Indiana Palladium, Volume 11, Number 28, Lawrenceburg, Dearborn County, 25 July 1835 — Page 1

M . m im - i ill . ' " i iii i. nM -m " - By I. V. Cllllcy & V. HI. Cole. aVriMS S3 i'-EJ 33t P CJ5.VT. DISCOUNT MADE ON ADVANCE, OR 101 ON HALF YEAULY PAYMENTS. VOIi. XI. ILAWRBmTCEeUf2II, OA,) SATURDAY, JUIY f59 1835. MO. S7 jiIijMiMZu I. iiMMiinrniiiinil n -nrrnirrTnigiTWwwwwM m i " nmiwiii nirinrMiiiimwBii i nnn i i TTrT"- h m irr m.. riwK-.,,.. - , m l-i,,-itgr .--rrff'fK,? ir otwi i i M....... r-fflr ir-"

OUR AFFAIRS WITH FRANCE. DCMRTJJENT OF STATE, July 1st, 1635. In ccv.fltleration of the iranr important interests conuortclwi:h the relations between the United States and France, the Pre blent lias directed the publication of tfie follow ing documents : Mr. Livingston to the Due dc Erolie. Legation or Tim U. Statf, ) Pari?, April 23th, 1??33. $ Hi r.. clloar-, the 'Dec lE Hr;cJLn, &c. Sir. About to return to my own country, I am unwilling to leave this without adding one mere effort to the many I have heretofore made to restore to both, that mutual good understanding, which their best interests require, nnd which probable event.- may interrupt, and perhaps permanently destroy. From the correspondence and acts of his Majesty's government, since the Message of the President of the U. States was known at Paris, it is evident that an idea is ertertained of making the fulfillment of the treaty of 1SJ1 dependent on explanations to be given of terms used in the Message, and of withholding payment of an acknowledged debt until satisfaction be given for a supposed indecorum for demanding it. The bare possibility that this opinion might be entertained and acted upon by His ?.Injsty's Government, renders it incumbent on mc ; to ttato explicitly what I unccrttand to bo the centiments of mine on this subject. Erroneous impressions arising from the want of a proper attention to the ttructuro of our Government, to the duties of the Chief Magistrate, to the principles it has adopted, and its strict adherence to tl em, in similar cases, might raise expectations which could never be realized and lead to measures destructive to all harmony between the parties. This communication, mad in full confidence that it 1 15 the with of his Majesty's (Iovcrnmcnt, rs it most sincerely is that of the President, to avoid all measures of that description, and it is hoped, therefore, that it will be received in the spirit by which it rs dictated thit of conciliation and peace. The form of cur Govcrrmcnt, and the functions of the President as a component part of it, have, in their relation to this subject, been sulliciently explained in my previous correspondence, especially in my letters to the Co in to, do lligny of the XJUth of January last. I ha vc, therefore, little to add to that part of my representation which is drawn from the form of our iovcrnmcnt, and the duties of the, President in administering it. If these are fully understood, the principles of action derived from them cannot Le mistaken. The President, as the chief executive power, inmt have a free and entire.y unfettered communica tion with the co-ordinate powers of Government. As the organ of intercourse n iih ether nations, he is the only source front which i knowledge rf our relation with them can be coin eyed to the legislative branches. It results from this, that the utmost, freedom from all restraint in the detail into which lie is obliged to enter, of international concerns, and of the measures in relation to them, is essential to the proper performance of this important part of his frictions, lie mu&t exercise them without having continually Left re him the fecr of offending the susceptibility of the powers whose conduct he is obliged to notice. In the performance of this duty ho is subject to public opinion, and ins own sense of propriety for, an indiscreet, to his constituents for a dangorcus, nnd to his constitutional judges, for an illegal exercise of the power; but to no other censure, foreign or domestic. Were any foreign powers permitted to scan the communications of the Executive, their complaints, whether real or affected, would involve tiro country in continual controversies; for, the right being acknowledged, it would be a duty to exercise it by dcaiandiifg a disavowal .f every phrase they might deem offensive, and an explanation of every word to which an improper interpretation could be given. The principle, therefore, has Icon adoj ted, that no foreign power has a right to ask for explanations cf any tiling that the President, in the exercise of his functions, thinks proper so communicate to Congress, or of any course ho may advice them to pursue. This rule is net applicable to the Government of the U. S. alone, but, in common with it, to all those in which the constitutional powers are distributed into different branches. No such nation, desirous of avoiding foreign influence or foreign interference in its councils; no such nation, possessing a, due sense of its dignity and independence, ran long submit, to the consequences of other interference. Wlren these are felt, as they soon will be, nil must-mute in repelling it, and acknowledge that the U. Jtatosraro contending in the cause common to them alL,-n:nd more important to the liberal (iovcrnmcnt of Europe than even to themselves; for it is too obvious to escape the slightest attention that the " monarchies of Europe, by which they are eurround- - cd, will have all the advantage cf this supervision rf the domcslracouncils cf their neighbors, without being subject to it themselves. It is true that in the Representative Governments of Europe, Executive communications to Legislative Hodie., have not the extension that is given to them in the United States, and that they are, therefore, le.-s liable to attack on that quarter, but they must not imagine themselves safe. In the opening address, guarded as it commonly is every proposition made by the Ministry, every resolution of cither Chamber, will offer occasions for the jealous interference of national punctilio, for all occupy the panio rrrounds. No intercommunication of the different branches ot Government will be sa!o, aim even the courts of justice will afford no sanctuary for freedom of decision and of debate; and the susceptibility of foreign Powers must be consulted in nil the Departments of Government. Occasions for intervention itr the affairs of other countries are but too numerous at present without opening another door to encroachments; and it is nonswer to the argument to say that no complaints will be made but for reasonable cause, and that of this, the nation complained of being the judge, no evil can ensue. But this argument concedes the right of examining the communications in question, which is denied: allow it, and you will have frivolous as well ns grave complaints to answer, and must not only heal the wounds of a just rational pride, but apply a rernedv to those of a morbid susceptibility. To show that mv fear of the progressive nature of the encroachments is not imaginary, I pray leave to call vour Excellency's attention to the enclosed report v.wn thn SVrrctnrv of .State to the President, it is DiTered for illustration, not for con plaint. 1 am in ttrurted, to make none, Because the (Iovcrnmcnt of Trance has taken exception to the President's r.ol.i.tr tnessarre. the Charge d'Affairs of Prance thinks 7t his duty to protest against a special communication, and'to point out the partieul tr p issi-p-o in a correspondence cf an Aracriean Minister with his own Government, to tho publication of which ho objects. If the principle 1 contest is just, tho Charge d'Affairs right; he baa done his iluty as a vigilant supervisor of t.ae President's corteepondence. If the principle la admitted, every diplomatic eent at Washington will do the tame, and we thall have twenty cen6ora of tho correspondence of

the government and of the public press. If the principle is correct, every communication which the President makes, in relation to our foreign affairs, either to the Congress or the Public, ought in prudence to be previously submitted to these ministers, in order to avoid disputes, and troublesome and humiliating explanations. If the principle be submitted to, neither dignity nor independence is left to the nation. To submit even to a discreet exercise of such a privilege, would be troublesome and degrading, and the inevitable abuse of it could not be borne. It must, therefore, bo resisted at the threshold, and its entrance forbidden into the sanctuary cf domestic consultations. But, whatever may be the principles of other governments those of the United States are fixed the right will never be acknowledged, and any attempt to enforce it, will be repelled by the undivided energy of the nation. I pray ycur Excellency to observe, that my argument does not deny a right to all foreign powers of taking proper exceptions to the governmental acts and language of another. It is to their interference in its proceedings, while yet in an inchoate state, that wc object. Should the President do an official executive act, affecting a foreign power, or use exceptionable language in addressing it through his minister or through theirs, should a law be passed injurious to the dignity of another nation, in all these, and other similar cases, a demand for explanation would be respectfully received, and answered in the

manner that justice and a regard to the dignity of the complaining nation would require. After stating these principles, let mc add that they have not only been theoretically adopted, but that they have been practically asserted. On two former occasions, exceptions of the same nature were taken to the President's Message by the government of Prance, and in neither did they produce any other explanations than that derived from tiio nature of our Government, and this seems on those occasions to have been deemed sufficient; for in both cases the objections were virtually abandoned. One. when Messrs. Marshall, (Jerry and Pinkney, were refused to be received; and again, in the negotiation between Prince Polignac and Mr. Rives, in the former case, although tho message of the President was alleged as the cause of the refusal to receive the Ministers, yet, without any such explanation, their sccessors were honorably accredited. In the latter case, the allusion in the message to an apprehended collision, was excepted to; but the reference made by 3Ir. Rives to the constitutional duties of the President seems to have removed the objection. Having demonstrated that the United States cannot, in any case, permit their Chief Magistrate to be questioned by any Foreign Government, in relation to his communications with the co-ordinate branches, of his own, it is scarcely necessary to consider the cape of such an explanation being required as the condition on which the fulfillment of a treaty or any pecuniary advantage was to depend. That terms of such a proposition need only bo stated to show that it would bo not only inadmissible, but rejected as offensive to the nation to which it might be addressed. In this case it would be unnecessary, as well as inadmissible. Franco has already received, by the voluntary act of the President, every explanation which the nicest sense of of national honor could desire. That wh .ch could not have been given to a demand, that which can never be given on the condition now under discus sion, a fortunate succession of circumstances, as I shaH proceed to show, has brought about. Earnestly desirous of restoring the good understanding between the two nations, us soon as a dissatisfaction with the President's Message was shown, I suppressed every feeling which the mode of expressing that dissatisfac tion Was calculated to produce, nnd without waiting for instruction, I hastened, on my own responsibility, to make a com munication to your predecessor in office on the sub ject. In this, under tnc reserve that the President could not be called on for an explanation, I did in fact give one, that I thought would have removed all injurious impression.. This is the first of the fortunate circumstance? to which I have alluded fortunate in being made before any demand implying a right to require it; fortunate in its containing, without any knowledge of the precise parts of the message which gave offence, answers to all that have snce come to mv knowledge. I can easily conceive that the communication of which I speak, made as I expressly stated without previous authority from the government, might not have had the effect which its matter was intended to produce, but it has since (as I have now the honor to inform your Excellency) received from the President his full and unqualified approbation; but it is necessary to add that this was given before he had any intimation of an intention to affarh it as a condition to the payment of the indemnity due by the treaty; given not only when he was ignorant of any such intent, but when he was informed by France that she intended to execute the treaty, and saw by the law which was introduced that "it was not to be fettered by any such condition. Thus, that is already done, by a voluntary act, which could not have been done when required as a right, still less when made, what will unquestionably in the United States be considered degrading, as a condition. At this time, sir, I would, for no consideration, enter into the details I then did. If I could now so far forget, what tmder present circumstances would be due to the dignity of my country, I should bo disavowed, and deservedly disavowed, by the President. It is happy, therefore, I repeat, that the good feeling of my country was evinced, in the man ner 1 have stated, at the only time when it could be done with honor; and though present circumstances would forbid my making the communication I then did, they do not prevent my referring to it, for the purpose of showing that it contains, as I have stated it does, every thing that ought to have been satisfactory. Actual circumstances enable me to do this now; future events, which I need not explain, may hereafter render it improper; and it may be nugatory, Unless accepted as satisfactory before the occurrence of those events. Let it be exaurined with the care which the imyortance of giving it a true construction requires. The objections to the Message, as far as I can understand, for they have never been specified, are, Frst, that it impeaches the good faith of His Majesty's Government. Secondly, that it contains a menace cf enforcing the performance of the treaty by reprisals. On the lir&t head, were I now discussing the terms of the message itself, it wnuld be easy to show that it contains no such charge. The allegation that the stipulations of a treaty have not been - complied with, engagements made by Ministers have not been tuitilleu, cruciied in respe-ttul terms can never be deemed offensive, even when expressly directed to the party whose infractions are complained ot; and, consequently, can ncver-jive cause for a demand of explanation; otherwise, it is evident that no consideration of national injuries cmld overtake place. The Message, critically examined on this point, contains nothing more than such in enumeration of the cau3es of complaint. As to ita terms, the most fastidious disposition cannot fasen on one that could be excepted to. The first refasal and subsequent delay aro complained of, but no unwor

thy motives for either arc charged or insinuated. On the whole, if I were commissioned to explain and defend this part of the message, I should say, with the conviction of truth, that it is impossible to urge a complaint in milder or more temperate terms; but I am not so commissioned. I am endeavoring to show that, not only every proper explanation is given in my letter to Mr. De Jligny, of the 2Gth January last, but that in express terms, declares that the sincerity of his Majesty's Government, in their desire to execute the treaty, was not doubted. Suffer me to draw your Excellency's attention to the passage alluded to. In discussing the nature of Mr. Serrurier's engagement; I say "it is clear, therefore, that more was required than the expression of a desire on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, to execute the treaty; a desire, the sin eerily of xchich teas never doubt ed bat which might he unavailing, as its accomplishment dejiends on the vote of the Chambcrs.'', Again in speaking of the delay which occurred in the month of December, I say, "It is referred to, I presume, in order to show that it was produced by a desire, on the part of His 3Iajestys Ministers, the better to assure the passage of the law; of this sir, I never had a doubt, and immediately so advised my Government, and informed it, as was the fact, that I perfectly acquiesced in the delay.' Thus it must be evident, not only that no offensive charge of ill faith is made in the Message, but that, as is expressly stated in the first extract, full justice was done at Washington, to the intentions of the French Government. While the delay is complained of as wrortg, no improper motives are attributed to the Government in causing it. Again, sir, the whole tenor of that part of my letter which relates to the execution of the promise made by 3lr. Serrurier, while it asserts the construction put upon it by the President to bo a true one, and appeals to ftets and circumstances to support that construction; yet it avoids charging the French Government with any intentional violation, attributing their delny to an erroneous construction only; for in the letter, (f again quote literally,) I say, "I have entered into this detail with the object of showing that although the Ministers of the King, under the interpretations which they seem to have given to Mr. Summer's promise, may have considered themselves at liberty to defer the presentation id' the law until the period which they thought would best secure its success, yet the President interpreting that promise differently, feeling that in consequence of it he had forborne to do what might be strictly called a duty, and seeing that its performance had not taken place, could not avoid stating the whole case clearly and distinctly to Conyress." Thus Sir. the President

stating the acts of which he thought his country had ! a right to complain, does not make a siiorJo imputa- i tion of improper motive, and to avoid all misconstruction, he offers a voluntary declaration that none was intended. The part of the ?dessage which seem? to have caused the greatest sensation in France, is that in w hich, after a statement of the causes of complaint, it enters into 11 consideration of the measures to j obtain redress, which, in similar cases, are s ine- i tioned by the laws of nations. The complaint seems ! to be, that in a discussion of the efficacy and convenience of each, a preference was given to reprisals, considered as a remedial, not as a hostile measure; and this had been construed into a menace. If any explanations were necessary on this head, they are'given in the message itself. It is there expressly disavowed, and the power and high character of France are appealed to, to show that it never could be induced by threats to do what its sense of justice denied. If the measure to which I have more than once alluded should be resorted to, and the humiliation attending a compliance with it could be endured, ami if it were possible, under such circumstances, to give an expdanation, what more could be required than is contained in the Message itself, that it was not intended as a menace? If the measure to which I allude should be adopted, and submitted to, what would His Majesty's Government require! The disavowal of any intent to influence the Councils of France by threats! They have it already. It forms a part of the very instrument which caused the offence, and I will not do them the injustice to think that they could form the offensive idea of requiring more. The necessity of discussing the nature of the remedies for the nonexocution of the treaty, the character and spirit in which it was done, are explained in my letter so often referred to and I pray your Excellency, to consider the concluding part of it, -beginning with the quotation I have last made. Rut if I wanted any argument to show that no explanation of this part of the Message was necessary, or could be required, I should find it in tho opinion, certainly a just one, expressed by his Majesty's Ministers, that the recommendation of the President not having been adopted by the other branches of the Government, it was not a national act, and could not be complained of as such. JNay, in the note presented by Mr. Serrurier to the Government at Washington, and the measures which it announces, (his recall and the offer of my passports) the Government of His Majesty seems to have done all that they thought its dignity required; for they, at the same time, declare that the law providing tor the payment will be presented, but give no intimation of any previous condition, and annex none to the bill which they present. The account of dignity being thus declared, by this demonstration, to be settled, it cannot be supposed that it will again be introduced as a setoff against an acknowledged pecuniary balance. Defore I conclude my observations on this part of the subject, it will be well to enquire in what lin-ht exceptions are taken to this part of the message whether as a menace generally, or to the particular measure proposed. In the first view, every measure that a Government having claims on another declares it must pursue, if those claims are not allowed, (whatever may be the terms employed,) is a menace. It is necessary, and not objectionable, unless couched in offensive language. It is a fair declaration of what course the party making it intends to pursue, and, except incases where pretexts are wanted for a rupture, have rarely been objected to, even when avowedly the act of the nation; not, a3 in this case, a proposal made by one branch of its Government to another. Instances of this are not wanting, but need not be here enumerated. One, howevr, ought to be mentioned, because it was intimately tonnecled with the subject now under discussion. While the commerce cf the United States was suffering under the aggressions of the two most powerful nations of the world, the American Government, in this 6ense of the word, menaced them both. It passed a law in express terms, declaring to them that unless they ceased their aggressions, America would hold no intercourse with them; that their ships should be seized if they ventured into American ports; that the productions of their soil or industry should be forfeited. Here was an undisguised menace, in clear unequivocal terms, and of course, according to the argument against winch I I . . 1 1 1 1 1.1 .1l:t contenu, neiiner v ranee nor ljnyianu comu uenurate, under its pressure, without dishonour. Yet the Emperor of France, certainly an unexceptionable judge of what the dignity of his country required, did accept the condition, did repeal the Berlin and Milan Decrees, did not make any complaints of tho

act as a threat, though it called it an injury. Great Britain, too, although at that time on no friendly terms with the United States, made no complaint that her pride was offended her Minister on the spot even made a declaration that the obnoxious orders were repealed. It is true it was a disavowal, but the disavowal was accompanied by no objections, to the law as a threat. Should the objection be to the nature of the remedy proposed, and that the recommendation of reprisals is the offensive part, it would be easy to show that it stands on the same ground with any other remedy; that it is not hostile in its nature, that it ha3 been resorted to by France to procure redress from other Powers, and by them against her, without producing war: Rut such an

argument is not necessary. This is not the case of I a national measure, either of menace or action it is a recommendation only of one branch of Govern mcnt to another: and France has itself hown that a i nronosul of this naturo could not be noticed as an of- ! fence. In tho year 1803 the Senate, of the United States annexed to the bill of non-intercourse a sec tion which not only advised but actually authorized the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal against both France and England, if the one did not repeal the Berlin and Milan Decrees, and the other did not revoke the Orders in Council. This mi not luvuau uiu vrueia in ouu iu . i 11 s , clause was not acceded to by the Representatives, 1 ... . J , r-. . I but it was complete as tne act or tiie renate: yet neither France nor England complained of it as an indignity both Powers had Ministers on the spot, and the dignity of neither seems to have been offended. If the view I have now taken of the subject be correct, I have succeeded in conveying to His Majesty's Ministers the conviction I myself feel, that no right exists in any foreign nation to ask explanations of, or even to notice any communications between the different branches of our Government; that to admit it even in a single instance would be a dar.gerous precedent, and a derogation from national dignity; and that in the present instance an explanation that ought to be satisfactory has been voluntarily given; 1 have then demonstrated that any measure founded on such supposed right, is not only inadmissible, but is totally unnecessary, and consequently, that His Majesty's Ministers may at once declare that previous explanations given by the Minister of the United States, and subsequently approved by the President, had satisfied them on the subject of the Message. The motives of mv Government during the whole course 01 uns controversy nave oeen misunuerstoou or not propei ly appreciated, and the question is dai- I ly changing its character. A negotiation, entered into for pecuniary compensation to individuals, in volved no positive obligation on their Government to prosecute it to extremities. A solei mn treaty, ratified by the constitutional organs of the two Pow ers, changed the private into a public right. The Government acquired by it a perfect right to insist on its stipulations. All doubts as to their justice seem now to have been removed; and every objection to the payment of a debt acknowledged to be just, will be severely scrutinized by the impartial world. What character will be given to a refusal to pay such a debt on the allegation, whether well or ill founded, of an offence to national honor, it does not become to me to say. The French nation is the last that would ever appreciate national honor by any number of millions it could withhold, ns a compensation for any injury offered to it. The United States, commercial as they are, are the last that would settle such an account. The proposition I allude to would be unworthy of both, and it is sincerely to be hoped that it will never be made. To avoid the possibility of misapprehension, I repeat, that this communication is made with the single view of apprising his Majesty's Government of the consequences attending a measure, which, without such notice, they may be inclined to pursue; that, although I am not authorized to state what measures will be taken by the United States, yet I speak confidently of the'prinoiplcs they have adopted, and have no doubt they will never be abandoned. This is the last communication I shall have the honor to make. It is dictated by a sincere desire to restore a good intelligence, which seems to be endangered by the verv means intended to consolidate it. Whatever be the result, the United States may appeal to the world to bear witness, that, in the assertion of the rights of their citizens and the dignity of their Government, they have never swerved from the respect due to themselves, and from that which they owe to the Gov ernment of France. I pray your excellency to receive the assurance of high consideration, with which I have the honor to be, your most obedient servant, EDWARD LIVINGSTON. Jlr. Cobbett. The following is Mr. Cobbctt's reply to a circular sent him, requesting his co-operation in the getting up of the dinner lately iven to honl J. Riiss.ll : Uolt Coirt, 3Iarch 13. Gentlemen, I do not know of any point in my character, or any event in toy life, which could justify you in expecting that 1 would join in the scheme set on foot under your auspices lor glorifying the Duke's son who rules the Opposition in the present House of Commons. A dinner to Lord John Russell Heaven protect and save U3 all I will seo him d d first. As you do not set forth in your letter any specific service or merit of the gentleman on which the honor intended for him i3 founded, I am at liberty to suppose that the station which be ha3 taken possession of in the bouse, by Ins own appointment, is the foundation of his feed. He is to be feasted, because he has taken upon himself tiie task of brinfiinif the Vhig3 again into office. Fur this reason, and to strengthen ami animate him in Ins mighty undertaking, I om called upon to leave my happy fire side, and throw away a pound, or perhaps two, upon a reeking mess, amidst infernal noise and clatter, in the ill ventilated, and, in all other respects, uncomfortable hall of the Freemasons Tavern' Now, gentlemen, what a confounded old fool you must take mc for. I can tell you what perhaps you hive no suspicion of. If tho dinner were desigited for my self, and in compliment to mo alone, .and if you and the rest of you were to be at the whole expense of it, my pocket untouched and free, I -would not take it: I might think you, but I would not accept your invitation, for I live better at Normandy Tything, and far more sumptuously even in Bolt Court, where I sojourn during the actual sitting of Parliament, thin I should at your greasy tavern dinner. I have sucking pigs fattened with Indiancorn which require no tnastification. You need but put a leg or an arm between your juvri, and it will melt away of itslf into your stomach. I have turnips, at this season ofthi year wrong which cut like marrow; I have chickens spoonfed with my own meal and asparagus reared in my own garden, to which I defy the King's table to show a match; and therefore, I repeat, gentlemen, that if the dinner which you propose to give, and have tho modesty to ask mo to assist you in giving, to Lord John

Russell were intended for myself I should find great touble and inconvenience to accept it. But no you have not the slightest notion of offering me a dinner, you never thought of such a thing before I went to Newgate or before I fled to America, or on my return, before the reform bill, when it received the royai assent. You never dreamt of paying the smallest homage or deference to me, never, never, never. I should not complain of this, because it is tho lot of all the benefactors of mankind; and why should I claim exception from that fate to be treated with ingratitude during their lifetime. But it is vexatious when a nation pluming itself on its judgment and discretion, goes out of lis way to raise the trophy of beef and mutton to a sort of

1 -. IT .T T" "1 " a Piii:cai jactc me uiant ivmer. Ana whom are you going to feast? One of the Poor Laws Amendmerit I5sll Lords. Just think ot that. Think ot the unblushing profligancy of such a thing. Would it not be much better, think you, to feast the poor? To give dinners to those whom the whig government, of which this Lord John Russel was one, condemned to perpetual starvation? Give him a i- j it i , 1 K... ,7 V ' , " , 1 7 , i- T TV , li-vr Iiim find n its siinnnrlfr? in lhf l!i:rrf nnn tnnrtli for him and all its supporters to the third and fourth generation. But gentlemen though I'll not dine with you, I'll tell you what Pil do Fil give you nothing to buy meat or bread to cram your idol with; but I'll help your cookery. I have a gridiron, for which I have no longer eny need; it was provided for a special occasion now past and gone, but has never yef, been used; I will give it to you, and you shall place it in the middle of Smithfield. For fuel I recommend you to take the poor laws amendment bill a foresaid, and Peel's bill, and the Irish coercion act, and this very Lord John lussell'd relief bill, ami if these are not enough you may throw in ono of my Lord Brougham's acts to make a blaze. When you h ive kindled a large fire, and the bara of the gridiron are of a proper heat, then take tho lit le man and broil him alive upon the heap. Let O'Connell blow the bellows and Whittle Harvey ply the poker. When the flame languishes, Lord Stanley may throw in a little of the oil of conciliation to revive it; and as soon as Lord John is dressed to your liking, cut him up and distribute him limb by limb, to the poor, whom Ins party have gioumi, 1 robbed, cast out and ruiued. One word more; be sure and send to Woburn Abby for a fat ox. Take it it is public property. The Parliament, in days of despotism, took the ground on which it grazes from the church, and gave it to Ilusscll the brewer. They bad nomoro right to do so than you have to go into my farmstead and take mother Marshall's fat hen off tho roost. Therefore make restitution to tho land. Take tho Bedford ox and roast it whole. From the Philadelphia Inquirer. DcatJi of Chief Justice Marshall. It is with emotions of the deepest regret that vVc announce to our readers that Jonx Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ofihe United States, departed this life at half past six o'clock yesterday afternoon, .-a the Boarding House ol Mrs. Crim, Walnut street below 4th, Philadelphia. This painful intelligence cannot but produce a strong sensation throughout the whole country. Mr. Marshall was born in Virginia, on the 24th of September, 1755; and, as early as the Summer of 17 75, received a commission as Lieutenant of a Company of Minute men, nnd was shortly after engaged in the battle of the Great Bridge, where the British troops, under Lord Dunmore, were repulsed with great gallantry. lie was subsequently engaged in the memorable battles of Bradywine, Germantown, and Monmouth; and, in 17S0 obtained a license to practice law. lie returned to the army shortly after, and continued in the service until the termination of Arnold's invasion. In the spring of 17S2 he was elected a member of the Slate Legislature, and in the autumn of tho same year, a member of the Executive Council, and married in 1783. In 1788 he was elected as Representative of the city of Richmond in the Legislature of Virginia, and continued to occupy that station, for the years 1789, 1790, 1791, and upon the recall of Mr. Monroe, as Minister to France. President Washington solicited Mr. Marshall to accept the appointment as his successor, but he respectfully declined. In 1799 he was elected and took his seat in Congress, and in 1600 he was appointed Secretary of War. On the thirty-first day of January, 1801 he became Chief Justice of the Supremo Court cf tho United States, which distinguished station he continued to fill with unsullied dignity, and pre-eminent ability, until the close of his mortal career. His biographer eloquently observes "What indeed strikes us as the most remarkable in his wholo character, even more than his splendid talents, is tho entire consistency of his public life and principles. There is nothing in either which calls for apology or concealment. Ambition never seduced him from his principles popular clamour never deterred him from the strict performance of his duty. Amid the extravagancies of party spirit, he stood with a calm and steady inflexibility, neither bending to tho pressure of adversity, nor bounding with the elasticity of success. He lived such a3 man should live, by and with his principles. If wo were templed to say in one word in what he excelled all other men, we should say, in wisdom; in tho union of that virtue, which ripened under the hardy discipline? of principles, with that of knowlcdgo which constantly sifted and refined its old treasures, and as constantly gathered new. The Constitution, since its adoption owes more to him than to any other single mind, for its true interpretation and indication. Whether it lives or perishes, his exposition of its principles will be an enduring monument to his fame, so long as solid reasoning, profound analysis, and sober views of government shall envito the leisure, or command uio attention of statesmen and jurists." He died calmly and tranquilly, surrounded by three of his children and many valuable friends. The blow was not unexpected, and ho was fully prepared. But a few days smco he penned an inscripfion for his tombstone. Indian Corn. In many parts of Ohio, particularly the flat uplands, the corn crops are entirely destroyed by tho rains, which prevented i:s being worked. In other places materially injured. Where the soil has been of tho nature as to admit of working, tho croos of corn look very fine end promising. Ohio Farmer