University of South Carolina Libraries
DEBATE IN THE SENATE. THE CASE OF MCLEOD. Friday, June, U, 1841. The business before the Senate being the motion of Mr. Rives to refer so much of th? President's Message as relates to our foreign affairs to the Committee on Foreign lfiairs? Mr. Calhoun said : I rise with the intention of stating very briefly the conclusion to which my reflections have brought mc on the question before us. IVrinit me, nt the outset, to premise ; that I heartily approve of the principle so ] often repeated in ttiis discussion, mat our 11 true policy, in connexion with our foreign , relations, is neither to do nor to suffer wrong, not only because the principle is j right of itself, but because it is, in its ap- ( plication to us, wise and politic, as well as right. Peace is pre-eminently our policy. Our road to greatness lies not over the ruins of others, but in internal ; mtercouse throughout our widely cxten. 1 * % , | ded country, and in drawing forth its unbounded agricultural, manufacturing 1 mineral, and commercial recourses. In 1 this simple field, all the industry, ingenu- { ity, enterprise, and energy of our People ' may fi?d full empiovment for centuries 1 to come; nrd, through its successful ' 1 I cultivation, we may hope to rise, not only toja state of prosperity, hut to that of 1 greatness and influence over the destiny ( of the human race, higher than has ever ' been attained bv arms bv the most re- ' 0 ( * ' W. ' nowned nations of ancient or modern ! times. War, so far from accelerating. ' C can but retard our march to greatness. 1 It is, then, not only our duty, but our ! nolicv. to avoid it. as lonir as it can b< i ?' ' ? r? with honor and a just regard for our rights; and, as one of the most certain 1 means of avoiding war, we ought to o!> serves trict justice in our intercourse with others. But that is not of itself sufficieni We must exact justice as well as render justice, and be prepared to do so; foi where isthe.e an example to he found of r either individual or nation, that has 1 preserved peace by yielding to unjust de- *' nm nds ? '' It is in the spirit of these remarks that I have investigated the subject before us, 1 without the slightest party feelings, but with an anxious desire not to embarrass j existing negotiations between two Governments, or influence in any degree c pending juaicial proceedings. My sole 1 object is to ascertain whether the principle already stated, and which all acknowl- c edge to fundamental in our foreign policy r has in fact been respected in the present * case. I regret to state that the result of * inv investigation is a conviction that it 1 " ' l I has not. I have been forced to the conclusion that the Secretary of State has not met the peremptory demand of the f British Government for the immediate * release of McLeod as he ought; the rea- 1 sons for which, without further remark, P I will now proceed to state. s That demand, as stated in the letter, f rp?k nn thr iillonrprl farts, that thp. trans. '' ' ? ??? ? action for which McLeod was arrested, is 1 a public one ; that it was undertaken by the order of the colonial authorities, who ^ were invested with urnlimited power to defend the colony, and that the Govern. P mcnt at home has sanctioned both the }! order and its execution. On this alltga. j11 tion, the British Minister, acting directly j P under the orders of his Government, de-; 1 n anded his iinrnediate release, on the j broad ground that he as well as others i * engaged with hiin, was "performing an | * net of public duty, for which he cannot 1 he made personally and individually re. ^ sponsible to the laws and tribunals of any 1 foreign country; thus assuming as a uni-,* versal principle of international law, that' * where a Government authorizes or ap. ii proves of an act of an individual, it makes ' it the act of the Government, and thereby exempts the individual from all respon. 1 sibdity to the injured count.y. To this J demand, resting on this broad and uni. versal principle, our Secretary of State 6 assented ; and, in conformity, gave the jy instruction to the Attorney General, | which is attached to the correspondence, 1 ? . i* 2 and we nave thus presented tor our con. v fciderntion the grave question, do the s laws of uations recognize any such prin- v ciple ? I feel that I hazard nothing in saying * they do not. No authority has been cited 1 to sanction it, nor do I believe that any 1 can be. It would be no less vain to look ' to reason than to authority for a sane- ' tion. The 1 iws of nations are hut the 1 laws and morals, as applicable to individ- 1 uals, so far modified, and no further, as 1 reason may make necessary in their ap. J plication to nations. Now, there can 1 be no doubt that the analogous rule, { when applied to individuals, is, that both ' principal and agents, or, if you will, in- I struments, are responsible in criminal ' cases; directly the reverse of the rule on * which the demand for the release of Mc I Leod is made. Why, [ nsk, should the I rule in this case he reversed, when applied ( to nations, which is universally admitted ' to he true in the case of individuals?? ' Can any good reason be assigned ? To 1 reverse it when applied to individuals, all 1 must see, would lead to the worst of con- { sequences, and, if I do not greatly mis- 1 take, must in like manner, if reversed, ' when applied to nations. Let us see how 1 it would act when brought to the test of particular cases. Suppose, then, that the British, or any other Government, in contemplation of war, should send out emissaries to blow up.the fortifications erected at such vast expense, for the defence of our great commercial marts?New York and oth> t Lf' ers?and that the band employed to blow up Fort Hamilton, or any other of the fortresses for the defence of New York, I should be detected in the very act of firing the train; would the production of the most authentic papers, signed by all the authorities of the British Government, make it a public transaction, and exempt the villians from all responsibility to our laws and tribunals ? Or would that Government dare make a demand for their | release ? Or, if made, would ours dare ! yield to if, and release them? The sup. J position, I know, is altogether improbable; but it is not the less, on that account, calculated to test the principle. But I shall next select one that may j possibly occur. Suppose, then, in contemplation of the same event, 1 black emissaries should he sent from Jamaica, to tamper with our slaves in the South, and that they should he detected at midnight, in an assembly of slaves, where they wore urging them to rise in rebellion against their masters; and that they should produce the authority of the home Government, in the most solemn form, authorizing them in what they did : ought j that to exempt the cut-throats from all \ responsibility to our laws and tribunals? j Or, if arrested, ought our Government to elease them on a peremptory dcmaml to Jo so ? And if tiiat could not be done j orthwith, from the embarrassment of j state counsel and to use its authority and ! nfluencc to etieel ii? And, if that could j iot accomplish its object, would it he 1 ustified in taking the case into their own \ rihunals, with the view of entering a wile "prosequi ? But, setting, aside all supposition cases j [ shall take one that actually occurred? hat of the notorious Henrv, employed bv j iie Colonial authority of Canada to tam>er with a portion of our people, prior to hp Ififpwnr. wilh top intnnfif>n of alian. iting them from their Government, and 'fleeting a disunion in the event of hostilities. Suppose he had been detected i ind arrested for his treasonable conduct, ind that the British Government had nade the like demand for his release, on he ground that he was executing the orlers of his Government, and was not, herefore, liable, personally or individualy to our laws and tribunals: I ask, would >ur Government be bound to comply with he demand ? To all these questions, and thousands )f others that might he asked, no rightninded man can hesitate for a moment o answer in the negative. The rule, nen, if it does exist, must be far from iniversa). But does it exist at all?? 3oesit even in a state of war, when, if :ier, if we may judge from the remarks if gentlemen on the opposite side, it nust ? They seemed to consider nothng more was necessary to establish the rinciple for which they contend but to how that this and all other cases of armd violence on the part of one nation or ts citizens against another is in fact war; | nformal war, as they call it in contraistinction from one proceeded by a dec- j iration in due form. Well, then, let us inquire if the principle for which they contend, that the utliority, or the sanction of his Governnent, exempts an individual from all res. lonslbilitv to the injured Government exsts in case of war. Turning, then, from a state of peace o that of war, we find, at the very thresh. >ld, a very important exception to the rule, 1 II .\!$IS ui uii^iii Hit; ui 1 Vone can doubt that, if a spy is detected md arrested, he is individually and personally and personally responsible, though lis pockets should be filled with all the luthority the country which'employed lim could give. But is the case of spies ths only exceplon 1 Are they alone personally and ndividually responsible ? Far, otherwise The war may he declared in the most lolemn manner; the invaders may carry vith them the highest authority of their iovemment,and yet, so far from exemptng them individually, rificers, men, and ill may be slaughtered and destroyed in ilmost every possible manner, not only vithout the violation of international aws, but with rich honor and glory to heir destroyers. Talk of the responsihil. tyofthe Government, exempting their nstruments from responsibility! How, et me ask, can the Government be made esponsible, out through its agents or nstruments? Separate the Govern- i " - 1 ?I ? A. 'i. L..i. . _ I nent irorn mem, ana wnai is 11 uui an deal, intangible thing ? True it is, when in invading enemy is captured or surrenders, his life is protected by the laws if nations, as they now stand ; but not because the authority of his Government iretects it, or that he is not responsible to the invaded country. It is to be traced to a different and higher source?the progress of civilization, which has mitigated the laws of war. Originally it was iifferent. The life of an invader might lie taken, whether armed or disarmed.? He who captured an enemy had a right to take his life. The older writers on the laws of nations traced the lawfulness of making a slave of a prisoner to the fact that he who captured him had a right to his life ; and, if he spared it, a right to his service. To commute death unto servitude was the first step in miti gation, which spares the life of a prisoner excepting the case of spies, to whom the laws of war, as they stood originally, are still in force. But, because their lives are spared, prisoners do not cease to be individually responsible to the invaded country. Their liberty for the time is forfeited to it. Should they attempt to escape, or if there be danger of their being released by superior force, their lives may be still taken, without regard to the fact that they acted under the au. thority of their country. A demand on the part of their Government for the im. immediate release, o:n the ground assumed in this case, would be regarded as an | act of insanity. Now, sir, if the Senators from Virginia and Massachusetts (Mr. Rives and Mr. Choate) could succeed in making the esse of the attack on the Caroline to be an net of war, it would avail them nothing in their attempt to defend the demand of Mr. Fox or the concession of Mr. Webster. M. Leod, if it be war, would be a prisoner of war, which, if it protected his life, forfeited his liberty. In that character, so tar from his Government having a right to demand his immediate release, under a threat ef war, our Government would have the unquestionable right to detain him till there was a satisfactory termination of the war by the adjustment of the question. To place this result in a stronger view, suppose, after the destruction of the Caroline, the armed band which perpetrated the act had been captured on their retreat !>y an armed force of our citizens, would they not, if the transaction is to be regarded as war,justly have been considered as prisoners of war, tube held as such, in actual confinement, if our Government thought proper, till the question was amicably settled ? And would not the demand for their immediate release in such a case be regarded as one of the most insolent ever made by one independent country on another ? And can the fact # I that one of the band has come into our possesion as McLeod has, if it is to be considered as war, vary the case in the least ? Viewed in this light, the authority or sanction of the British Government would be a good defence against the ennrge of murder or arson, but it would be no less so against his release. But, this is not a case of war, formal or informal, taking the latter in the broadest sense. It has riot been thought so nor so treated by either Government, and Mr. Webster himself, in his reply to Mr. Fox which has been so lauded by the two Senators, speaks of it as "a hostile intrusion into the territory of a power at \ peace." The transaction comes under a class of cases fully recognised by writers on international law as distinct from war ?that of bellige.ents entering with force the territories of neutrals ; and it only remains to determine whether, when viewed in this, light, our Secretary has taken the grounds, which our rights and honor required, against the demand of the British Jlinister. Thus regarded, the first point presented for consideration is, whether Great Britain, as a belligerent, was justified in enteringour territory under the circumstances she did. And here let me remark that it is a fundamental principle in the laws of nations, that ever? State or nation has full and complete jurisdiction over its own territory to the conclusion of all others? a principle essential to independence, and therefore held most sacred. It is accordingly laid down by oil writers on those laws who treat of the subject, that nothing short of extreme necessity can justify a belligerent in entering, with an armed force, on the territory of a neutral Power, and, when entered, in doing anv act which is not forced on them by the like necessity which justified the entering. In both of these positions I am held out by the Secretary himself. The next point to be considered is, did Great Britain enter our territory in this case under any such necessity, and, 4f.she did, were her acts limited by such necessity? Here again I may rely on the authority of the Secretary, and, if it hod Dot already been quoted i)v both of the Senators on the other side who preceded me, I would read the eloquent passage towards the close of his letter to Mr. Fox, which they did with so much applause* With this high authority, I tnav then assume that the Government of Great Britain, in this case, had no authority under the laws of nations either to enter our territory or to do what was done in the destr jction of the Caroline after it was entered. Now, sir, I ask, under this statement of the case, what ought to have been our reply when the peremptory demand was made for the immediate release ot Mc Leod ? Ought not our Secretary to have told ilfr. Fox that we regarded the hostile entry into our territory, and what was pepetrated after the entry, as without warrant under the laws of nations? That the fact had been made knov/n to his Government long since, immediately after the transaction? That he had received no explanation or answer? That we had no reason for believing thai his Government had sanctioned the act? That McLeod had been arrested and indicted under the local authority of New York, without possibility of knowing that the transaction had been sanctioned by it ?? That we still regarded the transaction in the light we originally did, and could not even consider the demand till the conduct of which we had complainedvvas xplained? But, inthc mean time that McLeod might have the benefit of the fact on his trial, that .1 - a! ' * J 1_ 1_ * tne transaction was sancuonea oy nis Government,andit would be transmitted in due form to those who had charge of his defence? Here let me say that I entirely concur with Mr. Forsyth, that the approval ofthe British Government of the transaction in question was an important fact in the trial oi McLeod, without, however, pretending to offer an opinion wheather it would be valid reason against a charge of murder, of which the essance is killing with malice prepense. It is a point for the court and jury and not for us to de. cide. Nor do I intend to venture an opinion whethervif found guilty, with the knowledge of the fact thathis Government approved of his conduct, it ought not tobe good cause for his pardon, on high considerations of humanity and policy. 1 leave both questions, without remark, to those to whom the decision properly belongs, except to express my present conviction that there is not and has not been the least; danger that any step would be taken towards him not fully sustained by justice, humanity, and sound policy. Any step which did not strictly comport with these would shock the whole community . Having taken the ground, I have indicated wa ought to have received explanation before we responded to a peremtory demand; there we ought to have rested till Wf> hnrl firiit rpCPIVoH nvnl.natinn I I till www " .^wv?? V\i VA|/IUIIUIIVIII , Ir. is a maxim, that he who seeks equity must do equity ; and, on the same principle, a Government that seeks to enforce, the laws of nations in a particular case! against another, ought toshow that it has first observed them on its own part in the same transaction; or at least show that it plausable reasons for thinking that it had. None, but a proud and haughty nation like England, would think of making the | demand she has, without even deigningtol notice our complaints against her conduct in connexion with the same transaction ; and I cannot but think that, in yielding to her demand, under sud| circumstances, the Secretary has not only failed to exact what is duei to our rights and honnor, as an independent People, but has, as far as the influence of the example may etFect it, made a dangerous innovation on the code of international laws. I cannot but think the priciple on which the demand to which he yielded was made is highly adverse to the weaker Power, which we must admit our selves yet to be, when compared with Great Britain., Aggression ore rarely by the wcakagoinst the stronger Power, but the reverse; and the practical effect of theprinciple,ifadmitted, would be to change the responsibility ofdeclaing war from the aggressor?the stronger Power?to the aggrieved, the weaker; a disadvantage so great, that the alternative of abandoning the demand of redress for the aggression would almost invariably toenforced on the j weaker, rather than to appeal to arms.? I This case itself will furnish an illustration. We have been told again and again, in this discussion, that in yielding the demand to release McLeod we do notsurrenderour right to hold great Britain responsible; that we have the power and will to exact justice by arms. This may be so; but is not felt on all sidesthat it is, I will not say empty boasting, but that it is all talk? After yielding to the peremtory demend for his immediate release ; after sending the Attorney General to look after his safety, and employing able counsel to defend aim against the laws of the State the public feeling must be two much let down to think of taking so bold and resoonsible a measure a9 that of declaring war. The only hope that we could hove had for a redress for the aggression would have been to demand justice of British Government before we answered her demand on us; and I accordingly regard the acquiescence in the demand for release, without making a demand of redress on our part as settling all questions connected with the transaction. Thus regarding it, I must say that, though.I am ready to concede to Mr. Webster's letter in reply to Mr. Fox all the excellence which his frieds claim for it, the feelingthat it was out of place destroyed all itsbeauties in my eves. Its lofty sentiments and strong con. demnation of the act would have shown to advantage in a letter claiming redress on ourpart beforeyielding to a peremptory de. mand; but, afterwards, it looked too much like puttingon airs when it was too late; after having made an apology and virtually conceded the point at issue. In truth the letter indicates that Mr. Webster was not entirely satisfiedwith his readycomplianec with Mr. Fox's demand, of which the part where ho says that he is not certain that he correctly understood him io demanding ! an immediate release furnished a striking instance. There could be but little doubt as to what was meant; but the assumption of one afforded a convenient oppertunity of nodifyingthe ground he first took. A USTOF LETTERS REMAINING in the Post Office at Ch*raw July 1, 1341, which if not called for beforo 1st October ncx? will be sent to the General Post Office as Dead Letters. B?Bart'ett Emma Poleen, Bryant William 8. Brown R. W. Brsgaw Isaac C. C?Campbell Miss C. M. Clark Aichibald, ftmv/fan Wsrron A. D. Chanrflv D. W. Chan* nan Mra, Maty J. Campbell Miss Katharine Campbell. D?Dodd Ransom Drake Lemuel S. Derrick D. E?Evans M. F. T. Edwards John E. F?Fisher Mary. G?Gallagher James J. Gronthom Henry (vroves David Goodwin Harry Grisan John C. GoHbold Cade. H?Husbands Lewis D. 2 Harkness John Harrel Janaes 4 Husbands Rachel Husbands J. D. Johnson Eli Jarrot John M, K?King George Keith Daniel 2 Kelly James G. M?McLauchlin Daniel McNabb Duncan Maiblum M. McKay Laucblin McKay John A. McDonald MurdockJ. McAlpiti Malcom Mun. roe Isabella K. McCall Duncan McQuageJohn McMillan John McCaskill John B. P?PerrisJohti Poore William Pired James Powe E. A. Pegues Win. sen. Powers Cyrus H. Postali J. C. R?Rivers Lewis Rakestraw Isaac. S?Smith John M. 2, Smith Caroline E* Smith Mary Smith H. H. Smith Chariotte M. Smith John Smith Martha Sweat Wm. Sweat Jessee Strother Mary C. Scott Nancy Stafford Malcora T?Thomas Riee 3, Turner Margaret Turn, age Wm, 2. V? Vandcrford C. W?Wallace C. D. William* Todford Webb Harriet Witer Miaa M. Williams H H Warren | Joseph, Winn Martha, Wallace Jackson. Ward Jane, Walters Harriet 2 William* Jesse WH ITE WINE VINEGAR ' Cider do ' For sale br AUG. P. LaCOSTE June 7 It'll 30 RET. RICHARD FUB&IAff'S SERMON, DELIVERED in the Baptist Church in this placo in vindicatian of the doctrine and practice of the Baptis. denomination, for sale at the store of i A. P. LACOSTB. HEAD QUARTERS. CLARENDON, June 4,1341. Orders No. ? The following Regiments will parade for i review and drill at the timos and places herein stated, vi*: The 25th Regiment at Winnsborougb, on Tuesday the 13th day ot July next. The 24th Regiment at the usual parade ground on Thursday, the 15th of July. The 26th Regiment at Chestorville, on Tuesday, the 20th of Jn y. The 27th Regiment at Oliver's Old Field, on Thursday, the v2d of July. The 46th Regiment at Ebenerer, on Saturday the 24th o July. The 34th Regiment at Yorkviile, on Tuesday, the 27th of July. The 35th Regiment at Union Court House, on Thursday, the 29th of July. The 9th Regiment of Cavalry a* McRrideville on Saturday, 31st of July. The 37th Regiment at Wilkin's Old Field, on Wednesday, the 4th of August. The 3<?th Regiment at Timmoti'* Old Field, .. tl,. ir.iu ..r *. uii i uosuay, mu i<?ui ut au^ubi* The 45th Regiment at the Burnt Factory, on Thursc'.uy, the l2thof August. The 41st Regiment at Park's Old Fieid, on Saturday, the 14th of August. Tlie 40th Regiment at Mrs. Boyd's, on Tuce. day. tho 17th of August. The lOtla Regiment of Cavalry at Boyd's on Thursday, the 19th of August. The 3rd Regiment ;.t Toney's OKI Store, on , Tho 1st Regiment of Cavalry at Pickensville, on Saturday, the 28th of August. The 5th Regiment at Hunter's on Tuesday, the 31st of August. The 2nd Regiment at Hull's, on Friday, the 3d of September The 42d Regiment at Mintori's, on Tuesday, , the 7th of September. The 4th Regiment at Verrenncs, on Thursday the 9th of September. The 8th Regiment at Morrow's Old Fbld, on Tuesday, the 14th of Septemtar. j The 6th Regiment at Loiuux's on Tliurday. the 16th of September. The 2nd Regiment of Cavalry at J/>ngmire's. on Saturday, the 18;h ef September. The 9th Regiment at Lowe's, on Tuesday the 2lst of September. The 7th Rogiment at the Old Wells, on Thursday, the 23rd of September. The lUth Regiment at Richardson's, on Satur. day the 25th of September. The 38th Regiment at Killer's Old Field, on Tuesday, the 28th of Septembor. The 39th Regiment at the usual parade j ground, on Thursday, tha 3t)th of September. The commissioned and n^n-commissioned j officers will assemble at their Regimental Mus- | ter grounds, for drill and instruction on the day previous to their review Major Generals and Brigadier Generals will, with their ataff, attend the reviews in their respective commands. The Brigadier Generals are specially charged vith the extension of so much of this order as relates to their own Brigades. The Commandants of Regiments will make their annual returns to their Brigadier Generis at such times as they may direct, to cneble them to make their returns to the Adjutant General by the fifteenth of October next. By order o( the Commander-in-Chief. JAMES W.CANTEY, Adjutant and Inspector General. June 16, 1811. [C] ; 6t. COiYSUJIPTIOi* A LIFER COMPLAINT. DR. TAYLOR'S balsam of liverwort. HAS been used successfully for night years in the cure of these diseases. Remember! the original and genuine is made ou'y at 375 Bowery, New York,- all others are spurious and unauthorized ! Consumption and Liver Complaint! As a general remdey for these diseases, I am fully satisfied from Balsam of Liven* o-t. Being purely vegetable, it can be use ! with the ntmo&t safety by all persons it. every condition. It cleanses the lungs by expectoration, ro'icves difficult breathing, and secrns to heal the chest. There can he no question but this medicine is a certain cure for chronic coughs and colds. I have u?ed it for four years in my practice, and always with success. A. F. ROGERS, M. D. Consumption! 7'he following remarks were ! taken from tho last number of the Medical Mag- j ' azitie.* The surprising offect produced hv Dr. Taylors ; I Balsam of Liverwort, in consumptive cases, cannot fail exciting a deep and thrilling interest 1 throughout the world. We have so long believed j1 this disease (consumption] incurable, that it is 1 difficult to credit our senses when wespe persons evidently consumptive, restored to health. Yet th s is & fact?f daily occurrence; how then can we question the virtue of the above medicine ? ( In our next we shall be more explicit; meantime we hope physicians will make trial of this medicine and report its effect to us." < Note?The orginal and genuine Taylor's Baisom of Liverwort is made and sold at 375 Bowery. OBSERVE ! Buy only that which is made at the old office, 375 Bowery, New York, and which is sold by Dr. A. MALLOY, Cheraw. S. C. I Hand ills and certificates givini a history of < the medicine, accompany each bottle. r 23 if i THE SOUTHERN HARP. C1ONSISTINGof0rigin.il Sacred and Moral / Songs, adapted to the most popular Aleio. ( dies, for the Piano Forte and Guitir by . MRS MARY S. B DANA. Or CHARLESTON, 8. C. " This work supplios a vacuum which has long been felt in the musical world. It is indeed the Christian's Vocal Companion, and we hope no family will be without it."?Bost. paper For sate at the Cheraw Bookstore hy JOHN WRIGHT. July 5,1841. 34 tf DRUGS, MEDICINES, f Chemicals, Patent Medicines, t Perfumery, Paints, Oils, Dye ? Stuffs, &c. &c, for sale ? wholesale and retail by a A. HOPTON, CHERAW, S. C. P At his Drug Store, next door to Brown . Bryan Brother. Where may be had at all times a general as p sortme-'t of articles in the Drug line?recom n mended to be of superior quality which will be disposed of on very moderate terms?Physicians nnd others wishing pure medicines, may rely on being supolied with them. May 26, 1841. 28 RECEIVING AND FORWARD- j IMG BUSINESS. si THE Subscriber continues the Receiving le and Forwarding of Goods and Produce, his jt Wharf and Store are in good order, and the room, ample. His charges are no more than Lhoso of other Houses in the the same lino. 1 BENJAMIN KING. I Georgetown S. C. Mar 24,1841. 29 . if 9 A CARD. JOHN A. INGLIS, Attohney at Law Will practice in tho Courts of Law tor the Districts of Chesterfield, Marion, Darlington, Jk and Marlborough. His office is in the build* iug next below the Store of Messri. Taylor & Punch. ' ' Dec. 141840. For Sale. A TRACT on the Doctrines of Election and Reprobation, by Rev. James H. ThornwelL Also, a Vindication of the Protestant Doctrine concerning Justification. May 1st, 1840. 25 tf The Subscriber has just received, and wil keep constantly on hand,Cotton Yarn and Twin* at wholesale, from the Manufactory of Rockingham. GEO. GOODRICH. Cheraw, Jan. 1840. 10 tf INSS. BLACK* Dark Blue. Light Flue, Red and Copying Inks, in small |BrUlee, For sole by John Wright at the Cheruw Bookstore. October 30. 1840. 51 tf Hats and Shoes. A LARGE and well selected stock for cal by A. P. LAC08TE. ' October 21, 1940. DCHLAP A MARSHALL, HAVE just received among other desirable fancy goods, the following article?, viz;? SHAWLS. Super Black Ilernani, 15-4 and 4 4, ? Handsome printed Mousclin De Laine from * ?* .1 n m 4'0 fOU"*. Supr. Scarlet Merino 4-4 and 5 4. Do. Mode (Plain) colored Thybet, Belvedere & Cabyle do. 6 4 and (4 GLOVES. A good assortment Ladies and Gentlemen*# uper colored and black H, S. Beaver and Buckskin. HOSE, Ladies super wliire and black Merino, Cash mere and Ingrain Cotton. MOUSELIX DE LAINES. Rich Printed, Fancy black ground and Mode 4 Colors. ALSO, Super Blue and wool dyed black rlntba, ? ?? * ? *? Cashmeres and Satinetts : ? . Tea and Loa Sugar. SUPERIOR articles, for family use, for sale ^ bv m A. P. LACOSTE. October 2, 18W. 49 if Clothing. CLOTH and Blanket Overcoats, Cloaks. A.c For sale very low, A. P. LACOSTE. October 21, 1640. Saddles and Leather. A GOOD Stock for sale low, by A. P. LACOSTE. October 21,1640. 1\EW AI?D CHEAP GOODS. 1 Have just icceirefi a well selected assort' rnent of' staple and fancy Dry Goodaof the L itest style and fashion for the season. Pi -at-o cull and examine my stock before purchasing. M. BUCHANAN. May 31, 1841. 29 tf JUST RECEIVED Methodist Hymns i2mo. do do 24mo. sheep, calf, and Morocco. Methodist Discipline bte edition, Watsons Dictionary, Life of Wesley, Life of Dr. Clark, Family Bible, ffceep snd calf, Al' of which will be sold at the New York prices, JOHN WRIGHT. April 10, 1841. 22 tf . ? * I tnnlnn Xjm IV.I n wflU.,11 jL/uiiicijj iy iTjuisiiaii HEREBY give noticethstthey will continue to xell tlieir bry Goods onlj, on the usual credit to punctual customers 1 hey will sell their Groceries at the lowest prices for cash only. Tho very short credit at which groceries can low be bought, amounting with the exchange limost to Cash, with their limited capital compels hem to the adoption of this. Umbrellas JUST received a good assortment of Silk and Ginghams Umbrellas. ' DUNLAP& MARSHALL 3PKRM AND TALLOW CANDLES FOR sale by A. P. LACOSTE October 21, 1S40. 49 0 LADI?S~ SHOES. DUNLAP & MARSHALL have jost reeeiv. id direct from the Manufactory (Phila.) 450 jair Ladies and Aliases Kid and Seal Slippers ind shoes. Lard. 2000 LBS,bLEAF lard' for4aie ' hy A. P. LACOSTE. September 30, 1840. State of South Carolina. DARLINGTON DISTRICT. Iif thx Court or Common Plxab. of W. Hunter Sur'v. Dec. on sealed Hunter &. DuBose Note, in Foreign vs. Attachment. B. E. DuBose. rHE Plaintiff in the above stated case having filed his Declaration in my office this day nd the Defendant having neither wife nor Attorey within the limits of the said State upon who copy of tliis attachment could he served. On motion of G. W. & J. A. Dargan Plantiff's Lttorneys- It is ordered that B. E. DuBose de lead or demur to the same, within a year andat ay from the date hereof or final and absoluo m idgment shall be awarded and given him. It is also ordered that a copy of rhis order be nhiiah?>r] in rha Farmers' flazetteonce everv three lonths for the space of a year and a day. S. WILDS DUBOSE. C.C. P. Clerks Office, Sept. 23. 1840. 46 1 ev 13 a UMBRELLA. ' A Cotton umbrella with a hooked handle wae mis aid somewhere in town a week or two ince. If the ftndor would be good enough te save it at tho bookstore, the owner would receir CHEESE. POR SALE BY < A. P. LACOSTE. October 21,184a ' I