The New Hampshire Gazette

From PHILAD. Feb. 9.

[From a member of Congress.]

"Though opinions vary in, as well as out of Congress, yet I flatter myself, that when, by discussion, the constitutionality of the Treaty shall be fully evinced, and its expediency and true policy fairly exposed to open view, there will be a large majority in favor of its support, and that therefore they will grant the requisite aid. Without it, what will be the probable result? Undoubtedly a non-restoration of the posts—non-restoration for the depredations on our commerce—in short, a war. It can scarcely be— a successful one—but suppose it should certainly be successful— two or three years of successful war—the expense will be much the same. to the government, in one case, as the other. But to say nothing of the evil of the expense, do we mean to be at war forever? Surely. no. Why then, we must treat after all. Treat & what, with, Great Britain? Surely.—Have we not treated already.? And shall we be on a better footing to treat after a war, than we were when, we did treat? Has Great-Britain ever discovered partiality to us, that should lead us to expect any peculiar advantages from her? Surely no—Or will she? Probably no. Where then will be the use of rejecting the present treaty, and of incurring the terrible judgment of war, in order, again to treat, when there is not the most distant probability that we shall ever get a better one than the present.

"And here, I think it proper to declare, after all the discussions that have come within my view; that I really think the Treaty a good one—as the balance of advantages and policy are on our side, and its constitutionality clear as the sun—and that the clamor raised against it originated wholly from selfish and designing men."