On the 29th day of October last, at the house of Jofeph Pearfon, in Ridley, Ifrael Elliott afferted, that I fold corn to the British," meaning, I fuppofe, when the British army were in Philadelphia during the late war: I declared it was an infamous falfehood-he faid Nicholas Diehl was his author. Subfequent to the above, I happened to be at the houfe of Henry Pafchall in Kingfeffing, the faid Elliott, Nicholas Diehl, Hugh Lloyd, and Matthew Hufton being prefent.-I mentioned the charge to the neighbours, and declared it was an infamous lie; Nicholas Diehl utterly denied that he ever mentioned it to Elliott, which Lloyd and Huston will prove. I declare the above affertion of Ifrael Elliott's to be an infamous lie, and defy all created beings to make it appear, that I ever, during the continuance of that juft, neceffary and glorious war, directly or indirectly aided, affifted, or abetted the British, or their adherents (the Tories), in their attempt to fubjugate the United States, or either of them, in any manner or way whatever. March 2. JOHN PEARSON. Darby, Delaware County, March 4th, 1797.. To the Public-Some time fince, as I was going towards Chester, I happened to stop at the house of Mr. Aarón Morton, where, to my great astonishment, I read, publicly pofted up, the foregoing. denial, figned John Pearfon. Seeing my character thus publicly attacked, I felt the neceffity of as public a juftification of it. I am charged with the propagation of a falfehood. Barely to affert that the charge is without foundation, would, perhaps, be fufficient, confidering the character of the accufer; but I do not wish to oppofe affertion by affertion: I fhould be ashamed to fuffer, for a moment, a competition between my veracity and that that of John Pearfon. For this reafon it is, that I lay before the public the following depofition. Delaware County, -Perfonally appeared William Smith before me, the fubfcriber, one of the Juftices of the Peace in and for the county aforefaid; and on his folemn affirmation doth declare, that he was at Nicholas Deihl's, fenior, houfe, and heard him fay that John Pearfon need not pretend to be fo great a Whig as he was: he, the said Smith, afkeď for what reafon? He faid he traded with the British, and fold them Indian corn. Further faith not. Affirmed and fubfcribed this 26th of January, 1797, before me, Ben. W. Oakford. WILLIAM SMITH. Thus is Mr. Smith's oath opposed to Pearson's bare word, the oath of a man whofe word nobody will doubt, opposed to the naked affertions of one who finds moft belief where he is leaff known; and thus has the meddling, factious, and turbulent tanner of Darby, who, were he permitted, would dress the fkins of his peaceable neighbours with as little remorfe as he does the hides of quadrupeds; thus has this would-be village tyrant, by his arrogance and infolence, established the truth of my affertion, which he wifhed to be looked upon as a lie, and rendered that public which was before confined to a few. By a violent effort to efface what the hand of time would have foon worn away, he has revived the ftain, and has rendered it indelible. March 6. ISRAEL ELLIOTT, To the Public.-When I wrote the piece which Ifrael Elliott, without my knowledge, published in Porcupine's Gazette of the 13th inft. I only meant ́abfolutely to deny the malicious charge of Elliott, which he in the reply, compofed for him, has not pretended to fupport, but wanders from the fubject into personal abufe. The falsehood, I fuppofe, ori 3 ginated ginated in his indefatigable malice. I fay his malice, for it commenced at the time when I, as a juftice of the peace, chofen twice by the unfolicited fuffrages of the good Whigs of the neighbourhood (previous to Thomas Mifflin's having the power to commiffion fuch a man as him, a power fhamefully prostituted), was obliged to take cognizance of his conduct on a charge of fornication. The epithets of his writer, of factious, turbulent tyrant," cannot apply to meI therefore take no further notice of him. Having the good fortune to be taught the tanner's trade, I am acquainted with skins, and Elliott may rest asfured I will not drefs his. I fhould expect from the abandoned profligacy of his youth, and confequent filthiness, the fkin would prove rotten, and as fkins dried in a hot climate (and mercury may have a fimilar effect in ours) the old fores would break out afresh, and caufe holes-in that cafe it would not do for a drum, as the celebrated Lifca's * was used for-unless, as it would be noifeless, it might fuft a captain of the militia horfe like him, who has the daftardly cowardice publicly to declare, that we (meaning the Americans) were not able to contend with the British. I am extremely forry to be concerned in a dispute of any kind, and wifh anxioufly for peace. I was not the aggreffor, and have not been in any cafe of that nature; if there is any individual upon the earth who conceives himself injured by me, let him come forward; the neighbours (the best tribunal) fhall determine, and fuch compenfation fhall be made by me as they think proper. Darby, March 24. JOHN PEARSON. *Meaning, I fuppofe, Zifca's.-EDITOR. The reader will obferve, that both these honeft men were juftices of the peace; and will, doubtlefs, conclude, that the ap pointment of fuch men to fuch an office must be wholly ascribed to the fuperior wisdom and virtue of republican government. From From the Merchants' Advertiser-A London Courier of December ftates, that a change in the adminiftration was confidered as indifpenfable to the obtainment of a peace, and afferts, that the following arrangement had been laid before the friends of a great perfonage: Firft Lord of the Treafury-Duke of Bedford. Secretaries of State-Marquis of Lanfdown, Right Honourable C. J. Fox. Lord Chancellor, with a Peerage-Hon. T. Erkine. Lord Prefident of the Council-Lord Thurlow. Firft Lord of the Admiralty-Earl Howe. Mafter General of the Ordnance-Duke of Northumberland, Lord Privy Seal Duke of Grafton. Ambafador to the French Republic-Earl of Lauderdale. Treasurer of the Navy-Mr. Sheridan. Prefident of the Indian Board of Control-Earl of Guildford. Secretary at War-General Fitzpatrick. Chancellor of the Dutchy of Lancafter-Mr. Mansfield. Solicitor General-Mr. Mingay. Thus far the London Courier; and thus our Merchants' Advertiser, in ftrict obfervance of that impartiality which it profeffes, difmiffes the abominable lie, without glofs or comment. The editors or conductors of this advertising paper did fet out with the pious refolution, not to meddle with party matters; this, efpecially when we recollect that they all bear an implacable hatred to one of the powers now at war, will undoubtedly be looked upon as an in ftance of the most heroic felf-denial. However, I must not be understood as allowing, that their natural inclination has never got the better of their prudence and piety. A few days ago, after repeating an article from the Whitehall Evening † A paper published by my old bookfeller, Bradford, in nership with one Lloyd, a fcoundrel, who, in 1793, graced the pillory at the Royal Exchange, London. VOL. V. D Poft, Poft, they add, in italics; " It is but fair to ob“serve, that the Whitehall Evening Poft is under "the direction of the British Minifter." Now, then, if a ftrict impartiality would admit of fuch a commentary as this, why would it not admit of fomething in the fame way after the extract before us? When an article was extracted which feemed rather favourable to the caufe of Great Britain, it was "but fair" to undermine its force by afcribing it to undue influence; but when, on the other hand, at well-known falfehood is to be found in a London paper, and that falfehood holds out a belief of the inftability of the miniftry, and of the confequent abandonment of the interefts of the kingdom; then, it is very fair to let the intelligence ftand upon its own foundation. This, in the new-fangled jargon of mendicants for public favour, is called impartiality. Yes, Meffrs. Conductors, there is very little doubt but you would rejoice at such a change in the adminiftration of Great Britain. You would then promise yourselves the pleasure of feeing the ruin of those whom you hate, merely because they are not already ruined. Randolph.-The following refolution was laid on the table of the Houfe of Reprefentatives of the United States by Mr. Williams, and agreed to by the House: "Whereas, it is stated to this Houfe in the report "of the Secretary of the Treasury, of the 15th of "February, that the accounts of Edmund Ran"dolph, Efquire, late Secretary of State, for monies "advanced to him for foreign expenditures, ftill re"main unfettled; and that neither the accounts of "the foreign minifters, bankers, and agents of the "United States, nor the records of the Department "of State, contain any explanation in refpect to a "confiderable fum of the faid monies :" Refolved, that |