demagogue, the people's friend: they were content that he fhould become abfolute mafter of the nation-they even gloried in their chains.

Oliver Cromwell, who fubverted the Republic in England, and, with the title of Protector, invefted himfelf with more than kingly powers, began his career as a skiltal practitioner of all the cunning and vil lainous arts of a demagogue. "Carried (fays Hume) by his natural temper to an imperious and domineering policy, he yet knew, when necellary, to employ the moft profound diffimulation, the most oblique and refined artifice, the fen.blance of the greatest moderation and fimplicity.". Cromwell's refl'efs infatiable ambition was hid under a homely and fimple exterior. In his dress, he was plain; in his manners, unceremonious and coarle. He was profefledly a king-hater, a detefter of nobility, a mortal enemy to pomp and pageantry, a devoted friend to the equal rights of the people. Affecting to be a stranger to pride and haughtinefs, he mixed familiarly in the lowest companies, and let down his converfation to coarfe vulgarity and buffoonery. His public fpeeches were interlarded with praifes of himfelf; and his proteftations of attachment to the rights of the people were enforced with fobs & tears, & with the moft folemn appeals to heaven.

That arch-demagogue, that political juggler, in a fhort fpace of time, was able to grafp unlimited powers of fovereignty and after he had fwept away the whole fabric of popular government and eflablifhed a mitrary defpotifm in its flead, he received gratulations and affectionate addreffes from the people-as much as to fay, we humbly thank you, fir, for voluntarily taking upon voarfelt the care and trouble of becoming our mafter."

66

Political.

FROM THE EVENING POST.

LOUISIANA TREATY.

WE think we might juftly lay claim to fome little credit from our opponents for the manner in which we have conducted with relation to this Treaty; fo oppofite in every refped to theirs on a former occafion. But it is important that we should not he misunderstood. We do not mean that any merit arifes from our having abftained from the outrageous and shameful condu&t to which they at that time defcended. We cannot in confcience or in de. cency predicate a claim for praife for not doing what we have never spoken of but

The members who voted for this refolution were Meffrs. Brown, Burr, Butler, Edwards, Gunn, Hawkins, Martin, Rob.

The next ground of clamour was, that the prefident had not fubmitted to the Sen. ate all his intentions and inftructions, previously to the Envoy's departure, and taken their advice upon the whole. Mr. Charles Pinckney, now our ambaffador at the Court of Spain, thought proper to pro cure a meeting of the inhabitants ci Charleston on this occafion, in which he got up and made an elaborate addrefs to them. In the courfe of his fpeech, as

with deteftation. We do not, therefore, extol our moderation for not having organized a party throughout the United States to raife at a moment's warning in oppofi-infon, Taylor, and to complete the lift, tion to the treaty as foon as a furreptitious Munroe, the very man who is now the copy could be circulated through the me- Envoy Extraordinary on the prefent occa dium of the papers. We make no preten- fion. fions to derive the leaft fhare of approbation for not imitating a celebrated writer against the British treaty, who in his hurry to inflame and prepoffefs the populace, undertook to analyze its merits, before it arrived, and even begun with "The Treaty is faid to be arrived." We have not, indeed, commiffioned any demagogue to get together a rabble of the loweft of the populace in every fea port in the Union, and demand of them to vote that the treaty con. tains commercial flipulations ruinous to our intereft. We have had no citizens to mount a bench in the midft of a frantic 1, ed himself: croud, and move to "kick the treaty to" If this is the fact, that Mr. Jay's it. Hell." We have not had a thoufand forms of objections prepared before-hand, and fent round the country to appear as original in all the newípapers. We have not hired blackguards to affail with brickbats in the streets any man who dare fpeak his mind; ner have we procured one of the L-to march to the battery with a mob at his heels and burn the treaty, together with the negociator in effigy.-No; we have done nothing like this, and we claim no fort of credit for not having done it.

Again; we have not preffed our adverfaries in the manner that circumflances would juftly warrant on the fcore of their glaring inconfiflencies, with themselves, both in profeflion and actions, and which ftare them in the face on the public records. The firft ftep they took was the very flep they had reprobated in a former Prefident, both in the Senate and through the medium of their preffes. When it was propofed to the Senate by Gen. Washington to fend an envoy extraordinary to Great Britain to demard redrefs for the wrongs committed on our commerce, the democrats, aller attempting no less than feven different times to throw the fubje&t out by poftponement, at length moved the following Refolution:

"Refolved, That any communications to be made to the Court of Great Bri "tain, may be made through our minifler at that court with equal facility, and at "much lefs expence than by an Envoy "Extraordinary, and that fuch an appointment is at prefent inexpedient.'

66

* A leading citizen of Philadelphia, at a meeting, at the head of which were Dallas, M'Shean, Dr. Shippen, and Blair M lenachan, and of which the last was chairman, rofe and made the following motion: "I make a motion, that ev ery good citizen in this affembly kick this damned treaty to hell."

carefully collected from his own notd and in fpected by himfelf," he thus exprell

"ftructions for forming this treaty were "not fubmitted to the fenate, nor recciv. "ed their affent, he confidered it as a mat"ter of great importance indeed, and that

66

66

required the moft ferious attention of the people, how far the conflitution ever "intended to authorize the prefident to "enter into any negociation with a foreign

power, without his having firft fubmit"ted his intentions and infiructions to "the fenate and received their advice and affent, as well with refpect to the receffity of fuch negociation, as to the propriety of his inftructions.

66

66

66

66

His opinion clearly was, that the con"ftitution gave no power to the prefident to commence a negociation, without previously fubmiting his intentions and inftructions to the fenate, requiring their advice and receiving their affent. The "words by and with the advice and "confent of the fenate" admit no other explanation. He cannot be faid to ad"vile with them upon a measure, if be "forms a treaty without their knowledge, "and merely leaves to them the power of "determining whether they will ratify it

"The true construction of this article, and the ufe the people of the union will one day require to be made of it, is, if "the prefident thought a foreign negocia "tion neceffary, that he fhould previoufly confult the fenate, and be gov. erned by their opinion, how far it would be proper, and upon what con"ditions, to proceed in it; If a power was to be given to the prefident to enter "into negociations with foreigners, without acquainting the fenate with the na ture, or the connections he wishes to form, and he should merely leave to "them the power of ratifying or not, it muft at once, be feen, that the agency, which the conflitution intended to give

umns)" to be concluded."-In one place the elab. orate writer says, "I fear that in another century America will be destitute of fire-wood." As this does not appear to be a very forcible argument ei. ther for or against dry-docks, we would advise the writer to make use of it to prove that the timber growing in Louisiana may fetch more money for

fire-wood some centuries hence, than the whole

province has cost the United States.-In another place, the writer has improved on Mr. Jefferson's plan of dry-docking, and has produced “some evidence on the subject." This evidence is an old vessel which lies near Albany, keel upwards.' The writer (who is a lawyer, and understands such things) has examined this evidence, and he says, "she contradicts every thing" that has been said about the springing and cracking of vessels which are laid up-Now this old vessel is in the same condition as a ship in dry dock, excepting in a few particulars, viz.-First, instead of lying on dry sand, she lies in the water-second, instead of being under cover, she is exposed, at all times (to use our lawyer's "sea phrase") to all the grief of weather"-third, instead of lying on her bottom, she keel upwards."-Is not this an improvement on dry docks? Answer who can."

lies

Though it is no wise strange that multitudes of people, in the United States, should be totally ig norant of the geographical situation of Louisiana, it might have been expected that all the national legislators would have been well informed on this subject; yet it is a well attested fact, that Mr. B———— P-, a member of Congress, a short time before the commencement of its present session, asserted, in the presence of a number of people, with confi. dent assurance, and with all the appearance of bonest simplicity, that the vast territory called Louisia na lies on the East side of the Missisippi!!!

INFIDELITY IN THE BACK-GROUND.

We have heard much boasting of the progress of Deism and Infidelity in the city of New-York; and of the talents and influence of the blind (emphatically olind) PALMER. The following letter received by one of the editors from a country friend, now in New-York, will serve to shew that PALMER has but few followers, and these few are ashamed to be known:

"New-York, Nov. 14th, 1803.

SIR,

Having heard much faid of the Deift Palmer, I had the curiofity to attend at Snow's hotel laft evening, to hear him deliver a moral difcourfe, as he calls it; and although notice had been given of the meeting in the newfpapers of the city, but 54 perfons attended. And, what was fi more to the honor of the citizens, thofe who did attend, feemed to confider the wretch in that contemptible light, which his baleness fo well deferves. Inftead of crowding to the foremost feats, and filling them firit, the back feat was filled fift and the two next partly filled-the front feats

The subscriber acknowledges the receipt of several letters containing sketches of the character and conduct of T***** K*****. A transaction of his, a short time previous to his leaving Schenectady, is mentioned by all my correspondents; and it casts a deeper shade, if possible, on his character, than the late letter-affair. I have, however, very good reasons for not making use of the information in a public It is doubtless the duty of every person to detect and expose knavery; but it is not, therefore, necessary for every person who detects a knave, to reply to the abuse which the fellow may bestow ep on him. The annexed anecdote concludes all I have to say on the subject :-

manner.

An

Some years ago it was customary in Crancctieut to compel horse thieves (in addition to other punishment) to sit for a given time on a wooden horse, exposed to the jests and taunts of the crowd. old hardened rogue, having in consequence of some trick, arrived at this distinguished cicvation, while surrounded by a multitude of hissing boys, full to abusing the sheriff's deputy who had been instrumental in bringing him to punishment, calling him all the hard names of thief, villain, rascal, &c. &c. The deputy be it all, with much good natured pa. tience, till the jockey had exhausted his wĥcle stock of epithets, when he looked him in the face and calmly asked, "Does all this prove that you dul not commit the crime for which you are suffering punishment?"This question, it is said, called a blush into the face of the criminal.

Suery. What effect would the same question have upon T. K. ?

HARRY CROSWELL.

of it, however, may be partly counteracted; and our women may preferve their health, their vivacity and their beauty much longer than they do. There is no doubt, that a warmer dress, in the winter, than is ufually worn by our fernales, would meliorate their conftitution, and contribute to their happiness.

Congress of the Union.

INTERESTING DEBATE,

On Mr. R. GRISWOLD'S Resolution for calling on the President for the title to the province of Louisiana.

(CONTINUED.)

MR. J. RANDOLPH,

In oppofition to Mr. Grifwold, rofe and faid, I hope the houfe, will not agree to this refolution. I am well aware of the confequences which may refult from requiring papers from the executive before the bufinefs comes fully before the houfe. The gentleman who brings it forward, has varied a little in mentioning the word fubject. I know it is a favorite expreffion with the gentleman. The peculiar penchant, of fome gentlemen for this expreffion, will be an excufe for my varying my phrafeology. A commiffary has been fent from France to Louisiana, to do that which may be neceffary, and of which the gentleman is doubtful, and to tranfmit his proceedings to the prefident of the United States. It appears from this that provifion is making on the part of France, to put us in poffeffion of the territory, and of the citizens of Louifiana, as foon as we on our part ratify the treaty. There is therefore a neceffity for our making provifion to carry it into ef fect. There was in the famous treaty with Great Brtain, obje&tions, almost in numerable. Langauge of this kind was then held up in the houfe, it was faid we deteft your treaty. A treaty now very different from that of Londona treaty advantageous and popular is made with France. If we find it a good treaty, we furely ought to mak provifion for it. Shall we take an excep tion to our own title, when France he pledged her felt for its validity ? Shall we retufe to be put in poffeffion? Can any gentleman doubt that as far as France can

chafe upon the face of the treaty itself? Not a country, but his Catholic Majefty's promife to cede a country at a future time and on certain conditions.-Now as the treaty itfelf furnishes no evidence of title, we enquire for the evidence on this fubje&t? We afk, have the conditions of the treaty between France and Spain, ever been fulfilled? Have the fix months elapfed? If fo, let us fee the actual ceffion which Spain promifed to make. If not, has

bestow, we have a title? Can they doubt, but that France has not a title from Spain? Will our paffing an act to make provifion for carrying this treaty into effect impair our title? If it fhould hereafter appear that Spain has a title, and that ti tle is un-conveyed to France, it certainly will not. It appears to me that it will be little better than a mockery, to enquire at this time whether we have a title to this territory. So long as we are informed by the executive that we are to be put in pof-Spain ever waved the performance of those feffion, and that he has powers fo to do, we need not in the present inftance inquire farther. MR. LYON,

conditions, and thereby yielded the title to France? If Spain has ever done this, we afk for the evidence of it-Let us know whether Spain affents or diffents to our taking poffeffion of the country.

Was in favor of the refolution, but thought it had been brought forward in a This information, we defire, not for the difiefpectful manner. [We have not been purpose of ratifying or rejecting the treaable to learn at what period Matthew Ly.ty-this belongs to the prefident and fenate on first began to feel fqueamish on this alone, but for enabling us to judge, what head. Has the word difrefpect the fame laws are neceffary to be paffed, or whethmeaning now that it had when Mr. Lyon er any, for the government of the country. was formerly in Congrefs ?]

MR. GODDARD,

Next offered the following found and conclufive arguments.

but

The object to be obtained by feeing the papers requested to be laid before us, is to afcertain, whether France, from whom we have received a ceffion of Louisiana, had derived from Spain, any title to that country. Gentlemen fay, that it is unneceffary for us to know this-that France has declared in the treaty, that she has an "inconteftible title to the domain and to the poffeffion of the faid territory." Such indeed, are the words of the treaty, France has not left the matter here—If that declaration had been fimply made, there would have been more in the argument-but the treaty has gone farther, and told us, what that inconteflible title is! And what is it? All the title of France to the ceded territory is derived from the third article of her treaty with Spain, of the first October, 1800. That article is introduced into the treaty, now on our table, and is nothing more than a promise on the part of his Catholic majefty.- To cede to the "French republic fix months after the full "and entire execution of the conditions

66

66

and ftipulations herein, relative to his "royal highness the Duke of Parma, the "colony and province of Loupana," &c. Our treaty with Fiance then goes on to fay, "and whereas, in purfuance of the faid treaty, and particularly the third ar ticle, the French republic has ar incontef ible title," &c. So that France not only tells us that he has an incontest ble ti le to the ceded terri.ory; but the a'fo tells us what that inconteftible tre is-and it nothing but a promile on the of part Sain, to cede fix months after the tu fil ment, of certain conditions, relating to the Duke of Parma. What then do we pur

But it is faid that the treaty provides that a commiffary fhall be fent by France to the ceded territory, to receive its poffef. fion from Spain and tranfmit it to us.

It is therefore of no importance to us to know, whether France has any title? If the commiffary cannot receive poffeffion from Spain he cannot tranfmit it to us. But fuppofe the mandates of the First Conful of France, is now law to Spain, may not the time come, when a different flate of things will exift? And may we not, before we pay fifteen millions of dollars, inquire whether our title to the territory is found ?

But a gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph) has faid that there is a great difference between this cafe and that of the British treaty to which he has referred. In that cafe, fays the gentleman, the house of reprefentatives faid to the prefident, "fir, we deteft your treaty." But this trea ty, the gentleman fays, has been hailed by the country as a bleffed thing. I do not know fir, how the people of this country can have expreffed their approbation of this treaty. It is now for the first time, been made public, and its terms and conditions, have been heretofore unknown, and cannot fuppofe that the people of this country will confider it as a bleffed thing to pay fifteen millions of dollars for a country, to which they get no title.

Mefs. Smilie, Randolph, Elliot, and Nichelfon Ipoke agair ft the refolution, and Mr. Thatcher in favor of it, when

DR MITCHELL,

After a fpeech of fome length, in which he entered into a geographical defcription of the boundaries of Louifiana, &c. moved for a poftponement of the refuton.

MR. R. GRISWOLD,

I cannot belive the gentleman from New-York (D. Michel) is encus, in