u> aid, thai any such imputation will
co&aututc a calumny.
DEPOSITION OF MR. JOHNSON.
Rtchartl M- Johnson, t Senator of
the U. States from the >tate of K-niucky,
appraicd before lit committee, was
sworn, and testified as follows:
Immediately after bteakfaM Friday
morn'og, Governor O^rboui, Secretary
of Wai, sent a messenger to my room
with a request to come to his house, if
convenient, without ('day; if not con
venient, he Mould c?li at my room. I,
without delay, went to his houst ; he in.
formed me that lie wished to stale his
conduct and proceeding relative to the
charge which had been made against
Mr. Calhoun by Mix; th?t I might see
Mr. Calhoun, ai d, as a mutual liicnd,
give h m the la< ?n in detail
1 heard what (i veinoi Harbour had
to say, and then vent to the lodging of
Mr. Calhoun. Colonel liayre of the
S.-nute was pres?-ni. I told Mr. Cal
houn that r. >v. B?i boor had requested
me to cail dt) him, and explain the
course he had taken in regar 1 to the
charge aforesaid, lie Mas then bu?y
in folding up an J seal.n,; some letter,
which 1 presume was the one he direct'
cd to the Speaker of the HouS - on the
subject. 1 stated to Mr. Calhoun that
e .v Barbour had been presrnted with
the letter of Mx, l.y a Mr. Clark,
making the char ge afore-aid; that upon
reading the letter he came to the part
which n.ade the ch?ige against Mr.
Calnoun; that he, Gov. Baibour, told
Mr. Clark, (hat he had no doubt that
the charge was a base calumny against
Mr. Calhoun. Mr Clark replied, that
he uelicVed so likewise, and it was wuh
a view to pres- nt Mix as making this
fco5 ?-hargc, to oi-r- him unworthy of
the confiJence of the Department, and
therefore, should not obtain a cer
tain Contrail for which he was thi-n
the lowest bidder; and stared, that it he
caul-? rnuke >ucha charge against Mr.
Calhoun, r.e might make the same a.
gainst him, c \ . Batbuur. Tuts a/as
urged, as I understand, by Ciark, to
have the pri. position of Mix lor the
contract rejected? that l.c icques'ed
Mr. Clark to leave the let er with him,
that he might loo> over it, as he was
also examining some other papers which
made charges against Mix, showing
him unworiby ol confidence; that in
examining the papers aiutcd to, he
found charges of such a character a
gainst Mix, that, connected ?nh his
charge aganst Mr. Caiboun, he had no
hesitation in rejecting his proposals,
although the lowest bid, a-, unwoithy
rf the cui.fi'lcnce ol the Dcpartmen
uofirnor B^tbour state.-4, that he un
dertrtood thut some friends of his and
... <? ?? t . L Ls tL.t L.
to have ictained the letter and advised
Mr. Calhoun ot it, or, that he ought to
have sent the letter to Mr. Calhoun;
up9t) that subject, he stated, it- at, be
lieving the charge false, and nut i ntnlcd
to any < redit, he did not thn>k that it
was worthy ol such const quern e or no.
lice, and that, moreover, he feared thai
he might insult the letlings of Mr. Cal
houn by giving such serious iinpor.
tance to the ct.argc, and in order to j
wash his bands of the whole affair, he
had returned the letter to Mr. Clark
under covtrv&nd rejected the proposals
of Mr. M x, upon the grounds alorc.
said, that ho *va* onwoilhy of confi.
dence and public trust, upon the -.'.round
of this charge against Mr. Calhoun, us
well as other infamous charges agiinst
said Mix. I think it was the charge of
forgery; and he hoped Mr. Calnoun
knew turn too well to believe tnal he
should lor a morm nt supple he was
capable of acting in any May to give
countenance to such a slander (.gainst
him. I eommunirated in substance
these facts to Mr. Calhoun, who. with
out hesitation, said he he|tev?-d Govern
or Barbour incapable of a des.gn to do
him injustice in the c?->?, and a quitted
him, as I understood, ol any wi?h 10 ?n
jure him in this respect, by giving the
least countciiancc to '.hecnaige a'oic
said.
Question by Mr. Clarke. ? Did you
hold this convci satiun with the Vice
President before lie made his commu
nication to the House?
Answer ? I did- It was the morning
of the day, and before he made the
communii ation to the 1 1 oust-.
Question by Mr. Campbell. ? Did
Mi- Calhoun, when yuu cal.ed on niin ,
speak of the publican ? ? in the I'noenix
Gazette of the 28ih ol Dettmbti? li he
did, what were his observation^
Answer. ? 1 do not recollect of hiv
ing any otner conversation with him
than that I have related. We did not
go into* any detail in relation tothe pub
lication
Question by Mr. Wright ? At the
lime you made the cominunicai ion to
Mr. Calhoun at the request ol Govern,
or Harbour, did he speak on the subject
ol the Mix contract? And il so, relate
what he said
Answer.? - I do not recollect that he
??id a single word icspcciing the Mix
contract. We entered into no detai ?
My object wis single and identic al, viz. j
to show him that Gov, Barbour hao
?cted honoiahly towaxls him' Upon
?a'isfying Mr. Calhoun on that subject,
we had no further conversation; in fact,
I talked and said nearly all that was
Mid; end that I have related as oeaiJy
aa i car. I
Question by Mr. Wright? Have you I
?17 knowledge of any contract enured
into in brha!f of the United State* by
the War Department, in which he was
ii? any way interested, or in the profit of
which he participated?
Answer? I never have; and I should
be sorry to know or believe such a
thing of him or any other man who has
ever filled that Department, or ever
will fill it, I have had a great deal of
bustness with turn during his wli >le
term of service, as th# agent, or rather
Iriend, of army contractor*; and I say,
that I believe he is a man ot as much
in1 entity as any on earth.
Q >6311011 by Mr. Ciarki ?? Hid you
been informed by any persot , beh>re
the publication of M'x's letter in the
Phoenix Gazett?, that the said letter
would ap|>e*ir there, and by whom were
you so informed'
Answer.? I never did know or hear
n f the existence ot such a lc;tcr, until
it was pubii. hed.
Swum iu ami ?ubs<-tibed this 4th day
of January 1827.
RICiiAKD M. JOHNSON.
1'JiITF.D STATES AND GEORGIA. * j
ExECVTIVK DCPAHTMr.VT, liKO.
.>tiUeJgtriUr, 17th Frb. i*27.
Sir? I reewtveu Uiis attonoox l?mii 1
L eut. Vinton, your Icttei ol the 29 h '
ult. and read wunin the satne hour hoin
it and the <*opy of it as puOli->h?<| in the
Na'ional Intel. i^cuci. r ot Hit 7h mat.
No r^om was left to mistake the mean*
in^ of this dispatcK ? Lient. Vii>t< n an
nuunced himself in all inn eductni y
note, a Copy o( which is herewith trans
mitted, ;? the Aid of the Comaian.ii -g
General; and you are sutlicicmv ex
plicit as to the means by nhuli yu
prnpt.se to rar y yi.ur resolution mt .
eff ct. Thus the mlli ary chatsc'tr ?>|
the menace is established, am! I am
only at libcity to gi*e ton the defiance
which ii merits. Vnu will distinctly
unoeistand, therefore, that 1 iet*l it to
oe my duty to re- is', to the utmost. any
military attack wmeh the Government
ot the Uni'e ; S.atcs snail mink proper
to make on the tcuitniy, the people,
or the sovcici^n y o1 Georgia, and all
the measures uecessaty to the pertorin
ance of thi* duty, accoiding to our lim
ited means, ure m progiess. _ Fiom the
first decisive act ot hostility, you will
be consid< red and treated as a public
enemy, and with thi less repugnance, j
because you to whom we might const'*
lunonally have appealed tor our own
defence against invasion, are yourselves
the irivadeis, and * hat i? more, the un
blushing allies of the savages, whose
| cause you have adapted.
You have relerrcd roc for ihe rule of
I niy coocuct to the T i city of VV ashing -
| w?. iik?. ?>i oiitci ircuiiea>
which nave received tnc constitutional
I sanction is iimoi)^ the supieme laws of
the land," and wmch the President is
j therefore bound to c.?rry into efferr,
'? by all the means ut.dcr hi ?? conrol."
In turrt I take the liberty to relcr you
to a Treaty of prior date, and prior
ra'.ifi' anon, concluded at the Indian
Springs, a copy of the proclamation of
which under the sign manual of the
President, I have the honor t<> enclose.
On a companion of date*, the President
may think proper to remind the Con
gress that the old grant claims prefei
ence of the new, and that when vtsed
r'ghts have passed, the o'd 1 1 eat y . like
the. old grant, has picLrcncc of the
new.
You have deemed it necessary to the
personal safe'y ol Lieut. Vinton, to
impose on him the injunction ot pro- 1
found secrecy, in th?s txecn'ion ol voor |
orders, whilst you cause to be publish* i
ed at Washington the ?ery instructions ]
which disclose those ordeis and enjoin
that secrecy, and which in fact readied
this place by ih<: public p r in s even be
fore L eut. Vinton had an opportunity
to deliver your dispa.ch. You mistake
the c 'in acter of the people ot (>eorgia
? -Offi f i ? of the IJ i;l . cd S' ate-', engaged
in the performance o? meir |.?W'ul du
ties have only to deport themselves a
gentlemen, 10 find the gjine securiiy'
and protection in tieorgia, as und r t he
aegis of ths government at Washing
ton.
I have the honor in be your obehent ,
servant, ii M. l'KOUi'>
lion, Jamts Darboi-r, j
Sicnlary oj War. |
r*t?VT|vr. l>?:i'*KTMr.VT, <??.<>. |
MilltdiftriUr, ntU I'ib. 1^27. I
Oroi.RH), That the A'totncy and j
Solicitors ( icncral of this Sate, in ev?.iy
instance cl complaint made ol the ar
rest of any suiveyoi, engaged in tin*
survey ol the lately accented feuitoiy,
by any civil pri. cess, under the anthoii
ty ot the (toveromeni of the Unitc l
States, do take <>l ncccs ary and legal
measures to effect the liberation of ihe
person so arrested, and to bring to jus
tice ri'hcr by indicment or mherwmr
the officers or parties concerned in such
ai Testation as offenders against the
laws and violators of the peace and per.
sonal security ol the public officers and
citizens m' this State ? That they give
| prolessional advice and assistance in
their defence against any prosecution
or action which m*y he instituted a*
gjinst them as < fTicera in the seivice ol
the state, and that they promptly make
known to this Department their acts
and doings in the premise*. It is mote,
over enjoined on trie civil magistrate*
of this state, having competent juris
**" 4 ????? ?l* t *?* ? ? i;
diction of thfe saipa, aiding and
ashling and enquiring tfito tfco cause of
evcrjr such arrest or detention a* afore
said, that the 'person may -he discharged
forthwith if illegally or unfitly detain
ed, and in affording sy^ch redress to the
aggrieved or injured pa-ty as by la* he
may be entitled to receive.
By the Governor,
E. H PIERCE, Src'y.
HEAD QUARTERS,
MUUJ^rriUf, 17 th Ft*. 18*7.
OKDURS,
The Major (Venerals commanding
| the 6ih a;>d 7J> Divisions will immedi
j atcly i>*sue orders to hold in rradiness
J the -e^eial Regiments and Battalions
I within their ?e<peciive commands to
renel any hostile invasion ol the terri
tory of this state. Depots of arms anJ
ammunition central to each Division
will be established in <<ue time.
By the Commander in Chief,
JOHN W. A. S \NFORD.
.iid-Jt-Camp.
The following statement of the cauae of the
diff -reneeu at present existing between the i
fluted St ate* und Georgia, ih extracted from
the Speech of I)aiu<-1 Webster in the IIouhc j
of Representatives on the IHh inst. when
the subject wasa^aiii brought forward and
it was finally dv termined to refer it to a se
lect couiinittcc. Trenton Ftdtralitt.
?In the year 1825, acntuin titaiy
was marie l>y (he United S.ates with
ilie Creek Indians, at a place called the
l-i.lian b( i:: gs, by which certain lands
wuc ceded m the U< iie?l Sij'es, which
l;iy within the territory of Georgia.
Hail i?"tl;incr prcveived this treaty Irom
gMiti.- into eflVt, in September, 1826,
to- ?e Uixls, pursuant to an agreement
between Georgia and the United States,
would nave heroine the letritnry of
[ (tcoigia. But previous to the period
assigned for this treat>Ts taking ? ffee*,
lor reasons which are known to all the
House, and wnich consisted chiefly of
?he dis*aiii'actiot> of a largo part of the
Indian tube, which were one party to
the treaty, and who complained that
those who , negotiated fhe treaty were
not duly authorized so lo d<>; a new
treaty was formed)" the very first ani.
cle of which declarer that the former
treaty, made at the Indian Springs,
was entirely annulled and done away.
This is tlfe. point which the ?-vnt'e
man in his statement seemed to Mr.
w. to hive wholly omitted, and it
Ccriainly a most important [xnut in tlic
case now. The Claim now brought
foiward and insisted cpori by Georgia,
if he understood it, wat, that this first
treaty, had the operation to vest the
title of the land* then ceded, in the
State of Georgia, and that the nullifies
lion of this first trclty, ? Inch afterwards
took place at Washh?gton, and formed
th* 6r#t article in the treaty of Wash
ington, could not, and did not have the
effect to divest Georgia of the title to
those lands. That, said Mr. W- is the
question. It m?y cer'ainjy be a very
grave question-** ques'ion of great
moment, rcspccting which, I shall uut
be in any hurry to give iny opinion.
Now, thdi-is-the Georgia side of the
question. The United States' side of
the question it different. The United
States' Government, on its part, cor.
tend*, that the second treaty does annul
the fi s'; that the pat s who made it
had power to annul first treat): that
by express term*, it is annulled, in eve
ry section, clause, and article o! it; and
that therefore there is no title in Geor
gia to any lands n?? embraced within
the new irca'y- Oti #j.is ground the
Government of the United States was
called upon to enforce this treaty, which
was the law of the laad according to the
prc-exi?<tinir statute law. Ar;d what is
that low* That whenever citizen* of
the United S.atts shall interfere, * beth
el as trespassers or as surveyors, to
run lines on lands guarantied t'? the
lr.dian tribes by ueay, the United
States shall revest such I'drarti ns of
treaty stipulation*, and shall puni-h
such persons as offend J^ainst 'hern.
Now, by the las' treaty with -he Creeks,
this protec'i'in of the Untied S'ates was
guarantiid ?o the Creek Indians, re
specting all the'r lands lying beyond a
certain lint. The hwr of the United
Sta'ts. m m> many wotds, provides ois
till ?1 v lor t hi-> ruse.
Tn : State ol Georgia, by its consti
tuted authorities, actii'g on ?b? ir ground
of t (instruction, and tl.r.c>y III the
lace of the second treaty, (whether
rightfully or not I sh^ll not now aitr nij?t
to decide,) sent their surveyors over
that line, with ord< rs to survey the
lands as per ain*ng to Georgia. The
Creeks immediately calhd upon the
United S ates to fulfil the yuaranty of
protection ??ii>lainrd in the 14th annle
?.?f the treaty of Washington. Georgia
proposes to maintain her suiveyofs by
military force, arid lie Unred States,
on the other hand, is culled upon by
the. Indians to maintain t tic iaith of a
tiei'y wi-h them.* This is a state of
things deeply tn be regretted: a is re
gretted by none more Ihan tnr. Ij.it,
regretted or n-i?, that is the q-iekt on at
issue. It is plain lhat if Georgia con
siders lersf It called to ma>ntam her
surveyors hy force, ar>d the United
S'ates' Govt rnmefit considers itself
called upon to msintnin the treaty by
force, there must be a collision.
FA MILY .tXOCJH, ~ ^
T N barrels and half bsrrolf, for sale by
Ji R. L. COOK,
Feb. |1 6j?? 3w
A LIST OF C.ME9 itcidMd <U-Ikc?*h<r. Tfrm
of th* Suprtmt Court c/.Wl* C?rW?**, ??? D.
. 1826. ?
William Fal's and o'hera v. Hugh
Torrance and Jimes K"?er, .Admrs.
from I resell. I?? Equity. Decree ac.
cording to the Report of the Clerk and
Maaier of freed!, tx< ept a* to the in
terest on '.he hire and profits ot tn>
t*roe?, which ((iiti iiHi is reserved tor
further consideration.
Pilgrim L. Williams > Micajah Ricks
and others, from ,Na>h. In Equity.
Dill dismissed without costs.
Miccjah Kicks v. Executors and
I Legatees oi Rowland Williams* Irom
Nail). In Equity., lute! locutory nr
dei of the Court below revers-d. He- i
I ferrcd to 'he Nlaster to take an account. I
William Uyao *nd others v. the Ex
ecutors and Trustees nf Mi.so Gnflio,
from Johns' on. I ?> Equity- Curia a<l
vitare vult.
William Crocm, Eircutor ol Bry?n
White field, T. William Herring and
wife, and others, legatees, fiom Lenoii.
In Equity. Order of teleience r?ncw
cd, Ly adding the Clerk ol this Court,
to the Commissioner ihoaen by the
parties.
R ibcn II. Wynne and wife v. Pcy
ton H. T install, front Halifax. In
Equity. Decree for ihe complainants.
L-roy Stowe v the heiia and devi
sees of Nathan Koid, dec\l. Irom Lin.
coin. The interlocutory order of this
Court ordering a panirtlon of the lands
reserved, and the cause remanded 10
the Superior Court ol Lincoln, with in
structions to make partition.
Fanny Simms and Saml. Allen v.
Cicswell Key and others, from Rock
ingham. In Equity. Decree accord
ing to Report.
Joseph Davidson, Treasurer of Pub
lic 11 lildings v. George Robinson, appt.
Irom Iredell? Judgment of the Supe
rior Court reversed, and new tiial
granted.
William Drew, Attorney General
and others v. Theophilus Huntet, fioin
Wake. In Equity. Injunction made
perpetual with costs.
Sarah Green ? William Croom,
Guardian, and William Uranton, from
Gicenc. In Equity. Remanded to
the Court below, with leave to take
further tcatimony.
Eium M. Johnson 9. Charles Car
son, appellant, from Buncomne. Judg
ment of the Superior Court ai rested.
Governor, to the u*e of County
Trustee v. Will am Bair a.;d others,
from Stokes. Judgment ol the So
perior Court affirmed.
Soto I3a:ik of North Carolina v. Hen
ry Hunter's Executors and others,
appts. from Edgecombr. Judgment
ot the Superior Court affirmed.
Djc on demise ot Y. Taylor and
other* v. Mary Sounders, appt- from
O..slow, Judgment of the Supeiior
Court affirmed.
John Morehead v. Eustace Hunt and
others? ?nd -arnj v. ?anit? :rt ni R ?*. k
ingham. In Equity. Injunction made
perpetua', and contract *et eside u, on
the complainant's rrcouveyiri^ the Lot
[ in dispute, by deed of conveyance, to
l>e approved of by the roaster ot this
Court.
Williatn Hughes v. Eustace Hunt
and others, from Rock ingham. I *? L?
quity. Injunction dissolved and Lnil
C^nnssed with costs.
Thomas Alston v Stephen Outer
bridge, from I'rar.klin. In Equity. In
junction made perpetual upo<i the com.
plainants reconveying to the dc 'cndani's
trustee whatever interest he may have
derived under the died lr<>m Ftmner to
him, and surrendering possession.
Jonathan Stephens v. Lilian J>nrs
I from Cumberland. Judgment ot the
j Superior Court affi nit-d.
| .Toab Alexander v. J >hn B. Hotehin
sor:? trom Ledcll. Judg.nctu ot ;hc
Supeiior Court reversed, and new nial
granted.
John IIowcll v. Martin Elliott, appt.
from Ru'.tierford. Judgment affirm
Cd- - %
Branch Collins v. Peter Porter, Ex
1 ecuior of Cader Collins, from Wake.
In Equity. Referred to the Cleik to
take an account, and report to ihv next
term.
John Neshittv. Hugh Montgotnc y's
Ex'rs. Irom Rowan. In E'pi'y. Re
u 1 red to the Clerk to take ait account
ot Hit; consideration money, wi.h inter
tst, up to tiic present time ? deducting
the wgr interest.
Jonathm Cheshire v. (i -nrgr |J(> ,r k
ntneis, I ro in Rowan. I 1 Equity. Hill
dismissed, urnli cost; , txcipi js to 'h
co-aaof the widow, who p>>* her own.
John Dick v Alien S;oktr and other ,
appt* irom Mon'uomery Judgment
<d tne Supeiior Co in rtveiatd, and
new trial granted.
Ambrose N?lsonv. Bird Evans, h om
Rockingham. J i<*gmcnt ol the Supe
nor Cuui t afTu mcd.
J tin II. Ea>le v. William Dickson
and C. M'Dowell, admrs. app??. from
buike, Judgment of the Sup*ri?r
Court reversed, and new trial grained.
John Karrnr v. Philip Alston, Irom
Chaham. Judgment of the Superior
Court reversed, and new inal granted.
W hilip Surdivant v. William S 01.
divan'( Irom Halifax. InEqjty. He
ftrieo to ihc Clerk to take an urc^ui t.
Archibald Fagan v. Arthur Newsom,
Irom Davidson, /'id^mrnt ol the Su
pcrior Court rcversctf otld trew dial
granted
VniHaoi Meretij and wife V, D?\.J
Bunting, ?en. from Sampwn. Judg
ment of the Superior Cot r; iflirmed.
Sarah B Carter v. Salomon Gri'fj,
appt. from C*%*cll. Appeal diami>?
cd.
J"hn Shanburg' r, app?. ?. Alrxan
dtrK, nnedy. it'mr. frr>n? Ju?'u
I ment of the Supc ioi Court ; ffunitt' ?
Role to set aside ?he nonsuit dt?rharj;t r.
j Margaret M'Dor.ald v. Kenneth
MurrhitoDi Imm Mo?re. Rule to ?ct
tsi'te n<ji?^u?t made absolute.
Redm n Ciua|)l> r anil o hers, app's.
v. the (I >v? rnor to the u->e of the Sta-c,
from Wake. ? Judgment ol the Supc>
Hor Cbun ?ffi<med. . .
Henry Willi; ma v. Donii I Wocil,
I ?pp . from ? J moment ol t!.c
Superior Court iffini'e'1.
John I* K. Ko *, a< d ? thera v. T. 1).
Watt*, r*'r. and J-?iah Turner, ?*?".
from Orarge. In F.qwity. Bill dis
missed wi-h rosts~each paitjr paying
their own costs.
Josiah Turner ant' Thomas D- Wa'ta
v. Cape Fear Navigation Company,
#n:l other*, from Orange In Equity.
Ordered that thia cause be remanded
tu the Couit below?it having been re
moved io this C?>uri prematurely.
P -qii.il P. A>he v. Cape Fear Nsvi.
nation Company, from Orange. In F*
qoiiy. Sam*- Older.
Child and C>ar<cy v Cape Fear Naw
igation Company, lioni Orange.
KquPf. S.<me Order.
Josi..h Turner v. Sjmufl Chi!d%
?x'r. from Orange. J dement ol if e
Superior Court reversed, and i.ew tiial
granted.
A. L tion e?, v. A. Lrr-nis, from
Cumberland. In Fijuiiy. liecree of
Sale.
D:rr.p?ey Taylor*. Ham and Z alnna
Taylor, from Na?h. An abated suit ?
ictrr \ueiat to the Defendants to show
cause wherefore they should not pay
costs. " Ordered that each party p<y
their own com*."
STATE CAUSES
S:ate v. Pender Weeks and Wo..
Beggar appta. from Kd^ecombr. Hu t
lor a new trial made absolute.
Sue v. Jim, a negro slave, from
New Hanover ?Judgment arrester.
Sia:e v. Curtis Orrell, from New
Hanover? -Judgment arrested.
State v. Robert II. M<?lier, from
Buncombe.-? Orc'crcd that a Subpoena
ducct tecum i?aue to the Cierk cl tf.?
Superior court.
Sii'e v. James K Brown, from CJran
, villr. ? Judgment ol t lie Superior court
I affirmed.
ji icw trick ? A t expectable physi
cian Hi Nr? York. wa? Stopped la*? ly
by a person who vushe f lo pay him*
d>llar, whi^h hr had been Rood enoo(?b ?
to lend Imn some tim-- previous. T&c
ilortor did not rccollect of his having
lent the money, but br?n^ a?vi'ed he
had, an<l the man preying the payment,
ne ^?>e the chfcngc for a three dollar
bill. Upon examination tbe bill prov
ed 10 be counterfeit.
liar in Tex at ? Bv a passenger in
a su am b"3' Irom Na'clmochrs, we
1 am th'i* nvo ac ions have Uui f tight
in t'exat between 'be I'redonhn* aid
I Mexicans, in hurl* ? I which tbe (orn ir
I r I ^ i ni tbe victory. Ol iht; tirs.1 fight
*t have no dt tails. The I a?t is sai ?
t it have occurred on the 4 h of ill ? ?
month, at ine i->wn of Nae-t.j5.J1.ci t*.
Sinir 7o 01 80 Mfxicai>s l.avirga.*
vaitccd on ;he village, tliey were 11. ct
by about 40 Kred?nons, ?i o soon rout
t-d their foe?, killing 4 and tvouf;dl"g
ten of i hr M^x.can aoh'ttrn.
Account* it orn Austin's settlement
stated tbc people to lie about iqr.illv
divided f, . r ? l'l ft'onians aid Sl?x"
ic .ns. As, I. o" ever, 'he former tve??
the tnost ifji-y and volrn', ii * as
t'i Miunl they take a!l the ao.
tnoi iiy into their own hand*.
A rJr!cuti* fiafiiT.
j It ix r.'fiin ih <J that lUDsMinhnttin tw (W?
' o'? the warUrsot" the l nitecf Mat *.
_ ? ? (.PHI"1 It KJ!
ciTir
*?' *yi is ??v.CSi
WwW ^ W IX w! W??>~y
No. ?_'<? l Market Philadelphia, *outli i?i?1 ,
two door* above the 1< I. ton Hotel,
HA** v?-?l l?v late a'ritalr', an el?;cant
, assortment o t r Hui", l>lai k, anil a
variety of lainy riilniircd < "l??t s?? and fa
niif*, ??f Sheppard'*, llui. ?><'?< an J other M. ?
nufartori'-H; \aleneia, Toilenett, Marseilh ?,
Silk, (.'ill Velvet, and other Vesting; oil if
whirh Hill he made in the mont fnfhional''r
*tyle, and from ten to fitV-en percent, low. f
than they ran he ptirrhascd rlftrwhcrr iu
the United State*. I.ik- wipo on ham}, a jv *
nrral nn^ortment of I. men, MuhIih, anil I !ati
liel Shirt* nnil I>iuwrrf, fanry anil ('lain Cia
vatn, Stork*, Su*|>? ndrrn, Kr.
Mr rehant ?? and other* visiting tlie nty, *il!
find it to their advantage to rail and <*annno
for thenwelyc*. Mt
If, \i ? X JIM',
ftriladclphia, Marrli 8 fv-tf
A