OCR Interpretation


Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, May 06, 1828, Image 3

Image and text provided by Library of Virginia; Richmond, VA

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84024735/1828-05-06/ed-1/seq-3/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

|k«ii by him tor 1325, the excess mi the
lie proseut Administration, according to his
exhibited above,corresponds precisely with
*t of my statement. i‘ will observe, out of
*l caution, that in taking iiis statement fot
j 1327, i have put the sutn at .<(131.000, as
i idently intended to he, and as it uiu^t be,
hn at all to the appropriation law, from
M* taken. In the speech of Mr. Bartlett,
?diu the newspapers, by a typographical
lehgure 1, before the ligure 8, is omitted,
addition made by him, requires and shows,
intended to put the sum at 8181,000, and
81.000.
k I must have satisfied you, that according
JJaitlctt's own data, if the year 1325 be
o.accountol Mr. Adams, as it ought, the
f iny comparison between the present Ad
jtion, and the one which immediately pre
cis precisely correct. “ The only loop to
loubton,” then, is whether the year 13254s
It down to Mr. Adams or to Mr. Monroe—
|»er words,whether Mr. AdamsU to be held
ublc for money admitted to have been ex
under his administration, or whether that
ibility is to be »h{fled back upon Mr. Mon
0 had gone out ol office, and ofeourse, had
roul over the expenditure. 1 should deem
Milt to the understanding,of the least wise
»iistitucuts,to argue such a question to them,
foment.
will, perhaps, wish, to know how it is that,
g as the particular sums given in my stat-'
u from those given by Mr. Bartlett,! should
duce the same result with his sums, as with
1 vi ill explain it to y ou. The dillereiice
|n his sums and mine, is an uniform i ne, in
years and proceeds Tram an uniform cause.
I for the year 1823, lie has uniformly oinit
the amounts given by' him for each year, an
icluded in the amounts given by me for all
•ars. i be item I allude, to, Is the appropria
te the salaries of agents of claims, at Loudon
nris. That appropriation in 1823 was $3,000,
as, as wc have seen, included in the amount
by Mr. Bartlett for that year, and hence the
at given by Mr. Bartlett, for that year, ror
»ds precisely,with the amount stated by me—
aeing $82,000. But, in giving the amounts
e subsequent years, ho has omitted this item
propriation, while I have iucluded it,and thus
iced the discrepancy between the particular
given by him for each of those years, and the
stated by me. In each year succeeding 1823,
tetn of appropriation was regularly $4,000; by
tg which to the sums given by him for the
s 1824, 1825, 1820 and 1827, you produre a
nts, corresponding precisely, with the sums
n by me fortlio.se years respectively, except in
year 1825, where there w ould still be a vari
t of $600, the cause of which has already been
jested. '1 he following parallel, shows the cor
iiesssof this explanation:
^ Tito amount given by Mr. Bartlett for 1S23 is,
already stated, precisely the same with thatgiv
f 't fy me, because, in that instance only, he in
cluded the appropriation for agents’salaries,which,
I'>r that year, tvas a double allowance of $8,000,
.aconsequence, I presume, of there having been
Jio appropriation for that object in the preceding
year 1822. This being the state of the case, it is
onvioiis that the result ot a comparison between
the two terms of three years which I took, will be
the same, whether this item of appropriation be
included, or excluded, the amounts appropriated
Bor it during tho whole of each term being equal
IrndI balancing each other, in 1822, the first year
Embraced 'n my comparison, there was nothing
■o'propriated for it—in 1823, a suin ol $8,000, and
■7 1824 a sum of Jfc4,000, making a total smn, for
Piie farst term of three years, of $12,000. In each
| >! the following years, 1825, 182fi and 1827, thero
Fwits a regular annual appropriation of $1,000,
I which for the whole term of three years, also a
tnounted to $12,000. 'I he result of a comparative
■■ratement for these terms, therefore, will be the
f^awe, whether you include, or exclude, this item
ot appropriation, provided it be uniformly done in
each year.
Before I dismiss Mr. Bartlett’s statement in rc
ation to this branch ol tho subject, I must make
<ne other remark upon it, which is this—that even
•iking his division ot lime, and throwing the year
IH25 upon Mr. Munroe’s administration, contrary
o every dictate of reason and justice, the result of
is comparison is altogether fallacious, in conse
quence of his suppression of an important fact, in
Lfiviug tiic amount for foreign intercourse, for the
■ •service of the present year, he puts down a sum of
I; 19,000 only, and then announces-the result of his
sminparison in these words “ leaving the cx
ketue of the three last years,” (the present being
■fie of them) " $27,000 less than tho three last
■>propriations ol the preceding administration”—
•.e inference from which tindoubtetlly is, that this
■ mi of $ 19,000 is all that the administration can
■spend for foreign intercourse during the present
|e®.p- ®ut <he fact is, as show n by a document
■'Inch, i presume, Mr. Bartlett must have read
that there are, at the disposal of the admitiistia
turn, large additional sums, consisting of balan
ces of former appropriations, still applicable to
tnc expenses, of foreign iuterercour.se, and -that
these sums are actually included in the estimates
lor the service of the present year. Foi this fact,
I reter to the letter ot the .Secretary of the 'I’rea
sury of 2d January last, transmitting the estimates
lor the service of the present year, being dor. No.
40, in the series of Executive Documents of the
present Sewon of Congress. From that Duru
loont, (pages 25 and 2fi) it appears that, besides
too sum of$i«t,0«.)0, mentioned by Mr. Bartlett,
P here is included in the estimates (or the service of
Plie present ycara sum of $100,000 as still applica
|>lc to what 1 have called the stated expenses of
loreign inlercouise, and also, another sunt appli
Wkk' <o contingent exnenscs of forci, ii im.-r
»e, the amount of which ii not there atated,
which, hom another Document (Report of the
mitleeon Expenditures of the Department of
'• P- ft.)1 fihrl to be $46^2—«id ihe-c sum*
r. Bartlett n$l9,fW)0 and then, even upon hi*
favourite apportionment or time, instead of
vine:, an lir» «»v« t(>.t . at_
w&. yoaia,” (that U, 1820, 1827 ami 1828) “$27,000
I'ts than the throe last appropriations of 'hr. pre
<edmg administration,” they Mill be $119,842
J hare now done with Mr. Bartlett’* eoinparf
son between the present and late Administration,
^in-mgard to the expenses of foreign intercourse,
^hu<! I thii.k I must have rvery candid and
■impartial mind, that the statement ( made on that
■btyeef is warranted, to the very letter, by unite
■Aaehaldc documentary authority, and that Mr.
^^rtbttt s statement, so far fiom impugning it, i*
-sw if full of errors, from beginning to end. But the |
RSdUenian from N. II. has thought proper to carry I
*~t Comparison upon thijsuleect back to the earlier |
I
periods oi chu go.cmm<'j»t, and has attempted to
show lM.it the present administration has not only
conducted tiie foreign intercourse of the country
with greater economy than its immediate prede
cessor, hut with far greater than oven Washington
or Jellerson, ortho eider Adams, and'for that pm
|K>sc, has brought up from Seyhcrt’e statistical an
ual.s, in formidable battle array, lar-'O-nnisses .,nd
columns of figures under the head” of •• Foreign
Iutercounit*,” during the |>eiicxl^ of iho^‘ admin
istiatioix . I here is such gross and ridiculous fal
lacy in this parlor the gc irlcinan’s statistics, that i
hardly know how to treat it seriously. It would,
indeed, have hoeti a most maguiticeiit discovery, it,
alter hjviut shewn that the expenses of forei pi
intercourse during the present year were only
tj l!i,ODl) us he stated them to lie, the same class of
expenditures, during several yours of Mr. Jctler
son s administration, ivcie largely more than one
million of dollars, and in one year of that adminis
tration, even more than two millions! These state
ments are taken from the work mentioned above,
(Seybert’s Slat. ami. p. 71H,)und the sums are there
arranged, it is true, for the sake of brevity and
simplicity, under the general head of •• Foreign
I ntorcourse;” hut these sums include many oilier
jtems ol very large amount, (as the gentleman
■night h»ve learned from the same authority (p.
70t,) it he did inn already know it,) besides what
both he and inysclf meant by expenses of foreign
intercourse, and to which only our statements ap
plied. I he sense in which I used the term, ex
penses of foreign intercourse, as was perfectly e
vident from the context, was the common and jmi
pular, as well as most naturul understanding ol the
phrase, to wit, the expenses of maintaining inter
course with foreign nations through the usual di
plomatic and official organs, and in that sense was
restricted to the items enumerated in page 5, of
this letter, such as salaries and outfits of Ministers,
t barges d’Affaires, Secretaries of L> gation, hir.—
I hat the gentleman fiont New Hampshire under
stood it in that sense, as indeed every body else
must have understood it, is manifested hy the fact
that, in his comparison between the present and
late administrations in regard to the expenses of fo
reign intercourse, his statements were made up of
these items, appertaining to the diplomatic estab
lishment of the country and of them only.
But the sums taken hy him from Seybcrt, inclu
ded not only the diplomatic expanses of" the go
vernment, properly so called, hut all claims against
• the government arising from treaties with foreign
powers, which, in some instances, amount to very
| large sums: f will illustrate this hy a single ex
ample taken iroin the statements made by (lie gen
t Ionian. Availing himself of the generality of Scy
bert’s classification, he states the expenses Of fo
reign intercourse in 1803 to have been $i,0il,.
808 3!. But when we come to analyse this a
monnt, we find that only $81,398 22 were ou ac
count ol what both ol us meant by expenses of fo
reign intercourse, and which, in the subjoined
statement, are denominated diplomatic expenses,
and that the balance ol the sum consisted almost
wholly of monies paid by virtue of treaty stipula
tions. 1 his statement is taken from a document of
unquestionable authority—“ the account of the re
ceipts and expenditures of the United States fo
the year 1303”—(a document required to be an
nually laid before Congress) and is founded on the
statements contained in that document from p. 48
to p 51, and on the tabular statement in p. ti.V
Diplomatic $91,393 22
British treaty 6,169 til
Convention with Great Britain 8S8.000 Oti
Awards under the 7th art. Br. treaty 4,215 73
Spanish treaty i,b03 81
Relief &. protection of American sea
men 10,371 97
$1,001,903 34
Thus we see that more than nine-tenths of th s
frightful sum have nothing to do with that cla-sof
expenses ol which the gentleman from N. Hamp
shire and inyself hail been speaking. There is a
| single item you will perceive, ol $8SS,000 wholly
independent of the diplomatic expenses of tUr go
vernment. That item was for carrying into died
; a Convention made with Great Britain on the 8th
j day of January, 1302, by which the United States
| stipulated to pay fo his Britannic Majesty the sum
j of $2,6(51,000 in three equal annual instalments,in
satisfaction and dischurgc of the claims of llnti h
subjects for damages sustained by them in con se
quence of impediments which had delayed or pre
vented the recovery of their debts from American
citizens. The sum of 6.88,000, mentioned in the
statement above, was the first of these instalments,
and the remaining instalments fell upon the iwo
succeeding years of Mr. Jcfll-rson’s administration,
and contributed to swell the amounts appearing to
have been expended for foreign intei course, in
those years. In addition to these charges u|ton
Mr. Jcflerson’s administration, there were others
oflarge amount growing out of tile Convention
with the French Republic of ilie 30th April, 1803,
by which Louisiana was acquired, it wa-one of
the conditions of that Convention, that the United
States should assume the payment of the claims of
their own citizens against the French Government
for supplies furnished, property captured, vessels
detained, &c.; and a law was passed on the 10th
November, 1803, appropriating a sum of 3,750,000
dollars, for the payment of these claims. The pay
ments made under this Convention are also included
in the sum appearing, according to the gentleman’s
statement, to have been expended for foreign in
tercourse, in the subsequent years of Mr. Jeffer
son’s administration; and in conjunction with seve
ral other treaty engagements, very naturally ac
count for the magnitude which this head of expen
ditures had attained in those years. The same
remark is applicable to th * largo sums arraigned
under the head of foreign intercourse, in the gen
tleman’s statement, during the periods of General
W ashington s and the elder Mr. Adams’s adminis
trations. Much the greatest portion ol them was
expended in fulfilling the stipulations of treaties
actually made, and docs not belong to that class of
expenses incident to the mere intercourse of na
tions through the medium of diplomatic agents, and
which alone was it^thc contemplation of the
gentleman and myself in the comparison • in
I tituted between the present and late aibninis
I trations, witli regard to the expenses of foreign
I intercourse. For what purpose, then, were these
imposing sums, including items of very laige
amount wholly distinct from the real subject of
f comparison, brought into the account? V. is it to
j confuse and mislead, or did it proceed from the
j want of belter knowledge? Whether it proceed
| od from the one or the other cause, f am content
J that the fact should bo received .Isa sample,either
I of the fair dealing,or of the political information of
] the gentleman, whotn my worthy opponents in
i Amherst have chosen for their Magnus Apollo.
It remains for me to advert to only one more
■ statement of the gentleman from New Hampshire,
I seeming to impugn the correctness of the statc
| men Is made by me I had stated the appropriations
| tor the contingent exp- twos of foreign intercourse
j during the three last years of Mr. Monroe’s ad
i ministration, and the three years of the present ad
| ministration,ns follows:
In 1H22 nothing
1823 nothing
1821 ft iO.OOD
ft 10.000
In 1825 $40,000
1820 10,0(0
1827 30,(R 0
Al 10.00)
Mr. Bartlett, without directly awaiting this st.itc
merit makes one of his own. exhibiting 4 very iif
j ferelit result, to wit: $21,820 less on th- -idt? of
i the present administrition than on that of its pre
decessor. But, how dot's hr’ produce this variance*
f irst, by adhering to his favorite plan of puttin '
the first year of Air. Adams’ Administration on the
shoulder- of Mr. Monroe, and then, in iffect, by
setting Off the expenses of only two yeai- of Mr.
Adams’ Administration against the expenses of
three preceding years; for tho year ISM which (»•
includes in his statement as on.- of *t. Adams
i three years, is made to present a perS-ct blank,
“ no appropriation” as lie says •• being a«L rf,” from
Which the inference is Ural nothing dm he i x
! pended for this object, during tin- prrdul year.—
1 But such is not the fact, 1- I have alhudy had
i occasion to state. There is a balance of former ip
aroprlations amounting to $ Hi,832, now at the ilia
i pos,il of the administration for the contugenl • >
ponses of foreign intercourse, find actually includ
ed in tlie estimate-for the service of tin- pr -ei t
year as still applicable to this object. Aiid thisstim
‘d 16,852 to hi« statement, and then uptm his own
scheme of allotment,** to time,there is cuurc-j of
•IM,ii 1on the side of the. present administration,
instead of a toting of £21,32#.— Hut there i- still
another cause of tna variance, between mv state
ment upou this subject, and that made by the |
. gentleman from .New Hampshire. Aiy statement
referred to the sums appropriated for the contin
, nTnt expenses c>t foreign intcri'ourjo, which
l took from the several appropriation taws. The
gentleman fioni Now Hampshire, hotrevrr, h-i*
undertaken to furnish, from smnu Mitrctfnr uthtr.
the sum* which hive her it actually expended._
His statement ol those sums may be cot reel, wttli
ont impugning in any degree the accuracy of my
statement as to the sums appropriated. In my
statement, I know there is no error. It there were,
a reference "cOho appropH. tioti laws would detect
it, in a moment.
I will here remark that, in my statement, I had
reference to the appropriations made; because,
while they furnished a general criterion for
<rpprtiximatv»fr the amounts expended, they sh-w
ed precisely the sums with which the admintolra
tion was chargeable and lor which they were bound
to account. It may happen,-in some instances,
that the appropriations arc greater than the expen
ditures, N\ hilc, in other instances, the exp-ndituri s
exceed the appropriation-: and lints dtj'ect in one
case balancing excess in another, the expenditures
and appropi in'ionin the gen ral muss of tiseal ope
rations, will he found very nearly to vorie-pond._
i low lar tin- actual expenditutes, may vary from
tlu* appropriations, in regard to the subject "l am
now speaking of, 1 am not prepared to say w ith ab
solute precision. In relation to that portion of (he
expenditure out of this fund, which i; most liable
to abuse (I mean expenditures ibi secret so vice)
we have now tiie authority of the public and un
eontradieted statement °f a member of Congress
(Mr. J. S. Harbour,) who i- also a member of tin;
standing committee on Public Expenditure-, for the
fact that the amount of this kind of expenditure
since the commencement of the present adminis
tration lias exceeded all bounds of proportion to the
same kind or expenditure under former adminis
trations, in like circumstances. Von will see from
Mr. Harbour’s speech, a copy of which I sent you,
that the amount of secret service expenditures du
ring two years and nine months of Mr. Adams’ Ad
ministration has been $10,t>2l 6S. while the whole
amount expended for secret service from the begin
ning to the end of Mr. Monroe’s eight years, was
°nly §8,630, and that in the short interval of thir
teen days, indeed, to wit, from the 8th to the 21st
November last, Mr. Adams expended $ 8,1)58 toi
secret service, being $2,328 more than Mr. Mon
roe expended, during the whole period of his
administration. Having seen an 1“ examined the
uuiciai voucncrs'on which Mr. Barbour’s state
ment is founded, I know it to be entirely correct.
I have now noticed all the statements made by
Mr. Bartlett, which appear to have a direct bear
inp on tin? tabular statement contained in my
speech. He has made some other statements ol a
more general character, leading to entirely f..: e
conclusions in relation to the ecouomy of the pre
sent administration, and which are susceptible ot
tiie clearest refutation. Hut, afer the exposure
I have already made ol the errors of his statistics,
it certainly cannot be necessary to pursue him any
farther. Indeed, is not the fact, which hits not
and cannot be controverted th at the whole current
cxpeu.niurcs ot the government under the present
a I mi lustration exceed the aggregate amount of
similar expenditures, during an equal period of the
Jns* administration by near seven millions ol dol
lars, at the lowest Culcnlation, (according to the
estimate in my speech this excess is $«,703.833.
Mr Ilarhour, in his speech, makes it $3,685,307
in con-eqiience of excluding the item ol military
pensions, which I did not exclude,) ami the re
luctant adinis ion of the President in his message
to Cong: at He comm- nceiuent of the Session
that “ the r\pci:ditm s <-f the la«t year exceed
its receip's,’ by the su . of time hundred thousand
dollars, which he vail-a small excess—Are not
these facts sutneient in themselves to stamp with
niter reprobation and discredit all the vain preten
sions of economy on the part of the friends ot the
present admiiri-trnlion?
I fear that in tin: exposition I have given you,
I sliail appear to have been tedious—My’ object
has been to leave nothing unexplained, but to give
you and the rest of my friends the fullest satisfac
tion, in regard to every point of discrepancy in
volved in the statements of Mr. Bartlett and my
sell. . I have I lit that tho charges which mv ene
mies in Amherst have railed upon these discre
pancies (choosing to consider Mr. Bartlett as in
/ii/li ilr aii«l Co cootitMiii) tne l>y Che tfUutdiir'i ot his
infallibility) touch my personal character, and that
consideration has awakened a sensibility, and pro
due d a solicitude to vindicate the cnri-cetmws of
my statements, which, under other circum
stances, 1 shim Id not have indulged—«.Sfien,
1 shall have b,?n tedious, I may yet hope
that, as an act of justice you will take the
trouble to examine what is here 'submitted, to
compare my statements with Mr. B.i.llott’s, and
to say whether, in every instance, they arc net
irrcfragably su-ained both as to fact and principle;
tile statistic, ot ih *• cenllen.aii fioni New llamp
shire” and e ;.s crlio - of hi- puffers ami sponsors
in Amherst io thec -mraiy notwithstanding.
I am, very lespeetiully,
Vour fiien i, and obt. serv’t.
„ _ W. C HIVES.
1 • s. I send you herewith a copy of a Lie port
very recently made by the Committee on the Ex
penditures ol the Slate Department. \ on will iiud
in it, as far as it goes, a complete corroboration of
the statements contained in-uiy speech. In page
2, you will sec the appropriations for the contin
gent expenses of the Department of State, tor
the contingent expenses of > . i in eroouisc,
an lo - the contingent expenses of Missions abtoad,
all Stated for the years, ISJj, irS2 i, .-in 1S27, and
corresponding, to a single cent, with the sum’s gi
ven in my tabular statement lor those years. 1,,
pages 5 and 6 you will see that while the etppro
priations for the contingent expenses of this jjc
partment have been largely increased for the last
three years, the expenditures for the same time,
have greatly exceeded tin-annual appropriations,
and that those expenditures compared with the’
expenditures under the last administration, have
extended from an average of $17,000 per annum
to more than $82,000 per annum- 1 on will see
also in the statement annexed to the report, and
occupying the space from page 90 to page 02, the
amount ol secret service expenditure by the pre
sent administration under the denomination of
I resident • certificate, without specification,”
which entirely supports Mr. Barbour’s statement
on this subject.— i'o the many other matters, of
an int* resting and important character contained
iu the report, I need not bespeak your attentio -.
W. C. U
VIRGINIA ELECTIONS.
House of JJeki’Utes.
Amelia—(Corrected.) Richard Hooker
Rodophil Jeter* 175.
ISO,
Bedford—(Roll* kept open throe days)—“ Mr.
taloldil Mcnnis’’ (Jacksonian) undoubtedly elect
c«l. At the close of the 1st day’s poll, Mr’. himon
Noell wa- 9 vote.- idle.,d of Col. Pleasant vl
Hoggin—,and the 2nd •lay, about 15. A small
majority against a Convention.
, ‘ " ■ * 1 us< 'ey, ini. Isaac
loiter —| /'»«//» a Correspondent: “Before the
vote was taken, Mr. Dromgoole of the Senate ad
dres-od the I* ©pie in a long and able speech, on
the subject of a convention, in opposition to the pro
priety ol Calling one. Mr James II. tiholaon, a
late r |ire-.-ntative of the county, under startl ing
that some misapprehension In regard to his indi vi
dual sc iitjnifnts on that subject c islcd, Iclt if a
duty, which he owed the people for whose stiffra
ges he was then a candidate, to declare Ins senti
incnts in regard to it. Regardless, of what might
bo the effect it would have upon Ids rc-eluction.
he did so in a manner which, while u lost him
the votes of a great number of his most inti
mate and personal friends, who upon the score of
p; inciplc lidt it Ihefi dny to vote against him, yet,
v*tolled their approbation of the candid, manly, K
independent manner, with which he avowed
thorn. I lie eonv* Id ton question was made a test,
and conn qucntly Mr. Hliolson was excluded ”
• /"'Jinan- f.eo. Stillmim 228,C«pf. John »t inn*
1 6_Sam.,el Y Morris 150. Maj. W,„. Tompkins
, y'■ rite cat, ,
I t the if. oT Dele.'ales were all pledged to the
cann ot Andrew Jackson. Tbo contest ,tll
< ..nvrnttoii Qite t.on was r-markaldy warm and
animated. Ilenry Magrnder Km. add.,
j eopl. in favor of a < onvott'iof). Every
wasm .de by its opponents n, pIOcnre ,
addressed H e
*5— Jig
I h c «tec'mu was uncommonly full ”1 1
...
waiia. e .t to— 11,on.,is MarshaH387.
for Jack^o, The1 “
... (Mr. T. is
winchester Republican” say
i
Col. Wuilaco U lor the Administration- -the W in*
cliostcr *• \ irghiian” considers him to be of the
school ol GhYistopher Quandary—Mr. Marshall w
tot ilio Administration. Hie Winchester Uonub
in .in , iy s tb it “ the Presidential question was
not Made a ist however.'”
Hali’ax—Dr. Tho*. 1*. Atkinson 457, If. K.
Scott* 437—General Carrington lit). Win. Minor
,y- [AVo/n a Curreryoiuhnt.} " The cause ol u
convention has boon and is impiuving in ihi« coun
t\ I‘he most sanguine conventionisU, never lin
’d lately, calculated on more than one vote out ol
lour. The ultimate result, it may be slated, will
l>e something like the present. The cause was
tMtii b injured by an argument used by an able
ann-conventionist (Mr. Logan) that is, the amal
gamation ol Convention and Administration.&. ha
ving an instance directly before him, (Gen. Car
rington) it was used as a powerful handle a
gaiii-t the cause of the convention. It had much
i ' <"!—many, u bo were before doubtful, at.once
decided—and believed with the Speaker that the
whole question “ was an effbr t nt power nnd a da
ring attempt to subvert the political principles of lire
*- tale. It this could be believed, the question is
gone. Gen. ( arrington being the Adams Elector
I lor this di l.-ict, it may tie believed that his poll
*‘e'vs the strength of the administration in this
! county This is not the fact—In this vote there
i is an Union ol Convention and Administration, t*.
I to my knowledge, many voted for the General
| who preler Geurral Jackson to any man under
: tin.- Sun. 1 he day of the JidminUtration ha»
long since jiasseii.”
! King and Queen—Benjamin Pollard, Edwin
i Upshaw. x
J/m/isoii—I.inn Banks 257, Wm. Kinks 157—
" "i "“liter 119, Alexander.Graves 17.
.. Morgan—Q*ssaway Cross* (Adin.) 88, John O’- i
l enull (Jackson) 83—John Sherrartl (Jackson) I
VV (Adm.) 27, John Hunter (Adm.)
' —. *' I he smallness of the vob® gi* en, may be
attributed in some measure, to high waters and
the absence ol many freeholders," who have a
vailed themselves of the present favorable state of
tiie streams lor*rafting their planks, hoop-pOles,&e.
to market. The polls were closed by consent of
the candidates, at an early hour,' on Monday e
Veniug. IMartineburg Cor.
Jliinror—Hugh Capcrlon, .Major Wm. Vasa
.(No opposition.)
Surry—John C. Crump 171,Francis Ruffin 159.
Mr. JohnII. Bernard is re-elected in the Caro
line District—the precise majority we Lave not
ascertained—Report says about 100.
In the Fauquier District — Daniel F. Slaughter"
is elected by a majority ofabout 50 votes.
.Not in the last Legislature.
CON VENTlON QUESTION.
Brunswick
Fluvanna
Franklin
Fauquier
Halifax
llanover
Madison
Morgan
Monion
Scott
80
162
126
451
161
lv-6
64
1:57
99
250
1
against.
300
Neutral.
158
356
55
409
252
184
168
23
l.'S.i
summary.
Frijm tlie votes which have been published on
* ,e *»uUjfCt of a Corn-. tition, it appears tliat in 78
counties and the city of Richmond, Norfolk Bo
rough,and Petersburg, the number of vote.' given
has been 28,222. This does not include Prince
U illiam- 1 tie votes stand thus :
Fora Convention }.'».2t5
Against a Convention 12 877
Majority for 2-JtiS !
T here are still 2G counties, and 1 city to he
1 heard from, namely ; 5 Eastern counties; Acco-I
mac Charles City, James City Middlesex, lhim-e |
'■ illiain'-—ami the city ot W illmmshurg—M Middle
counties, Bedford, Lunenburg, Orange and Pat - i
rick. 1 Valley county, Augusta : and 16 JVcs
tcni counties, Alleghany, Brooke, Cabell, Giles ‘
Grayson, Greenbriar, Logan, Lee, Monongalia’ !
Mason, Randolph,. Russell, T»zctvc!l, Washing-!
ton. Woo!, and \\ ylhe.—From this statement it 'is !
apparent that the majority for a Convention will j
be considerably enlarged. It is probable it will u
iimuut to live or six thousand.
COMING AT LAST.
The following article is from tire National Ga- 1
zette ot Thursday last:
i f" « observe the following sentence in a scries
[ of resolutions printed tor some public meeting:
“ It is now ascertained that Mr. Adams made o
vcrinrcs to the leaders of the federal party, before
bi< election, oll'riiig in substance to bring them
into power provitleil they would support him.”
1 bis may serve as a specimen of the electioneer
ing falsehoods put in circulation under the authority
ot party assemblages. No evidence of the fact thus
Mated—nor the shadow of evidence—is extant or
could be adduced. The utmost that hoi been al
| nuth any semblance of truth is—that one
1 or two members of Congress, Federalists, who de
cidedly preferred Mr. Adams to General Jackson,
| on the broadest grounds, wished to know, before
they definitively resolve,! to vdle for him, whether
if made president, he would pursue the /when
of erclutting Federalist* from (fire, and they
accordingly asked fir information on the subject
from Mr. Webster, or some other friend of Mr.
Adams, supposed tw be acquainted with his senti
Tbcir object was—not any stipulation for them-'
selves, but simply (he satisfaction of being assured
tliat ^disfranchisement as detrimental to the nation
al weal, as unjust and absurd in itself, w is not (ike- i
Iv to be continued. I'o ibis application the gen
tleman addressed gave a written answer,which had
the approbation or revision of Mr. Adams_and
which contained a profession of doctrine on the
point, similar to the one soon after made to the
world, more emphatically and fully, j/i his inau
gural address. Here is all that has been alleged
with any degree of plausibility. A d yet we arc
told now of overtures, corrupt bargains between
Mr. Adams and individuals, Re.]
weeks, and months transpired, after the pledge
was noticed in tli ■ papers, and yet Mr. W. pre
sorvtd silence. The administration papers were told
from the begin i,.4j that they had better admit
the farts and plead justification. With tlio excep
tion ol two Huston papers (which ft ft began this
course, hut soon drew back in a panic,)
their papers generally denied there was an
truth or semblance ot truth in the whole story. •
i’hcN. V'. American was even authorise d by Air.
Adams, himself, to deny that there was the sftglit
c.sl foundation, for it. —Mr Walsh blinked Ore mat
ter as well as lie eotild.—— In January last, wo w- re
informed by a-letter from N. Jersey, that Mr
Webster had communicated an account of the let
ter (written by himself nnl modified by Mr. Ad
ams) to Mr. Stockton, to Mr. Hopkinson and ti/
Mr. Walsh. These gentlemen wore interrogated
in the public prints about the matter.—Hut not
word’could he drawn from thorn except ,, very
general and most unsatisfactory remark from Mr.
>V aldi. Appeal after appeal was urged upon him;
but he was silent; until at length when tin- scent i f
becoming stronger is. stronger,It he bounds pres —
iug upon the heels of the hix: w hen the friends ol
Mr. S. ani disclosing facts which can no loiigei
be denied, Mr. Walsh finds himself under ihe
necessity of letting out his statements in a very
awkward manner, and attempts at this late hour
to plead justification
V. c may now exclaim with Tim Dramatist, in
(be celebrated screen scene, •• The troth incoming
at last”—only that Mr Walsh has no; all the cm!.
dor of fhe unfortunate l.ady. He admits gome at
the material facts ot tho case (which his juother
editors had been so manfully denying)—but tie
does not tell us 4// Ihe facts, and ho moreover seeks
l to givo a lal«e colouring to such a* he choose- to
[disclose. He does not tell us how many federal
ists there were, who wished to sound Mr. Adams’s
•eiitiim ntr and to govern their vote for him byt,t»
declaration towards their party—he dot s not « II
us, wheth. r Mr. W ebster told Mr. A. of the ob
ject ol hit application -tie does not tell us
Mr. A. modified Mr. AN*, letter—Ire does not t. II
ns to bow many federalists Mr, W. showed (A/s
l< tier, nor whether be showed if to three federal
ists who bad in their bands tho votes of two stale ,
nor whetb- r he ofteicd to another federalist, who j
| had sil o in bu hand Ihe vote of another State, to!
j slow it to h in a't i the tir T ballot, and that tbi-j
! fcdcraliat ih.-dfcir.cd to sec it. Wo also paa^ over 1
.Mr, \\ abli's dijiloimtic jjrgwi, about * <t ei/sent
. bmncf of truth, ’ about “ Air. Webster, or sotne
! olhcr J> tend of Mr. Adam*,” about “ ■> profetsimt
| ’f doctrine, similar to the one soon after made to
. Mie world, more emphatically and fully, in his Iii
| augural Address,” and about "all that lias Ihvii
\txx- with anV dcgiee of plausibility.” For,
ivi' ” ,ll'b well knows that the “ revision” of Mr.
' s letter by Mr. A. is not only alleged, but is
« '('<, and that it was Mr. Webster who conducted
lie overture, the negotiation, call it what you !
t please ;t tv as Mr. Webster who obtained the ■
soothing plr.lgv lor the satisfaction of the voters. !
M r. M al'h has given in Ins version; and we give
anoiher—let the world judge between them.—
Mr. Webster applied to Air. Adams to satisfy the
'hesitating federalists, who had votes to give. Air.
A. pcifcctiy knew the motive of the application,
and the use which was to be made of the letter.
-.o knowing, he revised if, and gave the rcrpiired
pledge—he gave it for the purpose of .satisfying
J‘,c gentlemen, and obtaining their votes. The
letter war so used—it was show n to federal gentle
men, who had in their hands the votes of two Slates
' was otlered to another, who had in his
hands the vote ol a third State, but he refused to
see it. . We leave it 16 the public to judge of the
plausibility’ ,){ this version—we leave it to them
to judge,how far Air. Adams was warranted in de
viating in hnsentimental letter that he wished the
election could go back to the people—and how far
he was warranted in authorising the N. V. Amur- i
ican to contradict the whole story, in the most un
qualified terms. Me leave it to tiicm to judge how
* ’r *'^r* Walsh might not also justify some friend
°t *Wr. 1 biy in going to Mr. M obster or “ some
other tiiend of Mr. Adams”—and saying to him,
M e wish to vote for Mr. Adams—but the inte
rest ot tin* nation is closely connected with that of
t he M est; her interest depends upon the Tariff and
Internal Improvements; we do not think them safe
unless the M est i; to he provided for in the choice
op the Cabinet, and the great friend of those inte
rests promoted to the tirst seat in it,” &c. &c.
l>nt to shpcl further light the circumstances un
der which this cotu'os-ion of the Nat. (Jamie w as
made, we submit th^ following:
Extract of a letter from a gentleman of respecta
bility to <i gentleman at fVmhington, dated,
| Trenton, rinrtl '-J. IS28.
“ A on no doubt have seen a letter purporting
to have been written by the late hu b.ml Stork
t'»n of Piinccton and published in the Kvening |
; host. Mr. Ilopkinson and It. T. Slorkton have
denied the authority t f the one published ns ini-I
! virig been written by Richard Stockton in his life
j lime, whieli is ail correct enough; but the/ do
I not, nor trill the ! deny that there teas such o
\ Utter Jt trill all come out in due time and hi/
j «. /•’. Stockton, li e think it best to differ it
j /or the present—that there teas such a letter,
ire aer ready to j>rcre when absolutely tuces-!
sary,”
“ THE ylCK OF CHI FA I. U\
Jin* Admini-tration pilots have again opened],
ttieir attacks upon an injured and porsoeuled wo
I 'nan. Mr. Hammond, Edi'or ol the Cincinnati j
! Gazette, and the confidential friend of olie ot the !
Secretaries, has recently been on a visit to Wash
: itiglon—and lias put.forth a new pamphlet again*'
' the private eh u-artcr ol an imhv idu:d, and that in
dividual is a woni'iiif I f undivds of these disgrace- |
I’ll pamphlets have hcvn circulated bv certain '
members ot l ungres*—who have abused tiie privi
lege ol their Frank, in order to give currency to a
garbled and insidious compilation of the document
rospecting the f*i.v At litiatncn,— ami to this abomi
nable tirade upon Mrs. Jackson.—We Irjve not
noticed tliis second and enlarged edition of the
*-!-• hood* formerly circulated about Mrs. J.— but
it ha3 received a proper castigation from other
presses -and Mr Hnmmohd seems to exult in tin
disgrace which he lias incurred. *• i am really
am* >f»d(says in iti his last paper) with the so ago- '
ni.dies. When I wrote the article that so deranges i
the tempers of the liefoite*, i .* culatesl topieree
them to the very joints and marrow, and 1 have 1
not been disappointed. The more it is abused, the j
more it will be read, and the more it is read the
more effectually it w ill blast at.d w ither the pros
pects ol their chief. Tin; efforts to excite sympa- ]
thy for the lady avail nothing. It is against the :
common feelings of mankind, to Harcivi: /vco.n- j
VICTED ADttI.TERR|S, AMD IIKR HRWOCII I
Iiusn A XT), INTO T1IK 1UT1MATION OVl'IUVIR- '
tuvuts a.no i uk : h astv.”— Such ia the lan
guage which i - employed fry one of the conti Icn
tia! par;isan< of the Coalition about Andrew Jack
son and iii- wife—and such are the desperate expe
dients to which they are driven, in the vain at
tempt to buoy up a sinking cause!
Mr. John Hinni, the notorious protege of the
pre.-ent ndudni-trution, and the notorious chculator
ol the Harti-letter ami the Coffin-hAndbills, has
thrown out the following language about the best fc
the most popular officer under the government at
Washington: “Nothing would ?p promptly and poiv
‘•r'fully liK-uwiTU and invigorate tin* friends ol
the administration as the prompt dismissal of the
post master general, who has cither from fully or
k)nierrij, at the public expense of some thou
sand dollars, lent himself and the patronage of bis
office to foment faction and give vigour to opposi
tion.”
Mr. McJ.can is supjUHed to prefer Gen. Jack-on;
but a* the same time In- is understood to take no
part in the election—He discharges his official du
ties with an energy and fidelity which have never
been surpassed— without supporting or opposing
the individuals with whom he is associated in tin
government.—Vet they would he very willing to
cashier him for his private feelings, if they dan
to indulge their smouldering resentment. They
‘Jar# not.—Their late equivocating conduct to
ward-! Gen. Ha fit son may cool some of tli i >
friends in Ohio—and to remove u man, *o much
beloved and respected in that State, would at once
irretrievably lose them her vote.—Hut these triv
ings-out cl Mr. iiinas probably indicate the stat of
their feelings.
\p intelligent Correspondent f>{ the Ihdtitnoi
Kj-l»tiJ»Jican writes from Washington urid«;r date 01
“'*•> April, that “ there is no rearmnahle douht <>f
tf»«* election ol Oen. J.irksou. Voti mc** how things
■ re going on in New-Jerwv~N.*w Voi k i-> -^af.
beyond .ill doubt, the “ re-action” pretended
the Adams party to the conti ary notwith-'andlng;
ib.it a “ re-action’ has indeed commenced, but >•
is against thh tai dition—that Harry, the J.i<-k on
earn*Mate lor (Governor in Kentitel.v, will be
*' ''tadfo, Hie Ad him. or rather the i la} eandi
i’e, by .1 considerable majority—that Ohio i- in ,i
•ate of great dufm-fy, which vf, W|ll be r. iiev 1
Iroio as soon a- the guhei n.dorl.il elertioti in Ken
toeky is over : sf,o will go for Jack on.”
I he Jackson for responding Ootmriiitee of the
• ** iiav«« enlarged tin ir number by tin
addition of 7« mmiie. The An'i- I.iek on t ,oininit
t< e of the si'm1 ripmiy have added 2.5 names to1
•heir oii|rinal t .'onitnif |cc.
I he Jackson < i) respondin'; Committee of Hoc k •
in-jti.im havo coneclcf a mistake into which one !
al our Correspondents h is Ivcn betrayed. The
state it as their opinion,that 150 n th- me t <
> ote wliieh tic Administration will probable obtain
m that county. -The Ksli'or of tl, lhrkiii”bon
,,Vl U r '•*' the confident b,.|j,<f of • Cl >- •*
!' » !'1 !<*ul.»iod to Ini hi a corn ct opinion, that a
least id if) votes mi^iit In polled in the county,” I
IV1U1T DOFS T/ffS ME.'IJV?
ihi.rkin* frrti »,.t1 f irrnnn'aftrr. . birti hm tirrn iti.
r*'»t"»n t*» the lorsn. »inpt>.yr,1 hy MS.t.e . K
1 »«•<• art r.r ihen.irt, , M.r u*., m...i snunnv m i.tfir..
« * f I-.i • 111 11 1.0. if r i‘U ini
, neie/t .Vi Air, E-q. ill hit JM vrir.iArrlitxii ar,!
; diaeaae. lie we* a man of highly cultivated mind. auer.nll
| member of Son.tv. an.I .lint r.^ittnl hy all who kurw hiuv ]
| - on I bui j,lay. (ho 17th ult >' tr't paiu til all I ll..*
gtrin/t illotu of nr ally 4 wecke, which the t,..rr wjilt uiiron
inuii fortitude aiidreeignalinu, !Ut. jLury R Bride,faiU i. v
■ of Mr. Thouiaa Hridyrfcith, ol Lonenfu'e. iulht SU wit
ol her !/<»,leaving a dncftaanl.it c liuehaiid and C chilJien »
deplore th.ii lor* In thr d..th ol ihu (inly i .tunable
man.tiiKiUy liar hem deprived of one < f .1. hr^iitnt oraa
ifit m(«. Her HI4MV viiiiit‘9 miJ Ctfillct drp>»r(m« til, tngttht*i
Willi a peculiar euavilt ol uiatucre. al nine commanded the
>r-|in t an.I r,t»cin of all hrr uri<hhore; „„| ,h» ai.ai m. * .
licit ndr which waa tuatiifriird for her lecartiy, hy ■ loCr.
riri le of friends and eeqiuintaiirea. whi . outu.ua d to bane
arCund the I r.l •nlr. iluiii r hrr india|MMtti<>ii, horr ampli |.a
ii o my ol (lie eeterbi ill which »he wri held by all atbo hoa-r
——afler a few ,1aT.j||r,..1,t ih.ra.i-'cneeof col (ftna,
TL. *Ut c“',n,»- V*- -v<‘r tf‘<f‘i HAitl/e A'no r, in thr
Jlh yrai I'f hrr Never In a if hreomr ihr i.a'iu
fill dnty of fur ml amt rrlalivr, to reconl (br death of a an.*
atniahir >r imer-dine you..* La ly. Ilian the ml jirt of the
pir-rut uoii.r. Hut a f*w ilaya prrvioua til tho orcairtcncr oS
»u rviul, ntiirh ha. ov.rwhrln.rd all who knew l.r. in I ho
iterprat eti.f.ahe wa. in thr f„|| e.,j.,y,0eol „l h.aUh; thr urn
waa yrt fir.hin hr. clierk-aiid the tiprrmon ol h.rUne
•mi k ryra.atioke in ihf afronycat laoyuata, tlirpunlvof (hr
•oul from whrncv (Am rx/,r,t)ton emulated. Hul U ha. pleai
rd AliDirl.tr Ciuil, in hu wiulnui, ti. take her hri.ee; an J.hiiv
ovrt painfi.l Itr il.ip.ination, her Iriend. ate cunaoled with
the .Prfo.uty that ihr i, now in the full rnmvtnint of that
happ.iarw, which a life of perfret an I coDariuua ten.tude. in
(bh w nlJ, cntiirei to its poiuitor in (tie b^xl. Wet* I i»
attempt to ,o jmtice lo the petite of tl.ii dear girl, 1 oiijlt.
with naif, till up the Theaa.ire of paper and l,u r. heforr me,
, ■ V 1 *n* UP*- l*y thia tin he of fate, a devoted jnoitirr
hae hei.u deprived »f a ita.u-htrr, whom .be adirod; andaf
aa 111 * *" '* ,rrJ * ildtr, of whom they writ jn.tli p,o,d.
DAY AFTE l TO KOHEOW,
H tit be Uiiuen in this Cili/,
the
31SMAI. SWAMP
CANaL LOTTERY,
... . Urn class.
h7 7. ^ C Aon.fanmr frx„,
. Hiplicst Prize §50,000—1 of .<>0.000—1 , f
^1.,;,r0«.r„Vf of I53’000—* o* 933,500
~2 °r[ fc ol $ 1,000- 9 of $aoa—apd ntany
Olliers ol smaller (lciioiiiiuation.
Only Id,180 Tick els.
, . PRIPK OF TICKETS.
GCKEN’S
LO-rmty ,i,vj) Excji.f.vi;E-OFyier
COB.yen OPPOSITE THR EAGLE MOTH. ’’
X. fn iht last . nil of the uAer. / . •, . ‘ .
«/« OOJ rf../W nvu totaol CoAtZ, O Jir, ,o
-J this city; unit tvh,rt xrui lol,l fn ,ht , ££ U.^TfA*
f rent o/ ij S, tin a Thou,on,I Volta,,, to a , cntlfne .
rcin/inr ■„ Cumbir/aHd caantt / S*DUtma.t
Xj’Addr-.a ■*
/f, Aw t KPllE-X' J‘-*•’ BROTHERS.
—gfrAmo id, ya. Mao «■__ _lOa-wr,.
iL\Y AFTLll TO-MOKttOW.
rinai.YU STATE lottery
K •»« Till: BENEFIT or i„E
DISBXAK. SWAESP
CANAL COMPANY,
Mth class,
Tu ,1‘ ail'n at Richmond, 1 ’a. on TJiur^dau
tet, Hu Sth tj'JIfai/. ' J
lj NUMBER LOTH u V—MX DRAWN BALLOT*
• prize of
1
I
J
i
priz.es of
*■•.'0,000
AO,000
10.000
•1,250
5.000
I’-s&uO
A,000
1.000
6 T.|
:.•«»
: \
■MO.i
i-jo
loo
!>U
^8i»
■’to
«;<>
60
40
•JO
60.-.I Prize-:,
1*139 Him**.
1*i 227,0»v
>rirl. Tickets, §120, barters, *3
10 I Eighths, ' "■ ■■
at JIL. V 7? > WAT El YSS
rr r o, ,, 2<ooA Store.
J, « C fi'hrr *nM ...
.lie,.,,:!.. 1 ' «uri.u?a, r ...
Ill
HhNJlA \\ AT KINS, liichruuu<!,
U3-4(
I'nusj.vfA
STATE LOTTERY
KOfl Til P D l« w K- l- r r i .• ^
KOK TUB BUNEflT OF TIIK
DIS.'l.lL Sti\J.MT C.i.YAL C’OAIPA.\'i
1 1th class.
TO BF. DRAJVjY AT RICHMOND, V.
On YUursdoy the Hlk day of .May 1{£>S.
1> NUMlfl.K LOTTERY—SIX DRAWN fl U.1X:'
t>
(lu
If
39
39
39
39
39
39
78
273
(to
do
<to
<6j
<!o
scuiiMi:.
£-.<>,000 is
20,000
•10,000 i<
•1,520 is
3.000 it
2.504 is
2.000 i.s
i.otm js
590 j.s
120 is
100 is
90 is
SO is
Jo
(to
(to
1446 do
5051 prizes,
70 is
60 is
50 is
40 is
9139 blank*, $
2o is
11,190 tickets.
J’ltfr. |,n»ah> -iOilsyi -»ft»-r (be drawing, *tnj
u,uat iltilurii, u of 1.5 jirr .rut
I’rict of Ticket.*, viz :
<50,DC .
20,006
10,IK
3,u
•SjAvr
4,00:>
ti.Ut >
A'.OlC
4Mi<
0,90
U,5l>>
3,126
2,73o
12.3lu
3.90<>
P),»J>
88,9-Jt>
$227,04o
•uSjecKu ir.«
$20
' 10
*> hole iickcts,
Halves,
Quarters,
■Eighth*. ■
i_r vM*j*r* non, Mir i i, fr« .
(< if*.
J. IK YATES tf A. ,
M.y 2.
Ttl l ’ll Sit A V J\ •/'■; A*T
IHE
i'|irorn|'(ly .
ji'eytyhe,
■Mifiyiggrj.
Alujj 8lU 1!
BISiVIAL SWAMP
CANAL LOTTKKY,
14/’// C/.
Will h* il- Mtit Ilbf Ciiy I,( IWliru 1,1, on VTfdn^».|,y. “• ,
I Miy, »i„l t„ i. i, n.on HjiMi.lnl Pii/e., Ci.«n *nv ml,./;
tiny in lh-- I non ■ "
•V,0,000 CAPITAL PxilZE.
SCHLMR.
i J i ;/.c oi $<>0,000
1 10,000
J *.000
2 Prizes of 2,000
*> SOO
.'JO 100
»0 80
00
2*.;j 40
s. a
I Prize ol $2Q,00
■J.iVj i
I U.ftO'r
t> Prize* of l (Ki"
*> J?<r
io
.* X 0
II Ol
'V fiolc 1 ickfto, $20—Shiin-i in proportion.
TM> / nit try hr ,ba:vn Ijf the approved Comblnni,,
Satltm,t\i'k trrirei In to \ T> k-t or Shnrt. thr uo.
rAim.r, rind it nholnUly nccorntt null HI'routi onlithr n
rfu Inbuitt t Ac n-holt •/ th* Print inn /■ ur nunnier. ' ’J
futh.nt heretofore,rrn.ht attain "l for nil Pi it tit the tuomr.
the llrtna.ng ii eon pitied. Ordtrt/■on, the Count, v „m..f
nilmtlrii to, nt the aid ettuliluhed prompt pau /Jotter«
Kxc hungt OJJm of
S. fc M. ALLEN fcev
CIIAKLLS
(Une (J.rfti a!x»ve Uk- Mansion-House, MaiieStfce'
Kielimood, Va.^
gn *1 »•< i i.rtrnf of Vrr,h Mrilif.in#., J-,..
• i Oil., |.yr Kmfl., Kf !«•», 8ffrg«<>B lortlnlnOiU. -
i ■ . r i . , , . | ,, „
*•• *'• ■■ I ill..I,.i li’’» »• 'ti.y t«n l.y (
! 1 ’ •■< i. • »r> 't.ivr^
i , »>vl 'li rr |iiiicbs*rng for 1 umly
HviImI to oil.
Jir.so,
if jy Klirft, a H«'<»»*'(y f ij K-»-r
Af rp»»«<li hiMii?, (%.i iti« |(f
Ky* Wafer, r*»rr f.ir *t*f
(ttUQ.Dt .

xml | txt