Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-04-18
No this emer yeucy, John Clarke threw

That the Contract VAS Abandoned or Chan
ged, that no m.re work Shanot the value ut
> S,6o1 . WAS executed, and that olnsr
work, eQulvAlen 90 the money drawn, W -
substituted in its stead. Inc journals aud
otiier records 10 inc council cnAnoer are
eearcnsd ~ vain, where are the entries -
ne. Where are the coDtractsf None
Where are the documents TO support TIA &c
Shargest None. sumo members, and
soms OK memOers, are examined. Some
Of them recoliect some out door convsrsa1-
en-, which conveyed an idea that sucn was
the confidence Of that board, lii the taients.
integrity, aad PATRIOTISM ut John CLARKE,
that he might f he saw cause, and the in.
terest OF the commonwealth would oe pro-
NOTED, make alterations.
The nfor,u atom derived from the mem-
bers thus exAmiued, was vague. 1t tits not
understood, It will be easy tor tnem t. ex.
pam themselves, ny committing their 1es-
timsny TO paper. Ii alterations were
made and other work Was done, demand
siyht ut the documents and accounts, Ii
not, and the Contract, Was abandoned ex-
cept az to 5 1857 IL, then way arxw from
ths treasury y 9 957 IS! rn,s plain and
anansweraolc arguAxnS shews, that On tlns
Particular branch OF these mysterious
TRANSACTIONS, Sc go according to the work
acknowledged, has been drawn Tor nothing,
and acc ruling III the public explain zion oi
1teorge Wiiii.,,nson, ,ne sam thus over
drawn, IL . PSI SIS. ~ respects the con-
tract alone.
The immcnse sum Of 5 25,595 so cent?
IS Lett 10 depend upJn siiniIar certihcatss,
similar excuses aud explanations II W.
take the amended explanation Vt George
Williamson, here before exn.otted, THIS
sum, viii be reduced 10 . 5000 80 that M
stead OF tving received a, different times
b 29,462 81, jJhu Clarke ought MT 10 nave
received more than Is 3 06o, and mas over
drawn from the treasury the suna OF 5 81
S62 81.
Before Iproceed, take leave to enquire
OF tne couuc ilors, who attempted To lx u
taissnood On me, why they did not pro-
pound to jonn Clark, or TO George WIii-
amson, Two os.ier questions. Is che cua-
tract complied win, and II not, how much
was iet> uIdone and ask tor the BOOKS which
might exn.oit these matters to iuli view.
shalt DC glad 10 know, WHO having
regard tor Character, wili eontradic, these
sta,enents and deductions. and usins the
language OF M'Rae, Muiiord and Heath,
" II say that they are face and gros'id.
lees!
In the course Of the investigation mott.
eed as before, 1t was found nec.ss ry to
examine Alexander M'Nae, Jona Hea.h &
William Muntord, she meMoe OF the ex-
ecuave Council, who Composed the commit
tee formerly mentioned. w iliAm Mum.
ford Wa n 81 examined. He stated that ne
was entire y Inhaencei in tor .ulns MS Opt
mon In regard 10 that report ny me infor-
NATION received from offers, Dat particu-
larry iron Alexander M'Kas--tne affida-
VT Of Iosepn Young, George Williamson,
and u aniei Alnertou, and tie letter OF Col.
Monroe that he nd no suspicion OF the
practice VIII Gu long prevaued OF drawing
certificates III sns a me OF Youas, TOR the
ben, h. of John Clarke, that If nc had un
der,tood The truth, he should Not nave sibn-
81 ,be report.
Although, IN this examination, Mr.. Mum
ford ex iressiy stated, that lac dad nos al
ways knSw, lhat the money drawn OH John
CiarkE's certificates, IN favor of Joseph
Young, was tor Clark. own benetis, yel he
d,d not specify inc time wnen he first CD :
tainsd \ knowledge OF that importan, fact.
1t WAS svilen. that he then KNEW II, and It
was no less eviuent, tIat ne kuew 4. wlen
he signed the report Oh the third OF De-
cem5er, bee use III the very accoent rem.
dereo by Clarke, on which he Claimed a
balance OF o 37S 63, u was c,ear.y stated,
and because the whole drift Of tlie Iesumo-
ny, Was designed To support, and give a
piausIbe coior.ng to That tissue of uuexim
pied IN quly, wn,ch had psomulg gated
WINCH Clarke had den.ed, and 20 which that
very committees mad devoted themselves,
not only to sanctIfy, but Oy the same pub
lie Official act, W deny, as false ~ ground
teas.
rbs is not all. Some days before the
meeting OF these honorable calumnia tors,
] had an interview with Mr.. Munford 1T
his own house, Ia the presence Of Mr. Blair,
aud then, IA The most earns Il aud esnpna-
tic manner, told him, that the facts, pup.
hsbed ny M, were Substantially true, and
thu ] was ready and wiil'ng, il proper
steps to compel testimony should be taken,
10 support the charg ID the fullest manner /.
took his pans with Mr.. Muaford, be-.
cause entertained for him pc son Il esteem,
and suspected tnat h. wound he duped oy
FEASIBILITY and faltehood nor was / d<cei
we'd.
Alexander MIR e, when examined, gave
very fsrent account. H. COME ssed that
he was we'll acquainted with the practice |;
that during is existence, h had known
that Young was C.4rke's Journey man, tia,
the certificates for service due Young were
in fact due 10 Clarke, and though drawn in
tne name OF young, were for Cidrke's be-
IS ~ ft ~. he I,.t,.,