Farmers' gazette, and Cheraw advertiser. (Cheraw, S.C.) 1839-1843, July 21, 1841, Page 140, Image 4
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