LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 ARCHIBALD M'lXTYUE, ESQ.. 
 
 <)P THR 
 
 STATE OF NEW- YORK 
 
i£x IGtlirta 
 
 SEYMOUR DURST 
 
 -f' Tort nleuw ^im^ftrcLim. ojr <le Manhatarus 
 
 When you leave, please leave this book 
 
 Because it has been said 
 "Ever thing comes t' him who waits 
 
 Except a loaned book." 
 
 Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library 
 Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library 
 
TO 
 
 ARCHIBALD MWTYEE, ESQ,. 
 
 OF THE STATE OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 My reply to your letter of the 18th of August has 
 been postponed longer than I could have wished, by 
 unavoidable delay in procuring the accompanying 
 documents, by a hope that the vouchers which I had 
 requested to be returned to me as early as October, 
 1818, and which are yet withheld, would certainly 
 have been returned before this time, and by a desire 
 to have your statement of my accounts with the state 
 (the final audit of which was not received until last 
 month) examined by competent accountants. 
 
 That examination has required much time and la- 
 bour, in consequence of the perplexity which has 
 been thrown over the accounts by the various ways in 
 which you have stated them, in March, 1818, Febru- 
 ary, 1819, and on the 27th of August last; by the 
 opening of accounts which had been examined and 
 allowed, and for the ascertained balance of which, I 
 had been paid as early as July, 1812 ; for the purpose. 
 
4 
 
 I presume, of suspending in 1818 as questionable 
 charges-, large sums comprised in those balances, and 
 which were not restored to my credit until August 
 last; thus holding me up to the community as a 
 debtor for money drawn from the treasury for audited 
 balances due and paid to me seven years ago; and 
 also by the manner in which the remaining vouchers 
 have been scattered, part of which have been return- 
 ed to me, part of them have been retained by you, 
 and a part sent to Washington without my knowledge 
 or permission. 
 
 In your letter you have gone at length into the 
 transactions relative to my accounts. I shall there- 
 fore close the correspondence on my part, with a full 
 exposition of the circumstances to which your com- 
 munication relates; and in doing this it will be neces- 
 sary for me to revert to the origin of these transactions, 
 and to trace them back to an earlier epoch than that 
 to which you have chosen to refer. 
 
 Although the manner in which the account against 
 me at the treasury has arisen, is familiar to you, it 
 may not be so to others who either take an interest 
 in the controversy in which I am involved, or whose 
 duties it may hereafter become to act upon the sub- 
 jects of it. A brief explanation of it here will not 
 therefore be deemed amiss. 
 
 Of the various and extensive appropriations which 
 were made by the legislature of this state during the 
 period that 1 administered its government, most of 
 the acts directed the money to be expended "by 
 order," or" under the direction of the person admi- 
 nistering the government." When therefore it became 
 expedient to draw monies from the treasury in order 
 to carry those appropriations into effect, or to defray 
 
expenses already incurred, the subordinate agents 
 entrusted with the expenditure applied to me for re- 
 quisitions directing your warrant to issue on the 
 Treasury in favour of the individual who was ap- 
 pointed to receive the money. It has been your 
 practice to charge these sums to my account, instead 
 of those of the persons to whom the disposal of the 
 money was assigned, thereby holding me accountable 
 for the ability, fidelity, and integrity of those subordi- 
 nate agents, and rendering me liable for all the acci- 
 dents to which their papers and documents might be 
 subjected by sudden casualties. 
 
 In the early part of my administration I protested 
 against this practice, and 1 mentioned to you my 
 opinion that the monies drawn from the treasury on 
 your warrants issued upon my requisitions, by officers 
 and agents of the government, and receipted for by 
 them, ought to be charged to them, and not to me ; 
 and that they ought to account to you directly there- 
 for, and not through me; but your opinion being dif- 
 ferent, your own course was adopted, except in a few 
 instances during the latter part of my administration. 
 The great injustice of this course cannot, I think, fail 
 to strike the mind of every dispassionate observer, 
 and its adoption has been the chief cause of the diffi- 
 culties under which I have laboured. 
 
 Of upwards of one million of dollars which has 
 been charged to me in the course of ten years, and 
 for the expenditure of which I have been called upon 
 to account, and in many instances to reaccount, a very 
 large amount has been receipted for by others and 
 has never passed through my hands; your pertinacity 
 in thus keeping me liable for the disbursement of 
 monies, when their disposition was beyond my con- 
 
troul, necessarily subjected me to great risk, respon- 
 sibility and loss, besides expense, labour, and anxiety., 
 in the midst of other official duties, which after the 
 commencement of the war became infinitely arduouh 
 and perplexing. 
 
 In March, 1812, 1 received a requisition from the 
 general government, to detach and march to Black- 
 Rock, Oswego, and Sacket's-Harbour, sixteen hun- 
 dred of the New-York militia ; soon thereafter, and 
 in the course of the ensuing summer and fall, most of 
 the detached militia, together with a considerable 
 number of independent and volunteer companies, 
 were called into actual service at New-York, Sag- 
 Harbour, Buffalo, Lewiston, Niagara, Oswego, Og- 
 densburgh, Plattsburgh, and at frontier posts between 
 those places. 
 
 Upon inquiry where camp equipage, subsistence, 
 equipments, and quarters, at those stations, were to 
 be found, it appeared that there was no immediate 
 provision for a supply of either, but remittances were 
 made to me by the Secretary of War, with a request 
 that I would arm, march, subsist, and quarter those 
 troops. There was no alternative between the as- 
 sumption of that labour and responsibility, which did 
 not belong to me, and the suffering and disquiet of 
 the militia, called into service for the defence of our 
 exposed fellow citizens of the frontiers. I was, there- 
 fore, compelled to assume in addition to my proper 
 official duties, those of all the subordinate depart- 
 ments of that portion of the frontier forces, composed 
 of militia amounting to nearly 25,000 men ; in which 
 arduous service I was involved the whole of that 
 campaign. 
 
7 
 
 In the early part of the next winter session of the 
 legislature, resolutions were passed in the assembly, 
 calling on me to report, not only the accounts and 
 vouchers for the distribution of munitions belonging 
 to this state, but of the expenditure of the monies 
 intrusted to me by the national government. They 
 also called upon you to report " a detailed state- 
 ment of monies drawn from the treasury by virtue of 
 the act further to provide for the defence of the 
 frontiers, passed 12th June, 1812, and of the ex- 
 penditure thereof, according to the vouchers returned 
 and filed in your office." For the monies received 
 from the United States and their expenditure, 
 I was not accountable to the assembly, nor had 
 they any right to make such call on me ; but as a ma- 
 jority of that body was decidedly opposed to the 
 war and to the prosecution of it, as the Council of 
 Appointment and most of the officers appointed by 
 them were of the same political character, and as 1 
 stood nearly alone in the government, I thought it 
 best for the interests of my country, to yield my own 
 rights and comply with all their resolutions. 
 
 The original vouchers and bonds, for munitions and 
 other public property, were transmitted by special 
 message, with a request that they should be returned 
 tome. No legislative measures were founded upon 
 this message and these documents, but the bonds and 
 vouchers disappeared and have never since been found or 
 returned to me. The journals, message, and other 
 evidences of the fact of this loss, were exhibited to 
 the commissioners, to the committee, and to yourself, 
 on various occasions. 
 
 The demand made upon me to exhibit an account 
 of the monies expended for the United States as 
 
8 
 
 well as for this state, in the midst of a busy legisla- 
 tive session, without the necessary aid to perform a 
 task so laborious in the then impaired state of my 
 health, was the cause of the intermixture of vouchers, 
 or duplicates regularly chargeable to the one govern- 
 ment, with those chargeable to the other; a circum- 
 stance which has since afforded the text for many 
 uncharitable commentaries. 
 
 The accounts of expenditures of state monies 
 were formally rendered at yo-ur office, with abstracts 
 and vouchers, which enabled you to comply with the 
 resolution of he assembly, and your report thereon 
 is to be found in the journals of that session, (page 
 535,) and it is here proper to state what you have fre- 
 quently admitted, that at the same time I also trans- 
 mitted to your office, vouchers to a large amount, of 
 various other expenditures for the state, independent 
 of those called for by the resolutions, and embraced 
 in that report. 
 
 The peculiar nature of the call required you, as 
 you supposed, to separate the vouchers into parcels 
 differing from the abstracts and vouchers as I had 
 rendered them, which threw them into great confusion 
 and disorder, and no part of these abstracts or vouch- 
 ers were audited or carried to my credit, but they all 
 remained in your office, in the confusion into which 
 your compliance with the legislative resolution had 
 thrown them, until the year 1811. 
 
 At that period you mentioned this circumstance to 
 me, and added that they were in such a state of con- 
 fusion that you did not well know what to do with 
 them. I then offered, if you would return them to 
 me, and point out a suitable person to whom they 
 might be entrusted, to employ such person to arrange 
 
9 
 
 ihein anew. You named Isaac Q. Leake, esq. I acced- 
 ed to the proposal, and some time in February, 1814, 
 sent Mr. Shippey, who then acted as my secretary, to 
 bring the papers from your office, in order that they 
 might be put into his hands. 
 
 On Mr. Shippey's return with a small bundle con- 
 taining a few of the abstracts and v ouchers, and some 
 unintelligible memoranda in your handwriting, I was 
 surprised to find that you had not restored any thing 
 like the quantity which I had deposited in your office 
 in 1813, and I sent him immediately back to you with 
 a message to that effect. He returned with an answer 
 that you would call on me in the evening, as appears 
 by the following certificate : 
 
 1 certify that at the request of Governor Tompkins, with whom 
 \ was then a clerk, I went to the Comptroller's office in February, 
 1814, to bring home a quantity of accounts, abstracts and vouchers, 
 which had been previously rendered, and on which the Comptrol- 
 ler had made a detailed report to the legislature. That on my re- 
 turn with a small bundle the Governor expressed his surprise, and 
 asked why I did not bring the whole ? He was answered that those 
 were all the Comptroller gave me. He desired me to return and 
 inform the Comptroller that the vouchers he had returned were 
 nothing like the quantity which had been rendered, and to request 
 him to look for and return the residue. I did so and the Comp- 
 troller said he would call at the Governor's in the evening, which 
 he did just before I left the Governor's. What conversation pass- 
 ed between them at that interview I did not hear. 
 
 JOSIAH SHIPPEY, Jr. 
 
 You called according to appointment, and I repeat- 
 ed to you at that interview that the vouchers had been 
 delivered by me in person the preceding winter, and 
 in order to refresh your memory, I mentioned the cir- 
 cumstance of my being accompanied by a servant, 
 
 2 
 
10 
 
 •unli a large basket full of abstracts and vouchers 
 You recollected the circumstance, and admitted thai 
 the parcel you had delivered to Mr. Shippey, did not 
 appear to you to be the same in quantity, but stated, 
 that those papers were all you had found ; at the same 
 time promising to make a more thorough search the 
 next day. \\ 'hat. success attended tlii^ search the 
 following letter which I received from you, accompa- 
 nied by a few more scattered and detached vouchers, 
 will show; and it will also evince, that you did not at 
 that time, when all the circumstances were fresh in 
 our recollection, feel yourself at liberty to state posi- 
 tively, that the vouchers returned to me, were all that 
 I had sent you. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 The parcel accompanying this, is all that remains in my 
 office, / believe, of the accounts and vouchers rendered by your 
 Excellency last winter. 
 
 It will be out of my power to spend any time in the examination 
 of accounts till next week. My time is now wholly taken up night 
 and day with tax sales. 
 
 Very respectfully, 
 Your Excellency's 
 
 Most obedient servant, 
 ARCH. M'INTYRE. 
 
 His Excellency Governor Tompkins. 
 
 16th Feb. 1814 
 
 Mr. Leake was not then in town, and the pressing 
 duties of the campaign of 1814, deprived me of the 
 power of attending to that business until peace was 
 announced. I then referred the papers to him, who first 
 copied such of the abstracts you had returned, and 
 then selected the vouchers which you had also return- 
 ed, with a view to restore them to their proper order. 
 
11 
 
 when it was satisfactorily ascertained that a large 
 part of my vouchers were missing, as appears from 
 the following certificate : 
 
 I hereby certify, that in the spring of 1815, his Excellency 
 Daniel D. Tompkins, then Governor of the State of New-York, 
 requested me to adjust some accounts of expenditures, made by him 
 in behalf of the said state, and for that purpose put into my posses 
 sion a trunk containing sundry papers, many of which were of a 
 private nature, and among which were various abstracts of public 
 disbursements, purporting to have been rendered with vouchers 
 accompanying to Archibald M'Intyre, Esq. the Comptroller of the 
 State, in 1813. Upon these abstracts were notes and endorsements, 
 some in the handwriting of the said Comptroller, and some in that 
 of John Ely, Jr. the deputy Comptroller, from which it appeared 
 that they must have been so rendered ; and in the margin of which 
 also, to the whole, or most of the items comprised in them, were 
 remarks in the same handwriting, classifying each under the dif 
 ferent heads of expenditure, required by certain resolutions of the 
 assembly in 1813. 
 
 That alter selecting the private papers from those of a public 
 character, 1 proceeded to search for the vouchers to which the 
 said abstracts had reference, but notwithstanding the most vigilant 
 investigation, many of these, and to a very large amount, could not 
 be found. 
 
 ISAAC q. LEAKE 
 
 New-York, 30th Aug. 1819. 
 
 I, however, made no complaint, and omitted the 
 public disclosure of these losses, until the interview 
 with the Commissioners and yourself, when the pre- 
 ceding facts with certain evidences were submitted, 
 and you then admitted the accuracy of my state- 
 ments. You went farther, and not only expressed 
 your belief that I had been a great loser on that oc- 
 casion, but frankly admitted that both yourself and 
 your deputy Mr. Ely, recollected two other vouchers 
 which you specified as having been rendered by mc 
 
12 
 
 in 1813, but which were not then credited to me, or 
 included in any of my subsequent accounts, nor were 
 they now to be found in your office. These facts you 
 repeated before the Joint Committee, and as the 
 vouchers thus recollected by you are not contained 
 in the abstracts which were returned to me, it conclu- 
 sively appears that other abstracts than those return- 
 ed were sent to you in 181 3, the amount of which 
 cannot now be ascertained. 
 
 These statements and document- were exhibited 
 both to the Commissioners and to the Committee, 
 (always in your presence,) and were not denied or 
 controverted by you in any respect, but on the con- 
 trary were candidly admitted. 
 
 To remove all doubt as respects the loss of vouchers, 
 I will refer you to your report of the 3d April, 1813, 
 the amount of which, as I have before mentioned, was 
 never passed to my credit. The accounts and 
 vouchers constituting that report, together with others 
 transmitted to you at the same time, were the papers 
 which you professed to have returned to me by Mr. 
 Shippey, but which, (as appears by his certificate, that 
 of Mr. Leake, your letter, and your admissions to me, 
 to the Commissioners, and the Committee,) could not 
 have been done. By comparing this report with that 
 of 1816, a very essential difference is discovered; for 
 in 1813, you report that I had expended under the 
 second section of the act of 12th June, 
 1812, - - - 550 23 
 
 And under the third section of the same 
 act, - - - - - 5,719 8& 
 
 Making an aggregate of 
 
 S6,270 09 
 
13 
 
 In 1816 you report no disbursements 
 under the second section; and under the 
 third section, only ... 1804 04 
 
 The balance, therefore, - - S4466 05 
 
 is a deficit to my prejudice, in those two items of ex- 
 penditure alone. 
 
 The surest test however, one which incontroverti- 
 bly proves the fact, and at the same time gives a par- 
 tial estimate of the loss sustained, is by a comparison 
 of the report of 3d of April, 1813, in which you ex- 
 pressly state, that, " according to vouchers returned and 
 jilcd in your office" I had expended under the act of 
 12th June, lt>12, - - - % 155,874 56 
 
 But upon an investigation of all your 
 statements of my accounts up to the final 
 audit of 27th xAugust, 1819, and by extract- 
 ing therefrom all items bearing date subse- 
 quent to 12th June, 1812, (the passage of 
 the bill,) and previous to the 3d of April 
 inclusive, (the date of the report,) ex- 
 cepting such as conclusively appear to 
 be expenditures under other appropria- 
 tions, I cannot discover that you have 
 allowed and passed to my credit more 
 than - - - - 100,150 91 
 
 The difference, amounting to - $55,723 65 
 
 at least, has been wholly lost to me. It must have 
 happened at that time, and could have occurred from 
 no other cause than the one to which I have ascribed 
 it. 
 
14 
 
 But this is by no means the extent of ray loss : other 
 losses were specified, and I believe satisfactorily ex- 
 plained, which had been occasioned hy the death, 
 absence, failure or misconduct of individuals, and hy 
 casualties detailed in the memoranda furnished to the 
 chairman of the committee, which you saw and re- 
 peatedly examined. 
 
 Had the preceding amount of vouchers demonstra- 
 ted to have been lost while in your possession, which 
 you refused to credit meat my solicitation, been <<1- 
 mitted ; had the amount drawn from the treasury by 
 the subordinate, agents of the government, and ehargrd to 
 my account, been credited ; and the items of my 
 account suspended by you as advances, or rejected 
 without sufficient reasons, (a part of which, amount- 
 ing to $7 1,972 51, I had withdrawn on the passage 
 of the law, at your request, or to facilitate the settle- 
 ment of certain accounts in your office,) been allowed 
 me ; the final audit and settlement of my accounts, 
 instead of a balance against me, would have exhibited 
 me as a creditor of the state of 822,274 15, as will 
 appear by the certificate and account f A) annexed. 
 
 To the Commissioners and the Joint Committee, 
 (always in your presence,) I also exposed the difficul- 
 ties under which 1 had laboured on account of Por- 
 ter's Volunteers, raised upon my sole responsibility, 
 in opposition to the declared will of the legislature ; 
 a corps of brave and patriotic men, whose achieve- 
 ments reflected lustre upon the state and country, 
 and contributed in no small degree to save the gallant 
 army of Niagara. 
 
 Besides the accounts and vouchers rendered by 
 me to the state, another laborious account, compri- 
 sing an immense volume of abstracts and vouchers of 
 
15 
 
 agents, officers and citizens, employed in the compil- 
 er- ;ed and extensive militia operations of 1812, ex- 
 ceeding in amount $600,000, was rendered to the 
 U ited States. The letter of Mr. Lear containing 
 the final audit of my account with the general govern- 
 ment, and the account itself, were often exhibited to 
 you, to the Commissioners, and to the Joint Commit- 
 tee. The balance expended by me in the campaign 
 of that year in the defence of the frontiers of this 
 state, was much more than I had received, indepen- 
 dent of various payments and expenditures, the 
 vouchers for which could not be collected and ar- 
 ranged in season. 
 
 In the year 1 814, the aspect of public affairs in this 
 quarter of the union was truly alarming. Our east- 
 ern brethren, blinded by a momentary infatuation of 
 party zeal, not only withheld their support, but 
 threatened serious resistance to the constitutional 
 arm; a well appointed and veteran army, aided by a 
 strong naval force, was pressing upon our Champlain 
 frontier : the Ontario squadron was in danger of at- 
 tack in Sacket's-Harbour from another combined 
 land and naval armament : the lately victorious but 
 now suffering army of Niagara, was pent up in Fort 
 Erie by the British forces in that quarter: the city of 
 New-York was menaced with invasion : the capital 
 of the Union was smoking in ruins : and to give the 
 deepest shade to the gloomy aspect of our affairs, and 
 add to the difficulty of their redemption, the national 
 government was literally pennyless. 
 
 At that momentous and trying crisis, I had an op- 
 portunity, as you well know, by accepting the Depart* 
 ment of State, of retiring from the cares, the labours, 
 the perplexities, and responsibilities of the station I 
 
16 
 
 then occupied, to one more seducing to ambition, and 
 opening future prospects, which lew men in my situa- 
 tion would have hesitated to pursue. But I declined 
 the flattering offer, which was made to me by Mr. 
 Madison, of a seat in the national cabinet, and con- 
 tinued in the station, where my local experience and 
 associations, enabled me to be most useful to my 
 country. 
 
 At this interesting period, I was appealed toby llit 
 National Government to make a vigorous exertion, 
 as much would depend upon my zeal and activity, as 
 the chief magistrate of a state which was the princi- 
 pal theatre of war. Mr. Monroe, then Secretary of 
 War, under date of the 15th September, 1814, wrote 
 as follows : " General Macomb, at Plattsburgh, is in 
 danger from a superior force marching against him, 
 and General Brown is alike exposed to imminent dan- 
 ger. It is in the power of your state to make an ex- 
 ertion that will not only save those armies, but crush 
 the British force employed against them. May I en- 
 treat you to call out immediately such a force in each 
 quarter as the exigency may require, and hurry it to 
 the scene of action? I do not go into any detail, be- 
 cause you are too well acquainted with all the cir- 
 cumstances merking attention to require it. General 
 Izard is marching to the aid of General Brown, but 
 as he takes Sacket's-Harbour in the route, and de- 
 pends on a conveyance thence by water, there is 
 much uncertainty in his movements. 1 wish your 
 measures to be taken independently of all calcula- 
 tions on him, since the expense attending them count as no- 
 thing compared with the salvation of Brown's army, 
 and of the post of Sacket's-Harbour, w hich must als© 
 claim your attention," 
 
17 
 
 Cotemporaneous with this pressing application from 
 the Department of War, and within a few days of 
 each other, I received the most urgent appeals for as- 
 sistance from the Committee of Defence of New- 
 York and General Lewis in the south, from Generals 
 Mooers and Macomb at the north, and from General 
 Brown in the west. 
 
 General Lewis, then commanding at New-York, in 
 his communication to me at that period, states — 
 u Private information from Halifax, from a source to 
 be relied on, leaves little doubt of a formidable ex- 
 pedition, consisting of 15,000 men, being on its way 
 from England, destined to act against this city," &c. 
 kc. And in a letter shortly thereafter, he says, " Be- 
 lieving that (he city of New-York is menaced with in- 
 vasion, and that the surest means of averting that ca- 
 lamity is to be prepared for it, I take the liberty of 
 calling on your Excellency for an additional military 
 force, to consist of 9,150 infantry, and 1,050 artil- 
 lerists." 
 
 The Committee of Defence in their letter of the 
 vime period, stated as follows : 
 
 44 The Committee of Defence having received your 
 Excellency's letter, advising them of your intention 
 of calling into immediate service 10,000 militia for 
 the defence of this part of the state, considering the. 
 importance of this city as the commercial emporium 
 of a great portion of the United States, its peculiar 
 exposure to attack, and the calamitous consequences 
 which would result to the honour, the prosperity, and 
 the finances of the country, in case a successful at- 
 tempt should be made upon it, are unanimously of 
 opinion, that the contemplated call of the militia 
 ought to embrace at least 20.000 men. The fate of 
 
 3 
 
18 
 
 Washington ought 10 redouble our exertion?, and to 
 teach us not to commit the destiny of this place to 
 hazard ; the expense will bear no proportion to the object to 
 be accomplished" 
 
 General Macomb, in his despatch from Plattsburgh 
 of the same date, says, " It is now ascertained be- 
 yond a doubt that the enemy will march for this post 
 with his whole force this morning. 
 
 u .Much is at stake at this place and aid is actually 
 wanted, as the garrison is small and the enemy in con- 
 siderable force; under all these circumstances, your 
 E\rellcncy, I am sure, will not hesitate to afford us 
 all the assistance in your power." 
 
 And General Mooers, in his letter by the same 
 mrssengcr, after representing in the most earnest and 
 patriotic manner, the dangers of the country and his 
 willingness to devote himself to its protection, adds, 
 * the exposed situation of this frontier and the alarms 
 so often repeated, have discouraged many of the citi- 
 zens from taking up arms as they would otherwise 
 have done.*' 
 
 The situation of the army of Niagara was equally 
 critical, nor were the appeals of General Brown for 
 relief less urgent : after stating the emergency, u will 
 it not be possible," he asks, 44 for you to increase 
 General Porters corps, and that promptly? I have 
 found General Porter a brave and efficient officer: 
 in the midst of danger his mind is calm and collected, 
 and his judgment always to be relied upon ; these 
 are rare qualifications, and therefore it is that 1 de- 
 sire that all militia force may be continued under his 
 command." — And in a letter, of date a few days sub- 
 sequent, he says — 
 
 " I was gratified by the receipt of yours of the 13th 
 
19 
 
 inst. Colonel Yates,* your aid, will remain with m 
 and we will try to make the most of the ample powers 
 with which you have clothed him. I rejoice that you 
 have it in contemplation to convene the legislature at 
 an early period. We have been amused and dis- 
 graced too long; strong measures are necessary to 
 save the sinking honors of the nation. My gallant lit- 
 tle army has, so far, done its duty, and has been 
 blessed with the smiles of Providence, but unless it can 
 receive efficient aid, there is reason to fear for its ultimate 
 safety 
 
 Venerable and patriotic citizens also, such as Col. 
 Rutgers, Col. Willett, Gov. Wolcott, Mr. King, and 
 others, animated me to the greatest efforts. The 
 latter gentleman, in an interview with me*, was pecu- 
 liarly impressive : He said that " the time had arrived 
 when every good citizen was bound to put his all at 
 the requisition of government ; that he was read) 
 to do this : that the people of the state of New-York 
 would, and must hold me personally responsible for 
 its defence and safety." I acquainted him with the dif- 
 ficulties under which I had struggled for the two 
 preceding years; the various instances in which I 
 had been already compelled to act without law or 
 legislative indemnity, and urged, that if 1 should once 
 more exert myself to meet all the emergencies and 
 
 * Colonel J. B. Yates was one of my aids during the war, and 
 was despatched, in consequence of 'Mr. Monroe's letter, to call out 
 the militia in aid of General Brown, and it was under this requisi- 
 tion that Swift and Davis' corps were ordered into service. Both 
 those gallant officers fell in that campaign. It is not the least mor- 
 tifying circumstance of these transactions, that my charge for 
 Col. Yates* expenses in this important service remains to this daj 
 one of the suspended items of my account. 
 
20 
 
 pecuniary difficulties, with which wc were pressed 
 I must inevitably ruin myself. " Well, sir,"' added 
 be, (wif h that enthusiasm Which genius lends to pa- 
 triotism,) 4i what is the ruin of an individual compa- 
 red to the safety of the republic? if you are ruined, 
 you will have the consolation of enjoying the grati- 
 tude of your fellow citizens; but you must trust to the 
 magnanimity and justice of your country, you must 
 transcend the law, you must save this city and state 
 from the dangers with which they are menaced ; you 
 must ruin yourself, if it becomes necessary, and I 
 pledge you my honor that I will support you in what- 
 ever you do/' 
 
 Under such circumstances I determined to forego 
 the honor Mr. Madison intended forme; to sacrifice 
 my own health and the comfort of my family, to the 
 paramount duty of serving my country, in that sphere 
 where I could be more useful, and to olFer myself a 
 victim for its safety if it should be necessary. In less 
 than forty days, without assistance in money from the 
 national government, I brought into the field, at vari- 
 ous points of danger, nearly diiy thousand men, orga- 
 nized, armed and equipped ; endured the toil, ex- 
 pense, and embarrassment, of commanding twenty 
 thousand of them in person, and at the same time ad- 
 ministered the government of the ^tatc. In less than 
 sixty days, when the national credit was at its lowest 
 point of depression, when the payment, even of the 
 interest of its notes, could not be provided for, I raised 
 for the public service upwards of a million of dollars 
 in current money, and made myself, by specific con- 
 tracts, personally liable for the whole amount. — The 
 enemy having obtained possession of the eastern ex- 
 tremity of the Union, and the state of Massachusetts 
 
21 
 
 having refused to lend any pecuniary aid in attempt- 
 ing to dislodge him from her territory, I informed 
 General Dearborn, that his drafts on me for one hun- 
 dred and fifty thousand dollars, for that purpose, 
 would be paid at sight : thirty thousand dollars were 
 advanced to Colonel Jessup to accomplish the enlist- 
 ment of a regiment in Connecticut : eighty thousand 
 dollars were advanced for the relief of the manufac- 
 tory of arms belonging to the United States at Spring- 
 field, the workmen of which had received no pay for 
 a long period, and were on the eve of mutiny : twenty- 
 five thousand dollars were sent to the Military Acade- 
 my at West Point, to enable the cadets to leave it at 
 the termination of the session, for which they were 
 wholly unprovided with funds : ten thousand dollars 
 were appropriated to provide for the hospitals, in 
 some of which the sick and wounded were languishing 
 without the ordinary necessaries and comforts of such 
 establishments: the sum of one hundred thousand 
 dollars was also advanced to the New-Jersey militia, 
 who had stepped forward in defence of the city of 
 New-York : five thousand dollars to aid in the de- 
 fence of New-Orleans : one hundred thousand dollars 
 to rescue the gallant army of Niagara from famine 
 and disbandment, and the residue has been received 
 by the patriotic officers and soldiers of the militia of 
 this state, who served in that campaign, and by the 
 staff departments attached to them. 
 
 I have the proud satisfaction to say, that in the 
 whole expenditure of three millions of dollars, I never 
 permitted a fellow officer, citizen or soldier, to be 
 paid in depreciated currency of any kind. In order 
 to relieve the prisoners of Porters volunteers, and 
 New-York militia, who were taken in the memorable 
 
n 
 
 sonic from Fort Erie, and sent by the enemy round to 
 Boston in an inclement season of the year, I obtained 
 specie, and despatched an agent with it to that place, 
 in order to provide for their comfort and convenience 
 in getting home, without imposition or sacrifice from 
 depreciated currency. In addition to all these ex- 
 ertions, at the recpuest of the War Department, I made 
 frequent and expensive, but indispensably necessary 
 journies, to every part of the frontier, with officers and 
 suite, in hose expenses w ere borne by me. 
 
 You have compelled me to enter into these details, 
 which might appear ostentatious, were they not forced 
 upon me by the injustice I have sustained at your 
 hands. It would be a false delicacy in me, under the 
 position in which I am placed, to refrain from reviving 
 the recollection of circumstances so closely connected 
 with the merits of the present controversy ; and in do- 
 ing this, I rely upon that magnanimous candour, with 
 which my fellow citizens have been accustomed to 
 view my conduct. 
 
 The loans of money which I obtained were general- 
 ly made to me for terms of ninety days, or six months, 
 under an assurance, that within those periods, the go- 
 vernment would be amply able to pay and relieve me 
 from my personal responsibility ; instead of which, I 
 was left until the year 1816, liable to prosecution and 
 imprisonment for these immense sums, and for which I 
 have never, to this moment, received the v smallest 
 indemnity, either from the national or the state go- 
 vernment. 
 
 It was for the raising of these monies thus obtained, 
 and thus expended, and in view of the great losses 
 which I had evidently sustained in your settlement of 
 my accounts, that the patriotic and enlightened legist 
 
S3 
 
 lature of this state passed the law of the last session, 
 out of which this controversy has grown, and in the 
 perversion and defeat of which you have acted so con- 
 spicuous a part : a law, by which they intended to 
 allow me the same premium which the general govern- 
 ment had allowed to others for the same services, 
 under circumstances certainly not more meritorious. 
 To them, a stipulated premium was given for raising- 
 current money for the use of the government, and to 
 enable them to do so, the contractors for the loans 
 deposited the certificates of stock at tire banks and 
 other places, and by adding their personal responsi- 
 bility to the deposit, procured the money. To me 
 they advanced treasury notes, by depositing which, 
 and adding my personal responsibility, and the little 
 influence I enjoyed, these monies were raised by mei 
 and advanced to the government. 
 
 I was charged with and held personally responsible 
 for the treasury notes advanced to me at their par 
 value, and with the loss which was sustained on such 
 as were forced into the market. What then, I ask. 
 constituted the allowance made by government to 
 others, which ought not to exist in my case? Where 
 was the difference, except that the means afforded to 
 them were not always extended to me ? There is in- 
 deed a difference, but I did hope, and as it now ap- 
 pears, vainly hoped, that this difference would never 
 have been objected against me. I was no Contractor ! 
 W r hile those individuals on the one hand, at the most 
 dark and gloomy crisis of our affairs, secured their 
 discount by guarded and well digested "contracts,"'* 
 I on the other, as I was advised by my venerable and 
 patriotic friends, trusted for indemnity for losses, sa- 
 crifices, and responsibilities, 4i to the masnanimi 1 . y of 
 
m 
 
 my country.'* They have received their premium to 
 the uttermost farthing; but to my claims, now when 
 the danger is past, when our country is rapid 1 J pro- 
 gressing in the full tide of prosperity, when our citi- 
 zens are enjoying the peace their valour has won, il 
 is replied, where is your contract ? " It is not in the 
 bond." You have stipulated for nothing, and therefore 
 nothing is due to you. 
 
 These, sir, were the circumstances under which the 
 monies in question were raised, these the ground - 
 upon which the legislature in its justice passed the 
 law which granted the indemnity, and you know too 
 well the pretences upon which that justice has been 
 refused. Judge then, of my feelings, when I see this 
 act of justice construed by you as a donation ! a mere 
 gratuity! 
 
 I have always been, I trust, as grateful as any man, 
 for the favours which I have so repeatedly received 
 from my fellow citizens, and as ready to acknowledge 
 them; but I feel that I cannot but be justified in the 
 opinion of every honourable and high-minded man. 
 in repelling with indignation the idea, that the lan 
 which you have shown such overweening anxiety to 
 defeat, has flowed from the generosity, and not the 
 justice of my country. 
 
 Suppose, sir, that instead of refusing to execute 
 the just intentions of the legislature, you had made 
 me the allowance they contemplated, what would 
 have been its effect ? Would it have been a gain to 
 me of that amount ? No, you well know that it 
 would not ; but that on the contrary, it would have 
 gone to satisfy my just claims for monies actually ex- 
 pended in the public service, and for which I am no T A 
 made a debtor to the state, and held up to the nation 
 
25 
 
 as a public 3efaulter, because, owing to the pressure 
 of the times, and the exigencies of the service, some 
 of these disbursements were not strictly authorized 
 by existing laws ; and for others, owing to the nature of 
 the expenditure, and the hurry, confusion, and casu- 
 alties inseparable from a state of war, I am not able 
 to produce such vouchers as are strictly legal, and 
 technically correct. 
 
 For a rigid scrutiny of the accounts, and a perfect 
 conformity to the acts of appropriation in their settle- 
 ment, if there you had staved your hand, you would 
 have heard no complaint from me ; and it was to 
 guard against the injustice of the application of 
 those principles, that the law in question was passed ; 
 it w r as for that reason that the state assumed a respon- 
 sibility, which though equitably and honorably bind- 
 ing on it, was only strictly so on the general govern- 
 ment ; but it is in the devices you have resorted to in 
 preventing the operations of that law, that you have 
 done me the greatest injustice, and shown the worst 
 designs. 
 
 It has not now for the first time been discovered, - 
 that in a state of war, expenses arc often incurred 
 which may not be strictly legal, or for which, owing 
 to the state of the times, satisfactory vouchers may 
 not exist ; nor is it now for the first time that the prin- 
 ciples upon which the act of the last session was 
 grounded, have been acted upon. 
 
 After the close of our revolutionary contest^similar 
 difficulties, growing out of the war, were fourTd to * 
 exist in the settlement- of the accounts between the 
 general and state governments; and to remedy the 
 injustice which might result from them, an act was 
 passed by Congress in 1790, appointing Commission- 
 
 4 
 
2G 
 
 ers to settle their accounts: the 3d section of which 
 is in the following words : 
 
 "And be it further enacted, That it shall be the 
 " duty of the said Commissioners to receive and ex- 
 " amine all claims, which shall he exhibited to them 
 " before the first day of July 1791, and to determine 
 # "on all such as shall hare accrued for the general or 
 44 particular defence during the war; and on the evi- 
 "dence thereof, according to the principles of general 
 "equity, (although such claims may not be sanctioned by 
 " the resolves of Congress, or supported by regular vouchers,) 
 "so as to provide for the final settlement of accounts 
 "between the United Stales, and the states indivi- 
 4 dually."^ 
 
 No candid and dispassionate mind will deny, that 
 the reason, principles, and policy of that law, of 
 which the state has availed itself, apply with full force 
 to the case in question, and should have induced a 
 liberal and cheerful acquiescence in the provisions of 
 the act under consideration. 
 
 You claim great merit for the pressing manner in 
 which, by letter and otherwise, you urged the settle- 
 ment of my accounts after I had left the state government. 
 It is true, that at that period, when you knew the 
 difficulties under which I laboured, and the necessity 
 of legislative interposition to insure me the least 
 semblance of justice, you showed as much industry 
 and perseverance, to force me to a settlement, as you 
 have since exercised in delaying and ultimately 
 evading the desired adjustment. 
 
 Is it to be wondered at, sir, that under existing cir- 
 : cumstances, with health impaired by the fatigues, 
 anxieties, and labours, of three years' public service, 
 (apparently deserted by my country's protection. 
 
27 
 
 when no longer useful to her, and liable to be torn 
 from a family that is clearer to me than any thing but 
 that country,) that I should have paused for some 
 time, appalled by the magnitude of the responsibility 
 and sacrifices to which my devotion to the public 
 interest had alone subjected me ? Can it be a matter 
 of surprise to any one, that I should have waited for 
 legislative provision for my relief during the period 
 mentioned in your letter — when he learns that 1 had 
 enquired of you, whether you would admit to m\ 
 credit the amount of vouchers rendered to you in 
 1813, but never credited to me, and which were lost 
 in your office, and you declined : (notwithstanding 
 the abstracts which accompanied those vouchers 
 were produced to you, with your marginal notes upon 
 them, which must have convinced you that the evi- 
 dences of expenditure had once been in your posses- 
 sion;) when it is known, moreover, that you refused 
 to allow r me credit for more than one hundred thou- 
 sand dollars advanced to officers and agents of the 
 government; unless, in addition to satisfactory vouchers 
 of the payment of the money to them, 1 should also 
 produce to you strict evidence that they (being forty- 
 nine different officers and agents employed during the 
 war, some of whom are dead, and others scattered 
 over the state, and the United States,) had well and 
 faithfully expended it. 
 
 When such, and such only, were the principles upon 
 which you would consent to make a settlement, of 
 what advantage would it have been to have rendered 
 them to you before ? It might indeed have enabled 
 you at an earlier period to have availed yourself of 
 an act of unguarded confidence, to hold me up to pub- 
 *»c -"^mViori and ridicule, by puM * my private 
 
28 
 
 papers as vouchers of public expenditure: but neither 
 to the state nor to roe could it have produced any be- 
 neficial result. 
 
 By the Journals of the Assembly in 1818, it will ap- 
 pear that you reported a balance against me in that 
 year of Si 97,297 67 
 
 and that the suspended items of my ac- 
 count then rendered amounted to 141^41 79 
 
 making a balance of g55,655 88 
 
 against me, tor which no vouchers were rendered. 
 Why they were not produced the preceding develope- 
 ment of facts sufficiently explains. 
 
 Had you, at my solicitation, consented to allow me 
 even for vouchers proven to have been in your posses- 
 sion, and never returned tome; and, also, to have 
 credited the amount expended for the public, and ad- 
 vanced to agents of the government; instead of this 
 enormous sum against me. your report would have ex- 
 hibited a balance of $67 88 in my favour, indepen- 
 dent of vouchers since discovered and rendered to you, 
 by which that balance is increased to g22,274 15. The 
 settlement of my account upon principles so obviously 
 equitable, would have produced very different results, 
 in many respects: I should have, been spared the shafts 
 of calumny which have been with such envenomed 
 malignity levelled at my peace — and you the necessity 
 of resorting to the various shifts and devices you have 
 practised, to protract and finally defeat its liquid- 
 ation. 
 
 While upon this subject, permit me to place upon 
 its proper ground the injury I have received at your 
 hands in the communication of my accounts to the le- 
 gislature in January, 1819, with the contumelious re- 
 
29 
 
 marks that accompanied them, which have been so 
 widely published to my prejudice and the annoyance 
 of my friends, and for a moment to consider the apolo- 
 gy you have made for it. 
 
 In the month of July, 1817, I received from you a 
 letter dated " Comptroller's Office, 
 
 2d July, 1817," 
 which, after speaking of some other matters, and re- 
 questing me to furnish you with my remaining 
 vouchers, concludes as follows : 
 
 " You need not be at the trouble of any arrangement of 
 them ; that I ivill attend to myself. The making of mere lists 
 of the vouchers is all that is necessary, and all that I hope 
 you will give yourself the trouble of doing. 
 With my sincere respects, 
 I have the honor to be 
 Your Excellency's 
 
 Most obedient servant, 
 ARCH. M'INTYRE, 
 
 Compt. 
 
 And in a letter of the 26th September, after making 
 the same request and suggestion, you add, M To their 
 arrangement and classification I shall cheerfully at- 
 tend; and indeed your excellency may recollect, that no atten- 
 tion ivhatsoever has been paid to the arrangement of any 
 of the vouchers lately rendered.' 1 '' 
 
 After the receipt of tho.se letters, Mr. Ironside de- 
 livered to you a bundle of papers, which you say, and 
 say truly, " was the most defective of the whole, and 
 contained more of the exceptionable items than any 
 which had before been rendered ;" and you might 
 have added, upon which you had made some of your 
 most offensive remarks. The remarks you say " were 
 intended for my eye alone," and you ask if I was die 
 
30 
 
 satisfied with them, why I did not complain when the 
 etateraent containing them was sent to me. I have not, 
 sir, been in the habit of complaining, but let me now 
 state what was done, and thereby test the propriety 
 of your conduct. Perceiving, from your statement 
 furnished me, that many of the vouchers rendered to 
 you at different times, were duplicates, (which it was 
 customary during the war in most cases to take,) and 
 that among them also, there had been sent, through 
 inadvertence, several of my private papers and re- 
 ceipts, I, on the 20th of October, 1818, wrote to you 
 a to return to me all the vouchers and duplicates that 
 were not absolutely passed to my credit;" the receipt 
 of this letter you admit, without setting forth its terms. 
 On the 4th of November, 1818, you returned to me 
 the vouchers and duplicates required, with the list of 
 the same, excepting such as you had permitted to be 
 taken to Washington, and some few detained for spe- 
 cial purposes. After this, sir, could I expect that the 
 vouchers thus withdrawn by me, and thus relumed, of 
 which mere lists had been furnished, and which had 
 been sent to you, under your letters inviting to a want 
 of care and scrutiny, could ever be regarded by any 
 one. and much less by you, as existing charges in my ac- 
 count ? But what, sir, was your conduct under the 
 circumstances I have here detailed, and which cannot 
 he denied ? 
 
 On the 18th of January, 1819, resolutions passed 
 the Assembly, calling on you to report to that house, 
 whether the commissioners appointed at the previous 
 session to settle my accounts, had executed the duties 
 jf their appointment; and if they had not, then to 
 report " a detailed statement of the unsettled charges 
 in the said account, and the objections to their allowance, to 
 
31 
 
 the end that some proper mode might be prescribed for their 
 final settlement." 
 
 Under this resolution, you, on the 26th of that 
 month, reported to the Assembly all the duplicate 
 receipts, which you had, the preceding fall, at my in- 
 stance, returned to me, as " existing charges in my ac- 
 count" against the state, formally alledging as your 
 reason for rejecting them, that they were double 
 charges previously allowed. You went farther, and 
 reported as " charges" in my then account against the 
 state, various receipts for private expenses, such as 
 " Physicians' bills," " Pastry cooks' bills," a bill for 
 .the " Analectic Magazine," and many others of a si- 
 milar description, the receipts for which you had long 
 before at my request returned; but these too, you re- 
 ported to the legislature, with your formal reasons for 
 their disallowance. Could you, sir, for a moment 
 suppose, that papers of this description were em- 
 braced in a call for the M unsettled charges of my ac- 
 count ?" Could you believe that the legislature 
 required your M objections to the allowance" of dupli- 
 cate and private receipts, which I had long before that 
 time withdrawn as such ? Is it possible that you 
 could, for a moment, think that the legislature con- 
 templated to prescribe " a mode for their final settle- 
 ment ?" No, sir, you could never have believed it ! 
 and if I do not much overrate the intelligence and 
 candour of my fellow citizens, it will be impossible for 
 you to divest this transaction of its true character, a 
 mischievous exercise of the authority of your office, 
 to draw upon me the opprobrium and reproaches of the 
 public, and eminently calculated to disclose the 
 real feelings which have governed the whole of your 
 
32 
 
 .dcent conduct in my afiairs, and the end which wal 
 hoped to be obtained by it. 
 
 But, if you had even believed that the resolution 
 called upon you for a report of these matters, and 
 your comments upon them, could you not have spared 
 one moment for an explanatory remark? To have 
 stated the circumstances and the assurances under 
 which the vouchers had been rendered? To have 
 stated the simple fact, that those which were so pal- 
 pably objectionable, had been long since withdrawn? 
 You say, indeed, that you 44 could not know that the 
 rejected and suspended items, and the remarks there - 
 on, were ever to be published; 99 How wretched is 
 this subterfuge ! What, sir ! was the open communi- 
 cation of them to the assembly, no publication ? Was 
 their entry on the journals, nothing." Were you so 
 little conversant with political affairs as not to know 
 that even newspaper publication of them would be 
 a matter of unavoidable consequence ? You were no 
 such novice — but I quit this disgusting topic. 
 
 In March, 1818, the legislature appointed commis- 
 sioners, to adjust and settle the residue of my accounts. 
 They met in Albany, that you might be present, and 
 no proof was made, or paper exhibited, except in 
 your presence. You denied no part of my statements, 
 objected to none of the documents produced, nor to 
 the principles contended for, as applicable to them. 
 It appeared before the commissioners, that f had 
 benefitted the state in one way alone % 105,1 23, upon 
 my own responsibility and credit, without any law or 
 authority on its part; but they decided that the state 
 should have the sole benefit of that service, and there- 
 fore rejected that item. To them also were exhibited 
 other claims, and the proofs in support of them, which 
 
S3 
 
 they allowed. Their report having been presented 
 during the session, and not previous to it, as the reso- 
 lution appointing them, perhaps, required, it was re- 
 jerred to a joint committee of both houses, before 
 whom both you and myself repeatedly appeared ; 1 
 then exhibited the same correspondence, evidences of 
 losses, original papers and accounts, to show the 
 justice and equity of the principles adopted by the 
 commissioners; and I believe I succeeded in showing 
 this both to your and their satisfaction. 
 
 I not only exhibited to the commissioners and to the 
 committee, all the papers concerning the business, 
 but gave to their chairman a brief or memorandum of 
 all, with references to the items and proofs in sup- 
 port of each item, and submitted to them the follow- 
 ing propositions : 
 
 1st, That a law be passed authorizing the comp- 
 troller to adjust the account according to the decision 
 of a jury, in an amicable suit to be instituted, by the 
 verdict of which I offered to abide. 
 
 2d, That the legislature should appoint any three 
 arbitrators they might think proper, and pass an 
 act, authorizing the comptroller to settle the account 
 finally according to the award. 
 
 I then left the committee and yourself in consulta- 
 tion : you oon after called upon me, and informed 
 me that the committee were disposed to admit one of 
 the items allowed by Messrs. Colden and Bogardus, 
 provided,! would relinquish, as against the state, my 
 pay, expenses of command and journies, losses, com- 
 missions, interest, and all demands and indemnity 
 for munitions and property, for which the state had 
 never contributed in credit, authority or money. This 
 concession on my part, you declared, would produce 
 
34 
 
 entire unanimity in the committee, mid advised me to 
 make the relinquishment, as the alhwanct of thai one 
 item ahnc, wotdd leave a balance in my favour, and I might 
 look to the United States for the residue. It was to 
 meet such balance, which von thus admitted would be- 
 due to me. that a clause authorizing the payment was 
 added to the act: and of this balance, by overstepping 
 the bounds of your official duty, and defeating the ac- 
 knowledged intentions of the legislature, you are 
 labouring to deprive me. 
 
 1 took your advice, and repaired with you to the 
 committee room, and there voluntarily renounced all 
 the items you had suggested. This relinquishment 
 appeared to give great satisfaction, both to the com- 
 mittee and yourself, and much pleasure was expressed 
 at the unanimity it produced. Some of the commit- 
 tee enquired how you would be able to ascertain the 
 amount, or rate of premium, or discount, which was 
 allowed to other citizens who advanced current mo- 
 ney to the government at the same period. Mr. J. A. 
 King, one of the committee, mentioned Mr. Burrali 
 as a competent person to decide; and I also expressed 
 my willingness to leave the point to Mr. Bayard, Mr. 
 Bronson, Mr. Astor. Mr. A spin wall, Mr. Furman, or 
 others whom I named. You stated to the committee 
 (hat there would be no difficulty or difference between 
 us on this head, and that if the certificate of indivi- 
 duals should prove unsatisfactory, you would write to 
 the secretary of the treasury, and obtain from him, 
 official information, of the date, and terms c>f the 
 loans to government. 
 
 After the passage of the bill, in consequence of 
 this compromise, I called at your office, and struck 
 from my account all the charges for pay, expenses of 
 
35 
 
 command, and journies, and agreed to waive losses, 
 commissions, interest, &c. ; in short, every thing that 
 you required as a fulfilment on my part of the under- 
 standing and agreement between you. the committee, 
 and myself. 
 
 I did. more : after the committee had determined to 
 report the bill which ultimately passed, i wrote to a 
 friend in New-York for information, as to the rate oi 
 premium which had been allowed by government to 
 others,, at the times I obtained the loans in question ; 
 and being advised, after the passage of the law, thai 
 it was greater than was anticipated, either by yon, 
 the committee, or myself ; and, unwilling to re- 
 ceive any thing under the act beyond the intention of 
 the legislature, I, to meet the liberality of that body 
 with a corresponding spirit on my part, voluntarily 
 withdrew receipts and vouchers to a large amount, 
 advanced to commissaries and others, part of which 
 had been suspended by you, and part arbitrarily re- 
 jected, in order that the antiquity of the transactions, 
 the death of the parties, and other causes, which 
 were difficult of satisfactory explanation, might not 
 create embarrassment in the settlement. And here lei 
 me remark, that a deeper scrutiny into the papers 
 with which you have furnished me, with comparisons 
 of your official reports from time to time, afford ample 
 conviction of the fallibility of your decisions, and 
 confirmation to me, that I have suffered heavily, not 
 only by the loss of vouchers from your office, but 
 from inaccuracies, and omissions, in the final audit 
 and settlement of my accounts.* 
 
 * The following is an account of monies drawn from the trea. 
 
You buffered me to fulfil the stipulations o( the 
 treat; (if I may so call it) between us. You suffered 
 
 sury, and accounted for in July, 1812, but of which not a dollar 
 was allowed me until the 27th of August last : 
 His Excellency Daniel L). Tompkins, Governor, 
 
 To the State of New-York, DH. 
 foil, July 15, To Warrant No. 759 on the Treasurer, $1,000 00 
 Oct. B8, To do. No. 923 do. 1,200 00 
 
 $2,200 OC 
 
 CR. By amount expended by him in effecting a treaty 
 with the Oneida nation of Indians, for the extinguish- 
 ment of their claim to certain lands occupied by the 
 New Slockbridge and Brothcrtown Indians, and for 
 'he purchase of said claim pursuant to said treaty, £2030 &t) 
 Balance due the State of New-York, 169 50 
 
 S2,200 00 
 
 State oi New-York — Comptroller's Ollice. 
 
 I have examined the preceding account of His Excellency Daniel 
 D. Tompkins, Governor of this state, in relation to his receipts 
 and expenditures, under and pursuant to the fifth section of the ac f 
 entitled " an act for the benefit of the Onondaga Tribe of Indians, 
 and for other purposes," passed 29th March, 1811. and do hereby 
 certify, that there is due from him thereon to this stale, the sum of 
 One hundred and sixty nine dollars and fifty cents. 
 
 ARCHD. M'INTYRE, Comptroller 
 Albany, June 30th, 1812. 
 Treasurer's Office — State of New-York. 
 
 Received from Daniel D. Tompkins, Governor of the said state, 
 one hundred and sixty-nine dollars and fifty cents, in full of the 
 balance stated in the above account. 
 
 DAVID THOMAS, Treasure:. 
 JOHN ELY, Junr. Dep. Compt. 
 Albany, 6th July, 1812. 
 
 Again — At the foot of an account rendered from your office,, 
 tohich was carried into the general account corrent of 6tb March r 
 
37 
 
 me to make all these voluntary relinquishments, be- 
 fore you intimated even a doubt, or suggested a diffi- 
 culty of performing on your part, that which was the 
 consideration of them. As the matter now stands, 
 you have made me the victim of my own scrupulous 
 adherence to the engagements 1 had made, and my 
 solicitude to remove all possible grounds of collision: 
 whilst you withhold on the part of the state, the ful- 
 filment of the law, the contemplation of which could 
 alone have induced me to enter into these engage- 
 ments. 
 
 You have thus been guilty of a double deception : 
 first, in seducing me to enter into the arrangement 
 by assurances that it would form a sure basis of the 
 final settlement of my accounts ; and then by violating 
 that very arrangement, and absolutely refusing the 
 adjustment. 
 
 1818, and constitutes part of the balance of $197,297 64, is the 
 following remark : 
 
 Of this balance of $ 139,537 54, it appears that Governor 
 Tompkins has paid out on unsettled contracts, $5,928 88 as follows : 
 
 1809, Sept. 7, To Simeon Frisbie, $600 00 
 
 1810, Feb. 10, To do. 650 00 
 Oct. 3, To do. 160 77 
 Nov. 30, To do. 340 00 
 
 — 3 1,750 77 
 
 1808, Nov. 2, To John M'Lean, as before noted, 923 11 
 
 1811, March 12, To do. - - 2,500 00 
 March 14, To Russel Atwater, - - 750 00 
 
 $5,923 88 
 
 And yet in your list of disallowances of the same date, are these 
 very items rejected as having been allowed to me years before. — 
 They now form part of the amount withdrawn by me, and are com- 
 prised in schedule (A"> annexed. 
 
38 
 
 Having thus reviewed the history of these transac- 
 tions up to the passage of the law. 1 will now answer 
 those parts of your letter which relate to subsequent 
 events. On the day preceding that on which I h it Al- 
 bany, in April last, you made an appointment to meet 
 me at your office at 9 o'clock in the morning. I was 
 true to my appointment, and wailed an hour before 
 you came. You then, for the first time, suggested 
 your doubts and scruples about the construction of 
 tho law. and intimated to me, that as the attorney 
 general was out of town, you had called upon Mr. 
 Van Vechtcn.lhe late Attorney General, in whose judg- 
 ment and integrity you had implicit confidence, and 
 that he had confirmed )our doubts. I was greatly 
 surprised at this sudden and unexpected change in 
 your mind, but told you, that if the proper law officer 
 of the state sanctioned the opinion you had thus sud- 
 denly adopted, I should acquiesce in silence. But, 
 as Mr. Van Buren, the Attorney General, was then 
 absent; as Mr. Ely, your deputy, was sick, and you 
 were desirous of going a few* days into the country, 
 we agreed that I should return to Albany on the 2d 
 of May to closo the business. Before I left you, how- 
 ever, you expressed your willingness to leave the 
 question to Judges Spencer and Van .ess. I was as- 
 tonished at this intimation, and assigned various rea- 
 sons why it was impossible to accede on my part to 
 that proposal; among others, I urged that the judges 
 ought never to be called upon out of court for private 
 opinions in any case: that there was a peculiar in- 
 delicacy in applying to any two judges in particular, 
 as it might imply a want of confidence in the learning 
 or integrity of the others ; and finally, that an applica- 
 tion to any of the bench, would imply a direct reflec- 
 
39 
 
 tion upon the competency of the law officer of the 
 state, whose appropriate duty it was to give official 
 opinions in the first instance, wherever the interests of 
 the state were concerned. You then consented to take 
 the opinion of the Attorney General on his return ; 
 and why you afterwards declined, or why, in the se- 
 quel, you so suddenly lost your confidence in the opi- 
 nion of Mr. Van Vechten, (upon which you so impli- 
 citly relied) so soon as you found it was no longer in 
 your favour, is left for your conscience to determine. 
 
 Previously to the 2d of May, I received your letter, 
 acquainting me with the continuance of Mr Ely's ill- 
 ness, which prevented me from coming up to Albany 
 at that time. Colonel Pell and myself then agreed to 
 meet you there, early in June, with which determina- 
 tion he acquainted you, and soon after showed me a 
 letter from you, stating, that you should leave Albany 
 the next day for Essex County, and should not return 
 until July. We then agreed to meet in Albany on the 
 6th of July, but you informed me that you must be in 
 New-York on that day, and for some days subsequent. 
 We then went to Albany on the 24th of July, which 
 brings me to that part of your letter relating to the cir- 
 cumstances which took place in that city, when the 
 settlement was suspended on your part. 
 
 As you had in the spring intimated to me doubts as 
 to the construction of the law, I thought it my duty to 
 remove them as far as possible, by stating a case and 
 taking the opinion of the most eminent counsel upon 
 it, for your satisfaction ; and as you had referred to 
 the authority of Mr. Van Vechten, the late Attorney 
 General, in support of your doubts, I unhesitating!} 
 presented the case to thai gentleman, and asked fo) 
 bis written opinion, which he promptly gave* in direr 1 
 
10 
 
 i>pf>ositiofn lo that which you had imputed to him. 
 But, the truth is, that your statement to him, as no 
 doubt it has been to every other person, was incor 
 rect in ihe detail of facts. And, indeed, sir, how 
 could you state an accurate case, upon which to oh 
 tain opinions, when it depended upon document? 
 which were not in your possession until Ihe 2d of Au- 
 gust, the day before your letter of the :>d, announc- 
 ing your Baal determinal ion, wm written ? 
 
 Some days after f delivered to you the written 
 opinion signed by all the counsel who had been con- 
 sulted, you urged me to go with you to Mr. Van 
 Vechten, alleging that you thought it improper and 
 indelicate in you to go with the opinion to any of to) 
 counsel, and to converse with them unless in my pre- 
 sence. 
 
 To remove your scruples, I consented and accom- 
 panied you, with the contracts to which the case re- 
 lated ; and after examining the contracts. Mr. Van 
 Vechten told you frankly, that the verbal opinion he 
 had given you, was founded upon the statement you 
 had made to him, relative to the contracts for loans, 
 which was not correct in point of fefcfc; and that 
 upon the facts as they appeared on the lace of the 
 contracts, he assured you there could be no doubt as 
 to thejntention of the Commissioners, the Committee, 
 and the Legislature, or as to the legal construction of 
 the act. 
 
 You neTit requested me to call with you upon Mr. 
 Henry, w ho re-examined the papers referred to in the 
 case, answered, as Mr. Van Vechten had done, all 
 your suggestions of doubt, and concluded with a like 
 positive opinion, both as to the intention and con- 
 struction of the law. You then pressed me to take 
 
41 
 
 ?be opinions of such of the judges, as you then thought- 
 unexceptionable arbiters between us ; I consented to 
 abide by their opinion, if you would undertake to ob- 
 tain it, at the same time repeating, w hat I had often 
 said to you, my conviction of the impropriety of ex- 
 tracting from them, extrajudicial opinions ; and that 
 having once been on the bench myself, and subse- 
 quently associated with its members in the council of 
 revision, I well knew what were the rules of deco- 
 rum towards the judiciary. You were, however, so im- 
 portunate, that I was persuaded to accompany you 
 to Judge Wood worth, w ho, after the object of our vi- 
 sit w as disclosed, with a promptitude highly honoura- 
 ble to his character, made the very objection I had 
 insisted on ; and stated his impression of the impro- 
 priety, of a judge giving an extrajudicial opinion in 
 any case : but added, that he would advise with the 
 .other judges on the subject. I apologized to him 
 in your presence, for the request, and informed him 
 that nothing but your earnest solicitations, could have 
 induced me to unite in the application. 
 
 I had previously yielded my assent to your applying 
 for the Chancellors opinion; you called upon him 
 alone, and in the evening informed me, that he had, 
 for reasons similar to those assigned by Judge Wood- 
 worth, declined interfering in the case. I then propo- 
 sed to submit the question to the late Chancellor, Mr. 
 Lansing, Harmanus Bleecker, Esq. and William A. 
 i)uer, Esq. or any other respectable persons, but you 
 declined it. 
 
 I also offered, if j r ou were not satisfied with the 
 opinions of Mr. Hanson, and the other distinguished 
 ornaments of the bar of this state, who had decided 
 in my favour, to take any other professional opinion. 
 • 6 
 
12 
 
 you should require, and proposed to submit the case 
 to Mr. Webster, an eminent and learned counsellor 
 of Boston, who was then in Albany; but you desired 
 me to take no more opinions, and to incur no more 
 expense, as they would have no influence or addi- 
 tional weigh! with you. 
 
 On the evening of the 2d pf August, (when you in- 
 formed me that the Judges alluded to in our last in- 
 terview, declined expressing any opinion in the case, 
 and asked me to give you the papers, with a view to 
 close the business the next day. in order that I might 
 return to New-York by the earliest steamboat.) the 
 conversation mentioned in my letter of the 1th Au- 
 gust took place, in the course of which I suggested 
 two or three ways, in which the Judges might perhaps 
 be properly called upon, to give a judicial opinion in 
 the case. The next morning, instead of bringing the 
 business to a close, as you probably had intended, you 
 fastened upon one of these suggestions as a pretext 
 for defeating it altogether : for you admitted to Mr. 
 i3etts, of Newburgh. and myself, that you had never 
 i nought of the mandamus, until that conversation. 
 
 At the time you urged me to leave the question to 
 certain of the judges, you did express a decided opi- 
 nion, that under the circumstances, it would not be 
 proper to call on certain others, and the reason you 
 assigned was, that you had already consulted one of 
 ihem ex parte on the subject; and I thonH l Jtyou added, 
 that you had either consulted one oth r, or knew his 
 opinion ; but as Mr. Betts was present at a subse- 
 quent interview, in v, hich I repeated certain circum- 
 stances, and this among others, in order that there 
 might be no dispute between us as to facts, I cheer- 
 fully submit to him which of us is most accurate in 
 our, recollections of that conversation. 
 
43 
 
 You affect to regret, sir, that I should causelessly 
 have attempted to excite odium against the high ju- 
 dicial tribunals of the state. In what have I done this ? 
 Did I not consent that you might take Chancellor 
 Kent's opinion, and offer to abide by it ? Did I not 
 offer to submit, to the decision of such judges of the 
 SupremeCourt, as you thought proper to be consulted 
 and against my own better judgment, wait upon Judge 
 Woodworth with you for that purpose ? Did I not 
 propose to submit the question to the late Chancellor 
 Lansing ? Do these offers show a want of confidence 
 in the judiciary ? No, sir! the only correct, delicate, 
 and manly course, when a question of law arises be- 
 tween a public officer and a citizen, is for that citi- 
 zen to submit a case to counsel, and take their written 
 opinion upon it; and the only proper course in that 
 officer, is to submit the subject to the Attorney General, 
 who is the counsel of the state, appointed and paid 
 as such; instead of making imperfect, or incorrect 
 statements to private lawyers, and surprising them 
 into the expression of hasty opinions, founded upon 
 such statements. 
 
 I appeal to every intelligent man in society, whether 
 this is not the only proper method of conducting on 
 such occasions ? I have pursued that course — you 
 have not. So conscious were even you, of your de- 
 parture from propriety in this respect, that in the fa- 
 miliar and animated conversation alluded to in my last 
 letter, you exclaimed, " I wish to God I had taken the 
 Attorney General's opinion in the first instance !" 
 
 " Had I been disposed," say you, "to take the opinion 
 of the present Attorney General, as to the construc- 
 tion of the act, deference to your repeated, nrA 
 strong remonstrances against that course, would have 
 
44 
 
 Withheld me." Nothing can be more uniair, and (f 
 am sorry to say it) more untrue, than this suggestion. 
 At our very first interview, you declared that you 
 would not, and could not take the opinion of the 
 present Attorney General : not because I remonstrated 
 against it, but because you had not taken the opinion 
 of the late Attorney General, while he was in office; 
 and that if you now took the opinion of Mr. Oakley, 
 it would not only be disrespectful to Mr. Van Buren, 
 but all the world would say, that you had waited for 
 the removal of that gentleman, and the appointment 
 of Mr. Oakley, for the express purpose of obtaining 
 an opinion against me. This was the reason, and none 
 other; you were ashamed of the course you had pur- 
 sued, and that alone withheld you. 
 
 But tins was not all: — when the Judges had de- 
 clined interfering in the case, you called upon me, 
 and after much embarrassment and hesitation, said 
 you would take the liberty of suggesting, that as you 
 could not with propriety, take the opinion of the pre- 
 sent Attorney General, and as he had thought it ne- 
 cessary to move an amendment to the bill in the As- 
 sembly, in order to give it the construction for which 
 you contended, which amendment was rejected, it 
 was probable, and indeed there could hardly be a 
 doubt, that his opinion upon the law r as it passed, must 
 be in my favour ; and w hether I had not better ask him 
 for an opinion ? 
 
 My answer was, that it was not proper for me, but 
 that you might do it if you pleased : which you declin- 
 ed. Recollect, sir, that in this affair, I, as a citizen, 
 had no right to ask the opinion of the Attorney Gene- 
 ral. In a question with the state, whose officer he is. 
 it would be most clearly improper : and I have neither 
 
45 
 
 asked, nor received any opinion, public or private- 
 either from the present, or the late Attorney General. 
 That was your business. 
 
 For the truth of this statement I again appeal to Mr> 
 Belts, who was afterwards present in your office, when 
 I repeated these circumstances, so that there might 
 be no misunderstanding between us about facts ; and 
 you unhesitatingly admitted them to be correctly sta- 
 ted. Now, sir, if my repeated remonstrances against 
 your taking the opinion of the present Attorney Gene- 
 ral, ever influenced your conduct, would you have had 
 the unblushing assurance to propose to me, to take his 
 opinion ? 
 
 But the grossest attempt at imposition, and in which 
 you have exercised your greatest adroitness, is your 
 evident, and but too successful design, to impress the 
 public with a belief, that I had preferred claims on the 
 treasury of g605,000, under the law of the last session, 
 I know, sir, that on a critical examination of your let- 
 ter, it will be found that literally, you do not charge il 
 upon me; but, with a dexterity peculiar to yourself, 
 you have introduced expressions,which, although they 
 might escape the notice of a casual reader, would fur- 
 nish you with sufficient ground to deny the allegation, 
 whenever its falsity, should be pressed upon you. 
 But before the explanation could be made, you have 
 succeeded in impressing many honest minds with that 
 injurious belief, and you have no doubt, amply indul- 
 ged in the warmest exultation, at the momentary suc- 
 cess of your imposition. The motive cannot be mis- 
 taken. You knew the commendable jealousy, which 
 the people of this state have always evinced for the 
 interests of the treasury; you knew from experience, 
 that there was no subject on which the tocsin of alarm 
 
46 
 
 could be sounded, with greater probability of effect, 
 and in true partisan spirit, you did not hesitate to pub- 
 lish a schedule, or memorandum of claims, \vl ich the 
 Commissioners had allowed to be ju>t. but which, with 
 the exception of a single item, the committee had ob- 
 jected to. This schedule had been attached to the 
 case for the consideration of my counsel, which you 
 took home with you under the pretence of examining, 
 but as it now appears, with the >u\c view of copying 
 the schedule for publication. 
 
 Being thus possessed of it, your next object was to 
 introduce it into your letter in such a manner as ta 
 cause it to be believed, thai I had claimed its amount 
 under the act, without committing yourself by a di- 
 rect statement that i did so. This was done, by intro- 
 ducing the w ords, " let us now see the extent of the 
 claims you have made upon the treasury under that 
 law." and by attaching importance to its not being 
 published with the opinion ; as if that was the only 
 paper, attached to the case submitted to counsel, that 
 had not been published. If, sir. this transaction did 
 not flow from the sinister design to which I ascribe it, 
 you w ould have stated, that immediately subsequent 
 to that sentence of the case, which refers to this sche- 
 dule, it is expressly declared, that the committee had 
 adopted one item of it alone. But w hy should 1 enter in- 
 to this detail ? You know that you have in part suc- 
 ceeded ; that the public papers, as well as individuals, 
 have so often stated on the authority of your letter, 
 that I had claimed g 605,000 under that law, as to 
 cause the truth of the assertion to be extensively ac- 
 quiesced in ; and you further know, that by this artifice 
 
47 
 
 a vile imposition has been practised upon the commu- 
 nity. 
 
 Before I left Albany in April, I delivered to you 
 the statement of my final account under the act, which 
 is now in your possession, in which the single item of 
 premium on the monies raised, (with interest, which 
 I consented to waive for the future consideration of 
 the legislature,) was charged. This was the item 
 contemplated by the act, and its amount was left in 
 blank, because we had not the data for making the cal- 
 culations to fill it. This you know is the only account 
 I have ever exhibited under the act, this you have con- 
 cealed, and in order to make a false impression, have 
 extracted a statement, not submitted to you, but to 
 my counsel, and published it, with the views I have 
 stated. 
 
 If you had thought it necessary, to drag that sche- 
 dule into the correspondence, and had stated the 
 truth in regard to it fully and frankly, I should not have 
 complained, nor, I trust, suffered in the public esti- 
 mation ; you would then have stated, that it consisted 
 in a great degree of items, for commissions on monies 
 expended in the public service ; that these charges 
 had been declared by Messrs. Colden and Bogardus 
 to be just, and that they recommended their allow- 
 ance ; that the joint committee too, had reported that 
 they were fully satisfied of the justice and equity of 
 those items as claims against the United States, but 
 questioned their legality, as claims against this state; 
 and that in the compromise between us which pro- 
 duced the act in question, they had been upon your 
 advice, expressly relinquished ; as appeared on the 
 face of that very case from which you extracted the 
 schedule, but which you designedly omitted to notice ~- 
 
48 
 
 and that they have never after been sot up against the 
 state, directly or indirectly: and if justice to me had 
 at all entered into your view s, you might hare added, 
 that similar commissions for monies expended in the 
 public serv ice during the late war, were allowed by 
 general government to others j and that bbey were 
 the same commi-^iuns which I was over and ovn 
 again, charged with having received during the wai ; 
 and the nasi extravagant calculations were made, oi 
 the splendid profits 1 was supposed to have realized 
 from them. 
 
 To add to the etlect calculated to be produced by 
 the story of the 8600,000, you exerted all your address, 
 to impress the public w ith a belief that it was on ac- 
 count of the extent of the allowance which I claimed, 
 that you refused to execute the law ; and that it was 
 because I claimed so much more than the legislature 
 intended to allow me, that you felt your-clf called 
 upon to resist it. All this too, you know to be utterly 
 unfounded, because the amount of the premium was 
 never a subject of discussion between us; and indeed 
 how could it have been, as you now avow that you 
 could not credit me with one cent under the act. The 
 amount of the premium would have been various, 
 depending on the times, the several loans and ad- 
 vances of current money were made, and they were 
 variously stated and averaged, viz. in the schedule 
 you have published at 20 per cent., in the statement 
 mentioned by Mr. Bacon, at 10 per cent., and in a 
 statement in your handwriting, laid by you before the 
 committee, and now in Mr. Davis's possession, they 
 are averaged at twelve and a half per cent. The 
 committee, and yourself, well knew that the true rate of 
 discount, was a matter of easy and obvious ascertain- 
 
49 
 
 merit, and they meant that I should he credited with 
 what it really was at the several times of my advanr<>9 
 of current monies. If the gross amount which it v. C4 s 
 proper for the legislature of the state to allow, was a 
 fit suhject for the animadversion and revision of their 
 Comptroller, if indeed, we have come to this, that it 
 is your business to judge of their providence or im- 
 providence in all cases, and when expressly required 
 to execute their laws, to yield your oilicial sanction or 
 not, as you may approve or disapprove; why did you 
 not state to me the rate of allowance which you thought 
 ought to be credited, and therefore must have been 
 intended by the committee and the legislature. If 
 then I had been disposed, in order to extricate myself 
 from the difficulties in which I had been so long in- 
 volved, or for any other reason, to waive still more 
 of my equitable, just, and even legal claims, the ac- 
 count might have been settled. But this was a point 
 to which I could never bring you. Then it would 
 have depended on myself whether I would continue 
 to struggle with the embarrassments under which I 
 have so long laboured, or end them by an abandon- 
 ment of a still greater portion of my rights. But you 
 did not choose to put the matter even on that issue ; 
 you took surer ground, you set up a construction of 
 the act which defeated it altogether, and rendered it 
 wholly nugatory, which left nothing for me further to 
 waive, and which rendered the prevention of a final 
 settlement of my accounts a? sure as fate. You ac- 
 knowledge, it is true, that before I left Albany I 
 avowed my belief that the balance in my favour, with 
 the deductions I was disposed to mnke, would not ex- 
 ceed S25.000; ant) you acknowledged to Mr. Betts 
 and myself, at the «ame time, that the rumours cir- 
 
So 
 
 culatcd by the present Attorney General and other*; 
 that I had claimed a larger balance, were wholly 
 unauthorized by you, and without foundation; and 
 yet, no sooner had I turned my back on you, than 
 you published to the world that I claimed upwards 
 of 600,000 dollars under the law! With this last 
 declaration, which I ever made to you, fresh in your 
 recollection, and with a perfect remembrance that 
 you had refused to credit a single dollar under the 
 act, how dare you then, sir, allege that it was on 
 account of the amount I claimed that you took your 
 stand ? and with what face cm you deny that the mat- 
 ters you have published, in regard to that amount, 
 were intended to create causeless alarm amongst the 
 people, to subject them to gross imposition, and me 
 to foul injury, and to subserve other interests than 
 those of the state ? 
 
 On the subject of the construction of the act, I feel 
 i hat it is not necessary for me to add much. I can- 
 not expect to convince you against your will, and the 
 public are, I hope, already satisfied of the futility of 
 the pretences set up by you in thus respect. If the 
 opinion of such men as Harison, Wells, Hoffman, Em- 
 met, Jones, Munro, Ogden, Van Vechten, and Hen- 
 ry, will not, in the estimation of an enlightened com- 
 munity, overbalance your resolution, I should despair 
 of giving satisfaction on that head, it is true, that in 
 a way, peculiar to yourself, you state the very natural 
 fact of the expense incurred in obtaining those opi- 
 nions. But you will not, I trust, venture to assert 
 (whatever you may be willing that others should in- 
 fer) that such men were induced by the small com- 
 pensation they received, to give an opinion contrary 
 to the dictates of their judgments and their con- 
 -ssienccs. 
 
51 
 
 The legislature directed an allowance fti me, of 
 the usual discount on the monies borrowed by me on 
 my personal responsibility; you now say that they did 
 not mean to allow me that discount on those loans that 
 were made by me, and the evidence of which was 
 presented to the commissioners, the joint committee, 
 and to you, and which were the only loans / had Made, be- 
 cause in making some of those loans, I deposited trea- 
 sury notes as collateral security for the performance of 
 my personal engagements. In addition to the opinion 
 which has already been published, I shall content my- 
 self with briefly submitting the following documents 
 and considerations : 
 
 1. The original account of loans, to the amount ot 
 $1,110,000, the identical document that was laid be 
 fore the Committee and yourself, as you acknowledg- 
 ed in the presence of Mr. Betts ; in which it is dis- 
 tinctly stated, that most of those loans were made on 
 special contracts, and on the deposit of treasury note-, 
 as collateral security for the performance of my per- 
 sonal engagements. 
 
 2. The report of Messrs. Colden and Bogardus, in 
 which they expressly state, that the loans referred to 
 were on my personal responsibility, aided by a deposit of 
 collateral security. 
 
 3. The report of the joint committee, in which they 
 refer to the loans mentioned by Colden and Bogardus, as 
 those on which they recommended the discount. 
 
 4. A letter to Mr. Davis, chairman of the joint com- 
 mittee, with his answer (B & C) annexed to this com- 
 munication, in which the whole subject is fully cl 
 fairly stated. I should do injustice to my own feelings, 
 were I to omit here an expression of the high sense 1 
 eutertain, of the liberality and fairness which cha 
 
ractenzed this gentleman's whole conduct on thai 
 occasion, as well as that of the Commissioners, and 
 all the members of the Committee. It evinced the 
 difference between those who have no other object in 
 view, than the discharge of their public duties, and 
 ;hose who are actuated by sinister and designing mo - 
 tives distinct from those duties. Mr. Davis has always 
 been ardently opposed to me in his political feelings, 
 and doubtless, v\as, in addition to his sense of duty, 
 in some degree influenced by those feelings, when he 
 introduced the resolutions of the 1 8th of January last. 
 When, however, all the documents were laid before 
 him and the Committee, when the multiplied and va- 
 rious responsibilities I had undergone, and losses 1 
 had sustained, were satisfactorily proved to them, he 
 and they, with promptitude, unanimity and pleasure, 
 agreed to the report and bill which have been pub- 
 lished and passed ; but under which you refuse to 
 carry to my credit a single cent. 
 
 5. Both the Commissioners and joint Committee, 
 had before them an account of treasury notes that 
 were deposited as collateral security for one of the 
 loans specified in the document first above mentioned, 
 and sold at a loss. 
 
 6. Both had also before them, the form of a con- 
 tract made for one of the loans, which stipulated the 
 deposit of treasury notes as collateral security for the 
 performance of my personal responsibilities. 
 
 7. You stated and admitted that there would be a ba- 
 lance in my favour, and advised me, in consideration 
 of that, to relinquish all my other claims which the 
 Commissioners had allowed, when in fact, no such 
 balance could exist after that relinquishment, with- 
 out embracing the loans for w hich collateral securi- 
 tj was depositee^ 
 
53 
 
 0. The Committee and the Legislature anticipated 
 diere would be such balance, and therefore inserted 
 a clause directing you to pay it. 
 
 9. An attempt was made in each house to strike out 
 that clause, and leave the payment of the balance un- 
 provided for, which was rejected in both houses. 
 
 10. An amendment was proposed by the present 
 Attorney General in the Assembly, to make a dis- 
 tinction in the discount on those loans, where treasury 
 notes were deposited in aid of personal responsibility % 
 and those where no collateral security was given> 
 which amendment was also rejected. 
 
 11. An amendment was offered in the Senate, to fix 
 the amount of discount in the bill, which was also re- 
 jected, because it was alleged, in behalf of the Com- 
 mittee, that 1 had made large relinquishments, in con- 
 sideration of their agreement to allow the same dis- 
 counts, that were made to other citizens at the same 
 periods, which could be readily ascertained by the 
 Comptroller, and was to be obtained by him. 
 
 12. A memorandum of the loans in your own hand- 
 writing, was handed by you to the Committee, and is 
 now in Mr. Davis's possession, in which you include 
 the loans where treasury notes were deposited. 
 
 13. The memorandum of Mr. Bacon, which }'ou 
 have published, also specifies the amount of loans 
 intended by the Committee at g 1,1 10,000, which also 
 includes all those where treasury notes were de- 
 posited. 
 
 / If these facts, documents, and proceedings, do not 
 establish unequivocally the intention of the commis- 
 sioners, the committee, and yourself, and both houses 
 of the Legislature, to include all the loans, and to al - 
 low the same discount thereon which were allowed to 
 
©ther lenders at the same periods, then am I at a loss 
 to know what would prove it. 
 
 In the special contracts for those loans, the phrase- 
 ology differs somewhat, but they are generally of the 
 same import. Those made with the State and Me- 
 chanics' Banks in Albany, so far as they relate to per- 
 sonal responsibility, are as follows: 
 
 " The said Daniel D. Tompkins agrees to deposit 
 the principal sum of $50,000 in treasury 0*tes, ;•<- ft 
 collateral security for the repayment of the said loan, 
 and to be personally responsible, for the repayment thereof, 
 according to the terms of this agreement." 
 
 That made with the Bank of America contains the 
 following article : 
 
 M Fourth — His Excellency agrees to hold himself 
 personally responsible for the fulfilment of this agree- 
 ment." This contract and the 6ale of treasury notes 
 deposited under it were exhibited on all occasions, 
 and you may well remember that to make it more 
 certainly, an individual and personal transaction with 
 me, I was required to subscribe a memorandum at 
 the foot of the agreement, that the proceeds of that 
 loan, should be passed to my private credit in the bank, 
 and not to that of the United States. 
 
 My engagement with the Corporation of the City 
 of New-York, contained a stipulation to deposit trea- 
 sury notes as collateral security. But the govern- 
 ment never performed its engagement with me, to re- 
 mit me the treasury notes for the purpose, and for 
 that reason alone I could not, and did not perform my 
 stipulation. Of course I became immediately liable 
 and personally responsible for the whole $400,000, 
 and continued thus liable and responsible until the 
 year 1816; they having no other security for re-pay- 
 
55 
 
 raent during the whole of that time but that responsi- 
 bility, and a deposit of about 30,000 of unendorsed 
 treasury notes. These details establishing so clearly 
 the Legislative intention in passing the act, render 
 any remarks upon its legal construction superfluous. 
 None, therefore, save a brief commentary on your re- 
 marks and conduct in this particular, will be made. 
 
 You say, that M it is incorrect to look out of the act 
 for reasons to determine its meaning," that " the law 
 must be construed by the terras of it alone." This is 
 in a great degree true, and however seldom it may be 
 that men who have not made the laws their study are 
 apprised of the rule, and make the application, it is 
 nevertheless the language of the law books, and fami- 
 liar to professional men. 
 
 But it is equally true, that in construing an act, you 
 are not confined to its mere letter, that you are to 
 look to the general object of the legislature; and in 
 ascertaining that, to regard the law as it stood before 
 the passage of the act, the evil to be redressed, and 
 the remedy to be provided; and so to construe the 
 act as to remove the difficulty and effect the remedy. 
 What were they here ? I had rendered the state ser 
 vices which they deemed meritorious, and for one of 
 which they were willing to make me compensation : 
 but by the law as it stood, its officers were not autho- 
 rized to allow it. To remedy this defect, a special act 
 is passed; it goes through all the forms required by 
 the constitution; and you, to whom its execution is com- 
 mitted, decide that it does not allow me any thing, 
 thereby leaving the matter precisely as it stood 
 before its passage. Could you for a moment suppose 
 that in so doing, you was complying with the just in- 
 tentions of the legislature ? You cannot pretend it ! 
 
5« 
 
 Had you enquired of those w ho have devoted theif 
 lives to the study of the law ; or if you did, had the\ 
 advised you honestly and fully, they would have told 
 you, that whatever might have been a safe rule if the 
 question had only ^onc to contract the operation of 
 the act, a construction which renders it a nullity, 
 ought never to he adopted, except upon grounds most 
 p dpable and inevitable; and that in this case no such 
 grounds existed. 
 
 They would further have told you, that the cardinal 
 principle in the construction of all legislative act.-. i< 
 to carry into effect the intentions of those who made 
 them; and that therefore when you declare, as you do 
 in your letter, that there was no doubt in your mind 
 and never had been, that the committee intended to 
 allow me % 11 0,000. and "that such yon realty believe teas 
 the understanding and intention of most of those who vo- 
 ted for the law" and in the face of that unequivocal 
 declaration, construe the law so as to allow me nothing 
 — and that when also you publish the letter of Mr. 
 Bacon of the committee, declaringthat it was their in- 
 tention to award me Si 10,000, to justify yourself for 
 refusing to allow me any thing, you involve yourself 
 in those wretched contradictions and absurdities 
 which are the invariable indicia of error, and which 
 so strikingly prove the impracticability of screening 
 from observation and detection, the most ingenious at- 
 tempts to pervert the truth. 
 
 Your effort to obviate the conclusion irresistibly 
 resulting from Mr. Oakley's amendment, is an insult 
 to the understanding of those to whom it is submitted, 
 unworthy of refutation; and I pass over your awk- 
 ward apology for not taking the opinion of the then 
 Attorney General, and your assurance that your con- 
 
5J 
 
 duct has been uninfluenced by others, with this single 
 remark: Had you been called upon to decide upon 
 the construction of this act, without any previous 
 knowledge of its intent and meaning, and your atten- 
 tion had been directed to its supposed defects, and 
 had reasoned as you now do, your conduct might 
 have borne a different aspect. But when it is conce- 
 ded that you were with the committee, and represen- 
 ted the interests of the state in their discussion; that 
 you advised to the allowance of the item I claim ; that 
 you knew that the bill was reported by the committee 
 to provide for it; that you have never doubted that 
 the Legislature intended to allow it, and, unless it was 
 allowed, there was nothing for the law to operate up- 
 on. When all this is conceded, to suppose that you, 
 within a day or two after the passage of the act, with 
 the origin, progress, and design of which you were so 
 well and personally acquainted, should, without ever 
 consulting the law-officer of the government, set up 
 the construction on which you have reposed yourself, 
 uninfluenced by others, and without any other motive 
 than a " fearless and impartial discharge of your 
 duty," is certainly difficult of belief It may be so : 
 but I trust no liberal man will hold me uncharitable 
 for refusing my assent to it. 
 
 You close your letter with an extract from one of 
 mine, addressed to you in 1807, containing the opi- 
 nion that officers and agents, who draw money from 
 the treasury, ought to be held accountable for " its 
 faithful expenditure for authorized public purposes." 
 True, sir; but my complaint is, that you have charged 
 monies drawn by other officers and agents to me, and 
 not to (hem. apd hold me. and not them, accountable for 
 
 8 
 
its faithful expenditure. This, it appears to me, makes 
 an essential difference in the two cases. 
 
 VV ith you I may say, that I have long served the 
 public in various laborious and responsible stations, 
 from the early age of 2(u and that my utmost en- 
 deavours have been exerted to discharge their duties 
 with fidelity and firmness; and in doing this, sir, I 
 have not been deterred by the clamours of defeated 
 factionists. or by the ravings of disappointed cupidity: 
 nor have my exertions, I trust, been wholly unsuccess- 
 ful. I have obtained from the United States, and bor- 
 rowed upon my private responsibility, upwards of two 
 millions of dollars, over and above the appropriations 
 of the Legislature, and have expended and accounted 
 for it in defence of the state, without receiving or sti- 
 pulating for pay, commissions, or any other indemnity : 
 I have procured for it by my exertions alone, and 
 without any aid from its credit or funds, an accession 
 of property, to an amount greater than the whole stun 
 awarded by the act of the Legislature, and have re- 
 linquished equitable and just claims to three times 
 that amount: I have been held accountable to the 
 istate, for most of the officers and agents who have 
 drawn money from the treasury during my adminis- 
 tration: I have consented to sustain in silence, the 
 losses occasioned by your repeated derangement of 
 my papers and vouchers, with your omission to credit 
 me with settled accounts of seven years standing, 
 and have borne without complaint, that you should 
 report me a debtor to the state, for large sums which 
 have been due and paid to me as audited balances : 
 My private concerns and business, for five years, 
 have been partially suspended ; the comforts of my 
 family have been sacrificed: my personal liberty 
 
0L> 
 
 jeoparded by immense engagements and responsibili 
 ties ; my health has been impaired by the incessant 
 labours, anxiety, and losses to which I have been sub- 
 jected in the public service. 
 
 Two tribunals constituted by the state itself for 
 that purpose, have admitted the justice of my claims; 
 and in consequence of large concessions and relin- 
 quishments on my part, a law providing for one of 
 them only was passed, the fulfilment of which, was 
 your bounden official duty. This duty you have not 
 performed. 
 
 And have I not a right to complain of your injus- 
 tice? Was it not enough that I relinquished, at yoin 
 suggestion, just and equitable claims, more than 
 equivalent to those for which the law was intended to 
 provide? That even after the passage of the bill, I 
 consented to reduce the item upon which the premium 
 was allowed, one hundred and eighty thousand dol- 
 lars, and thus, to my own prejudice, confine the ope- 
 ration of the law ? Was it not enough that I consented 
 to abandon aright to commissions, interest and other 
 charges, amounting to four hundred thousand dollars, 
 which had been declared by those tribunals, equita- 
 ble and just? Was it not enough, that to obviate 
 your captious and ill grounded objections to a true 
 construction of the act, that 1 procured the written 
 opinions of some of the first counsellors in the union, 
 and at your urgent solicitation, and contrary to my 
 sense of decorum, consented to ask opinions of judges 
 for your satisfaction ? And were these services per- 
 formed — these labours and privations endured — these 
 rights abandoned — that 1 should finally be deprived of 
 the just indemnity, for which the legislature had pro- 
 vided, by the lawless conduct of a public officer? 
 
By what aci of my lite, either public or private, haw 
 I forfeited the right to the same equity and justice 
 which would be freely dispensed to any other citizen? 
 Of thanks, sir, I have had enough : of the confidence, 
 affection, and support of the people, the army, the 
 navy, and the militia, more than I merited : of factious 
 opposition, calumny, detraction, and abuse, an unex- 
 ampled portion : but of remuneration — indemnity — 
 equity, or justice — nothing. Pardon me, sir, I have 
 indeed obtained one great and lasting indemnity — the 
 consoling approbation of the monitor within my own 
 bosom; an inestimable reward, which man can neither 
 give nor take away. 
 
 DANIEL D. TOMPKINS 
 Caslletoru Statcn Island, 30th October. 181SL 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 SCHEDULE ( A . ) 
 
 We do heieby certify, that at the request oi ins Excellency 
 Daniel D. Tompkins, we have examined the printed report of Ar- 
 chibald M'Intyre, Esq. Comptroller of the State of New-York, 
 made to the legislature, on the 3d April, 1813 ; relative to the 
 expenditures of the said Daniel D. Tompkins, late Governor of the 
 said state, under the " Act for the further defence of the frontiers," 
 passed 12th June, 1812 ; and that in the said report, the ComptroK 
 ler declares, that the expenditures of the said Daniel D. Tompkins, 
 under that act, " according to the vouchers returned and filed in 
 his office," amounted to $155,874 56£. And that we have examined 
 the statements of all the accounts of the said Comptroller, against 
 the late Governor, from the commencement of his administration, 
 until the 27th day of August last, the date of the last account 
 rendered ; and after extracting all the items of credit therefrom, 
 hearing date subsequently to the said 12th June, 1812, and pre- 
 viously to the said 3d of April, 1813, excepting such as have been 
 expended under appropriations, other than those of the said act of 
 
61 
 
 12th June, 1812 ; we find that the same, amount to $99,118 li 
 making a difference between that sum, and the said report, or 
 $56,756 45, by which it appears that vouchers of expenditure to 
 that amount, have never been passed to the credit of the said 
 Daniel D. Tompkins. And we do further certify, that we have ex- 
 amined a list of vouchers, purporting to have been returned to the 
 said Daniel D. Tompkins, by the said Comptroller, on the 4th No- 
 vember, 1818 ; and find therein various items, not noticed in the 
 final account audited by the Comptroller, as existing charges in the 
 same, but which are held by the said Daniel D. Tompkins, as claims 
 against the state ; and that the same amount to $71,972 51. 
 
 And further, that from the accounts of the said Comptroller, 
 there yet remain suspended for his final decision, vouchers rendered 
 by the said Daniel D. Tompkins, (independent of the above sums,) 
 amounting to $14,207 79. 
 
 From the toregoing statement it will appear, that if on the final 
 settlement of the said Daniel D. Tompkins's accounts, he shall be 
 credited with the amount claimed by him, and for which vouchers 
 have been rendered to the Comptroller, that his account with the 
 state will stand thus : 
 
 Z)aniel D. Tompkins, in account with the State of New-York.. 
 
 DR. 
 
 For amount of all the sums drawn by him from the 
 Treasury, from 1807 to the 22d February, 1817, 
 inclusive, as appears by the printed report of the 
 Comptroller, 17th February, 1819, - - $1075,021 72 
 
 Balance due Daniel D. Tompkins, from the State 
 Qf New-York, 23,307 25 
 
 $1,098,328 97 
 
 CR. 
 
 By amount disbursed by him in the public service, 
 and allowed by the Comptroller, from 1807, to the 
 .22d February 1817, inclusive, - - - $955,392 22 
 
 By amount of voucheis of expenditures, under 
 Act of 12th June, 1812, rendered in 1813, and not 
 *hen credited, and which appear not to have been re- 
 turned, 56,756 U 
 
 By amount of vouchers suspended or disallowed 
 by the ?aid Comptroller, which are held by the said 
 
02 
 
 D. D. Tompkins, as charges against the state, in- 
 eluded in the said list of vouchers, returned 4th No- 
 
 vemher, 1818, 71,972 51 
 
 By amount ol charges suspended by thr Comptrol- 
 ler, which yet remain subject to his decision, ex- 
 tracted from accounts last rendered by him, 27th 
 August.. 1819, 1 4,207 79 
 
 $1,098,328 97 
 
 Exhibiting a balance as above stated, of twenty three thousand 
 three hundred and seven dollars twenty-live cents,* due from the 
 State cf New-York, to the said Daniel D. Tompkins. 
 
 JONATHAN THOMPSON 
 THOMAS MORRIS. 
 JAS. B. MURRAY. 
 ISAAC Q. LEAKE. 
 New-York, 29th October, 1819. 
 
 (B) 
 
 Copy of a Letter to G. R. DAVIS, Esq. Chairman of the Joint 
 Committee, ^-r. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 As the friend of the Vice-President, I take the liberty of 
 tailing on you as chairman of the joint committee who reported, at 
 'he last session of the Legislature, the bill for the final settlement 
 of his accounts, for answer to the following questions, viz. 
 
 First — Was not a statement of the monies raised by the Yico 
 President for the United States, and for the re-payment of which 
 lie had made himself responsible, laid before that committee by him? 
 
 Secondly — Did it not appear from that statement that the monies 
 had been raised wholly, or partly on the deposit of treasury notes, 
 in addition to the personal responsibility of the Vice-President ? 
 
 Thirdly — Was not the Comptroller present at the deliberations 
 and discussions of the committee, and was not the statement above 
 alluded to submitted to him; and were not the committee and Comp- 
 troller well apprised that the monies had been obtained in the man- 
 ner stated in that paper ? 
 
 Fourthly — Was it not understood in the committee, and in the 
 House of Assembly, that the monies loaned and upon which the pre- 
 
 * The balance here stated, is greater than the amount specified to be doe in pages. 
 14 & 28 ; it arises in consequence of some items having been considered as expen- 
 ditures under the act of I2tli June, 1812 ; but which upon investigation, proved to 
 have been under previous appropriations. 
 
63 
 
 mi um or allowance was claimed, had been obtained on the security 
 of treasury notes, in addition to the personal responsibility of the 
 Vice-President ? 
 
 Your answer to the foregoing questions will much oblige, 
 
 Yours, &c. 
 
 W. L. MARCY. , 
 George R. Davis, Esqr. Troy, lOihSept. 1819- 
 
 Copy of the reply of Geo. R. Davis, Chairman, fyc. 
 YVm. L. Makcy, Esq. 
 
 I received your letter of date the 10th inst., requesting my an-., 
 swer to certain questions therein submitted. Not feeling disposed 
 to become a party, or to enter into the controversy now carried on 
 between the Vice President and the Comptroller, in relation to the 
 act of the last legislature, for the final settlement of the accounts 
 of the late Governor; yet any information of which I may have 
 been possessed, as a member of the committee who reported that 
 bill, I consider the property of either of the said parties ; and shall 
 not consider myself justifiable in withholding any distinct facts, 
 from the friends of either of the said parties, who may desire them 
 from me. 
 
 The Vice President, at the request of the committee, furnished 
 them (among other documents) with a statement of the various loans 
 made by him for public purposes, and for which he claimed a pre- 
 mium, of which the following is a copy, to wit ; 
 
 Dates of loans. 
 
 
 1814, Dec. 3, 
 
 $ 100,000 
 
 35 
 
 100,000 
 
 24, - r 
 
 55,000 
 
 25, - - 
 
 165,000 
 
 26, 
 
 150,000 
 
 1815, Jan. 17, 
 
 100,000 
 
 1814, Dec. 24, 
 
 410,000 
 
 
 30,000 
 
 
 §1,110,000 
 
 These loans, it was stated by the Vice President, were made by 
 him on pledges of Treasury notes, in addition to his personal res- 
 possibility ; aided in some instances by his personn* friettfhs, ex^r** 
 
the sum of ^410,000 loaned by Inm of the Corporation of the City ot 
 New-York, and which lo in WHS contracted by him on the likesecu- 
 uties ai the other loans ; but the engagement with ihe corporation 
 he was not able to mc t in Treasury notes at the time limited in the 
 contract, owing to the failure on the part of the general govern- 
 ment, to furnish him with those notes in pursuance of an assurance 
 previously given by the then Secretary of the Treasury ; at.d upon 
 the strength of which at arance, the said loan and engagement 
 was made in his part : and v, hethcr this loan was afterward*, from 
 the statement of the Vice President, redeemed by him in Treasury 
 notes, subsequently furnished by the general government, I am 
 not able, from recollection, now to state ; although it is my irnpre* 
 moii that he did so state. 
 
 You ask me whether "the Comptroller was not present at the de- 
 liberations and discussions of the committee, and the statement 
 above aJluded to submitted to him," kc. 
 
 The Comptroller was present, by the request of the committee, 
 at most, if not all of the interviews of the Vice President with the 
 committee, and I presume saw the said statement, and understood 
 with the committee the manner in which it was stated those loans 
 had been obtained ; but he was not present at any of the private 
 discussions and deliberations of the committee to my recollection. 
 
 A^ain. you ask me, whether " It was not understood in the com- 
 mittee and in the house, that the monies loaned, and upon which 
 the premium or allowance was churned, was obtained on the secu- 
 rity of Treasury notes, in addition to the personal rcsponsbility of 
 ,the Vice President." 
 
 It appeared by the statement above alluded to, and was under- 
 stood by the joint committee, and so stated in the House of As- 
 sembly, when the bill was under discussion, that the loans were ob- 
 tained by the aid of treasury notes, deposited as a collateral secu- 
 rity; and I never understood it to be the intention of the friends of 
 the bill in the committee, or in the house, to confine the premium 
 to monies loaned by the Vice President on his personal responsi- 
 bility alone, unaided by the security of treasury notes. 
 
 Yours most respectfully, 
 
 GEO. R. DAVIS. 
 
 ERRATUM. Page 12, 10th line, instead of " These state- 
 ments and documents," read, These statements and certain docu- 
 ments.