Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

To assess the Same, and for which my bond was given to the StateThe Debt due from the Proprietors to the State was partly paid by Some of them-and what was due was wholly Secured to the State, by the individual Bonds of each Proprietor for his part, due to the State agreable to his assessment;-The memorial was formed for a design or view but to request the general Court to take from me one Proprietor, State Notes to discharge the debts due, of a Balance in State Notes, of other Proprietors, the Memorialists-wh sum to be taken from me more than my proportion of ye Ballance being about £200. State notes for which there is not the least Obligation to the State or otherwise that I should pay it, Notwithstanding it passed the house very Soon; and nots I offered to pay my just debt till I did pay more than I owed; the Memorial was dated ye 12th day of December and the prayer thereof granted by the House, on Saturday ye 15th day of that month, without notifying me either of the memorial being preferred, or a day given me to be heard upon it, to shew Cause why the Prayer should not be granted-upon notification of a memorial presented and an Opportunity of being heard upon it, being the practice of the general Court, when a petition is preferred to them by one party against another-but in my Case, that practice was laid aside; a resolve passed without allowing my being heard; & ex parte, to take from me about £200. State notes, to pay the Debts of others the memorialists-by which proceedure of the House, I was denied the privilidge of a Citizen of the State, and my property taken from me, for the benefit of private persons, and eventually deprived me for a time of my paying a debt to the State, when I would have paid it, & which was upon Interest, which Proceeding by the house, in a case of private Right and Property, where the State is no way interested, but only private persons, is a proceeding very abitrary, as it was unjust especialy when other Courts are provided in the State to determine Such private matters, when disputed; & no Precedent can be found in this State, if in any other in the Union, where private Property has been so treated as mine in this Case; and if this Proceeding should be made a precedent I think the Property of the Citizens of this State has but little Security, and held very precariously, if to be taken from the owner for ye benefit of others by their memorial only desiring it, and that without an opp of being heard upon the case-but so it was determined, upon a Memorial only on which Memorial I would make Some observationsThe first Paragraph of the memorial is-"The general Court passed "a Resolve in their Session in December 1791 allowing Said Propri"etors who owed State Notes on their Several bonds to the State, "to pay the Same in Specie at Seven shillings in the pound, after

66

"paying a Specifyed Sum in said Notes, was made up of the Several "Sums, which Several Propritors had on hand which they gave ac"count of, and were ready to pay " The Application of the Proprietors to the general Court to Reduce their Debt to the State in State Notes was reffered to a Committee, what their Report was I never knew, but presume the Resolve was founded upon it-And upon what principle, the Specifyed Sum, or balance to be paid by those Proprietors, Who had not paid State Notes, should be made up of the Several Sums, four of the Proprietors had on hand, and rendered an Account of; I am at loss--I can Scarcely conceive the general Court, would arbitrarily, determine, because those Proprietors, accidentally had those State Notes on hand, they Should be Applyed to the payment of the debts of the other Proprietors-And that they were all ready to pay those State Notes they had on hand is an allegation not true in respect to me-what was the Inducement of m Penhallow, peremptorily to give the Sum of £110-5-8 in Notes toward the ballance due from the Proprietors who had not paid State Notes, I know not-as to m' Jo. Peirce paying the £5- he had on hand, and m' Humphries, for m' G. Sparhawk, £26-5-10 he had on hand, they being ready to pay those Sums for their respective parts of the Balance due from the Proprietors Who had not paid notes, is easily accounted for, as it is but a Small part, of Peirce's proportion of his part of the ballance, and I beleive not half of m Sparhawk's part of that balance in notes-and as to ye Sum of £279-2-in State Notes I rendered an Account I had on hand, I never was ready to pay any more of that Sum than my proportion of the balance due to the State, in State Notes agreable to the Resolve of the general Court pass'd at their Session in December 1791-in which it is neither expressed or implyed that I should pay that Sum in Notes-what had been paid in State notes by Some of the Proprietors, was their individual Debts in whole or in part, & had no relation or connection with ye other Proprietors debts

The next paragraph "That George Jaffrey Esqu' then gave in "what he had on hand the Sum of £279-2-0 in Said Notes, but hath ever Since refused to pay the same; that of the others, those "possessed of the remaining State notes, have always been ready "and desirous to pay them, and are now ready to do it; and all have "wished, as far as was in their Power, to pay off or lessen their Several debts, by making payments of the Specie part, But the "Treasurer hath not conceived himself at liberty to receive partial "payments nor indeed any payments at all in Specie, untill the pay"ment in Said notes were completed" I did give an Account of having £279.2. State notes I had on hand in December 1791. at the

66

request of m Humphries, for no other purpose but removing an Objection, disadvantageous to the obtaining of the general Court, ye liberty of discharging the Proprietors debts to the State, to be paid in Specie instead of State Notes; but with no design of making any payment of them on my own Account or of any others-at the time I told him I had that sum in State notes on hand and that those others who posessed State notes, there is no doubt, but the Treasurer would have received them, Since the resolve of the general Court at their Session in December 1791. to the passing of the Resolve in December 1792. and also payments in Specie, in whole or in part of the Memorialists, for their Respective debts, by their bonds to the State-which they Say in their memorial they were wishing and desirous of paying and ready to do as far as was in their power to lesson their debts-to which payments I conceive there was no hindrance by the Treasurer not receiving ye whole or part of their respective debts in State notes or in specie from Jan 3a 1792 to December 21st 1792 which conception or assurance I ground upon the Experience of payment I had made in part of my Debt at the Treasury, Since my disapointment of receiving £800. in State notes in 1790, and ever Since, have been anxious about discharging my bond to the State, and Since the Resolve of the general Court of paying Specie instead of State notes, except my part of ballance in State notes I "wished and was desirous of paying my Debt to the State, and lessening it when in my power"-I was at Exeter the latter of September 1793. and fearing my bond would be put in Suit. I waited upon the Treasurer, to know if it was Soon intended; or if he would receive part of ye Debt without the whole; he readily told me he would; in the beginning of October I sent him £159: 14.8 in Specie which he received and advised me he had endorsed it on my bond-by which Instance, the Treasurer then conceived himself at liberty to receive partial payments before ye payment in State Notes were completed-wherefore the alegation in the memorial was not true, but a false Isinuation of a dificulty of their discharging their Debts, in whole or in part, to the State between Jan 3a 1792. & Dec' 21st 1792. which false Insinuation made to obtain the grant of their petition to take from me in State Notes about £200-more than my proportion of debt to discharge their respective debts in said Notes; & which in fact appear's to be an assertion of falsehood though proved Successfull to their purpose-I continued my Intention of discharging my bond to ye State; by collecting money for that purpose; in the Month of May 1793. I received the principal part of the Sum I recovered of Rand, with which and other money I procured, I had it in my Power to discharge my bond to the State, and mentioned my Intention to the Treasurer, he said that he could not receive it, being

restrained by the Resolve of the general Court in December 1792, unless I paid £279-2-0 in State notes-from that time to my Tender made to the Treasurer in February last, I had the full Sum of my Debt in hand, to discharge my Debt to the State-but it could not be received by the Treasurer

The Prayer in the memorial is Similar to the memorial, at any rate to wrest from me a Sum in state notes, to pay the debts of the memorialists in those notes, and to prevent me from discharging my bond to the State which is as malicious as injurious; but how the matter passed in the house, in every Respect, I am to conjecture, and that any men however esteem'd for their Importance and Influence, Should obtain Such a Resolve in the way and manner it was effected, without my having an oppo of being heard especialy upon So Slender a pretence as my Saying I would pay my State Notes in hand to discharge my own Debt to the state, and perverting that equivocal expression to a purpose, there was not any ground, in reason, Circumstance, or common Sense to Support-but if that expression was obtained, with the insiduous design, to be improved to the purpose it is used, deserve's epithets, I will not mention, and what I had not the least Suspicion of, upon many accounts, from those who authorize Such a Design of taking my property from me in that manner-As you intend to be at Amherst next week-I think it probable the affair of my tender to the Treasurer may be Considered by the general Court this Session, I desire you will appear for me as the matter will be only in Respect to the state and my Self; as I had not the oppertunity of being heard upon the memorial I hope I may at this Session upon the Tender-I now Send you a true State of the facts before the last memorial and the resolve thereon pass'd the general Court, and Some Sentiments respecting the affair as they occur to me; but depend upon your Judgement on the Validity and propriety of the whole Process-and hope you will have Oppertunity to be heard in my behalf-I am not able to attend the general Court in person, or I would take the Oppertunity of the pleasure of waiting upon them-As the Affair has been vexatious to me-I wish it may be now determined at this Session, and wish it may be bro't to a final issue; tho' the present Case is mine a precedent may be made of it, where every citizen in Respect to Right & privelege may be affected by ye Determination of it-I hope you will be able to read what I have wrote, and when you made use of it for your own perusal; pray return it to me, being a rough draft

I am with Respect-
Your most Obedt Serv

Portsmouth June 5th 1794
William Plummer Esqu'

Geo: Jaffrey

Sir/

[Oliver Peabody to George Jaffrey, July 12, 1794.]

[Masonian Papers, Vol. 2, p. 62.]

Exeter July 12th 1794.

I send you enclosed a Copy of a Vote passed at the Session of ye General Court in June last-you will see by that, that your Bond is to be sued unless you pay agreable to the resolve you once shewed to me-If you are disposed to settle it may now be done, if not, I must as a public Officer cause a suit to be commenced by the 24th day of the present Month I am Sir with respect with very

h'ble Serv

Oliver Peabody

P. S. I expect to be from Home from this day, to the 20th of ye Month, & if you, should conclude to settle, I wish you would not call on me before the 21st

[Deed, Woodbury Langdon to Proprietors, Aug. 15, 1795.]

[Masonian Papers, Vol. 2, p. 64.]

Know all Men by these Presents that I Woodbury Langdon of Portsmouth in the County of Rockingham & State of New Hampshire Esquire for and in consideration of Twenty Cents & Compensation made me by the Proprietors of the Lands purchased of John Tufton Mason Esq otherwise called the Masonian Proprietors lying within the State aforesaid Commonly called Masons Patent Have remised, released & forever Quit claimed & by these presents do remise release & forever Quit claim unto George Jaffrey Esquire of Portsmouth aforesaid Clerk of said Proprietors and to each and every other of the said Proprietors myself only excepted to be held by them in the same manner as they now hold Common Lands in said Patent and according to their several & Respective shares and Interest therein and to his & their heirs & Assigns forever in the manner & proportions aforesaid all my Right, Title, property claim. & Demand of in & to all the Lands now held in common & Undivided among said Proprietors within said Patent which I hold by purchase from Michael Wentworth Esq. in the Right of John Wentworth Deceased be the same more or Less

To have and to hold the said granted Premises with the priviled

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »