Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-07-07

sioness of the Navy under whom I had made the
contract for the stone, dated Nov. 5, 1929, enclosing
the papers to them and requesting them to approval
the Claim if they found it correct, as the cou,mdndant
Of the Macy Yard had refused &c do so. Two days
afterwards l received the papers back from the
Board with their approval of the account in these
words: eft appearing that the stone contained in
the annexed bill was inspected, and received by order
of Barron, no reason can be discovered
why it ought not to have been paid for, it being OBJ
v1ous that if the stone in quality had not been 'ac.
cording to the provisions specified in the contract,
been received (Sigued) Jno. Rodgers; dated Navy
Commissioners Office. Nov. q, 1929. FURNISHED
with this, / then enclosed the papers to the President
informing him again that tho Commodore had refu-
sed 10 approve the account which the Board had thus
certified; and requesting him to dispose of it as he
might think proper. Fhe President thercupon re-
ferrcd the papers to the Secretary, who made his re-
port upon them, under date of the 18Th Jan. 1880, in
Which he states: 1T appears from the examination
OF the documents presented, that Scranton deiirered
the stone dSreeubiy to order. amounting to $500; anu
from has receipts that he has been PAID He saws
also, 'it does not appear that AIR. King has received
any credit IL the settlement of his account with the
Fourth Auditor for this sum-"
Looking, however, las we must presume much
more deeply into the subject than the Navy Commits
sioners had done, he sees the difference in the two
receipts, 1.-THE one to tue Bank and the other to me,)
already mentioned, and adds, in his characteristic
way, ut is to be noted that the original receipt states
the money to have been paid by the Branch Bank of
the United States at Norfolk, the duplicate by MIR.
King, as Navy Agent. This mysterious TRANSACTION
requires explanation" As the subiec, was thus sus.
pended again, 'my friend and counsel" ibut who was
not "my COUNSEL except as be was a Senator from nv
own State wrote the opinion which appeared amono
the documents, and which explained this "mysterious
Transaction" SO clearly, that even the Secretary I
believe, found 1t quite satisfactory at last. AT least
l was told by our. Auditor what he has
himself stated, that the claim would be allowed
without any further difficulty. Accordingly. upon
my return to Norfolk, l informed the cashier that it
would De; and, at his request, endorsed the claim
over to him, as be seemed to think, Though did
not,) that my assignment might be necessary to ena.
BILE him to receive The money. Here l thought the
matter would rest at last. But l vas reckoning
without my host; foI it turns out after all, that the
claim has not been allowed; and to free him from any
further trouble about II, | have paid the money to the
Cashier.
This Is a long account of a small matter, but il
may serve to sheW wha. veXatIouS difficulties I have
had to conflict with in the attempt to settle INV ac.
counts With men who were determined from the be
ginning not to settle them but in their own way. II
shows also, most perfectly, the total falsehoud of oil ou1
AUDITORS charges against me on the subject of this
item. For how, indeed, could l have concealed the pre-.
fended fact that the stone had not been received
when l had the certificate of the person who inspect-
ed and received it by the Commodore's order, to
shew It had been! And how could l conceal the
subsequent condemnation Of it by the same Commo-
dore, when the want of his approval of the account
growing out of that fact vas the very thing that had
created all the difficulty which 1 was appealing to the
Board, and to the President himself, to remove; and
was accordingly expressly stated as the sole reason
for my applying TO them in the case. And hoy car
our Auditor now say that "the stone was never re-
ceiVed by the United States when the assertion
contradicts, not only The certificate of The Inspector,
and the certificate OF the Commissioners but the
report of the Secretary himself, already quoted, in
which he distinctly says: lit appeursJ from the eram,-
nation Of the documents presented, thai Scranton de.
hce'ed the stone agreeable to order" Is it decent for
our auditor TO contradict his honorable friend this
way: And as to the round assertion that it gas Iona
before the last presentation OF the claim, if not be-.
fore the first, delivered over to the disposition of Mr,
King" l utterly deny that it has ever been delivered
to noe at ali, down to this day. On the contrary, |
have always refused to receive it, and the stone nov
lies upon the wharfrented by the United States, and
OF course in their possession. Yet the claim for it
is rejected, all these facts to the contrary notwith-
standing; and still further, to punish me, I presume.
for attempting to deceive the rural innocence of our
Auditor about it, it is actually charged las VIC have
seem to my debit IN the account! After this, if this
stone is not absolutely that of Sisyphus instead OF
Scranton, it shall rest forever where it is, as a per.
petual monument Of the malice and meanness of nv
ecrusers together.
ITO be concluded.)