Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-04-11

4 "SoNie auotiiSt, eAih p'CuSS su'
that is dear to man, that my charge
was not only substantially true, but
was d fective only IN not exhibiting
the full extent of this public abus-,
and this will now proceed to demon
strate.
In the general account furnished by
the auditor for erecting the buildings,
there is debit as follows:
"Work on the machinery and FIX
lures, S29751, 67.
This enormous sum was expended on
machinery and fixtures, some of which
is totally useless, and the residue af-
fords no advantage equal to its cost &
repairs. 1t has been approved and
sanctihed by three me mbsrs of the ex-
ecutive council, whose names are al
ready mentioned, upon view of facts
and documents to which they have
referred. They have further adj
mitted a balance to be due to John
Clarke of S379 GO, making in all
S 3O14l IS, which is about equal to
three dollars each on the flushed
muskets, for the use of the machinery
alone.
also have had view of the same
documents, and have no hesitation in
saying, that great part of this money
has been improperly drawn from she
treasury, and that the report of the
committee cannot be supported by the
testimony upon which they relied.
ItaPpears that a contract was made
with John Clarke, August 1899, to
supply certain machinery 10 the amount
of S ioo57 So.
This extraordinary and deceptious
report is said to be supported by the
afliiavits of one of the millwli lights
named, Joseph Young, and the two
master armorers, George Williamson
and Daniel Athertos.
1t appears that 29751 67, have
been drawn out of the treasury for
machinery alone, by orders. certificates,
or some other voucher, in favor and
for the exclusive benefit Of +. Clarke,
tho SIZES SO thereof have been
irawn in the name of Joseph Young,
in sixty four different items, of diff
ferent dates and amounts, ard he also
now demands the further sum of
S $40 Go being the balance reported
By the committee, ali for work done
by Young and others, certified by John
Clarke and sancti6ed by the executive
council.
1t appears by the documents, that
IN theses transactions, Young, {rhe
accounts were rendered in his own
name was the foreman fJohn Clarke,
that the money drawn in this way was
received by him, and that after paving
the men employed under him, he paid
the overplus to Clarke as his private
profit
Thus it happens that John Clarke, whilst
he acted in the character of superinten-
dant at salary OF 1000 dollars, directed
work to be done, in the execution of which
he had a private interest. He fixed its
value, made out aud certified the accounts,
IN the name, and apparently in favor Of
Joseph Young, whose name was used to
cover and conceal the real transaction
81 that in every instance when certif
cate was issued for money due, to Joseph
Young by Clarke, he in fact decided how
much money in that particular instance he
should draw out of the treasury, for his
own private emolument. And not for SER
vices rendered, or intended to be render
ed, but for an imaginary and fictitious pro-
bt, fabricated in his own Closet, for his
sole and exclusive use and benefit.
Such are the principles and procee-
dings. and such the d td and contrivances,
by which the SUM of S 10, 1875 So have
been drawn from the Treasury, of which
according to the most correct view that
can take, upwards of 3 5000 are profit,
which have passed into the pocket of the
superintendent, by those contrivances al
ready noticed, and yet further to be Elk.
pained.
Joseph Young, who is about to hold a
co spicuous station in these matters is an
iiliterate man, mill wright by trade, and
has been lately taught the art of writing
this tact is of much importance as vii
hereafter ahhear.
1t appears that the committee of the ex-
ecut,ve have founded their report upon a
lengthy statement, said to be for work
done. 1t embraces pages of large folio
paper and contains 2o5 separate aud dis.
tinct items, relating TO transactions which
he r