no money from the government or any of its officers for tobacco or other produce, since the year '91. But I have incontrovertibly shown, that the sum of 6000 dollars by Owens, of 6333 by Collins, and of 9640 by Powers, were all received from the government or its officers long after the year 1791. They were then by his own confession, not received for tobacco. On what account then were they paid? It does not appear from whom the sum of 6590 dollars, mentioned in the letter to Adair, was received; whether from his agent Nolan, or from the officers of government. I do not therefore include it in the above calculation, but added to those three sums, they form a total of 28,563 dollars, which were all received after '91. Now admitting them to be the produce of the damaged tobacco, and that this damaged tobacco had sold as well as that which was merchantable, there must have been at least 570 hogsheads, an extraordinary quantity to have laid forgotten for so many years. But I do not rely,` though I safely might, on the evident absurdity of this poor excuse. I have promised to leave no doubt on this point, and I hasten to fulfil my engage

ment.

We have seen that the general came down with a small cargo in 1787, and that in August 1788, he entered into partnership with my kinsman Daniel Clark, who had been his agent for the disposal of all the property he sent down previous to the partnership. The day after that connection was formed, the previous accounts were made out, settled and signed by both parties. (See No. 27.) This settle

ment presents a payment of 335 dollars to major Dunn for balance, and shows that 3000 dollars out

of 10,000, the whole amount of the sales, had been advanced to Wilkinson a year before the produce came down, and that the produce was drawn for, in favour of different persons to whom he owed money. It also appears by this settlement, that Mr. Clark acknowledged to have on hand a quantity of tobacco in bulk, weight unknown, and also other parcels amounting to eight hogsheads, for which he made himself accountable when sold. None of the monies therefore which I have shown to have been paid to general Wilkinson, arose out of any commercial transaction prior to the 8th of August 1788. On that day the partnership with Daniel Clark, senior, commenced. The accounts of that partnership from its date to the 1st May, 1789, were settled on that day, and a balance of 2681 dollars then paid to capt. Abner M. Dunn, the brother of one of the partners. The gross amount of sales by this account, appears to be 16,441 dollars. At the foot of it is added the receipt of Mr. Dunn, for the balance. (See No. 28.)

By this account the balance appears to have been paid to capt. A. B. Dunn, and was by him taken round by sea to his brother, the partner of Wilkinson, in Kentucky.

On the 5th of September in the same year, general Wilkinson was at New-Orleans, and there made another settlement, by which it appears that there was a balance only of 401 dollars in his favour, which was paid to Nolan, his agent, by his order, (See No. 29,) and of course, that the sum of 6000 dollars, sta

ted by Ballinger and Mr. Jones to have been taken up in this year could not have proceeded from any of his commercial operations. An inspection of the account will show that the large payments were always made either in advance to Wilkinson himself, or to his order in favour of different persons to whom he was indebted. This account is signed by Wilkinson himself, and closes the accounts of the partnership, which, as we have stated, was dissolved on the 18th of the same month. (See No. 5.) In this settlement the tobacco which is mentioned as loose, and weight unknown in the first account settled by major Dunn, is accounted for, and appears to have amounted only to 974 dollars.

Thus all the tobacco transactions up to the 18th September, 1789, are distinctly placed before the public-they must of necessity have entered into the partnership accounts, and those accounts are annexed; and let it be remembered that it is to this year, 1789, that the general and the court of inquiry refer for the shipments which are to account for the enormous sums which he has been proved to have received. It should also be remarked that the periodical rise of the water taking place from February to June, after that period, except on extraordinary occasions, the accounts of the year close in the commerce between the Ohio and New-Orleans, and therefore not much more can be expected from the accounts of this year; but there is still a portion of the time and a remnant of the transaction to be elucidated, and I will not leave a day or cent unaccounted for.

Prior to the dissolution of the partnership, Mr. Clark had sent up the river on the joint account, a boat called the Speedwell, with a cargo amounting to about 8000 dollars. This not being included in the settlement, Wilkinson, as appears by the document before referred to, (No. 4,) agrees that he will invest the proceeds in good tobacco, and ship it to New-Orleans on their joint account in the month of December next; and that when he has fulfilled this and another undertaking of the same nature, with respect to a debt he was authorised to collect, then the partnership should cease:

It appears by a letter from Wilkinson to Mr. Clark, dated 20th May, 1790, (No. 30,) that the shipment which was by the general's engagement to have been made in December, 1789, could not take place until the spring of the following year.

And here, if our sole purpose was to refute the half-uttered, hesitating excuse that has been offered, here we might stop, for confused as the defence is, thus much at least has been distinctly stated, that the sums received after the year 1791, were all for tobacco shipped in '89; but the accounts to May 1790, are clo sed, irrevocably closed. The general's signature to the account, attests every thing to the month of September. His letter shows that nothing was sent down between that time and May. With this re. futation of his only defence, I might stop; but I will anticipate the answer to any amendment he might make by pretending the mistake of a year, and after showing that the sums he received did not proceed from his commercial operations in the year '89, I

E

will show as clearly that they were not produced by those of 1790, which by his own confession was the last of his commercial existence.

By the agreement for dissolving the partnership, as we have seen, it appears that the Speedwell's car. go was to have been invested in tobacco, on the account of the partnership. By the letters No. 29 and 30, it appears that the proceeds were so invested; that purchases of tobacco to a large amount were also made on the general's own account-but that to equalise the risk, the whole was thrown into a common account, the proceeds to be divided in proportion to the respective interests. This is explicitly stated in both letters-and in consequence of it, we are furnished with proof which we otherwise should not have had, if the Speedwell's cargo had been separately invested. As this business was nominally transacted by Nolan, his account of that investment would have given us only partial information, and it might be said that the monies we have proved to have been received were the proceeds of the residue of the shipment; but the whole being carried to one general account, Mr. Clark was entitled to an account sales of all the adventure, and he was liable for his proportion of any loss that might have happened by the damage done to any part. We accordingly find that the general in his letter is minute as to that loss, and states in the first letter that a flat with 40 hhds. had been sunk, which by the second appears to have been recovered with a loss of about 12 or 15 hhds. In the second letter, June 20, 1790, (No. 31,) the general expresses his mortification that the tobacco