charter officers in his paper. They now begin to cast him off. Two of the Federal editors, Coleman and Lewis, have each of them published against him. How is this change to be accounted for? For every change must have a motive.

A writer in the American Citizen, of October 28, under the signature of " A Republican," supposes the cause to be jealousy of Cullen as their literary rival; but there could be no occasion for this, for Cullen is but a poor creature. The Philadelphia Aurora, of the 28th, concludes it to be a quarrel about the division of the spoil, that is, about the division of the million pounds sterling, which Cobbett (Porcupine) says, the English Government expends in America. The more fool they for doing so-for though the generality of newspaper printers may be bought or hired to print any thing, the farmers, who are the main stay of the country, care nothing about the clamour of printers, nor about the ravings of anonymous scribblers. These things serve them to laugh at. The press is become too common to be credited, unless the writer be known.

But without supposing any other cause why the Federalists have thrown off Cullen, the case is, that the project which this emissary went upon, that of an alliance offensive and defensive with Britain, would have been the ruin of the merchants, the greater part of whom are of the Federal faction. These men, though ignorant in politics, have, from habit, some talent for speculation; and they could not but see, unless they were stone-blind, that if such an alliance was formed, the whole of the carrying trade would be lost at once, for the United States after that alliance, would no longer be a neutral nation, nor be considered or treated as such. And as men when they begin to think do not stop at the first thought, for thought begets thought, they would soon see that the trade to Bourdeaux, which is greater than the trade to London would be lost also; and by thinking a little farther, they would discover that Amsterdam and all the ports of the Continent of Europe would be shut against American vessels as they are now shut against the English. Allies must share the same fate.

Whether Coleman and Lewis saw this before the faction to which they belong discovered it, I leave to be settled among themselves. They might also apprehend that the continual abuse and blackguardism in Cullen's infamous paper against the French nation, the French government, and the French minister at Washington, could not long, and would not always pass unnoticed. COMMON SENSE.

Nov. 5, 1806.

FEDERALISTS BEGINNING TO REFORM,

THERE is some hope that the Federalists are beginning to reform, they have already descended from the high vice of direct lying, and have taken up with the humble vice of only asking lying questions. That this reformation is already began, the New York Evening Post, and some other Federal papers, and a quid Federal paper in Philadelphia have shewn, by their putting the following lying questions to Thomas Paine.

66 'Do you know any thing of a certain memorial transmitted to the Executive Directory of the then French Republic, by an American citizen, then in France, inviting them to send over a powerful army to revolutionize America. The memorial, stating among other inducements, that there was a French party and an English party in the United States, and that the army would be joined by the French party here, immediately on its arrival?"

"Do you know that his memorial made a deep impression on the minds of the Directory, and that it was referred to Citizen Pichon, late Charge des Affaires in the United States ?"

"Do you know that it was with great difficulty that the Directory were induced to give up the idea of revolutionizing America, nor did they relinquish it till they were well assured [pray who assured them] that the citizens of all parties would unite and oppose an [any] invading army

whatever?"

"Do you know [here follows a long space filled up with stars, thus ***] but how should you be acquainted with any of these things; besides, three queries at a time may be as many as you can well answer?"

Asking a lying question is a symptom of reformation in the Federalists, because it is not so bad as telling a lie, but the danger is, they will fall into a relapse. As their recovery from the dreadful state they have been in is interesting to the public, it will be proper to publish now and then a bulletin of their state of health.

As a lying question may sometimes be put to shame by a true question about something that is true, I ask those quidnunes, if John Adams, when he and the Fed. Congress of

that day passed the law for annulling the treaty with France, paid the six millions of livres to France, which Colonel John Laurens and Thomas Paine brought from France to Boston, in August, 1781, two millions and a half of which was in silver money, and lodged in the Bank at Philadelphia, of which Thomas Willing was then President; the rest was in clothing and military stores sufficient to load a ship and brig, besides the French frigate that brought the money.

The case is there has been a race of self-conceited Federal ingrates, started up since " the times that tried men's souls," that knows nothing about those times. The writer of this, whom every body knows, could tell many more things if he was not restrained by prudence; but the foolish Federalists have no prudence. They blunder on, and force out explanations that prudence requires to be concealed. CN S

Nov. 10, 1806.

TO A FRIEND TO PEACE.

"There appeared

The American Citizen of Nov. 5, says, in The People's Friend (the paper of the emissary Cullen, alias Carpenter) of yesterday, in the Commercial Advertiser, and the Evening Post, a two column essay signed A Friend to Peace, which from first to last of it is a bitter invective against the National Administration for not fortifying the port of New York. "This Essay, written by some Federal hand, most probably by Mr. King, made its appearance the same Morning, in his Excellency's quid paper, the Morning Chronicle. See the People's Friend and Morning Chronicle of yesterday.

THE first remark that offers itself upon this subject is the choice which the writer or writers of the fore-mentioned two column essay made of the newspaper in which their piece appeared. They chose for that purpose the paper of the emissary Cullen, alias Carpenter, whose paper is continually filled in the first place with abuse and blackguardism against the national administration, to which the proposed address of the Federal faction for fortifying the port of New York is to be addressed, which shews that this proposed

address is a mere trick for the purpose of amusing the people. In the second place, the paper of this emissary, whom the Anglo-Federal faction protects, for it is they who protect them and not the people, is crammed with the most vulgar and outrageous abuse against the French nation, the French government, the French minister at Washington; and now this emissary, and those who associate with him are crying out to the citizens of all other States to be at the expence of fortifying New York against the apprehended consequences of their own abuse, for that is the only danger to which the place is exposed.

The people of Boston, of Philadelphia, of Baltimore, of Charleston, and other commercial places, all which are approachable by ships of war, do not call on New York to be at the expence of fortifying their town; why then does a faction in New York call on them? The answer is, that those places though they have their local disputes, do not harbour an emissary of one belligerent nation against another belligerent nation, and a Federal faction in New York does.

The faction says, in their fore-mentioned address, that "among the most important duties of Government is the application of the public funds to the means of security against foreign invasion and insult." But it is the faction itself that gives the insult by their continually insulting the French nation and government, and now they want to be protected against the apprehended consequences of that insult. It is an insult to France to harbour the emissary Cullen, alias Mac Cullen, alias Carpenter, for he has passed by all these names, and it would be an insult to England to harbour a French emissary. A neutral nation violates its neutrality when it harbours the emissary of any belligerent nation. It was the doing of this that was the cause of the overthrow of Switzerland. Basle, in Switzerland, was the harbour of British emissaries.

If Rufus King is the writer of the forementioned foolish piece, for it is tediously and foolishly written, he must know, for he has been (God knows!) a foreign minister himself, that it is an injunction on every foreign minister to transmit a weekly account to his government, if the opportunity offers, of every thing that passes in the nation to which he is sent, that has reference to the interest of the nation he represents. The movements, therefore, of the Anglo-Federal faction in New York, will of consequence be known to the French government, but, at the same time, that government will see,

by the opposition made to those movements, that they are the work of a vulgar and despicable faction, and not of the people. And so far as the writer of this (who is the same person who wrote the pamphlet Common Sense, the beginning of January, 1776, and the several numbers of the Crisis during that war) has made an opposition to those movements, and distinguished between the faction and the people, he has been the friend of the people. As to the faction itself, Thomas Paine cares nothing about it; but he has been civil enough to warn it of its danger. If Rufus King, in case he is the writer of the piece in Cullen's paper of November 4, and in the Morning Chronicle of the same day, will say in direct terms what he there insinuates indirectly, that Thomas Paine invited two or three thousand French troops to plunder the city, Thomas Paine will honour Rufus King with a prosecution for LYING. A faction must be in a lamentable condition indeed, when it is obliged to seek refuge in lying. It ought to recollect that nothing is more easy than to tell a lie, and nothing more difficult than to support the lie after it is told.

But all this affectation about fortifying New York is a mere electioneering Federal bubble. Why did they not think of it in the administration of John Adams, or in that of Washington? Why is it made a subject at this time, and was not at that time? New York is in no more danger now than it was then, nor than any other commercial town or city of the Union is in, except it be the danger the faction brings upon it by harbouring and encouraging an emissary of one belligerent nation against another.

But supposing for the sake of supposition, that the other States would agree to be at the expence of fortifying New York, which is next to certain they will not, for all the Atlantic States have commercial towns of their own, how, I ask is New York to be fortified, for I deny the practicability of fortifying it? It is nature more than art that renders places defensible, and the situation of New York does not admit of defence. Where any foreign power disposed to attack it, they would not attack it in front by ships of war. They would pass the city either on the East river, or the North river, or both, and land their troops some miles above the city, and march down upon it, or they would come down the East river for that purpose, or they would land on the East shore of Long Island, and march across the island and pass the East river in boats they would bring with them. If the Federal faction will exhibit their plan of