eit o) others, ought we too readily to riedit an opposite opinion ? Ought we not to expert full proof of the (inccrity ' of tllofp declarations, that are intended to produce 1 a belief of this difintereiied and felf-denying couife ? 1 Ought not the very propefal of such a measure, ' from its extraordinary nature inspire circumfpec tio;i, and put a prudent nation on its guard ? If ' moreover, the overture Ihould occar at a moment ' wk'en we are afcartained that those who make it, 1 desire, md are in faCt pursuing objeCts incompati ble with die dilinti'itftednefs which it avows. If while it is said wc wifli that you 'houl.l remain in peace, those who hold this language, negleCt no means to engage our citizens to violate their neu- 1 tral duties and thereby expose their country to war ; if when we ai'etold " we rejoice in the freedom of ' The opinica heretofore cited of Mtntefquuu, a Frenchman, agreeing with facts, is a politive tcf tirr.ony that the ptinciple of the French fyltem, f-ke ihc Englffh, is Monopoly. h a fitter republic" all m»»c Jangvrous Ly our*uufuf'i' KAI '• ' unlimited affectfon f of. i!, o f c v.':"',"- rs ' : ' ;:i '■ were employed to alienate our att •dine.'V""' uwn iu ™»»-Vo '■ anarchy ;if when the fkrcinalh.r Pi ..., ■ , -' !!c '' ; mg new channels of commerce, 4ich £'• ''' " unbounded nelies to our merch • '-"'v with mote caution than was dciii"/ 1 that in cafe of refufa!, or ' : ! - roiuy) trancc would repeal her e had be» d.««te<| by S :i attachment t°c» th- V""" 1 nca,,s - Wllat have been our Vf ■ what the mcafute of our folk, ha-' plicit credit to words fy much at,,,"' n V" i;: " temporary actions? But it is a foe.: do *" ters ms Mr. Ge.ict to Mr. Jefrerfon \v ' been pubhfltcdj prove that Frnn-e .-Kfr,!j'UllZ. r L-red to enter into a new drfiatocUbil gnd"/,!,' . \ t I rcaty or corr.mcrca with us. The,-,. be fairly examined. 4 'V > There are two letters from Mr. Or,- : ftibjedl Immediately after hi,"a,rival?V" 7? r P' ,a » »» a letter to Mr. Jefferfc.n of tl » , ','v" r !79} he fays-.. The French repuUil £ « ... charge to «he to propose to your gnv f „L to con.cciate by a t; ue family compact, | jy onal covenant, the liberal and fratmwl I,,:",- which it wiflics to ejtablifh the commercial ami T 1.uc.l M. 0/ p „ plt , „, lofc V lnleparably connefltd." It the objea of this proposal was a rcvif, o n 0 our commercial treaty, in order to render the V terceurfe between us more free and advantageous this min.tler was Angularly unfortunate in h; 3 prefiiofls He might have employed the fine phra'te of consecrating by a true family company", national covenant, the liberal and fraternal bafisn't which it was wiihed to efhblifh the commercial ytlem of the two countries, and hare been Intel liable; but when he tells us, (hat hi is inlUu&etl to open a negociation with our government, for the purpose of eftablifliing the comraerciaJ and htieal fyllem of the two countries, what aie we t» understand ? That trade and its regulations are a lone iu view ? Or that a family compadt eUabliili. ing the political, as well as the commercial fyitem of the two nations, mult include likewise the league or treaty of alliance, whereby the flrength and wealth of the two nations should be clotely united in the prosecution of a common objedl. I his ambiguous overture, if its meaning is net too plain to allow the epithet, was reacived in die molt trie.'.dly manner by our government, and on the fuggellion that the Senate are united with the President in making treatie?, it was irnderftoud be tween Mr. Jefferfon and Mr. Genet, that the subject should be deferred till the meeting of Con gress. Before that period, however, Mr. Genet, in a letter of the 30th of September, 1793, renews the propolal to opert the negociation relative toth^ proposed family compact between us and Fiance ; and proves to us, that our benefit was its principal exclusive object, by affectionately intimating in the eqg£MorM.f his letter, that he is further ihlUuflcl ro tell US, in* cm I -or Tfrurai U i jjiwi!" to enter into this ftmily agreement, tha; France will repeal the laws dilated by the attachment of the French for the Americans. Had it before been doubtful whether political engagements relative to war, were intended to be connedted with the proposed treaty, these doubts mud have disappeared en the receipt of this fecund letter from Mr. Genet: the intimation that the laws, of Franec which operated favourably to our trade wiih their dominions, would be repealed, in cafe we refufed or evaded the conclusion of a new treaty, cannot be reconciled with the belief, thai; this treaty was fought for from motives purely com mercial, 01 solely to enlarge and add profpe.iiy to our trade. CAMILLUS. \_Tv le concluded tc-mcrro