Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1809-04-07
tFa wesk, altho' he had not affixed to
il either dates or prices.

this contract had been complied with
the members activein the enquiry were
Influenced by that opinion--and for
the reasons which will presently APP
pear, thew thought Mr.. Williamson
not only incompetent, but Incredible
and because his testimony seemed TO
support an account and claim which
had no foundation in truth or justice.
The Eli lavit Of Daniel Atherton WAS
intended for the same purpose. He
deposed that he believed the work was
all done-was we'll executed--and was
worth three times as much as the con-
tract work. Upon examination, it was
found, that great deal Of that work,
to the execution, good quality and va
lue of which, Mr.. Anterior had given
his belief, was executed, i! ever exc
cuted at all, several years before he e.
yer was in this state so that, let him
believe what he pleased, and convey
his belief in what language he would,
no man of common understanding
would believe him. If therefore, he had
been put to the bar for examination,
hese things being explained, would
have completely vitiated his testimo-
nv, and deprived John Clarke OF the
means of vindication, expected to be
derived from this source.
Inrthe early stage of the inv Gstigati
on, had exhibited Il written statement
to the chairman of the committee, in
which l had very fully unGolded the
imposition-had shewn that the con-
struction put upon the testimony of
these witnesses, was unjust TO the com
monwealth, and as that statement is
now among the papers which belonged
to that enquiry, | presume twas read
by every member of the committee
who chose to do so.
From this or other causes,
Mr.. John Strobe and Richard Young
were appointed to examine I'll work,
done under the contract, as well as that
called extra work. Upon their report,
it appeared that the contract work had
never been executed, and that the ex-
ira work, to which the atfiiavits of
Williamson and Anterior were annex
ed, as not so valuable as the con-
structiou put upon their affidavits re
presented it to be.
To all who had strictly examined
these matters, these witnesses appear
ell not only incompetent, but iucredi-
bic. The House determined thar they
were incompetent, and the Other point
was not considered. An act then pas
4 A. l. axr,~-1taI
the same act it was provided that the
officers Of the arnory should be elect
ed by joint ballot OF both Houses and
it contained nothing to prevent the re-
election of Williamson.
AS soon as Williamson was expelled,
he then voluntarily STAGED what nj tes-
timonv. if he had been examined,
would have been, and it appeared to
all who heard him, that an erroneous
construction had been put upon his tes-
timonv; that h. did not mean to con-
vev an idea that the contract for
S1O,O55, had en- executed. or that
the ezra work was worth more than
three times that sum---so far from it,
he stated in the most explicit aud clear
terms, TO my-elf rs we'll as nanr o.
Tiers, that the work done b John
Clarke in pursuance Of the contract,
did not exceed TWO thousand dollars
that the contracs had been abandoned,
even fer it was made, and that all the
work after the contract was abandon
ed done by the hands OF John Clarke.
was called extra work 50 that instead
of supporting the account or he eport
of the com nitee, for drafts HDop the
treasury TO the amount of s 2oOS2 %,
it would NOT support more than S 5000
leaving an immense deficit OF
81, 900 dollars.
This explanation gave new face
to the subject. The Impressions for
merlv made, Taught every one to be-
lieve, that the aHilavits Of Williamson
and Anterior were intended to supper,
an account for machinery. amounting
to 8 29,o82 90, bur NOW, when the real
state of things was Exhibited, It appear
ed that Williamson's testimony could
nor support more than eOoO--and