Balance Closet.

Cheetham's New-York Watch-Tower, has recently come to hand in an entire new dress-in such a strange habit, in fact, that it was almost as much unknown as the notorious swindler who disguised himself by putting on a clean shirt. But Cheetham has been cautious, while altering his manner, not to improve his matter. Falshoods appear in the columns of the Watch Tower, as numerous as usual, with no other difference, than that they shew a face more bold.

In a note to a long electioneering publication, Cheetham attacks, with much asperity," Mr. Scott Smith," (James S. Smith, Esq) denouncing him as an enemy to the present administration and a friend to Mr. Burr; and censuring him for having voluntecre! in defence of the junior editor of the Balance, on his late trial.

After declaring that Mr. Smith is "insignificant in every thing but mischief," Cheetham asserts that he was, during the revolution, a British officerthat, after the peace, he sailed for England with the British feet, pouring out upon the United States a torrent of most fervent curses"--that he shortly after returned, with half-pay as a British officer, which he continued to draw until lately.

This may be true, or it may not; for it should be observed that Cheetham's word goes but a little way towards establishing a fact. But, admitting for a moment, that it is true, we beg the reader to recollect that this same half pay officer has been

until lately," very lately, a friend and favorite of Governor Clinton, and the whole democratic party. The friendship that subsisted between him and Governor Clinton, was not that common-place political intimacy which grows out of a congeniality of sentiment; but they seemed to enjoy each other's confidence, in a degree by no means common, both in public affairs and in private concerns — Governor Clinton employed this same half-pay officer as an agent for transacting the business of his patent with his tenants in Du.chess county; and for various other kinds of business, the emoluments of which, we presume, did not fall far short of the half-pay of a British officer. Under the administration of Governor Clinton, Mr. Smith was appoint. ed a captain of light horse, notwithstanding he was, at the same time, (according to Cheetham) receiving half-pay as a British officer." That Mr. Smith was not only a favorite of Governor Clinton, but of the whole party, will appear from his having been on all occasions, while he resided in Duchess, a principal leader of the band at elections, a standing committee man, and a distinguished speaker at electioneering meetings; and from his having been twice a candidate, on the democratic ticket, for a sea in the state leg lature. Now, whether Mr. Smith received all the honors of democracy, be cause ne "was, during the revolution, a British oficer," & & &c or whe her it was merely be.

་་

cause he was (according to the Watch Tower)

insgudicant in every thing but mischief," we leave Geeam, and his master Cn to decide, while we pass on o anther pare f his; ubi cation After mentioning, in his habitual manner, the

That Mr Smith voluntarily offered an able and ingenious argument in favor of giving the truth in evidence on the trial of the junior editor, is true; but that he advocated defamation is false. His motives for doing what he did, as avowed by himself, were highly laudable. At any rate, he may claim the merit of consistency, which has been forfeited by most of his party. He cannot be accused of de serting his principles, although he may have turned his back on the Clintonian faction. He frankly declared, that as he formerly condemned the Sedition law, which permitted the truth to be given in ev idence, he could not now honestly advocate the com. mon law doctrine of the greater the sruth, the greater the libel-Mr. Smith is not the only democrat that has had candor, honesty and consistency enough to avow the same sentiment; but a large portion of his party have changed from the most clamorous bawlers for the liberty of the press, to your thoroughgoing advocates of gags and shackles-star-chambers and inquisitions.

But, reader, we hasten to that part of Cheetham's note, which most particularly deserves your attention. A remark which fell from Mr. Smith, in the course of his argument, on the trial above-men tioned, calls forth all the ire of the Clintonian Organ. This single remark (Cheetham tells us) is sufficient to convince every body that Mr. Smith no longer belongs to their party; and we confess that, for once, we are of Cheetham's opinion-for the re mark consists of the following plain English words: An Executive without virtue is unfit for his flation.'

66

Now Cheetham takes this as the clearest proof that Mr. Smith is opposed to the present administration The sentiment has so much the quality of Mr. Burr's toast; "An union of all horest men," that Cheetham and the Clintonians cannot bear it. V hat! Mr. Smith preted to be a republican, and utter such an anti-democratical sentiment! A republican! and hoid that "an executive withour virtue is unfit for his sta tion!" Down with such republicanism, says Cheetham Mr. Smith has joined the enemy! He is a dangerons mar! He thinks rulers ought to be virðu. ous! He must be a federalist, or a Burrite. Fr democrats h Id that an executive withou: virtue, is not ur fit for his station." Cheetham asks, What repub ican would be found in Mr. Smith's disgraceful situation ?" (while delivering the above senti meat,) and then he answers, NOT ore!"

Let us seriously ask the reader, what must be

CAPTAIN HOLT'S BRAVERY.

The captain, feeling hurt by some cutting truths concerning the militia affair, which had been told by a correspondent of the Gazette, threatened Mr. Stoddard, in high terms, and cautioned him against admitting such communications-But hold-we will give the Captain's own language :

66

I now feriously warn you, Mr. Stod"dard, that although a fentiment of regard has hitherto withheld my hand, the next (being the third) offence of this nature "received from you fhall be attended with confequences which you fhall feel in the most fenfible and lafting manner," After such warnings as these, who could have thought that Mr. Stoddard would have the presumption to again mention the captain in his paper? Would a prudent man dare to rouse the resentment of such a valorous hero as Captain Holt Only think! astonished reader, that " hand" which had been" hitherto withheld," was raised aloft, to deal forth upon the head of the offender" consequences" both sensible and lasting." And yet, Mr. Steddard was not intimidated. He could not be seen to remble. He even trod on the very toes of the Captain's forbearance-for, in his next paper, he committed that third offence" for which he was to be so severely punished! And do you ask what was the " consequence "Why, truly, the Captain bore it all like a philosopher: But in his 1 st paper, he says, that Mr. Stoddard" must not presume too much on his patience, for it shall not always screen hm," &c-Under the indefinite terms of too much and not always, the Captain finds a retreat for his meanness and cowardice-Fie, man, fie-"there's no terror in your threats "

The dry-deck-monger, noticed in our last, has filled a colunin of the last Bee, with the concl fion of his whimsical disquisition. The first thing that occurs in this last column, worthy of attention, is an assertion of the writer, that he has " carefully ex amined posts and fences taken from the bottom of vessels which have been standing for a number of years." He does not inform us of the size of the vessel from which these fences were taken.

He next teils of the vital parts or iron work of a ship." We know not what he means by the "vital parts." The sails may be most properly termed so, because they conduce, more than any thing else, to the life of the ship. But who would think of a ship with iron sails?

While encountering an objection in the course of his essay, the writer (who, by the bye, calls him-elf" Nautilus") says, "To this an answer comes a volunteer." As we find nothing else worthy of particular notice, we leave Nautilus" and his "volunteer" to drown in their dry-dock.

"

in a fimilar cafe with Great Britain. When we have decided whether we shall take poffeffion of this territory or not, it will be the time for the gentleman to make thefe enquiries. Another ingenious gen. tleman, Mr. Goddard, fays, that though the ipfe dixit of the First Conful is now a law to Spain, yet, he afks, how long may it continue fo? This was the very reafon why Great Britain fo long withheld from treating with the Republic of France. There is no confidence to be placed in them, they may make war again, faid the British minifters. So Spain may take poffeffion again when the is ftrong. This is the gentleman's argumentWe may now take poffeffion-then Spain in her turn takes poffeflion from us. I do not understand fuch arguments. The Prefident has fent us his meffage, and this is all that is at prefent neceffary. If gentlemen can fhew a diffent on the part of Spain, then it will be time enough to enter with an armed force. I hope the committee will immediately proceed to carry the Treaty into effect, and I fhall vote to that effect.

Dr. Mitchell here offered to withdraw his motion.

MR. GODDARD,

ed to the United States, I then was, and truft I always fhall be, ready to redrefs, whether they arife upon the banks of the Miffiffippi, or in any other quarter of the union-judging from the little information which was then afforded us, I fhould have been willing to this end to have taken poffeffion of the Island of Orleans, until our rights were reftored, altho' no propofition of that kind was before us-But, for this, is a wifh to involve the country in war to be afcribed to me? And that for the purpose of acquiring territory not our own? No Sir, I repeat it, no difpofition to my knowledge, was ever entertained of acquiring the Territory now ceded to the United States by force, as the gentle. man feems to infinuate-The war-whoop has been raifed and a difpofition to plunge the United States into war, and acquire this country, per fas aut nefas, afcribed to us; but I did not expect to have feen countenance given to it here--I then felt and now feel the imputation to be unjuft, at the fame time I am ready to acknowledge the existence of a difpofition to redrefs the wrongs of my country-But I admit the navigation of the river Miffiffippi to be vastly important, that great facrifices. ought to be made to fecure it to the Unit ed States-and fuppofe I admit for argu ment fake, that we were difpofed to go to war to fecure it-What follows? A dif ferent courfe has been purfued-A Treaty is now prefented to us, by which it is faia Louifina is ceded to the United Statesare we precluded from enquiring whether any title has been acquired to the ceded country? Are we not to be permitted to enquire, whether the feeds of future war are not fown by this ceflion? Are we fir, to pay fitteen millions of dollars for the purchafe and fill go to war with Spain for the poffeflion of the country ? May we not defire gentlemen to give us, or peace? If the country must be had, let us either acquire it by force, or if we pur chafe it, let us have the peaceable poffef fion. We requeft documents, if any there are, which will prove to us that France, of whom we have purchafed, had any title.

Next role and faid, As I had no right to demand, I had no reafon to expect a compliment from the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Randolph.) But altho' the gentleman is not willing to allow, to the remarks which I had the honor to fubmit to the houfe, when I was firft upon this question, the credit of ingenuity, yet as he has feen fit to bestow no fmall attention to them, I trust the house will indulge me a few moments, while I reply-The gentleman has been pleafed to enquire atter the hoftile fpirit, which actuated me and my political friends on a former occafion--when this fubject was under confideration. To what does the gentleman allude? Was there ever, fir, a propofition before the house to acquire Louifiana by force? Is it in the recollection of any gentleman that this country was deemed to important to the United States, that any members of this houfe-The Treaty does not fhew this, but the propofed to go to war to acquire it? W there ever indeed a propofition to acquire

it in any manner?

I answer there was not-Look at the report of the fecret committee made laft feffion and now published-Does it intimate that it would be defirable to annex the immenfe country of Louisiana to the United States? No, the project to do this is to me novel-But Sir, I do recollect at the laft Seffion of Congrefs, that I faw the rights of the United States on the Banks of the M.fi Tippi, invaded-her honor infalted-a moft tolemn treaty infraƐted-the cellb. erate wrongs and infults which were offer

war

reverfe A Gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Randolph) has faid, that France has declared to us in the Treaty, that he has an inconteftible title to the domain and poffeffion of the ceded country. That it is the business of France to fee to it, that we have the quiet and peaceable poffeffion, and that this ought to fatisfy us-Had this Treaty left the matter in a fimple declaration on the part of Fiance, that her title to the ceded territory was inconteftible, it would have been a very different thing; but the ic careful to explain this declaration, at fate to us clearly, what that title is, and fir, let any perfon read the third arti

cle of the Treaty of Oct. 1, 1800, between France and Spain, and they will fee, that no title is thereby acquired by France-It is true, that his catholic Majefly promifes to cede the country to France-But when? Six months after the full and entire execution of certain conditions and ftipulations relative to the Duke of Parma. And France cedes her right, acquired in vir tue of that article, to the United States, which is in other words, her right to the King of Spain's conditional promife-To know whether this promife is binding on Spain, we afk to be informed, what is this treaty? And what are thefe conditions and ftipulations? Has France ever performed them? Is Spain fatisfied on this fubject, and has Spain made the promifed ceffion? If not, has fhe waved their performances? In either cafe France may have acquired a good title-But if they have not been fulfilled, or waved, she had none-If none, none could be conveyed to ús, and the confequence is, that we buy a conditional promife made by Spain to France, to cede the territory in queftion and the conditions not fulfilled-But it has been anfwered that we do not pay our money until we get poffeffion-I admit it, but fuppofe as I have before faid, that Spain yielding to imperious circumftances, does not at prefent refift our taking poffeffion, is it of no importance to us to fee to it, that right and title are on our fide? When the politics of Europe fhall affume a different afpeét, Spain may re-affert her right, and fay to us, this was mere ufurpation on the part of Francewe never did cede this country to her; a promife to be fure was made to cede on certain conditions; thofe conditions were never fulfilled; you bought with your eyes open your title is unfound, and you knew it at the time of the purchase; reftore to us a country, of which we have been unjustly deprived; ought we not to fee to it, that Spain can have no fuch claim upon us, before we purchafe? And should we not, in cafe of a future conteft with Spain on this fubje&t, proceed with much more confidence, it we know that the title, as well as the poffeffion is in us ?———But fuppofe Spain fhould wreft it from us, and application fhonid be made to France for indemnity-Would not the alfo fay, you bought with full notice of what cur tide

was.

Look at your Treaty-it fays we had only a conditional promite from Spain to cede to us; fach title as we had, in vittue of that promife, we gave to you and you paid us for nothing more, lettle that matter with Spain; fuch would be the language of France. Suppofe, fir, we had purchafed the Iflend of Malta of Great Britain; fhe told us that ber title was derived from the Treaty of Amiens, and the called it an incomteftible tile, and fored to deliver to us the poffeffior; fhould we be fat

of the French government."

Selected.

[OMITTED TWO WEEKS.]

FROM THE ANTI DEMOCRAT

FROM A CORRESPONDENT AT WASHINGTON.

NO ftronger proot can be given of the bad effects of fuch publications as the Aurora, and its reflectors, than in the univerfal corruption of good manners induced by their perufal. The common ftyle of Du ane, Cheetham, and fome other of that clafs, is every way the reverfe of what would become gentlemen; yet fuch afcendency have thefe perfons acquired over those who read them, that their very language has found its way even into our Senate. An inftance of this was af. forded a few days ago by an Honorable Gentleman from New York (Mr. Clinton) who in replying to Mr. Dayton, in language no doubt perfectly parliamenta. ry, obferved that what he Mr. D had faid was unfounded-Not fatisfied with this, he, fome time after, reverting to the fame topic, added to his former politeness the affertion that what Mr. D. faid, was untrue. When the courfe of debate required Mr. Dayton again to addrefs the koule, he took occafion to obferve, that he had avoided noticing the languge of the honorable member from New-York, as refpect to the Senate forbade him from replying to fuch rudeness and indecency, in the terms they demanded; hinting that he fhould find a proper time, a proper place, and a proper manner of remarking upon them.

It may be fuppofed that General Dayton kept his word. Report fays, that, immediately after the adjournment, he fent a card to Mr. Clinton requefling an explanation of what he had faid. No answer was returned. In the evening, however, two honorable gentlemen waited on the General with a project of accomodation; but fuch an one as it appears he did not think proper to accede to; ftill demanding an explanation. About 11 o'clock in the evening, it is faid, a certain honorable fenator conveyed a mell ge to Mr. C. the nature of which may be conjectured. Mr. C. finally confented to explain-(the readers of British parliamentary debates will know what is meant when a member explains) and the next morning a lever was read be. fore the fenare (Mr. C. hating departed for New York) declaring iar in the lan guage he had ufed, he had not intended the

General Dayton, &c. &c. This is called the amende honorable, and of courfe was fully fatisfactory to that gentleman, and to his friends.

Such rudeness of attack, however, as Mr. Clinton was on this occafion guilty of, added to other inftances which have here. tofore occured in our legislative affemblies, offer no very gratifying reflection. But it is not to be wondered at. A man's language will generally partake of the character of his reading. And when we perceive fuch publications as I have already alluded to, fpread upon the desks of fo great a majority of the members of both houfes, it would not be at all furprizing, if, in the progrefs of a motion at prefent depending, for excluding certain characters from the privilege of attending their deliberations, they fhould make a rule to forbid good-breeding from entering within the bar.

By a letter from a gentleman of Marietta, we learn, that Gen. RUFUS PUTNAM, Surveyor-General of the United States, has been difmiffed from office, and a Mr. Mansfield, of Connecticut, appointed in his place. Gen. Putnam is a veteran of '76, who ferved with reputation through the revolutionary war, and has fince been a faithful fervant of the public. It is prefumed that no charge was made against him, excepting an adherence to the politics of Washington."

We do not recollect to have seen the above removal mentioned in any of the papers. Indeed, fuch kind of removals have now become fo common that it is probably deemed almoft ufelefs to mention them. It a revolutionary patriot is permitted to remain in office under the present order of things, it is a wonder worth noting.

We learn from Tenneffee the very interefting intelligence, that on the 6h inflant, the Governor of that fate received intructions from the Prefident of the U. nited States, through the Secretary of war, for rafing without delay five hundred mounted infantry, exclufive of officers, to be well armed and in readiness to move for Natches within fix days after the receipt of the order.

In addition to thefe troops, three regiments are to be raited in Tenneffee, and in readinefs to march by the 20th December next, to aid in taking poffeffion of New. Orleans, fhould any oppofition render it neceffary.

[Morning Chronicle.]

At Claverack, Miss JANE HOCEBOOM, eldest daughter of Mr. Peter Hogeboom, aged 19 years. position and manners, which rendered her the deTo a pleasing person, she added a sweetness of dislight of her connections and numerous acquam.

tance.

"In early youth the paths of death she trod "In early youth she flew to meet her God." In this city, on Thursday last, in the 68th year of her age, Mrs. SARAH SEWARD, the widow of Rev. William Seward, of Killingsworth Connecticut. She was a woman of a meck and quiet spirit," and of, unaffected and exemplary piety.