|
Trial of Col. Burr
.TAKEN FOR TfcE FEDERAL GAZETTE
TnuKSTiAY, June 13.
After the court was opened, the following
.opinion was delivered by the chief justice,
afto the propriety cf a witness answering
qofcstfons which might criminate himself:
OPINION.
In point of law the question now before
the court, relates to the witness himself.
The attorney for the United States offers a
piper in cypher, which he supposes to have
litoceeded fr»m a person against whom he
ha preferred an indictment for high treason,
. and another for a misdemeanor, both of
which are now before the grand jury, and
¦ produces a person said to be the secretary or
c'-rk of the accused, who is supposed either
t. liaye copied this paper by his directions,
or to be able to prove in some other manner
that, it has proceeded from his authority.
To a question demanding whether he under-
stands this paper, the witness has declined
giving an answer, saying, that the answer
might criminate himself ; and it is referred
to the court to decide, whether the excuse
he has offered be sufficient to prevent his an-
swering the question which has been pro-
pounded to him.
It is a settled maxim of law that, no man
is bound to. criminate himself. This maxim
.forms one exception to the general rule,
•which declares that every person is compel-
lable to bear testimony in a court of justice,
If or the witness who considers himself as
beiiig within this exception, it is alledged
that he is. and from the nature of things
must be. the sole judge of the effect of his
answer: That he is COJI equenflyeat liberty
to refuse to answer aivj? questioiij if he will
say noon his oath tha "his answer to that
question might criminate himself.
When this opinion was first suggested, the
court conceived the principle laid down at
|Uebartobe broad, and therefore required
that authorities in support of it might lie
adduced. Authorities lave been adduced,
and have been con?:':1 red. In all of them
the court could perceive that an answer t~>
the question propounded might criminate
the witness, and he was informed that he
was at liberty to refuse an answer. These
cases do noJ appear to the court lo support
the principle laid down, by the counsel for
the witness in the full "latitude in which
they have stated- it. There is no dictum
which takes from the court the right to con-
sider and decide whether any direct answer
to th" particular question propounded could
be reasonably supposed to affect the witness.
There may be questions, no direct answer
to v hich could in any degree affect bim. and
there is no case which goes so far as to say
that he is not bound to answer such questi-
on?. ¦ The case of Goosely in this court is
perhaps the strongest that has been adduced.
Bat the general docti irie of the judge in that
case must have reference to the circumstances
which shewed that th« answer might termi-
nate here. When two principles come in
conflict with each oilier, the court must give
them both a reasonable construction, so as
to preserve them both to a reason jib-
extent. The principle which entitles the
United States to the testimony of every ci
ti'/.en, and the principle by which every
witness is privileged, not to accuse himself,
can neither of them be entirely disregarded.
They are believed both to- be preserved to a
nable extent, and according to the true
intention of the rule, and -if :\u> exception
to that rule, by observing thai course which
it is conceived courts have generally observ-
ed. It is this: When a question is pro-
pounded, it belongs to the court to c insidi r
and to decide whether any direct answer
to it rah implicate the witness. If this be
decided in the negative* then he may answer
it without violating the privilege which is
Secured to him by law. If a direct answer
to it may criminate himself, then he must
be the sold ;udge what his answer would be.
The court cannot participate with him in
this judgment, because they cannot decide
on the effect of his answer without knowing
what it would be, and a disclosure of that
fact to the judges would strip him of the
privil ge which the law allows, and which
he claims. Tt follows necessarily then from
this Mate of things that if the question, be
cf such a description that an answer it
may or may not criminate the witness ac-
cording to the purport of that answer, it
must, rest with himself, who alone can tell
what it would lie, to answer the question or
not. If in such a case he says upon his
oath that his answer would criminate him-
self, the court can demand no other testimo-
ny of the fact. If the declaration be untrue,
jt is in conscience and in law as much a per-
jury as if he had declared any other untruth
upon his oath. It is one of those cases in
¦which the rule of law must be abandoned or
the oath of of the witness be received.
The Counsel lor the tynited St.-tes have
also laid down til'8 rule according to their
understanding of it, but they appear to the
court to have in ;efe it as much tnoftavrpw as the
counsel for the witness have made it too broad-
According to their statement, a witness can
r.e/er refuse to answer any question unless
that answer unconnected with other testimony
would be sufficient to convict him of a crime.
This would be rendering the rule almost per-
fectly worthless. M.Xy links frequently com-
pose that chain of testimony, vvb.cb is i-.eces-
st'.ryto convict an individual of a crime. It
;>! pears to the Court, to be the true sense of.
the rule, fliit no witness is compellable to
furnish any one of them agiunst himself.
It is certainly not only possible but a pro
bible case, that a witness by disclosing a sin-
gle fact, may complete the testimony against
himself, and to every effectual purpose ac-
cuse hims< If, s entirely as he would do by
stating every circumstance which would In:
required for bis curve tion. That fact of it-
S"If might be unavailing, but all other facts
without it would be insufficient. While that
remains c mcenled ¦within his Own honor be is
safe, but draw it from thence., and he is ex-
p sed to a prosoci'tion. The rule which d e-
clarcs that no man is compellable to :;c suse
himself, would most obviously be infringed
by compelling a witness to disclose a fact of
tliis description.
What testimony may be possessed, or is
attainable iigaiiut any in'tiyiriiia-l, the court
can never know. It would seem then, that
the court oiudit never to to".). I a witness to
give aii answer, which disci ses a fact that
would forth '< necessary ami essential part of
aCr'nri , which ;s pinkish able !>' the laws.
To s to 'he ;,;:,
ca»e undct consideration. 3V fctjow and
- _
eoneSat fnc- tt'cajnn ftf anr-tber, 1$ tn'sMsum
of treason, and »« punishable by lvw. r>o
witness, therefore, is compellable bv law to
disclose a fact which would firm a necessa
rv and essential nu't of this crime—If the
lelter in question contains evidence of trea-
son, which is a Pact not dependent on ihe tes
tiinony of ilia witness before the court, and-
tiieeef re maybe proved without the aid of
his testimony, ami if the witness was ac
quaintert with that treason when the letter
.was wtifton, he may prohably be guilty of
misprision of treason, and thereforethe court
ought not to compel him to answer any q".< s-
tion, the answer to which might disclose
his former knowledge of the contents of that
letter.
But if the letter should relate to the mis-
demeanor ausl not the treason, the court is.
not apprized, that a knowledge and conceal-
ment of the misdemeanor, .wquM expose the
witness to any prosecution whatever. On thi3
•j' cunt, the court was at first disposed to in-
quire whether the letter could be deciphered
in order to determine from its contents, how
far the witness could be examined respecting
it. The court was inclined to t-his course,
(rem considering tne question as ene which
might require a disclosure of the knowledge
which the witness might have bad of the
contents of this letter, when it wis put in
cypher, or when it as copied by bins, if in-
deed such was the fact. But on bearing the
question more pi ¦, ticulsrlv and precisely stat
e 1, and finding that it refers only to the pre-
sent knowledge of the cypher it appears lo
to the court, diatthe question may be answer-
ed without implicating the witness, because
his present knowledge would not, itisbclicv.
ed in a criminal prosecution, jus'if the in-
ference that his knowledge v us a quired pre-
vious to this trial, or afford the means of prov-
ing that fact.
The -court is therefore of opinion, that
the witness may answer the question now
propounded.
The gentlemen of the bar, will under-
stand the rule to be laid down by the court
to be this.
It is the province cf the court to judge,
whether any direct answer to the question
which may be proposed, will furnish evi-
dence against the witness.
If such answer may disclose a fact which
forms a necessary and essential link in the
chain of testimon3', -which would be suffi-
cient to convict him of any crime, he is net
bound to answer it, so as to furnish matter
for that conviction.
In such a case, the witness must himself
judge what his answer will be, and if he
says on oath that he cannot answer without
accusing himself, he cannot be compelled to
answer.
Mr. Wiley being interrogated, replied, he
did not understand the part of the letter in
cypher.
Mr. Hay then put the following question :
" Mr. Wiley, do you know whether or not
this paper was written by colonel Burr or
by his directions ?"—
Answer—The part in cypher, was wrote
by colonel Burr.
Mr. Hay then moved, that the paper go
to the grand jury as they had sent for it.
Mr. hotts objected to the motion, and con-
tended that the materiality of the paper to
the present case, ought first to be shewn to
the eourt, before the paper could be sent.
The court were of opinion, that the paper
ought to be decyphered in eourt to prove its
relevancy, before it could be sent to the
grand jury.
The grand jury came into court about two.
Mr. John Randolph, the foreman of the
grand jury, thus addressed the court- - ' May
it phase the court, one of the witnesses un-
der examination, has answered certain ques
tions touchinga letter in cypher. The grand
jury understand that a letter of the same
description is in the possession of the attor-
ney or the court, and they wish to have that
letter in order to ascertain whether it be the
original or a copy of the same." The tat-
ter in cypher was accordingly, after some
discussion by the counsel on both sides, de-
livered to the grand jury.
Friday, June 19.
The court was opened about one quarter
after eleven,
Co/ Burr rose and stated to the court, that
the process which was obtained for the
president of theUnited States last Saturday,
was served upon him on Monday morning ;
but a verbal answer was only given, signify-
ing that an answer to the notification of the
process, would be returned through some
other channel. Col. Burr therefore observ-
ed, if nothing was heard in the course ©f
the day from the attorney for the prosecu-
tion, that tomorrow morning a motion
would be made for enforcing the process of
the court.
Mr. Hay rose and observed, that he wish-
ed to make a motion to the court. That the
gentlemen on the other side, had taken so
much of the time of the court, & had keptirp
such an incessant fire, that frhisownpart, he
was unable either to think or reflect as he ought
to do ; but however, he should make a mo-
tion which should be, that he should be at
liberty to send up to the grand jury certain
questions or interrogatories, to be put to the
witnesses.
Mr. Martin iz\&, he had no objection un-
der certain qualifications, that col. Burr also
might be at liberty to send up certain inter-
rogatories.
Mr. Hey replied, that although he had no
objections, yet he could not assent to the
proposal of the gentleman.
Nt. Edmund Randolph then rose to make
the motion, of which he gave notice oh
Wednesday. Mr. Hay interrupted him,
to state some remarks on the motion which
Mr. Randolph proposed to make, by ob-
serving it w< nld be entirely irregular, as
he was assured its only intention was for the
purpose of debasing anddegrading gencial
Wilkinson. He asked the court to consider
theaffidavitswhichMr. Randolph was topro-
duce, and if after reading these, the court
were not'of opinion that the motion was ir-
regular, an argument might be heard.—In
fact, he would object to the reading of the
affidavits, because he knew the spirit of the
witnesses who made them, and who were
actuated with a most deadly hatred against
general Wilkinson. Mr. H.iy said be
glanced his eye on a singleexpres6ionin the
paper which Mr. Randolph held in his
band, which he knew was intended as a
deadly blow against the character of ge-
nera) Wilkinson, tli.-.t be knew was false.
He hoped, therefore, ths couU would r.eyrr
sattetion vie Kefeit'cn offhagg voluntary af-
fidavits, on the part of these reluctant wit-
nesses On the part of the United States.
¦ Mr. Edmund , Randolph. I. was about,
please your honors, to go forward with the
motion of which I had given notice the o-
ther day, when I was interrupted by the
gentleman for the proseeu-tiort. However
I might have been inclined to lmve deferred
the motion for this day, yet from the obser-
vations which have fallen from him, I have
determined now to-proceed--—I make a mo-
tion to you, sir, for examining certain docu-
ments and testimony to prove that -gen. Wil-
kinson has used improper means with seve-
ral of the witnesses for the prosecution.
The counsel on the other side, sir, have
said a vast deal ab ut the policy which we
had in view, in making this motion. That
our policy, sir, was to degrade anil debase
the character of gen. Wilkinson.—I tell
you, sir, that our policy is to shew, that the
most arbitrary means have been resorted to,
in dragging hither several of the witnesses.
That gen. Wilkinson by virtue of military
authority, has endeavored to interrupt the.
free course of testimony. Why, sir, inform
us that this gentleman, this military hero, is
to come forth,-after this trial is over like the.
purest gold from a fiery furnace ? Wh
we told, sir, that gen. Wilkins n is the sa-
viour of America ? Why has the attorney
insinuated, that tljose men who we wish to
bring forward, are actuated with the most
deadly hatred towards general Wilkinson ?
WThy else is he telling you that the law .viil
be prostrated by the production of the testi,
stony, we are desirous sir of producing ?
Sii when we come to exhibit to the court
the several testimonies we have ih regard to
the points which I have stau d, I have no
doubt but the court will sec tne propr ety of
the million and of the Measures we have a-
dopted.
Mr. Hay says, that from a single glanc-
his eye had at a paper in my hand he was
satisfied my intention was to strike at the
character of general Wilkinson. This, sir,
is the great stroke ; general W. is or is not
subject to legal consequences . If he is. not
subject to legal consequences, how depl ru-
ble how lamentable must be the lot of the
accused ! These affidavits contain a vast
deal of miscellaneous matter of the flintiest
o
importance in the present question. If
there be any impropriety in exhibiting these
affidavits, it lies with the court to determine.
The court are to say what the law is in tliis
case. It is said the witnesses are here—I
rejoice, sir... that the witnesses are here;,I
also rejoice, sir, that there are several res-
pectable p-rsons here to bear witness of the
integrity of their characters.—I glory, sir,
that this is the case and that we have an op-
portunity of repelling the insinn.i.ions that
have been thrown out against them by the
attorney for the prosecuti n. If their cre-
dibility be doubted, we can speedily remove
this doubt to the satisfaction of the court.
I trust, therefore, that an argument will be
gone into with respect to the propr ety of
the motion.
Mr. hotts spoke about ten minutes in
support of Mr. Randolph.
He was replied to oy Mr. M F\ae, in a
speech of a quarter of an hour a aitist the
propriety of the motion, ami in vindication
of the character of gen. Wilkinson.
Mr. llickham ro>-e and answered Mr.
M'Rae's pr, position of submitting the affi-
davits in question to the secret inspection
of the court, which he said was a mode of
proceeding be sh uid always oppose. He
would certainly protest against the erection
of a secret tribunal of this sort, and adverted
to the aspersion o hich was attempted to be
thrown on the character of the witnesses.
Mr, Hoy intercepted him by ob-erving,
that he was surprised at Mr. Wickham's
extraordinary remark on the epithets which
he had used with respect to the witnesses.
Had he and the counsel associated with
him, not accused gen. Wilkinson of the
blackest deeds ? Had they not accused gen.
Wilkinson of perjury ?
Mr. Martin rose and remarked, if by per-
jury, Mr. Hay alluded to the charge made
against gen. Wilkinson lor the violation of
the constitution, this was a fact known to
the whole world. WTere not Swartwout
and Bellman in court ? Were there not liv-
ing testimony of gen. Wilkinson's having
broken his oath, so far as regards the pre-
servation of the constitution of the United
States ?
The Court expressed a desire to hear the
inspection ot the affidavits, and that the ar-
guments on the motion might proceed to-
morrow.
Col. Burr rose and stated, that notwith-
standing the inconvenience to which he was
subjected by the delay, yet he was willing
to conform to the wishes of the court, and
that the arguments on the propriety of the
motion should be commenced to-morrow.
Mr. Martin hoped the gentlemen for the
prosecution would also postpone their aio-
tion.
Mr. Bay had several objections to a delay,
particularly as there were several of the wit-
nesses respecting whom be intended to put
interrogatories, to be sent up to the grand
Jur>'-
Col. Burr had no objection, provided he
also had the privilege of giving interroga-
tories to any witnesses he pleased, and had
the privilege likewise of inspecting the in-
terrogatories which might be put by the at-
torney.
Mr. Martin said he bad been attorney-
general for the state of Maryland for many
years, and never bad known it practised
that interrogations were r.ent by the attor-
ney to the grand jury.
The Chief Justice said that the principle
was no doubt a novel one, and lie should
for his own part be opposed {p tlis -iauock.c-
tieii of trie practice of llie public Attorney
sending up the written interrogations to the'
grand jury.' Tlut ;if the principle were ad-
mitted on-one side it ought likewise to 'have
a place on the other, and if the prosecut-
ing attorney bad the priviledge of sending
up written ihterepgations, that the accused
likewise should have the ¦same indulgence.
Mr. Hay therefore-, waved his po.position
of sending interrogations for witnesses to
the Grand Jury, and stated that he would
content himself by relying on the integrity
and candor of the Grand Jury.
Col. Burr rose and informed1 the.court
that in Kentucky, Mr. Daveiss, the public
attorney for that district, bad made the same
proposition to the court, that of sending in-
terii.j aiories to the Grand Jury - That beat
first bad attempted to go to the ground jury
himself, but: the Court very properly pre-
vented the extraordinary measure—That he
then proposed interrogatories ; but as they
Were only three in nnmberv and the very
questions which he, colonel Burr himself,
was desirous should be put by the Grand
Jury to the witnesses- He then-fore request-
ed that U:e o, ,.,( would assent to their being
sent, and in this m.inner the court had
agreed'lo the sending of the interrogatories
drawn ¦ Daveis, ;¦.
. The Chief Justia observed, he did not
that : ttempt had ever before been
made by a public attorney.
.- proposal v.'.r. afterwards made by Mr.
Hay, that general Wilkinson should i "pe-
c>aliy informed : the charges which were
to be made against him.
A di i ission ¦ t some length took place
on this when iVi . Rand lp stRted that
be would tell them exph.-i'ek that ihe pur-
port of th' . lion would !)• *¦ attack the
conduct of General Wiikinion in the pre-
sent cause. Adjourned,
BV THIS DAY's MAILS.
BOSTON, June 19.
A number of vessels haw arrived at Nan-
tucket, and New*Bedford, within a few days
past, full of oil.
Labrador Fishery.
The last. Newburyporl paper enumerates
the number of vessels from that place to
'he Labrador, during the present season.
Tin , :.-.,.- number is 48, besides two others,
now lilting out, the to.mage of which is
4407. It is calculated that they carry one
man to every nine tons which make's ;:bou1
490 men, who are employed in that fish-
ery, from one single port only.
The Danish government has cautioned
their captains and supercargoes against agree
ing with their captors to abandon their
claim, for damages for dele , which
is a too common case-on the
tral vessels ; and have stated a case ..
sir William Scott condemned the captor ot
a IXinish vessel to the payment of all dama-
ges, expenses, etc.
Masonie. We understand that fhe en-
campments of knights of M ilta, and of . ¦.
holy order of St. John, of Jerusalem,
knights .'templars, and knights of ths red
cross, will make the first appearance ever
witnessed in this' state, at the -x-iebratioe.
of the festival of St. John, at Dorchester,
on Wednesday next. The exercises are pub.
lie, and Will-commence at .0 o'clock, a. u..
in the new. meeting house.
Arrived, ship Hannah, Cottle, of New-
buryport, 35 day'afrom Dublin
Scrrr. Oe . atts, from Berbice, is
days ; iJritish sclir. Dart, LongworthJ 28
days from Honduras ; brig Stranger, from
Havana, via Portland ; schr. Isabella and
Ann, Rooke, 20dSys:frOm N-v-d'ounularn*.
Brig Sally, Pratt, 95 days from Ne.v-
Orleans Ship Thomas, Allen, went over
the Bar May ?,o, but put back leali
was entering the river May 23 ; ship Harri-
ot, Gray, for Liverpool, irst wind. May
l23, in the river inside of the Bar ; snip
Draper, Page, do. do. ill the river, just with-
in the Bar. Spi ke on the passage, schr.
Adherbul, M'Meal, 22 days from Baititnare,
3 leagues frem the Balize. Lat. S3, 48,
long. 78, SO, schr Favorite, Potter, 5 days
from Baltimore for Charleston. Lat. ?i, 40,
long. 75, schr. Mercury, Grove, in 16 days
from Portland, for Charleston. Freights at
New-Orleans very high ; cotton 4 i-2 a 5
cents, and other articles in proportion, and
there were not half vessels enough to take
eff the produce on hand.
Schr. Betsy, Freeman, Trinidad, in 27
days.
Brig Retrieve, Wait, Havana, 26 days ;
and schr. Nancy, Gardner, Trinidad.
Schr. Triton, Rich, St. Martins, 18 days.
Of the 3d June, in lat. 8, 19, long. 66, 26,
fell in with the English Jamaica fleet, of
167 sail, homeward bound, with two prizes.
NEW-BEDFORD, June S-
Arrived, ship Russell, Allen, from the
Pacific Ocean. Left on the coast, Dec. 20,
ships Monticello, Coffin ; Perseverance,
Coffin, Jan. 4 ; Maria, Coffin, do. ; John
Jay, Clark, do Feb. 28, parted company
with the ship Lion, Paddock, bound home.
May 25, in lat. 31, 85, N. long. 60, 30, W.
ship William Wilson, of and from Balti-
more, capt. Gibson, for Amsterdam, 72 hours
from Cape-Henry. May 29, lat. 38, 20, N.
long. 66, 50, schr. Four Sisters, Bowling,
from Beverly for Havana. Passenger in me
ship Russell, papt, Timothy Kavnare, of the
ship Juno, of Hudson, which ship was con-
demned as not being seaworthy, in the port
of Payta, on the coast of Peru.
The ship liarclay, Hand ; and Culloden,
Swain, both from whaling voyages.
Dart, Hodgkins, Savannah ; Hero, Baker,
Norfolk.
NEW-YORK, June 20.
Laftst j) oiii diu: ope
By the arrival of the brig Robert Barclay,
captain Brady, at 2 o'clock this day, in 31
days, from the Downs, the Editor of the
Commercial Advertiser has received London
papers to the 11th cf May, inclusive, and
Lloyd's Lis.s and he 8th.
We have made as copious selections f.sun
these as our time would permit, The offi-
cial account of the Capture of Ahxandria,
the terms of the arirristire agreed upon be-
tween General Mortier and the Swedish
commander, we are competed to omit until
iMonday.
Pttee of Sleeks, May 11.— 3 per cent. red.
62 1-3 5-8 ; 3 per cent, cotjg. 63.5-4 3 $ ;
i milium. 1*1-4 i-S
Admiral Duckworth.— E.x.tracts"pt' atfm'l
Duckworth's letter, and enclosures trans-
mitted to the admiralty, were published, as
expected, in the Gazette of last night. They
contain a full detail of the passage and re-
passage of the Dardanelles by our Beet, and
of the causes which unfortunately conspired
to defeat the object of the expedition. A
fine wind from :ae southward on the morn-
ing of the 18th of Feb. permitted the Bri-
tish admiral to carry into effect the resoluti-
on which he had formed of passing the Dar-
danelles. At a quarter before 9 o'clock the
whole of the squadron had passed the outer
Castles, without having returned a shot of
the enemy's tire, which occasioned but little
injury. This forbearance arose from a wish
to preserve every appearance of amity, that
his majesty's minister might negociate with
the strongest p-oof of the pacific disposition
of our sovereign towards the Porte. A se-
cond battery on the E iropean side fired also
with little effect. The greatest resistance
our fleet experienced was in sailing through
the nnrrow passage of Sesfos and Abylos.
The Turks opened their lire upon our ships as
they passed in succession, but the spirited
return it met. with, considerably diminished
its force. Having thus triumphed over ali
Opposition, with the steady gallantry of
Kruish seamen, and with little loss, the
squadron at half past 8, p. m. was enabled tt»
make sail, and on the evening of the next
day, the 20th, came to an anchor at l(*
o'clock near the Frince's-Islands, about »
miles trorn Constantinople, the wind not
admitting of a nearer appro.uii. Such wast
the unfortunate state of the weather that
Fi ir/i the moment our squ.idron anchored till
it weighed on the ir.t of March, that adm'i
Duckworth writes, " That it was not at any
time in his power to hays occupied a situa-
tion which -voiild have enabled bun to com-
mence offensive operations against Constan-
tinople. The hnglish admiral having stated
these particulars, comes to the most, inter-
esting point of all- a dev| lopement of the
motives which impelled nun 10 repass the
Dardanelles, Having onuuie.ated the force
and preparations of the enemy, he says,
" We should bare been jn no state to have
defended ourselves against that force, and
then repass the Dardanelles.? Adrairal
Duckworth makes no complaint of (he want
of land forces ; and it is cvid-nf that they
could not have contributed in to the
attainment of the object of the exoeeiition.
May 8.
A gentleman is re-rived in town, who
left Hamburg so late as Saturday last. He
brings intelligence that a part ot the French
troops had returned thither, and that -the
king of Sweden had refused to ratify ihe
armistice. This may be the case, and,the
French most likely had a suspicion it would
be so, v hich induced them to draw up the
Armistice in such a manner, that the con-
ditions would he carried into execution be-
fore the king's opinion could be obtained.
The funds have experienced a fall ihw
morning, Which, it is said, is owing to the
y intended for Russia amountingto the
lS sum of six millions ! !'
May 9.
The following letter was received this
morning from oar Plymouth correspondent:
Plyti.uth, May 7.
" Arrived, his majesty?* brig Delight, of
36 guns, captain Hanfielu, from Alexandria,
'with dispatches, which were immediately
forwarded to the admiralty. She brings the
important; intelligence of the capture of
Alexandria, by a detachment of British
troops, under the command of Gen. Fraser,
consisting of SG60 men, on the HHh of
March last. They met with a slight resist-
ance on their landing;, which took place oa
the 18th of March, and the next day the
garrison surrendered to the Britieb forces ;,
cur less is said only to consist of 20 killed
and wounded. The detachments accompa-
nied by one line of battle ship, some frigate*
and gun-boats ; but the day sifter the surren-
der, a British squadron of 7 sail of the line,
arrived at -lexandria. The Delight telt
Alexandria on the BSth of March, and Mes-
sina on tiie 8th of April, and passwd through
Lord Collingwood's. fleet 7 days since, cruiz-
ing off Cadiz, all well."
May I r.
The Gazette of Saturday contains the of-
ficial details of the capture of Alexandria,
It will be seen that this conquest was affect-
ed without any extraordinary exertions ; but
the -pint, valor, and perseverance of our
gallant countrymen, were prepared and rea-
dy to meet and surmount the most arduous
resistance. Our loss, we are happy to
find was very inconsiderable. • .
As the arrival of the transports which,
had separated, enabled general Frasier tr>
follow up the capture of Alexandria by fur-
ther operations, detachments were sent (r>
take possession of Rosetta, and.llafhnrar.ee,
the Mamelukes and Arabs are confidently
stated to be friendly to our cause. We have
received several letters from Alexandria,
which we are obliged to postpone for the
present. Admiral Duckworth has return-
ed to Sicily ; admiral Lenis remains at
Alexandria. The e 1 ps employed in fha!;
service, were the first bataiii 0 of the 3 is!, fcs
and second batalions of the 35th, fecoiicl
batalion of the 78th regiment. Lie Rolie'e
regiment, fom troops of the 26th dragoons*
three companies of of artillery, and two ttf.
artificers.
Some more foreign papers and letters have
arrived since our last. The accounts From
Dantzic are of so late a date as Pi«e aofh
uit.—No general battle had taker, places
a part of the besieging force had joined the
French grand army 5 and an immeuseCus-
sian reinforcement was on its mutch to i'o-
land. Letters from Copenhagen, of the
a8ih, state that the Danish preparations for
war had become very .formidable, and thnt
the crown prince bad placed himseii at thr.
head of 25000 men in.Holstein. "Report,
says, that Austria is immediately expected to
declare againt France ; while on the contra-
ry, it is asserted, the negociatiuns under tbr-
mediation of the court ot Vienna,are alnicly
in a state of great forwardness. Itisaddcd, but
we doubt the statement, that Great-Biitain 13
included in these negociations. Letters
from Varel, of the ^tn inst. confirm onr .
former accounts, iciativ;: to the arrangem-CRt
|
