The New York Herald Newspaper, February 20, 1855, Page 2

394 FRENCH SPOLIATION. Veto Message of the President, ‘Yo Tex Hover or REPRESENTATIVES : Thave zeceived and carefully considered the bill en- | position of the. titled ‘An act to provide for the ascertainment of claims ef American oitizens for ‘spoliations committed by the French prior to the thirty-first of July, one thousand eight hundred and one,’’ and, in the discharge of a duty imperatively enjoined qn me by the constitution, I re- turn the same, with mj objections, to the House of Representatives, in which it originated. Ip the organization of the government of the United States, the legislative and executive functions were separated, and placed in distimet hands. Although the President is required, from time to time, to recommend to the consideration of Congress such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient, biy participation nthe formal business of legislation ix limited to the single duty, in a certain contingency, of demanding for » Will @ particular form of vote, prescribed by the consti- utien, before it can become a law. He is not invested swith power to Jefeat legislation by an absolute veto, but only to restrain it, and is charged the duty, in case Ye disapproves a ineasure, of invoking a secogd, and. a more celiberate and solemn consideration of it on the ‘of Congress. It is not mcumbent on the President a bill as a matter of couse, and thus merel authenticate . he action of Congress, for he must exercise mtelligent judgment, or be faithless to the trust reposed im him. I be approve a bill he shall sign it; but if not, be shall return it, with his objections, to that house in whicp it shall have originated, for such further action as the constitution demands, which is its enactmeat, if at ail, not bya bare numerical majority as in the first instance, but by a constitutional majority of two-thirds of both houses. While the constitution thus confers on the legislative bodies the complete power of legislation in all cases. it #, in the,spirit of justice, to provide for the pro- tection of the responsibility of tae President. It does not compel him to affix the signature of approval to any bill unless it actually have his approbation, for, while it requires him to sign if he approve, it in my judgment, imposes upon hum the duty of withholding ‘his signa- ture if he do not approve. In the execution of his offi- eial duty in this repect, he is not to perform a mere me ebanical part. but is to decide and act according to con- ecientious convictions of the rightfulness or the wrong. fulness of the proposed law. In a matter as to which he is doubful in his own mind, he may well defer to the majority of the two houses. Individual members of the respective houses, owing to the nature, variety and amount of business pending, must necessarily rely, for their guidance, in many, perhaps most cases, when the matters involved are not of popular interest, upon the Sevostigaticn of appropriate committees, or, it may be, that of a single member, whose attention has been par. ticularly directed to the subject. For similar reasons, but even to a greater extent, from the number and va riety of subjects daily urged upon his attention, the Pre- sient naturally relies much upon the investigation had, and the results arrived at, by the two houses, and hence thore results, in large classes of cases, constitute the Dasis upon which his approval rests. The President's responsibility ix to the whole people of the United States? at of a Senator is to the people of a particular State, that of a representative to the people of a State or dis- trict; and it may be ssfely assumed that he wiil not re- sort to the clearly-defined and! imited power of arresting Jegislation, and calling tor reconsideration of any measure, except in obedience to requirements of duty. When, however. be entertains a decisive and fixed conclusion, not merely of the uncons‘itutionality, but of the impro- preety. or injustice in other respects, of any measure, it declare that he approves it, he is false to his oath, and he deliberately disregards his constitational obliga- tions. Icheerfully recognise the weight of authority which attaches to the action of a majority of the two houses. But in thix care, as in some others, the framers of our ecnstitu‘ion, for wire considerations of public good, pro- vided that votbing less than a two-thirds vote of one or both cf the houses of Congress shall become effeetive to bind the coordinate departments of the government, ‘the people, and the several States. If there be anything of seeming invidiousness in the official right this eon ferred on the Presidext, its in appearance only, for the xame right of approving or disapproving a bill, aecord- ing toeach one’s own judgment, is conferred on every woember of the Senate, and of the House of Representa- tives. | It is apparevt, therefore, that the cireumstancra mat be extraordinary which would induce the President to withhold approval from a bill involving no violation of the constitution. The amount of the claims proposed to be discharged by the bill betore me, the nature of the transactions in which those claims are al'eged to have originated, the length of time duriog which they have eccupied the attention of Congress and the country, pre- rent euch an exigency. Tuer history renders it impos- sible that a Presicent who has participated to any con- siderable degree in public affairs could have failed t form, respecting them, a decided opinion, upon what he would deem satisfactory grounds. Nevertheless, instead | ef resting on former opinions, it has seemed to me proper to review and more carefully exayming the whole subject, #0 ae ratisfegtorily to deterguing the upturg and extent ‘of mp Ob!ications in the premises, 1 feel called upon, at the threshold, to notice an asse! tion, often repeated, that the refusal of the United Siates _to satisfy these claims, in the manner provided by the PFeeent bil, rests asa etain on the justice of our coun- try. Ifitbe co, the imputation om the public honor ia aggravated by the consideration that the claims are co- © ith the prevent century, and it has been a persist- ent wrong during that whole period of time. The allega- tion is, that private property has been takea for publ use without just compensation, in violation of expre: sions of the constitution; and that reparativa has deen withheld, and justice denied, until the injured par- ties bave for the most pari descended to the grave. But i it iv not to be forgottea or overlooked, that those who reprevented the people, in different capacities, at the | time when the alleged obligations were incurred, and to whom the charge of injustice attaches, in the first in- stan :¢, have also passed away, and borne with them the special information which controlled their decision, aud, | it way be well presumed, constituted the justification of their scte. If, however, the cbarge in question be well founded, altbough ite admission would inscribe on our history « page which we mht desire most of all to obliterate, | and although, if true, it must prinfully disturb our con- | fidence in the justice and the high sense of moral asi | | | Palitieal responsibility of those whose memories we have p taught tocherish with so rouch reverence and re. spect, rttil we have only one course of action left to us, and that i, to make the most prompt and ample repara tion in our power, and consign the wrong, us far as may be, to forgetfulness But no euch heavy sentedce of condemaation should be | lightly parsed upon the sagacious and patriotic men who | participated in the transactions out of which these claims are supposed to have arisen, and who, from their ample means of knowledge of the general subject in its minute details, and from their official position, are p Miar'y responsible for whatever there isof wrong or injus: | tice in the dee’sions of the government Their justification consists in that which constitutes the objection to the present bill—namely, the absence | plea of any indebtedness on the part of the United States. The charge of a denial of justice in this case, anda | comrequent stain upon our national character, has not | apd if, thereby, France was relieved of any valid claims But, if it | against her, the United States received no consideration | in return, and that if private property was taken by the yet been endorsed by the American people; ‘were otherwise, this bill, so far from relieving the past, would only #tamp on the present # more deep and in éelible stigma. It admits the justice of the claims, concedes that payment has been wrowzfully withheld for fifty years, and then proposes, not to pay them, but to compound with the public creditors by providing that whetber the claims shall be presented or not, whe ther the Psum appropriated shall pay much or’ little of what shail be tound due, the law itself shall consti- tute a perpetual bar to allfuture demands. This is not, in my judgment, the way to atone for wrongs, they exist, nor to meet subsisting obligations ii new facts, not known or not accessible during the adminietration of Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Madison, or Mr. Monroe, bad since Leen brought to light, or new sources of information discovered, this would greatly relieve | governments should each be acknowledged, and the bal- But nothing of this | the subject of embarrassment. nature har occurred ‘That those eminent statesmen hadjthe best means of arriving at a correct conclusion, no one will deny. it they never recognised the alleged obligation on the part of the government, is shown by the history of their | respective administr Indeed, it stands, sa | matter of controlling jority, but asa fact of histo- ry, that these claims have never since our existence as ® mation, been deemed by any President worthy of re- commendation to Congress, Ciaims to payment can rest only on the plea of indet- edmess on the part of the government, This requires ‘that it should be shown that the Uniced States have in eurred liability to the claimants, either by such acta as deprive them of their property, or by having actualty en it for public use, without making just compensa- tion for it. The first branch of the proposition —that on which an equitable claim to be indemmitied by the United States for losses sustained might rest—requires at least a cur. Sery exasstnation of the bistory of the transactions on which the claims depend. The first ink, which in the ebain of events arrests attention, ix the treaties of alli ance and of amity and merce between thy United Btater and France, negotiated in 1 By those treaties, peculiar privileges wer ared to the armed veasels of each of the contracting parties in tre ports of the other; | peace among sister nations, the freedom of trade way greatly enlarged; and mut obligations were incurred »y to guarantee tot ‘other their territorial posses n America In 1792-'3, when war broke out between France ant | with epecial instructions to represent the amicable diy- Overnment and people of the United Goice to remove usies, and to re- store confidence by showing that the complaints against them were gro' . Failing in this, another attempt to adjust all ditferences between the two republics was made in the form of an extraordinary mission, composed of three distinguished citizens; but refusal to receive was offensively repeated; and thus terminated this last fort to preserve peace and restore kind relations with our early friend and ally, to whom a debt of gratitude was due, which the American people have never been willing to depreciate or to forget. Years of tiation nad not only failed to secure indemnity for our citizeas and exemption from further depredation, but these long- continued efforts bad brought upon the government the su sion of diplomatic intercourse with France, and ch indigities as to induce President Adams, in his me: sage of May 16, 1797, to Congress, convened in ion, to present it as the particular matter for their ef a and to speak of it in terms of the highe: indignation. 'Thenceforward the action of our govern: ment assumed a character which clearly indicates that hope was no longer entertained from the amicable feei- ng or justice of the government of France, and hence the su juent measures were those of force, On the 28th of May, 1798, an act was passed for the employment of the navy of the United States against “armed vessels of the republic of France,’’ and autnoriz- ed their capture, it ‘“tound hovering on the const of the United States for the p e of committing depreda- tions on the vessels belonging to the citizens thereof.” On the 18th of June, 1798, an act was passed prohibit- img commercial intercourse with France, under the penalty of the forfeiture of the vessels so employed. On the 25th of June, the same year, an act arm the merchant marine to oppose fearchea, capture aggres- sors, and recapture American vessels taken by the French. On the 28th of June, rame year, an act for the condemna‘ion and sale of French vessels captured by authority of the act of 28th of May preseding. On the 27th of July, same year, an act abrogating the trea- ties and the convention which had been concluded be- tween the United States and France, and declaring ‘‘that the same shall not henceforth be regarded as legally ob- lgatory on the government or citizens of the United States.” Onthe 9th of the same month an act was passed which enlarged ine limits of the hostilities then existing, by authorizing our public vessels to capture armed vessels of France wherever found upon the high seas, apd conferred power on the President to issue commissions to private armed vessels to engage in like service. These acts, thongh short of a declaration of war, which would put all the citizens of each country in hostility with those of the other, were nevertheless ac- tual war, partial in its application, maritime in its cha- racter, but which required the expenditure of much of our public treasure, and much of tie blood of onr pat- riotic feitizens who, in vessels but little suited to the purposes of war, went forth to battle on the high seas for the rights and security of their fellow-citizens, and to repel indignities offered to the national honor. It is not, then, because of any failure to use all availa- ble means, diplomatic and mihtary, to obtain reparation, that liavility for private claims can have been incurre by the United States; and if there is any pretence for such liability, it must flow from the action, not from thy neglect, of the United States. The first complaint on the part of France was against the proclamation of Presi- dent Washington, of April 22, 1193. At that early pe- riod in the war which involved Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, the United Netherlands, and Great Britain on the one part, and France on the other, the great and wise man who was the Chief Executive. as he was and had been the guardian of our then fant republic, proclaimed that “the duty and int that they should, with and pursue a conduct friendly and impartial towards the belligerent Powers.’? This attitude of neutrality, 1t was pretended, was in dieregard of the obligations of alliance between the United States and France, And this, to- gether with the often-renewed complaint that the stipu- lations of the treaties of 1778 had not beev observed and executed by the United States, formed the pretext for the series of outrages upon our government «nd its citi- zens which finally drove us to seek redress and safety by | ap appeal to force, The treaties of 1778, so long the | subject of French complaints, are now understood to be | the foundation upon which are laid these claims of in- demnity from the United States for spoliations committed by une French prior to 1800. ‘Phe act of our goverament which abrogated not only the treaties of 1778, but also the subsequent cunsular convention of 1788, bas already been referred to, and it may be well here to inquire what the course of France was in relation thereto. By the decrees of 9th of May, 1793, 7th of July, 1796, and 2d of March, 1797, the stipulations which were then and subsequently most important to the United States were rendered wholly inoperative. The highly injurious et- fects which these decrees are known to have produced show bow vital were the provirions of treaty which they violated, and make manifert the incontrovertible right of the United States to declare, as the consequence 0? these acte of the other contracting party, the treaties ut an ead. The next step in this inquiry is, whether the act de- clasing the treaties null and void’ was ever repealed, or whether by any other means the treaties were evec re- vived so as tobe ¢ither the subject or the source of na- tional obligation. The war which has been described was terminated by the treaty of Paris of 1800, and to that instrument it is necessary to turn to find bow much cf pre existing obligations between the two goveraments cuflives the hostilities in which they had been engaged. By the e€cuné articie of the treaty of 1800 it was declsr- ed that the ministers pleppotentiary of the two parties, not being able to agree respecting the treaties of alli- ance, awity and commerce of 1778, and thi ¢enyention of 1788, ner upon the indemnites matually due or claimed, the parties wMl negotiate further on there sub- ects at ‘a convenient time; and until they shall have agreed upon these points the said treaties and conyeution | shall have no operation. When the treaty was submitted to the Senate of the Luited States the second article was disagreed to, and the treaty amended by striking it out and inserting a provisicn tat the convention then made should con- tinue in force eight years from the date of ratification, which convention thus amended was accepted by the st Consul of France, with the addition of a note ex- planatory of bis construction of the convention, to the effect that by the retrenchment of the second article the two States renounce the respect(ve pretensions which ‘were the object of the said article. It will be perceived by the language of the second ar” ticle, as originally framed by the negotiators, that they had found themselves uns ble to adjust the controversies | on which years of diplomacy and of hostilities had been expended; aud thet they were at last compelled to post- pone the discussion of those questions to that most in- | Uefinite period, a “convenient time.’” All, then, of these rubjects which was revived by the convention was the right to renew, when it should be convenient to the parties, a ciscussion which had already exhausted nego- tiation, involved the two countries ina maritime war, and on which the parties had approached no nearer to concurrence than they were when the controversy began. | But, however omerous they may have been to the United | | ticuse. Rut itie here proper to inquire whether the United | the United States were faithless to the obligations of the Great Britain, the former clarmed privileges in American | ts whieh our government did not admit as deducible doy the treaties of 1775, and which it was belt were ia conflict with obligations to the otuer belligerent Powers. ‘The libera! principle of one of the treaties referred to—- that free ships make free gools, and that subsistence and supplies were not contraband of war, uule tines to a blockaded port—was found, commercial view. to operate disacvantageourly to France, as com- pared with her enemy, Great Britain, the latter assert. ing, under the law of nations, the right to capture, as contraband, supplies when bound for an enemy's port Induced mainly, it is believed, by these coariterations, the government of France cecreet, on the 9th of May, 1793, the first year of the war, that ‘the Freacu people are no longer permitted to fulfil towards the neutral Powers in general the vows they have so often tnuni- feated, and which they constantly make for ths full and entire liberty of commerce and navigation;’ antl, a: a counter measure to the course of Great Britaia, authori wed the seizure of neutral versels bound to an enemy's port, in like manner as that done by her great mari- time rival. This decree was je to act retrowpes ively and to continue until the enemies of France should di from depredations on the neutral ves @ts bowed to ports of France. Then followed the embargo, by wh.ch our vensels were detained in Bordeaux; the Britis goods on boerd of our suips, ani of the property of American citizens, under the pretence that it oeloaged ¢@ Rogliah rubjects, and the imprisonment of Americea teens captared on the bigh seas * these infractions of de® of our rights as a veusral Pover, we complained seizure of | | and injuries pro des | pressure of circumstances, will now be reviewed with | The obligations of the treaties of 1778, aud the con- vention of 1788, were mutual, and estimated to be equal. | States, they had been abrogated, and were uot revived by the convention of 1800, but exprensly spoken of ak suspended util an event which could only occur by the e of the United States. It seems ir, then, that the United states were relieved of no obligation to France | by the retrenchment of the second article of conven'ioa; | United States from their own citizens, it was not for pub- States did relieve France from valid claims against her on the part of citizens of the United States, aut did thus deprive them of thei property. The complaints and counter-complaints of the two gov erpments Lad been, that treaties were violated, and that both public and individual rights and interests had been sacrificed. ‘The correspondence of our ministers engaged in negotiations, both before and after the convention of 1800, sufi ly proves how hopeless was the effort to obtain mnity from France for injuries inflicted on our commerce from 1793 to 1800, unless it should be by an account in which the rival pretensions of the two ance struck between them It is supposable, and may be inferred from the contem- poraneous luistory as probable, that had the United States agreed in 1800 to revive the tr f 1778 and 1788 with the construction which France had placed upon them, that the latter government would, on tne i, have agreed to make indemnity for those ons Which were committed under the pretext that alliance between the two countries. Hence the conclusign that the United States did not sacrifice private rights or propesty to get rid of public ‘ons, but only refused to reassume public obliga tions for the purpose of obtaining the recogaition of tae claims of American citizens on the part of Franoe. All those claims which the French government was Willing to admit were carefully provided for elsewhere in the convention, and the declaration of the First Consul, which was appended in bis additional rote, had no other application than to the claims which had been mutually made by the governments, but oo which they had never approximated to an adjustment. In confirmation of the fact that our goverment did not intend to cease from the prosecution of the just elaims of our citizens against France, reference is bere made to the annual message of President Jeflersoa of December %, 1801, which opens with expressions of bis gratification at the restoration of | d after «peaking of the Assurances received from all ns with whom we had principal relations, and of the confidence thus inspire! that our peace with them would not have been disturb ad if they had continued at war with each other, he pro- ceeds to Ray | ‘But a cessation of irregularities which had aMicted | the commerce of neutral nations f the irritat | ed by them, cannot but add to this | nee, and strengthen at the same time the hope tha’ wrongs comm tted on unoffending friends, uaier « candor, and will be considered as founding just claims of retribution for the past and new assurances for tue future ‘The veal and diligence with which the claims of our citizens against France were prosecuted, appear fo the diplomatic correspondence of the three years next suc- ceeding the conventien of 1800, and the effect of these efforts is made manifest in the convention of 1803, in which provision was made for payment of a class of cases, the consideration of which France bad at all previous periods refaved to entertain, and which are of tuat very class which it has been often assumed were released by striking out the second of the convention of 1800. Thie own by reference to the preamble, and to the fou fifth articles of the convention of 1803, by which were admitted among the debts due by France to citizens of the United States the amouate le for “prizes made at sea in which the n properly lodged within the time mention id convention of the 30th of September, 1800," and thie class was further defined to be only ‘captures of whieh the council of prizes shall bave orde: restita- tion, it being weil stood that the claimant cannot st ng treaties and viola. | might have bad to the French republic, and only in case «f the imeufficiency of the captors.’ | bave reconrse to the United States, otherwise than he | the 30th of April, 1803. millions of francs were set ae aeum which w! exceed, but could not fall , Of the debts due by France to the citivens of the United States, how are we reconcile the claim now maée by thore ae Kn fog? events, and integrity bavein no. small degree cbaracter and of country in live? Is it pt ap hl that the claimants, pow present themselves for indemnity by States, _o debts which would have been admit apd paid by France but for the intervention of the United States? And is it ible to escape from the ef- feet of the volumnious evidence tendin; to establich the all these clans uty | fact that France resisted enly after lon; the United States obtained the recognition of claims as were ded for in the conventions of 1800 and 1803? not this conclusive against any pre- tensions of ceesa on the part of the claimants if left w to mal a-tpetsapplicntiens to Frenen; that the only debts due to Ameri citizens which have teen paid by France are those which were assumed by the United’ States, ae part of the consideration in the purchase of Louisiana y ‘There is little which is cred:table either to the judg- ment or patriotism of those of our fellow- citizens who at this day arraign the justice, the fidelity or love of coun- try of the men who founded the republic, in represent- ing them as having bartered aw: the property of indi- viduals to escape from public obligations. and then to have witbbeid from them just compensation. It has been gratifying to me in tracifig the history of these claims, to fine that ample evidence exists to refute an accusation which would imy the purity, the justice, end the tant ey phe of the illustrious men who guided and controlled the early destinies of the republic. 1 pass from this review of the history of the su! » and, omitting many substantial objections to theae claims, proceed to examine somewhat more closely the oply grounds upon which they can by possibility be maintained. Before entering on this, it may be proper to state dis- tinctly certain propositions which, it is admitted on all hands, are essential to prove the obligations of the go- verpment. First—That at the date of the Treaty of September 0 Meinting ae against 1800, these claims were valid and sul France. Second—That they were released or extinguished by the United States in that treaty, and by the manner of its ratification. ‘Third, That they were so released or extinguished for a consideration valuable to the government, but in wath the claimants bad no more interest than any other citizens, ‘The convention between the French republic and the Cnited States of America, signed at Paria on the 30th day of September, 1800, pu: ‘in the preambl sto be founded on the equal desire of the First Consul (Napoleon Bona- parte) and the Presidentof the United States to terminate the differences which have arisen between the two States. It declares, in the frst piace, that there shall be firm, inviolable and universal peace, and a true and siocere friendrhip, between the French republic and the United States. Next it proceeds, in the second, third, fourth and fifth articles, to make provision in sundry respects, baving reference to past differences, and the transition from the state of war between the two countries to that of general and permanent peace. Finally, in the residue of the twenty-seventh article, it stipulates anew the conditions of amity and intercourse—commercial and political—thereafter te exist, and, of course, to be sub- stituted in place of the previous conditions of the trea- ties of all'ance and of commerce, and the consular con- vention, which are thus tacitly but unequivosally re cognized as no longer in force, but in effect abrogated, either by the state of war, or by the political action of the two republics. Except in so far as the whole convention goes to es- tablich the fact that the previous treaties were admitted on both sides to be at an end, none of the articles are sivetiy material to the present question, save the fol- lowirg:— Art. 2, ‘* The m'nisters plenipotentiary of the two par tier vot being able to eee at present respecting the treaty of alliance of 6th February, 1778, the treaty of amty and commerce of the same date, and the conven- tion of the 14th November, 1788, nor upon tbe indemni- ties mutually due or claimed, the parties will nezotiate forther on these subjects ata convenient time; and until they may have agreed upon these points, the said trea- ties and convention shall have no operation, and the re- eens of the two countries sball be regulated as fol- JOWR — Art. 5, ‘The debta contracted by one of the two na- tiens with individuals of the other, or by the individuals of ove with the indviiduals of the cther, shall be paid, or the payment may be prosecuted in the same manner as it there bed been no misunderstanding between the two States, Bur this clause shall not extend to indemnities claimed on account of captures or confiscations.’”” On this convention being submitted to the Senate of the United States, they consented and advised to its ratification with the following proviso:— “Provided that the secend article be expunged, and that the following article be added or inserted: it is agreed that the present convention shall be in force for the term ot eight years from the time of the exchange of ratibcations.”? ‘The spirit and purpose of this change are apparent and unmistakable. The convention, as signed by the respec- tive plenipotentiaries, did not adjust all the pointe of controversy. Both nations, however, desired the restor- ation of peace Accordingly, as to those matters, in the relations of the two countries concerning which they could agree, they did agree for the time being; and as to the yest, conzernirg which they could not agree, they fuspended and por poned further negotiation. They alendoned no pretensions, they relinqu'shed no right on either side, but simply adjourned the question until a “convenient time.” Meanwhile, and until the arriyal of such convenient t me, tne relations of the two countriés were to be regulated by the stipulations of the copyention. Of coursé, the convention was on its face a ‘emporary and provisional one, but in the worst possible form of prospective termination. It was to cease at a convenient time. But bow should that convenient time be ascer- tained? It is plain that such astipulation, while protess- edly not disposing of the present controve:sy, had within itself the germ of a fresh one; for the two Ly: sesersind might at any moment fall into dispute on the question whether that convenient time had or had not arrived. The Senate of the United States anticipated and pre- vented this question by the only possible e: jient— that is, the designation of a precise dat 18 being done, the remaining parts of the second article became superfluous and useless; for, a all the provisions of the convention would expire in eight years, it would neces- sarily follow that negotiations must be renewed within that period; more especially as the operation of the amercment which covered the whole convention was that even the stipulation of peace in the first article be- came temporary and expired in eight years, whereas that article, and that article alone, was permanent ac: cording to tke ori ival tenor of the convention. The convention thus amended being submitted to the First Consul, was ratified by him, accompanying his act of acceptance by the following declaratory note :— «tue government of the United States having added in its ratification that the convention should be in force tor the space of eight years, and hawng. omitted the se- cond article, the government of the French gppublic con- sents to accept, ratify, and confirm the abov@eenvention, with the addition importing that the convention shall be in force ior the space of eight years, and with the re- trenchment of the second article : Provided that by this retrenchment the two States renounce the respective pretensions which are the ol tof the said article.’’ The convention, as thus ratified by the First Consvl, having been again submitted to the Senate of the United States, that body resolved that ‘(they considered the convention as fully ratified,’ and returned the same to the Fresident for promulgation, and it was accordingly promv)gated in the usual form by President Jefferson. Now, it is clear, that in simply resolving that ‘they considered the convention as Falty ratified, ’’ the Senate did in fact abstain from any ex) declaration of dis- sent or assent to the construction put by the First Con- aul on the retrenchment ot the second article. If any inference, beyond this, can be drawn from their revolu- tion, it is, that they regarded the proviso annexed by the First Consul to his declaration of acceptance an foreign to the sub . 48 nugatory, or as without consequence or effect, Notwithstanding’ this proviso, they considered the ratification as full, If the new proviso made an; change in the previous import of the convention, them it not full, And in considering it a full ratification substance deny that the proviso did in any re- spect change the tenor of the convention, By the second article, as it originally stood, neither republic had relinquished its existing rights or’ preten- tions either as to other previous treaties, or the ind ties mutually due or claimed, but only deferred the sideration of them to a convenient time. By the amend- ment of the Senate of the United Statns, that convenient time, instead of being left indefinite, was fixed at vight years; but no right or pretension of either party was surrendered or avandoned If the Senate erred in assuming that the proviso add- ed by the first Consul did not affect the question, then the transaction would amount to nothing more than to bave raised a new question to be disposed of on resum- ing the negotiations—namely, the question whether the proviso of the First Conen! did or not modify or impair the effect of the convention as it had been ratified by the Senate. ‘That euch, and such only, was the true meaning and effect of the transaction, that it was not, aud was not intended to be, a relinquishment by the United States of any existing claim on France, and especially that it was not an ataudonmedt of any claims of individual citi- zens, nor the set off of these against any conceded na- tional obligations to France, ie shown by the fact that President Jefferson did at once resume and prosesute to successful conclusion negotiations to obtain from Franve indemnification tor the claims of citizens of the United States existing at the date of that convention; for on three treaties were concluded at Paris between the United States of America and the | French republic, one of which embraced the cession of Louisiana; auother stipulated for the paymant of sixty millions of francs by the United States to France; and a third provided, that for the satisfaction of sums due by France to citizen ve United States at the conclusion of the convention eptember 30, 1800, and in express compliance with the second and fifth articles thereof, a vurther sum of twenty millionsof frances should be ap- propriated and paid by the United States, In the pre- amble to the first of these treaties, which ceded Louisia- na, it is set forth that— ‘The President of the United States of America and the First Congul ot the French republic, in the mame of the French people. desiring to remove all source of mis understanding relative to objects of diseission men- toned in the second and fifth articles of the convention of the Sth Vendemaire, an. 9, (50th September, 1800.) relative to the rights claimed by the United States in virtue of the treaty conciuded @t Madrid, the 27th of October, 1795, between his Catholic Majesty and the anid United States, and willis union and friendship which at the time of the said convention vas happily re-establiened betweem the two nations, baad ‘have Lan phy hy see their plenipotentiaries,’’ who agreed to the following articles,”’ Here is the most distinct and categorical declaration of the two governments, that the matters of claim in the second article of the convention of 1800 had not been ceded away, reling uished, or set off, but they were still fubristing subjects of demand against France. The same ceclars tion appears in equally empbatic language jn the recites that— 4 the United States of Am andthe he Presid First Consul of the French republic, in the of the French peop ) Baving by a treaty of this date termi- nated all difficulties relative to Louisiana, and established ona solid foundation the friendship which unites the ‘two nations, and being desirous, in compliasce with the second and ii(th articles of ‘the convention of the eighth ment of September, 1800, sums pt peg eT i “have appoint ni tiaries,’? who following among other articles —" “Art. 1 The debts due by France to citizens of the United States, contracted before the 8th of Vandemaire, ninth year of the French republic, (30th September, 1800,) shall be paid according to the following regula- tions, with interest at six per cent, to commence from the periods when the accounts and vouchers were pre- sented to the French government. Art. Il. “The cebts provided for by the preceding ar- ticle are those whose result is ised in the conjec- tural note (a) annexed tothe present convention, and which, with the interest, cannot exceed the sum of twenty millions of francs. The claims comprised in the said note which fall within the exceptions of the follow- ing articles eball not be admitted to the benefit of this provision. Art. iV. “It is expressly a that the preceding ar- ticles shall compretvend no debts but such debts a8 are due to citizens of the United States, who have been and et creditors of France, for suppiies, for em} and prizes made at sea, in which the appeal has properly lo“ ged within’ the time mentioned in the said copvention, eighth Vendemaire, ninth year, (30th Sep- ave th di ticles shall ily—1st, . V. “The preceding articles shall apply only—1st, to captures of which the council of prizes mee have or- dered, restitution, it being well understood that the claimant cannot ‘bave recourse to the United States otherwise than he might have had to the goverment of the French Bo veee and only in case of msufficienc: the captors; 2d, the debts mentioned in the said fifth ar- ticle of the convention contracted before the 8th Vende- ire, an. 9, (30 September, 1600.) the ent of which é retofore claimed of tas cP nips govern- which bas been ment of France, and for which the creditors have a right to the protection of the United States; the raid fifth arti- cle does not comprebend prizes whose condemnation has been or shall be confi . Itisthe express intention of the contracting parties not to extend the benefit of the present convention to reclamations of American citizens who shall have established houses of commerce in France, England, or other countries than the United States, in erabip with foreigners, and who by that on, on the nature af their commerce, ought to be re- garded as domiciliated in the places where tuch houses exist. All agreements and bargains concerning mercha: dise, which shall not be the property of American citi- zena, are equally excepted from the benefit of the said convention, saving, however, to such Ry their claims in like manner ag if this treaty not been Art. XII. ‘(In case of claims for debts contracted the government of France with citizens of the Unit States since the 8th Vendemaire, ninth year, (September 30, 1860,) not being comprised in this convention, may be’ pursued, and the payment demanded in the same manner as if it bad not been made ”” Other articles of the treaty provide for the appoint. ment of agents to liquidate the claims intended to be se- cured, and for the payment of them, as allowed, at the Treasury of the United States. The following is the con- cluding clause of the tenth article— ‘<The rejection of any claim shall have no other effect than to exempt the United States from the payment of it, the French government reserving to itself the right to ecide definitely on such claim ¢o far as it concerns itselt.’” Now, from the provisions of the treaties thus collated, the following deductions undeniably follow, namely— First, Neither the second article of the convention of 1800, as it originally stood, nor the retrenchment of that article, nor the proviso in the ratification by the First Consul, nor the action of the Senate of the United States thereon, was regarded by either France or the United States as the renouncement of any claims of American citizens aga‘nst France. Second. On the contrary, in the treaties of 1803 the two governments took up the question precisely where it was left on the day of the signature of that of 1800, without suggestion on the part of France, that the claims of our citizens were excluded by the retrench- ment of the second article, or the note of the First Con- sul, and proceeded to make ample provision for such as France could be induced to admit were justly due, and they were accordingly discharged in full, with interest, by the United States in the stead and behalf of France. Third. The Cnited Stater, not having admitted in the conyention of 1800 that they were under any obligations to France be) reason of the abrogatisn of the treaties of 1778 and 1788, persevered in this view of the question by the tenor of the treaties of 1803, and therefore had no such national obligation to discharge, and did not, either in purpose or in fact, at apy time undertake to discharge 'hemselyes from any such obligation at the expense and with the property of individual citizens of the United State Fourth. By t] eaties of 1803, the United States ob- tained from France the acknowledgment and art of the indermnity for the cession of Louisiana, of! ims of citizens of the United States fer spoliations, so rance would admit ber liability in the premises; but even then the United States did not relinquish any claim of American citizens not provided for by thove treaties; so far trom it, to the honor of France be it re- membered, she expressly reserved to herself the right to Speen any rejected claims of citizens of the United tates. Fifth. 0 claime of citizens of the United States against France, which had been the subject of contro- versy between the two countries prior to the Ls fexive td of the convention of 1800, and the further consideration of which was reserved for a more convenient time by the second article of that convention: for these claims, and these only. provision was made in the treaties of 1503— all other claims being expreasly excluded by them from their acope and purview. It ie not to be overlooked, though not necessary to the conclusion, that by the convention between France and he United States of the 4th of July, 1831, complete pro- vision was made for the liquidation, discharge and pay- mint, on both sides, of all claims of citizens of either against the other for unlawful seizures, captures, se- questrations, or destructions of vei cargoes, or other property, without any limitation of time, so as in terms to run back to the date of the last aet- tlexent—at least to that of 1803 if not to the commence- ment of our natvonal relations with France. ‘This review of the successive treaties between France has brought my mind to the un- doubting conviction that while the United States have in the most ample and the completest manner discharg- ed their duty towards such their citizens as ma} have been at any time aggrieved by acts of the Fiencl government, so, also, France has honorably discharged hervelt of all obligations in the premises towards the United States. To concede what this bill assumes, would be to impute undeserved reproach both to France and to the United States. Iam of course aware that the bill proposes only to provide indemnification for such valid claims of sitizens of the United States against France as shall not have been stipulated tor and embraced in any of the treaties enumerated. But in excluding all such claims it ex- cludes all in tact for which during the negotiations France could be perauaded to agree that she was in any wise liable to the United States or our citizens. What remai And for what is five millions appropriated? In view of what has been said, there would seem to be no ground on which to raise ‘a liability of the United Stater, unless it be the assumption that the United States are to be considered the insurers and the guaran- torot claims, of whatever nature, which any indi- vidual citizen may have against a foreign nation. LIN PIERCE. Wasmixeton, Feb. 17, 1885. ‘The Merchants’ Mecting. New York, Feb. 19, 1855. TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD. J enclose & memorandum of the precise words used by me nt the meeting of merchants on Saturday, which I would not trouble you with, but I would wish your re- port corrected so far as to include the statement made by me, ‘that 1 was not present at the last interview be- tween Mr. Fieb and Mr. Grimnell,’’ but that the conver- u which took place was repeated to me immediately MORTIMER LIVINGSION, Tam not going to make a speech, but rise simply to endorse the statements made by Mr. Grinnell. I re- mained with bim in Washington until the last moment. l was not, however, present at his last interview with Mr, Fish, but be immediately after came to — and repeated to me, almost in the same words as he has to you, the result of the interview. You will yourselves determine from the statements whether Mr. Fish changed hismind or ceceived Mr. Grinnell a« to the courae he intended to pursue. The Brooklyn Soup House. TO THK EDITOR OF THE HERALD. As this great and worthy charity, perfectly systema tized, bas been in operation nearly six weeks, it will probably be worth the space in your valuable journal, to give some account of it. The location is the bert that could be found—a one story building at the junction of Fulton and Willoughby streets, 100 by 80 feet, with benches that accommodate over two hundred that are very often waiting for the hour of 11 o'clock A. M. to ar- rive, that being the hour dealing out ix commenced, and continues to3 P. M., and very often laver One quart is allowed to an adult, and a pint to each child in the family. The room is heated by two large stoves, in addition to the heat from the kitchen, where there are four boilers that will make sevenveen barrels of soup. Saturday, Feb. 17, the number of families that had been was 1,346, averaging four and a balf to a family, 1g & total of 5,720 adults and children; and near! an follows of the following nations, viz:—Twelve-twen- tieth’s Irish; three-twentieth’s Germans; two-twen- tieth’s colored; one twentieth Euglish; one-twentieth Americans, one-twentieth mixed. BROOKLYNITE AND VISITER, Unemployed Workmen. TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD. In your paper of yesterday, I perceive my name, in conjunction with others, signed to an article leaded “Unemployed Workingmen.’’ | beg leave respectfully to state that altbough I cordially endorse most of the views set forth in ssid communication, I never signed or au- thorized any person to attach my name to said docu- ment, and cannot consent that apy person or persons should make ase of my name without my knowledge or authority. Br giving this an insertion in your valuable payer, you will much oblige BENJ, PRICE. lal Term, Supreme Coar' Before Hon. Judge Clerke. of Opening Cliff Street. —The Court made an order appoin' « ‘the following gentlemen commission. ers of ertimate and assesements:—Horace Holcen, Geo. | H. Purser, and Joreph W. Bank. In the Matter ; OF THE MUNICIPAL REVOLU- TION. THE BELGIAN PAUPERS AGAIN—A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO BE SUED OUT—FROCLAMATION OF THE MAYOR— THE COMPLAINT BOOK, BTC. ‘The Belgian Consul, Mr. Mali, called upon the Mayor yesterday, and told him that he informed the Belgian Munister at Washington, by letter, of his intention to send the alleged paupers back to Antwerp at the expense of the government which he represented, and that he bad received his reply thereto, declining to take any part in returning them to their own country, In the mean- time, preparations are being made to have a writ of babeas corpus sued out, and to bring the whole matter defore # legal tribunal. The counsel engaged for the prisoners is Mr. Taeodore Sedgwick; and for the Mayor, Mr. Oakey Hall. If they are not taken out of his power by due process of law, it is the Mayor’s determination to have them sent back at the expense of tle city govern- ment. ‘The following proclamation has just been issued for the arrest of the two young men whose furious driving, while ina sleigh on Broadway, near Seventy-first street, Sunday, the llth inst., resulted in the death of a lad named Jobn Betts :-— $500 REWARD—PROCLAMATION. Mayor’s Caio New York, Feb. 19, 1855, he PROGRESS Whereas, John Betts, a thirteen years, was run over by a horse and sleigh, in Broadway, near Seventy-first street, on Sunday, the 11th inst.; and whereas the said John Betts has since died in conse- quence of the injuries then received; aad whereas the perzen who drove said th is unknown to the authori- ties, I do, by authority ve in me, offer a reward of five hundred dollars for the apprehension and conviction of the person who commit said violence, to be pai on conviction of the offender, on the certificate of the Recorder or District Attorney that such conviction was bad upon the testimony of the person or persons claim- ing said reward. But all claims not presented to the Mayor within twenty days after such conviction, will be disregarded. FERNANDO WOOD, Mayor. MAYOR’S COMPLAINT BOOK, That Cliff street, between Frankfort and Ferry, is bet much annoyed by crowds of boys, of all ages, who col- lect together cursing and swearing, and playing all sorts of games, on Sundays, to the great annoyance of the re- nidente of that neighborhood” Captain Ditehett, of the Fourth district police, was notified. That the driver of the ash cart ge eb and refuses to remove the ashes from the east sids of avenue B, be- tween Sixth and Seventh streets, when the same are paeet. upon the sidewalk. Referred to Commissioner of te and Lam} That the aighborbood ef Eleventh, Twelfth and Thir- teenth streets, near avenue A, is resorted to by loafers, who insult ladies and others when passing. Captain Hart, of the Seventeenth ward, was fied. That Twenty-fifth street, between Sixth and Seventh avenues, isin a filthy condition, and that the sidewalk om the south side is a! it impassable from the dirt and ashes there deposited; and the lots being unfenced, are. deposit for all kinds of. manure. Referred to Commis- sioner of Streets and Lamps. That old carts and wagons encumber the sidewalk in Tenth street, between Third avenue and Broadway, and have become a perfect nuisance. Captain Dilea, of the Fifteenth as notified. ‘That the sidewalks in the Second avenue, between Eighteenth and Nineteenth streets, are not fii and are in a miserable condition, ashes being deposited thereon, Referred to Commissioner of Streets and Lampe. "That # large hole exists in the sidewalk 232 William street. Referred to Street Commissioner. ‘That Nineteenth street, between Sixth and Seventh avenues, is on Sundays the resort of loafers, who disturb the neighborhood wo pa cursing and yelling, and that they also steal anything that comes in their way. Re- ferred to Capt. Stevenson, of the Sixteenth ward. ‘That a Jarge amount of cotton encumbers pier 18 East River, rende: it impossible for vessels to make fast and discharge their cargoes. red to Commissioner of Streets and Lamps. That Nos. 7 and9 West Thirty-recond street are not fenced, loafers resort thereto and disturb the , of the Twen- neighborhood. Referred to Capt. Speight ty-first ward. That a fruit stand occupies the sidewalk corner of Broadway and Canal street, in length from twelve to sixteen feet by two to three feet wide, and in kept there in direct violation of the law. Referred to Capt. Turn- bull, of the Eighth ward. ‘That the street and sidewalk corner of Ninth avenue and Thirty-fourth street are encumbered with carts and wagons. Referred tothe Captain of the Twentieth dis- trict police. That loafers congregate in Fourth street, between First and Second avenues, on the Sabbath, fighting cocks and dogs, to the great brea dened of the neighborhood. Referred to the Captain of the Seventeentl: ward police. ‘That the arhman will not remove the ashes from 169 West Twenty-second street, unless placed on the side- walk, which is contrary to law, Referred to Committee on Streets and Lamps. That the sidewalks in Attorney street, between Riving- ton and Delancey, are encumbered with ola sleighs and cartes, and other nuisances. That the correr of Anthony street and Elm is the resort, of loafers on the Sabbath, and that they insult the pi ers by. THE SUNDAY LIQUOR TRAFFIC. The police captains reported sixty liquor stores open throughout the city, on Sunday, the following being First ward, 1; Se- cond, 4; Third, 1; Fourth, 6; Fifth, 1; Sixth, 5; Seventh, 5; Eighth, 0; Ninth, 4; Lepth, 6; Eleventh, 2; Twelfth, 0; Thirteenth, 1; Fourteenth, 0; Fitteenth, 2; Sixteenth, 0: Seventeenth, 3; Eighteenth, 5; Nineteeath, 0; Twen- tieth, 2; Twenty-first, 6; Twenty-second, 2. Total 60, A large number of the barber shops were closed, and it is expected in two or three weeks there w'll not be one open in the city on Sundays. ARREST OF SUPPOSED BURGLARS. In the Heraxp of Sunday we published an account of the attempted burglary on the boot and shoe store on the corner of Jobn street and Broadway, and of the ar- rest of one oi the supposed burglars, named John Wilson. They were detected in the act of breaking into the store by Officer Kinner, of the Reserved Corps, who, while at- tempting to arrest one of them, was severely injured by a w which he received in the face froma jimm; the hands of one of the party. Yesterday morning John rae a alge loffman, moped vulgiery le slias Finniman, who were engaged in the with Wilson, were arrested at 504 Twelfth street, and in de- fault of bail in $2,000 each, were committed to prison. Two ether c of burglary have been preferred against them, the first by Mr. George , of 17 Duane street, and the second by Joseph Maur, of 178 Broadwey—both of whom swear that their shoe stores were broken into, and that the shoes on the prisoners were stolen from them. AN APPEAL TO THE MAYOR FROM THE MILITARY FOR «= __CLBAN STRERTS. To THe HoNORARLE Ferxanpo Woop, Exq., Mayor:— Dear SiR—The military of this city appeal to you to Lave the streets cleaned on the occasion of celebrating tho 22d of February, the birthday of the illustrious Fath- er of Our Cou: , 48 the majority of us are unnsed to the hardships of war, such as wading thi “_ ond marshes, over icy rocks, &c., kc. By attending this matter, you will be doing @ great favor to the com- munity in general, as well as the military of New York “i A NATIONAL GUARDSMAN,. ‘eb. 19, 1855, BOARD OF ALDERMEN. Fen. 19.—The President, Isaac 0. Barker, Esq., in the chair, The minutes of the last meeting were read and approved, MISCELLANROUS 'APERS, Avast number of papers passed on by the Board of Councilmen were received and referred to the various cemmittees. A remonstrance from Goodhue & Co., and several other persons, against the removal of the location of the new City Hall from the Park. Referred to Special Committee. INCREASE OF POLICEMEN IN THE VARIOUS WARDS. The report of the Committee on Police in favor of increasing the number of policemen in several wards, was received. The committee recommend the increase as follows:—To the First ward, five additional policemen; Fourth ward, five; Eleventh wart, seven; Twelth ward, ten; Fourteenth ward, four; Ssventeenth ward, two, ia addition to the present respective force of thore several wards, Alderman Voonums movei to strike out from the re- pert the increase to all the wards except the First, there vg much property, exposed there on the wharves. increase in other wards would be un- necessary if the Aldermen would aid the Mayor in his efforts to close the rum holes on Sundays, Alcerman Howarp complained that the police force in his ward was not suflicient. He would never insist on the stores in his ward being closed on Sundays. solicited the votes of those men before tne election, be would not now break his word with them. Several members spoke in favor of the increase. Alderman Bricos was oppesed to the increase Bag Heemen, Le et of ee ee fot for politica’ ur] and required w: emselves. Pulldcrman ELY said he had reseived from ibe Chief of Pelice # return of all the men detailed in the various warde, ond he moved a postponement of the subject for four weeks, when, perbaps, there would be another ap- point ng power. Alderman Aerricr op; the postponement, if it waa for the vj “sd taking the appointment out of the hands of t ‘or, who waf doing everything to the satisfaction of the community at large. Alderman Voornis would vote for the postponement, but not for the reasons stated 2 the Alderman of the Seventeenth were, ¢ believed that Mayor Wood, having hops on Sundays, had done more to check rowdyism than all the police of the ci could do. Fernando Wood can now do more with half the ens than could be done before yith double the number. Alderman WiLisAMs0N was opposed to the postpcne- ment, because he was not (although a political opponent of the Mayor,) inclined to join any crusade against him. He did not speak from any personal motives; he received po favors from the Mayor, nor did he want ‘but he wal boys to any motion that would take bim apy of which he is exercising to so much advantage to the city. ipsorment. The latter gentleman deleted the Chiet at ment ler in defended the fF Paiice and the body of men who acted under him. He doubted if there were, in other city, more efficient men. Be contended that the acopted citizens, when MESSAGE FROM THE MAYOR WITH ORDINANCE RESPECTING * te ry tg pi ad RAILROADS, The following containing ordinance, was rece ed from his Honor the Mayor — : Mayon’s Orvice, New Yox, Feb, 19, 18% To rHr Hononasre the Common Covnci. or THe C Gxtuamre it on on ae osequel FS the front platform near the driv ; ns Ragen or off at the front platform w! dn motion, the liability go Le run over is ao ereat people are ce tly ox} ah from their je are constan: ly CO feecneat, nad alse from the want also proper preventives 1 caution upon the part of the railroad From at 1m refer to another the modern mode of continuing # ighs, with sige platforms on either side, #0 and in, to the rest limbilit: limb, Without desiring to encro aPindats deans Winepcrtt sed evel initiate ordina: ave ere wi eu one for i m, which will, if ador ted, entir| lemove rs referred The preventives are sim nd very ‘constructed, and will he attended with lit expense to the vopristare of the railroad cars or end will no doubt bo readily adopted by them, on the pass. of the proposed urdinance. V full: Very respectfully, FERNANDO WOOD, Mayo An Ordinance to Provide for the Bitter Security of P rain Olly Rerlivod Care and Onnioun Sleigh ‘TheMe: or, Aldermen and Cx York, in Common Council convened, do ordain as follows! Seo. 1. “All railroad cars running under grant from { to rom any points of route in » men #0 thateach of said gat ‘old ‘of said platforms parallel ith. 1 rivers and c: ma) therew! ductors of said care ich platform, 80 er oan get on or off the said car trom the sald platfor d such gates shall remain closed until, the trip, ig teri ed and the horses are changed to the front of the ot platform of said car. Seo. 3, | The gates of the platform which shall become rear platform of the car when in motior 1] remain on ing the trip, securely fastened, parallel with the rail of the said platform, in the manner provided for in seetio, of this ordinance, so that passengers may cet off and on the said platform unobstrncted. It shall be the duty of cv conductor to prevent passengers from climbing over #' intions or corporations running said om river or conductor of an: 8 penalty of ten dollars for any violations of foregoing provisions of this ordinance; alf complaints of ». violation to be made before the Mayor, who may, im his cretion, either proceed forthwith to hear, and to’ determi aint, and discharge the same or impose ty, or he shall send it to the office of ney, for pi city; and wi nt, it shall be the duty anid C tion Attorney forthwith to prosecnte th $o,j0 ment, and to collect she asid ponalt; it of city treasury. In case such wit! penelty be not paid twenty-four hours after it is imposed by the Mayor, or ju ment obtained therefer by the Corporation Attorney. # Mayor shall revoke the license of any or all tho cars run such assaciation o company. of the vaia cars referred to and See. nam] in this ordin: all come to full stop whenever ® p. sepger hails or notifies the conductor or drive « car, in order to get on the same, or dosires to leave the #1 car. See. 6. All sleighe run by any staze or omnibus com| ar stage or omnibus peopsiaey, ahall ‘ne constructed w t the side thereof, mado in any manner of effectually prevent any persons from stand! nthe driver or conductor of every such stage rohibit or prevent any person ieempting tolwtand. th cake inder p. im, OF a a of five dollars for each offence; the same co ve ae of and dealt with in like manner as provided in s) n 4, t See. 7. T ce shall be printed and pat up cx Tallroad car aud sleigh reterfed to bere the duty of every policeman to compl: f this ordinance ty apy car oralei; | all pointaof route of sald car or sleic | Sec. 9, The provisions of this ordinance shall tak ‘i o 2 ee ee ee ee herein, on and i Fine! w jeth day succeeding its passage, an to slei on fter the first day o! December A. D. 1855; and on the of of, it shall he the duty of the Inspector of copy of this ordinance on every railroad or omnibus proprieter in this city. The communication was referred to the Committee Ordinances, and directed to be entered at lergth on t! minutes, ‘THE SUFFERING POOR. A rerolution was offered by Alderman Keity, calli upon the Board of Councilmen to give to the sever ward committees the sum of $500 each, to enable to continue their reiief to the poor. ' Alderman Howarp taid that out of the $10,000 appr priated for the relief of the poor, there was not a ce given to the Sixth ward. The conrequence was, that Bumber of gentomen got together, and subscribed f the relief of the poor of that ward. He (Alderman had got a number of tickets from the Commissioners ‘ho Almshouse, and he distributed them to the starvi: 1oor, but, on going for rtliet, they were refused. © ra bad told him that the persons he sent from t) Sixth ward were not citizens. (.aughter.) Poor + men could get no relief, because they were not five yea in thee ty. He (Alderman H.) supposed the Comm »foners of Alms were Know Notbings. (Laughter.) Alderman Voonms said the gentleman of the Six abored under a mistake. There waa more money e ry for the relief of the Sixth ward than acy other 1 iy Aldermen Sreers spoke in favor of the resolution, a: etailed rome of the miseries which prevailed among t! oor of his (the Eleventh) ward. The resolution was adopted by a vote of 1 to 8. Adjourned to Thursday next, at 5 o'clock. BOARD OF COUNCILMEN. Fen. 19.—The Board met at 5 P. M.. pursuant to a Journment—D. D. Connover, Esq., President, in tl chair. The minutes of the last meeting were read a1 approved, PETITIONS REFERRED. Of divers citizens, for improvements in Forty-nint street, between Third and Sixth avenu Of Dr. A. B. Chadwick, for professional services und the direction of the Twentienth ward police. Of the officers and members of the 6th company, 71 Regiment of National Guard, for rooms for armories. ‘THE AMENDED CHARTEE. Councilman MATHER moved to take up the followir bp and resolutions, laid over at a previous mee — has been 4 and sigued by twent gentlemen who xe prevent hold the cilice of ridermen in th City; and. whereas, such signers have appended their ofict character fo their respective names, ax appears by said m a ty of New Yor charter for said city,’ and is nddree he Senate and Assembly of the Sta team before ths Common Countil, of; (en, fares inte ease heen mon Council, or (#0 a informed and velieves,) the Hourd of Aldsrmen—therefore, ved, That sald memorial isan indignity to this bos | —& false pretence—and entitled to no weight, influence « rly day, expre ject matter || ith what they believe to ! m they represe: Councilman Marie justified the position taken i these resolutions, asd moved their adoption, as expres ing the sense of the Board on the subject to’ which the reterred, The resolutions were adopted on a division, by 43 to R RESOLUTIONS. To and flag sidewalks of lots 437 and 439 Fourt avenue. Referred, Directing Committee to inquire at what id in of the people who: to use the ‘steam generator’ can be 5 report upon the practicability of applying steam to fir fe ey as & means of fire defence. Adopted. ‘That it be referred to the Committee on Streets to ré port their opinion of the method of paving known # the ‘Nicholson pavement,’’ which bas been tested wit success in the city of Boston. Adopted, That the committee appointed to superintendthe celr bration of Washi "8 better | be requested to fur nish 0 spirituous liquors on that occasion. Lost. That the Congest be requested to faform this Boar why he haa ayes directed by the late Con mon Council, a lot of ground suitable for a location « Hose Company No. 24. Adopted. That it be referred to the Finance Committee to it, quire into the expediency of purchasing the ship can: across the upper portion of this island, in the vicinity 109th street, end that be empowered to make #uc’ tettlement with the origi re to enable city to complete the proposed improvement. Lost. ‘REPORT. Of Committee on Law De. for subpanas, &c. Adopted. The ind mittee a the imacigeation of Fores; 4] comi upon the Im aupers and Pry A plow Coe in connection w" eir report, the resolutions were presen’ a te the Committee of the Whole t passage of of the Uni States, having of the evil. That the Board of Aldermen be requested to appoint like committee, and that the sum of —— be ap, to defray the expenses of the same. Numerous were received from the Board ef Al dermen, and referred to the appropriate committees. The Board then went into Committee of the Whol The adoption of a few papers wax recommended, whic! — subsequently ordered to a third reading by thi ‘The Board then adjourned. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. Fes. 19.—His Honor the Mayor presiding. The m nutes of the last meeting were read and approved. Several petitions for the remission of taxes were re. ceived ana referred, and the Board then adjourned t Thursday next, (Washington's birthday.) i Supreme Court, ' Saturday Motions.—A new calendar of Saturday mc tions will be made up for Saturday next, Feb 24, Special Term Calendar.—Wednesday, Feb 28, in th last day for filing notes of issue for the Marob Special ba ran ites of issue must state the dates (of isene), . ve ( ), attor. ney’s names and titles, and will lendar according to the priority of iseue. pgp wurt be diet Was inetly stated a¢ wach, and will take