Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1831-01-17


TO name the person referred to IA his name yer SC
will satisfy all who know him. that the contract was
o. tue Tine OF mixing It a jlacious one on his part
lie rs not only gentle or in.cliUnnre hat RI
marka5c for his wisdom aud discretion in tho man
a9ement OF his private affairs; nciyc industrious
and vgilan'. no hid been tho chosen noent of Vir.
g.hh III tne seitlemens OF her claims upon the IT,
States mean Mr. John Chow of Fredericksburg
the cole devsee Of Mr.. Kemp who was dovsc, Of
Capt. Peter Kemp. In n personal interview told
VIZ, N",p'. nemp 8 name was on the roll then filed
WIN tue committee OF Claims. bu, there was no
eV'dcnce touching tho claim showing that Cant X
was sapernhmeraFv later than the date of the Board
II" agreed that If ! would prosecute the i'm
got me evidence, &c. at exncnse and trouble
ne would give one third of what might be recovered
ahu 'ha' contingent compensation shall become ex-
traordinary, (Which is far from being ccrtao) he will
nave N" more reason to blame himself than if he had
so'd (even for double the market prce) n,oetv Of n
lottery ticket which subsequently, drew a high nr;ze
will mention another fact, shew the value which
he agents themselves placed these contracts prior
TO the decision of the Court of Appeals An agent Who
osd oeen employed in several cases, (udgmen, on five
OF winch have been obtained for a large amoupt who
mao ended IN the investigation of the claims about
one half of what he proposed receive did offer l,s,
winter after the Legislature refused tn p.v INV r ,L.
claims, considering the chance of success thereafter
so desperate for 500 dollars to transfer to me all his in
teres IN every claim. Yet obligng himself to aid as
lar MS he could in the establishment of ,hem-hnd il
ocen accepted, he would have been reimbursed for
pat actual rxpenscs end would have received about
S23o Tor all his 'rouble-I declined the proposition
VIII he a'ested oath before the Committee r 10
srcd) show that the contracts were viewed bv the a
gents as cHerIng mere chances remote cbnnces of
comoensa'i"n, and rs equivalents not exceeding the
ordinary certain fees' Dew, If any of the claimants
would have given thing certain
Several Claims offered me, If would tako
'esS man one-hrd the owners considering that too
Inuch. declined, aud others have been engaged ard
Judgments obtained for very large sums OF which :
ner cont. It paid will be most ample rampnera
tion--hut could not foresee this. and would take
nothing less than third, notwithstanding the An
dltor thinks -5oth part of that sum would oounIIv
have effected tho object. The truth is, The ella ms
we're considered almost absolutely desperate and
scarcely any OF The parties would have been willing n
incur any EXPENSE whatever in the prosecution Thn
Legislature had however been prevailed on In mss
SOME OF tben-glviDg communication in q sort of com
promise. and n the claims could have been branch,
Forward two or three at each session. they would
probably have been paId and but for this probability
OF the legislatures doing some,hi I do NOT bo
new" anv person would have undertaken to prosecute
the suits for ono half do not say this 10 deprncste
the opposition of any one-I mean to ask no favor
ana So Tar ~ my own interes. is concerned would
rather the Legislature and tho Courts shoud re;ac,
the clnms than allow them if apv impression in ,ho
latter case Is TO exist against the f:res. IF my
duct III the claims be rejected il will he cnnclus;ya
tna' tne contingent compensation promised was less
than the most ordinary fec. But | do not moan "a
abandon the claims, believing them lust in prnc;no
j will do all can TO establish them
Una. the administration bonds given penal
'' Judgments
matter necessarily of any consequence Is no, known thai
IN pe'enn: INC penalties of honds, reference ONLY
10 the value OF the estate, bm the the
tors being distributed In looking the Repor of the AID
tor see but three Of inadequate bonds One
oers case where the bond wears before b,
suit by the Executor. who is only two Distributes
yed IA esc aseo.anG 10 the Report nothing can be
large sum-
In another the penalty Of the bond i, s1oo mil, vh
explanation is simple The administrator had
Tied the only child of the officer now entitled u,
cent of the claim aud no debts believed 70 cT;s,
hayR
usual penalty. THE only Other case is that Of bond r
$500. Aud in that case the adm;nr.,or in ,sh, % "
aer SISTER Living believe with HIM, the Distributes and
no debts believed exist Why therefore shouId arssr
penalty have. been required?
Another remark nf the Auditor in tone Of con,roin, !.
mat these judgments rendered nm, eyi
Ies 'a e. pIrie DOES not the Auditor know that evi.
v"uv been submitted to him That the appeal he Corn
revise his gmen, upon tina evidence accomnonvng IN,
claim, which had been presented him Aud in presenting
claims OF any kind against the Commons eah not the ev
dence Arrays pnrc To whom should notice he given No
controversy existing l the appeal But another an
wer 10 the remark Ascounsel for these claimants
did apply the Auditor il he desired notice of br
time and place Of taking evidence He crprsssP 1rG,red II
told him had been written the subject and wished &c
communicate his views answer He said re wished 70 inn
pose difficulty and tina, The ,ct,
should he satisfactorily established all he required with
reference the particular form think ne as
and answered correspondent only refer to the facts
to show that there receiving or pnr evil
dcnce, the fault belongs neither the Count nor council
did not intend In make commentary on the Auditor
Eep0ri-rScepi IN show his Of of inference
far they might personally injurious to nc did NO
intend advert 10 the singular positions taken nv tia
officer Vet cannot refrain from observing his reference :,
the example nj Congress in giving as auihoi,
for NHRnias eompellng these public accept il
very unfortunate Congress did mrosc the
on Tive officers hut left tn their option accent or reject H.
The Legislature last winter bv resolution nEsd ,hcs,
claimants the courts open them satisfy any d.,
manS they might have the justice Of the Common wealth
ne invitation o the assembly HcCepird-and the inds
mrns for the supposed just demands have been rendered
The Auditor thinks would he entirely in the Legislature
now TO reoede and IN the claimants VIC vii
give You three or four times the Courts have adj
Judged IN he vor just rights and others win give vn,
hut one third or fourth Of what has decided 10 be TIN
measure OF your rights
The Auditor thinks that those who rcceved the cnrp
,aon already 0U he entitled receive donc mr. treble th
amount, these Judgments be paid-ndec, had thought
consent could vary any c"nracty the ofie Acts TN
| required in every case ~ "
The Auditor the officer have REGARDED the ucd
nj half comfortable provision his widow and on
sprngand not for collateral heirs cr.ditorsand would
limit the payment accordingly How did old Bachelor 70
gard R The Commonwealth srcrns must have HE nrrr,,,
~ the exclusion o lis suffers whom hr may have dcvise,
this, his only prorrrtv unless creditors slew that the,
relied on Ibis resource al the origin of their dcb-'cn m,
case would I've different. -
tu this erriUiiV gwen rc-rrd flr rrrsnna scry
cee says the Rcpoi given voluntarily. rirr the service
rendered and without he