Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-07-06

he latter some unccrtaiuty huNy lie was to act.
q. You speak nj your impressions concern
rg a letter to yourself or Col. johnson. BY
was that letter written?
a. My impression is that it was written by
he President OF the Bank, who was also the
Col. Johuson's brothcr-in-law hold
ng u vCry large portion ofthe stock Of that bank
&c has been principally relied upon for some
ears past to make all negotiations with Mr..
Crawford concerning it that have been made
acre, AMI we have generally had conversation
upon the subject VIXEN he has had TO act in those
II | received the letter, 40 doubt it was
communicated To him; and if he received one,
it is equally probable that it Was shewn to
inc.
q. Do you Inow that the Receiver ut Ed
wardsynle ever saw that paper. called the en-
closure in the letter of LIST Novc,nbcr?
A. OF my own knowledge, I do not, but l
should think it very strange If he had not seen
it, he being the President of the bank.
q. In examining the records in the Receivers
Office, did you sec Il letter from MIR. Craw ford
of the lst November
A. did.
q. Does ii contain any detection TO the Re-
cciver to deposite moneys i'll the Bank Of Mis-
souri,?
A. / think not. have already stated that
| believe il is silent rs To his future dcposite, aE-
ter the one therein specially referred TO.
q. The letter to the Receiver, of LIST No
vcmbcr. and the enclosure of which you speak,
differ in this respect. That part OF the cnclo-
sure which relates to the Bank of Missouri is not
found in the letter to the Receiver. Is there
not this difference?
a.. The letter which I saw at the Land Of
flee nj EdwarJsvillc from Mr.. Crawford to the
Receiver, of November LIST, 1919, l feel conf
dent contains no directions to mako the depo-
site i'm tho Rank nf Missouri 6,tf IA siIonf nc r
have before stated, as to fntue deposites.
q. Could the Receiver, if he had seen this
enclosure, have doubted about the propriety of
continuing his dcpositcs, with the letter of lst
Nov. in his hands,
a. think he could.
@. In giving your advice To the Receiver in
the Fall of 1919, did you give il i'll the c!arac-
ter of his friend, or as 4 person holding a high
place IN tie government, with Il view to pro-
mote the public interest?
A. At that time l bad lost confidence in
banks generally, SO much so THAT | Gid not wish
10 be held responsible for any bank. adv isel
the Receiver as Il friend To him, and also with
a view to free mysclfof all responsibility for the
bank, by placing things in snch a situation that
MIR. Crawford could act in the case as he should
think fit on his own responsibility, leaving the
funds in the Receivers hands entirely to his
control.
q. Dill yoi consider the funds of the Uni
ted States safer i'll the hanIs of the Receiver
than in the Bank of Edwardsrilic, for ninety
a.. considered the funds, nj tiiat time, rs
in the hands Of either, with tins difference
however, that the Bank might have been more
liable to use them than the Receiver.
q. Did Seu not, after or about this time,
write to IA PayInastcr or Pay,nasters, recon-
'%ncni.ng, suggesting, or soliciting linn or them
10 pay the troops of the United States in notes
ofthc Bank OF i;iwardsvillc?
\. / have no recollection of having writ
Ten to any Paymastcr at all on the subject.
Iad, AT that time, rs much confidence in the
lctcs "fthe Bank Of EiwaTdsville, asin any other
D! the Local Banhs. Their rotcs were rccciy-
able lii the Land Office, ana were current in
that part OF The country, and, Tsllould suppose.
might have bee taken by persons to whom the
was to make his payments. as safe
y as any other notes in that quarter of fl,c
Eor should have had any objection to
recommend them to any Payilaster as readily as
my others Of the notes of the local bauks which
there. | think, about that time. had
heard of some order having been eiven by the
Department, which, as well as | now re-
member, required the troops to be paid either
IN missouri paper or in specie; and | think
wrote to the Secretary Of War, aud probably
other persons, probably to Col. johnson.
of tue order.
q. Do you recollcct whether il was before
or after you attended Congress, that YOU wrote
letters.
a.. 1 do not recollect the time, but / sup
pose IT must hayc been after the first. and be-
the second session l served M onrrc,s.
The Bank only got into operation a Short ,i,nc
before my departure for Congress, in 1918.
rccoilcct but little of the case alluded to. LIN
however, strongly Impressed with a belief th,f
there was, or that | 50 understood it. AZ, order
10 Paymastcrs that | considered very partial 10
the Bank of Missouri.
y. Was the letter which YOU wrote. ot the
request OF hir. Stephenson, dated on the same
day on which it was copied.
a. l do not rccoIlcct, but T presume i, u,.
@. Did you sec hin, on that dav. encIose
4 printed COPY OF your publication aaI were
both in the same package?
d, 1t was on the same day, and, | think,
both letter and paper were put 10 one cover.
q. Was Inc Land Office, then, kept in lfr.
horse' or in a separate building.
A.. 1t was iii a separate building, moi far
from bis house.
@. Did you see him carry t',e letter 10 thc
Office; or 70 you know that he did so,
"A. j did not sec it put in, nor do I know
that it was. The Post Office was at a consi-
dcrablc distance from the place.
Q. al what time of the day, in the morn
ing or the afternoon, was thc COPY taken9
4. | do not rccolicct.
Q. Did yon make the draft Mt the office, or
in your own house, before you went there?
a.. think 1t was written in my own house.
@. was 1t made OF the same day on which
it was copied. or tic day beforc2
A.. | do not recol!cct, but | think it was on
the sanc day.
q. at what hour of the day did tho mail
Ip1yp IIvvar1ev:ll, e. ,U.-I.