fected which might not have been done long before without dishonour, by the substitution of a different policy?

Where are the advantages which the existence of the old British treaty secured to us? They have been so neglected by our political wisdom, as to be allowed to cease; and we shall think ourselves very fortunate, if after seven years tedious negociation, we can obtain the same advantageous terms of connexion which the wisdom of our rulers had indignantly rejected. So much has the wounderful ability of Mr. Jef. ferson's administration been displayed, that the Chesapeak proclamation, the embargo and non-intercourse acts, the neglect of the old treaty and the rejection of the new, will probably at the end of another year have proved so very effectual, that our commerce will be about one half as extensive and profitable as it was three years ago!

They have applauded the murder of our seamen, and prayed for war as fervently as a farmer would pray for rain.' Chronicle, May 18, 1809.

War with whom? If England, the assertion is disproved by all the federal papers, If France, the war policy has not been generally adop ted; but this has been the idea, if the United States were compelled to choose in such a crisis as this, war with France rather than England ought to be preferred. As to the presumed applause given to the Chesapeak attack by the federalists, the writer knew the assertion to be false at the time he penned the paragraph.

They have applauded the impressment of American seamen on board British ships of war. Chronicle, May 18.

If we understand the Chronicle in regard to what they denominate British taxation and British licences, the assertion made above is absolutely false. If they mean the taxation and licence implied in the Orders in Council, it is very well understood, that the federalists uniformly have been opposed to those Orders. If in point of principle, they now contend against the rule which prohibits neutrals from the enjoyment of any trade in time of war, from which they were debarred in time of peace,' how much more strongly must they be opposed to the doctrine of the Orders in Council, which implied all which the rule of war of 1756 contained, and other principles a great deal more pernicious, both in the abstract and in the practical effect. On the contrary, if the Chronicle intends by the terms taxation and licence to convey any other meaning than that to which we have just alluded, we defy them to produce the instances in which the federalists have approved the one, or vindicated the other.

As to the assertion that the federalists have applauded the impressment of American seamen,' it is so far from true that the federalists by

such an approval would go even beyond the point the British aim at obtaining. They not only do not want to impress Americans, but a provision was made in the last treaty, rejected by Mr. Jefferson, stipulating that all commanders of privateers before they receive their commissions, shall, with two sureties, be jointly and severally bound in the sum of two thousand pounds sterling; or if such privateer be provided with above one hundred and fifty seamen or soldiers in the sum of four thousand pounds sterling, to satisfy all damages and injuries which the said privateer, their officers or men may do or commit, in searching of merchant ships.

An arrangement could always have been made with the British government to exempt Americans from impressment; it is ridiculous to say the federalists are in favour of such impressment, since they, more likely than the other party, would first become the victims of their own temerity and fool-hardy opinions.

They have formed a northern confederacy, consisting of choice spirits from various parts of New-England, Canada, Nova-Scotia, New-Brunswick, Quebeck, &c. with intention to separate the northern states from the American union; and

.

They have attempted to scatter far and wide the firebrands of discord, by exciting the people to oppose the laws, arm themselves against government, and distract the country with the horrors of civil war.'

Chronicle, May 18.

The frequent occasions we have taken to charge the Chronicle with falsehoods and misrepresentations, seems not in the least to dampen the fire of invention with which the faculties of its writers appear so ardently burning. They have a noble disdain of reputation; and the silence they have preserved, since the charges which we have made cannot be very easily refuted, has been imposed by a necessity, as imperious as it is disgraceful. The lies which, we are now considering, had their commencement in that paper, and are too gross to be adopted by the more cautious editor of the Patriot. The Chronicle must beware of relying too much upon the infamy of its name, for extending its circulation, since there is a point of corruption which will nauseate the senses of the most depraved political demagogue. The Patriot, by the subtilty of its deportment, by conferring a degree of plausibility upon its statements, we apprehend, will soon come to supercede the use of a paper replete with lies of such unblushing effrontery, and misrepresentations of such daring hardihood, as are ranged in the Chronicle. We anticipate the period of its mental decease; it has already sunk into miserable decrepitude, and when its time arrives we have no doubt the hostile efforts of its expiring malignity will be like those of the frenzied Condorcet, to spit with spiteful venom at heaven, and denounce its authority and justice.

The idea of a northern confederacy is so absurd in its very nature, the pretended objects of it are so improbable, and the agents destined to act in it so uncongenial, that no writer but the ostensible editor of the Chronicle, could for a moment admit the hypothesis. We should suppose the modesty of the Patriot editor would become alarmed at the dangers attending such monstrous fabrications, and would consider it a paramount duty to oppose his mountainous authority to the current of such nonsensical delusions.

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

IT is a melancholy reflection that the efforts of the democratick party, the peculiar pretensions of which has always been to economise the publick expenditures, should have forced the federalists to enlarge the number of representatives in the Legislature of this state, in order to preserve their rights and maintain their influence. The democrats wished, undoubtedly, to extend their own numbers to the remotest verge of right, and now that they are defeated in their scheme of offence, are denouncing Boston for the number of members which she has chosen to represent her. There appears to be no reason why the political influence of the capital should not be preserved and enforced as well as that of any country village. Unless some scheme of general and equal reduction of the numbers of representatives be adopted, the only safe policy for the federalists will be to choose their full number. Otherwise a state decidedly federal in its politicks, might have a democratick ascendancy in the House of Representatives; the people would not be justly represented, and the very objects of a republican representation would thereby be defeated. Nothing can therefore be more absurd than the arguments of the democrats, as to the preponderating influence of Boston. Let them agree to reduce their numbers in every town in the state, and Boston will set an unparalleled example to the federal towns. So long, however, as the aim of the hosilities of the jacobins, is not the publick good, but only to harass and annoy their adversaries, it becomes the imperious and commanding duty of the federalists to exert their utmost energy in counteracting their machinations.

The absurdity of our representative scheme will be rendered appar ent, if we contemplate for a moment an accession of population of three times our present number of inhabitants. On this supposition we might have a House of Representatives of more than EIGHTEEN HUNDRED MEMBERS; a political monster, which would destroy the very fabrick of government. When the whole of the provinces of France sent five hundred members to their council, it was universally denominated a many headed monster,' and the tyranny of its power

was visibly felt in the remotest extremities of the globe. The Legisla ture of Massachusetts has already past that number, and every succeeding year will add to the magnitude of our dangers. It is therefore seriously to be wished that some plan may be adopted, by which this excessive representation may be restrained; and that the present Legisla. ture may recommend a mode which may terminate hereafter in equal representation, reduced numbers and radical reform.

MR. OGILVIE'S ORATIONS.

THE success of this gentleman in Boston has been highly flattering to his talents. He has pronounced six orations, and the enthusiasm which he excited at first has not diminished; on the contrary, the number of persons who were excluded from admission on the first night because all the tickets were disposed of, having increased every succeeding evening, was greatest on the last. The company was always uncommonly respectable. We have no disposition at present to enter into any elaborate remarks upon the nature of his orations, and investigate their peculiarities of excellence; it is however, but justice to Mr. Ogilvie to observe that he more completely enchains the attention, by stronger appeals to feeling, in his utterance, than any publick speaker to whom we have ever attended. These productions too, are highly figurative, passionate, and declamatory; perhaps they owe their success in part to these peculiarities in the composition. We under-stand it is the intention of Mr. Ogilvie to pronounce an Oration upon the BOSTON ATHENEUM, for the benefit of that institution. There certainly is no theme, which is more calculated to command the talents of a writer than the formation of so noble an establishment as that of the Atheneum in so small a place as Boston; and there is certainly no theme, which can at the same time excite stronger sensations of interest, both in the hearer and speaker.

Mr. Ogilvie intends very soon to visit Salem, Newburyport, Portsmouth and Portland, at each of which towns, he probably will pronounce one or two Orations, and we now offer him our best wishes for his success.

THE PATRIOT NEWSPAPER.

THE Editor of the Patriot finding himself detected in our last number, of three glaring inaccuracies, not to say political falsehoods, re

sorts in his last Wednesday's paper, to the usual method of defeated mob brawlers, and being no longer able to fight like a man, 'wags his tongue' in rude abuse like a school boy. The editor of the Patriot is so very adroit in his management of this weapon of controversy, that. we should suppose it vain for any competitor to presume to encounter him in the lists of personality. We are not disposed to contaminate ourselves with the dirt, with which a conflict with this person would be certain to besmear us. We shall be willing to meet him on the ground of fair controversy, whenever he can descend from grovelling in the mire.

Of all mad creatures, if the learn'd are right,

It is the slaver kills, and not the bite.'

If the dullness of the Ordeal was so very apparent, it surely could not be difficult to overturn the arguments it contained, or to shew how far it was palpably deficient in that respect.

The Ordeal asserted and proved that Great-Britain had some merit in coming to a settlement of difficulties with this country, by offering terms so advantageous and unexpected that they astonished the American government; being more favourable than their own minister was authorized to demand. This assertion was advanced in contradiction to the statement of the Patriot, that England had come to an adjustment with America on the precise terms offered by our government last August.' The argument of the Ordeal was either true or false, and it was the duty of the editor of the Patriot to substantiate his first state

ment.

The Ordeal brought forward evidence to prove that neutral property under the protection of a neutral flag, for more than a century previous to the French revolution, was' not ' by the publick law of civilized nations, free from the confiscation of belligerents, in all cases excepting goods contraband of war,' &c. &c. This assertion was made very peremptorily, in an illiterate, loose and virulent paper, entitled' The Volunteer,' printed in the Patriot. If the wind-mill author of the Volunteer can manufacture an argument to maintain his assertion, he will find we shall not shrink from the Quixotick encounter

The editor of the Patriot was mistaken in the scope of Mr. Stephens's argument in the British House of Commons, and is probably afraid to confess it. If he chooses to maintain the assertion he has made respecting it, we will prove his palpable ignorance of the meaning of the English language. The various points which we have suggested, this editor' will not answer, nor is it necessary; his silence on one hand, and personal vindictiveness on the other, are an answer to them all.' If he had produced a single reason, in reply to the remarks in the Ordeal, it would have been of more essential service to his cause than all the rancour of his malignity, and all the writhings of his exasperated feel