Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-08-13


sent hnr and it he gave 1t oWilknson, tits more
likely tina, he sent for Wilknsonto corne and get it, /
than that he went to Wilkinson to hand it to him; and
II he sent for Wilkinson he probably sent Tor him by
his porter or runner" But IS NJ Lattimer states
that JeGrles Wilkinson told him that he thought at
the time, the stone was not fit for the purpose This
may be for Wilkinson not exactly ordered to say
whether he thought fit for he purpose, but whe-
Their 1T was according to the contract It's, how
ever more probably mistake; for it appears that he
was careful and particular in inspecting and receiving
the stone, (See Cert. No. A.. Mr.. Lattimer IS one of
the a" three gentlemen who condemned the stone
that Wilkinson received. / pass over the osher Ger
for the present because some OF them do not
touch this point, aud the rest of them may be more
conveniently answered In anothen place as will soon
appear Thus far, them at least, the main FACT that
Jeffries Wilkinson inspected and received the stone
a. the inst ance of Com. Barron, remains unsbaken
Indeed it is fully proved by the new facts
which have been brought INTO the by Aud
itors certificates For it appears by them, well as
by Jeffries Wilkinsons statement that the stone was
carted around tn the wall, for the coping of which
was intended. But could this have been done without
Com. Barron's order? Was he not the Captain of the
Yard But it appears further that it lay there for
about eight weeks afterwards; for Jeffries Whknson's
receipt, for it dated the 9th of August and that of
the three gentlemen" condemning it the nth OF
September. And could it have laid there all that
time without Com Barron's order1 Was he not the
Captain of the Yard? Clearly, then. it must have
been received a; least; and could it have been recev
ed without having been first inspected, and found ac
cording to the contract? Surely we must all agree
with the Commissioners, that elf the stone had not
been according to the provisions specified in tbs con
tract" (which according, to their Instructions
Com Barron would not have permitted it to be re-
celved 1t appears also from the certificate of Lem
uel Langley, that the Commodore put the cont ract
Tor the stone into his hands at one time Il is plain
Therefore that the Commodore had receive it, and it
Is thus rendered moe probable that he gave it to
" ilk'uson also at another. And lastly it appears
from the certificate of Barker which have had taken
lsce Cert N. ~ hat the of the Yard of whom
he was one at the time took the stone from Taylors
wharf as 1t was received andinspectcd by WILKINSON
who was there with paper in his hand noting the
measure OF each particular piece asst handed out
from the reSse and carried it round TO the wall under
the direction of Lieut. Smoot Sailing Master
Potts, both Officers in the Yard and it is plainly i'm
possible that either of these officers could have or
dered the carts this service without au hority from
the Captain of the Yard. The proof is then even
more full on this point than it before g. the GER
.ucates instead OF invaiidatng, only confirm and
tabiish Wi!knSoI's receipt.
But perhaps 1t will be said, the other hand that
Commodore Barron has expressly denied that Jcffres
w lklnson inspected and received this stone by his
authority Yet no--I do not think that he has-and
should be sorry, for his sake. if he had after the
Iact ha been so thoroughly proved. But have
looked into both his letters and cannot see any tbinr
like that clear and explicit denial of the fact which
we ought to require in the case 1t is true in his
rst letter to the Secretary he says 81 author
sed any person to receive the stone and kno,o nothing
about tie receipt whch your letter uluaes to-" Bat
the Secretary in his letter says, Il wish YOU to for
ward to the Department by the return of the steam
! boat, such information you may be in possession
Of connected With the delivery, receipt ana payment
OF certain quantity, of stone, said to be delivered
and rece'pted for by Ichabod Scranton at the Nisuy
Yard, Gosport" Now the Commodore, in his reply
probably means to say, that he knows nothing about
any stone receiptsd for by Ichabod Scranton tie
-oacy fdfd; and there was truly such believes
though there was certainly receipted for by
! JefirIes Wilkinson, whose name, although he must
have heard and seen it too before he does not even
mention in his let.er-At any rate he deos moi. horo
| al he ucy Scran
ton; and is possible that he may not use the word
''auutorSe" exactly the rest of us do. Indeed
our Auditor himself seems to have thought that his
first letter was not quite explicit enough tue point
for 1t appears he wrote to him for second little
i more to the purpose. am sorry, by the way, he
has not given us this letter of his also, as always
like TO see the whole of thing; perhaps however
he kept no copy of t.) But the Commodore is not
yet quite explicit enough, in this second letter for
me-For In the fist place. observe that although he
does exactly say, our Auditor represents TINT
'.Jefres Wilkinson did not even belong To he Yard
yet he takes some pains remark that "hi name ons
mol on our roll at the time that nc represented 10
be Master Inspector" and this while he admits dis
tlncy that ne was working In the Yard as zone of
the Contractors, and Stone Masons on the new foun
daion under Ship House, No Il" as Wilkinson him
self has stated. and am led TO suspect that he had
some reasons for noting this apparently mmateria]
fact. When no goes on then to say, she never was
ordered by me to inspect the stone alluded 10 i'm your
communications" it strikes there is sometime
cautious and guarded in the phrase and cannot helo
ausPeehiiS, Ut ieast, tniL as w Hklnsons name
not oD our roll" the Commodore may have thought
That he had not exactly Alright to order him to inspect
the stone; and am confirmed in nv conjecture on
this point. by observing that the "hree gentlemen"
who were not son ROLL but who afterwards in
spected the sone only certify that they were scaled
on" by Commodore Barron, &c. and Mr Lemuel
Langley, also, see, in like manner certfes that
he was called on by the Commodore at another
time This then is the Commodores phrase for the
thing; and when he says that Jsffries Wilkinson
was never ordered ny me to inspect the stone" he
only means to say that, although he was scaled on
or reqaested he was not. as he would say ordereI
NOR yet exactly dthtori=ed) to do it. So then the
INN odore has not coutradicted the statement of
Wilkinson on this point, and was sure he could not
have intended to 90 so for it may be seem that
Mr. Murden certifes, that he presented the bill for
the stone, with the certificate of Wilkinson attached
to It, 20 the Commodore both before and after made