Alien act; and Mr. Hartley, who was then absent, voted for the Sedition act. Mr. Bayard, from Delaware, is an avowed aristocrat, an unblushing advocate for political corruption, and a man whose life has been dedicated to the most unworthy pursuits. unto your orators, the most gracious writ of the people, of injunc、 tion to the said Thomas Marston, his attornies, counsellors, solicitors and agents, and every of them, to be directed, thereby commanding them, under a certain pain, therein to be expressed, absolutely to desist from further prosecuting the said suit at law against your orators, until the said defendants shall have fully answered this bill, and your honor shall make other order herein to the contrary. And may it also please your honor, to grant unto your orators, the most gracious writ of the people, of injunction to the said Thomas Marston, Francis Childs, and William Denning, junior, and their confederates, when discovered, commanding them and every of them, at a certain day and under a certain pain, therein to be expressed, to be and appear before your honor, in this honorable court, to answer all and singular, and to stand to perform and abide such order and decree therein, as may be agreeable to equity and good conscience; and your orators will ever pray. J. H. LAWRENCE. Sworn this second day of June, 1800, before me, JAMES M. HUGHES, Master in Chancery. I certify that I have perused the within bill, and in my opinon a writ of injunction ought to iffue, agreeably to the prayer thereof, the suit at law not being at issue. JAMES M. HUGHES, Master in Chancery. Dated 2d June, 1800. I certify the preceding to be a true copy of a bill filed in my office, July 5, 1800. ISAAC L. KIP, Clerk of Chancery. William Craik, of Maryland, was originally a man of some moderation, and possessed of a considerable share of political knowledge. By both parties he was heard with deference and respect; Answer of T. Marston to the above Complaint. State of New-York, 1 The several answers of Thomas Marston, defendant, who is impleaded with Francis Childs and William Denning, junior, to the bill of complaint of Jonathan H. Lawrence, and Jonathan Dayton, complainants. IN CHANCERY. This defendant, now, and at all times hereafter, saving and reserving to himself all, and all manner of benefit, and advantage of exception, that may be had or taken, to the many errors, uncertainties, and manifest insufficiencies, in the complainants' said bill of complaint, contained for answer thereto, or unto so much thereof as this defendant is advised is material or necessary to make answer unto, he answereth and saith, that some time in the month of April, or the beginning of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, this defendant holding certain land-office warrants, he was applied to by Francis Childs, named in the said bill of complaint, through his agent, George Knox, to sell the same warrants to him; that this defendant agreed with the said agent to sell the said warrants at and after the rate of fifty-five dollars for each hundred acres; that the number of warrants amounted, as near as this defendant can recollect, to four hundred and sixty-two, covering in the whole forty-six thousand two hundred acres of land. And this defendant further saith, that the amount of the consideration to be given for the said warrants, was twenty-five thousand four hundred and ten dollars; and that the same this defendant agreed to accept in notes, payable within eighteen months, with lawful interest; and this defendant further answering, saith, that on the thirteenth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and but this did not please Mr. Adams, and a friendly hint was given to him by Secretary Pickering that neither praise nor profit could be got by such conduct, ninety-six, the agreement for the sale of the said land-office warrants was completed, and, as near as he can recollect, he delivered the said warrants to the said agents, or a clerk of the said Francis Childs, and at the same time, this defendant received a promissory note, dated the said thirteenth day of May, in the said year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, made by the said Francis Childs, in favor of Lawrence, Dayton and Co. for the sum of eighteen thousand eight hundred and ten dollars, payable in eighteen months, with interest, which note was endorsed by said Lawrence, Dayton and Co. to William Denning, junior, and by the said William Denning, junior, endorsed to this defendant. And this defendant further saith, that for the residue of the said consideration for the said warrants, he received one other promissory note, bearing date the said thirteenth day of May, in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, made by the said William Denning, junior, in favor of Lawrence, Dayton, and Co. for the sum of six thousand, six hundred dollars, payable in eighteen months, with interest, which note was endorsed by the said Lawrence, Dayton and Co. to this defendant. And this defendant further saith, that the said agreement for the purchase of the said land-office warrants, as aforesaid, was an honest and bona fide transaction, and not a corrupt or usurious agreement; neither are the considerations expressed in the said promissory notes, usurious or illegal; neither were the said notes given for the loan of money, at an interest exceeding the interest of seven per cent. per annum; but the same were given to secure to this defendant the payment of the amount of the consideration money, agreed to be given to this defendant, for the said landoffice warrants, and for no other purpose. And this defendant further answering, saith, that some time after the said notes became due, he caused a suit to be instituted in the Supreme Court For the speculations of General Morgan, of Virginia, I must refer the reader to Captain Stephenson's printed letters. Morgan held an office in the Pittsburgh expedition, and shared very deep of Judicature of this State against the complainants upon the said note; that as this defendant hath been informed by his attorney, and which information he believes to be true, in such suit it was plead in abatement of the same, that the said Francis Childs was their partner; and thereupon the said suit was discontinued and the suit alluded to in the complainants' bill of complaint, instituted, and is now depending. And this defendant further saith, that he has not received at any time, either from the complainants, the said Francis Childs, or the said William Denning, junior, any payment whatever, on account of the said notes, or either of them; but that the sum of twenty-five thousand four hundred and ten dollars, the amount of the said notes, with the lawful interest thereon, from the said thirteenth day of May, in the year one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, is now justly due this defendant. And this defendant humbly insists, that the allegations of the said complainants, in their said bill of complaint, are mere pretexts, to avoid paying a just debt. And this defendant further saith, that as the agreement for the sale and delivery of the said land-office warrants, was a verbal one, from the length of time elapsed, since the making of it, he cannot from his recollection, set forth any further or more relating thereto, than what he hath already done, in this his answer. And this defendant further saith, that he denies all, and all manner of unlawful combination and confederacy, wherewith he is charged, without that there is any other matter, cause or thing,in the complainants' said bill of complaint contained, material or effectual in the law, for this defendant to make answer unto, and not herein and hereby well and sufficiently answered, avoided, traversed, or denied, is true, to the knowledge and belief of this defendant, all which matters and things this defendant is ready and willing to aver, maintain, and prove, as this honorable court shall direct; and humbly . pre ly in the profits of that job. Want of health vented his attendance when the Alien and Sedition bills passed, or he would, without any hesitation, have voted for the royal pair. prays to be hence dismissed, with his reasonable costs and charges in the law, in this behalf, most wrongfully sustained. THOMAS MARSTON. Sworn the 1st of July, 1800, before THOMAS COOPER, Master in Chancery. Answer of Francis Childs, &c. State of New-York. The several answers of Francis Childs, defendant, who is impleaded with Thomas Marston and William Denning, junior, to the bill of complaint of Jonathan H. Lawrence and Jonathan Dayton, complainants. This defendant, saving to himself, now, and at all times hereafter, all, and all manner of benefit, and advantage of exception, that may be had or taken, to the many untruths, errors, uncertainties, and manifest insufficiencies, in the complainants' said bill of complaint, contained for answer thereunto, or unto so much thereof as this defendant is advised is material or necessary for this defendant to make answer unto, he answereth and saith, that some time previous to the thirteenth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-six, this defendant and the complainants, Jonathan H. Lawrence and Jonathan, Dayton became partners in trade, under the firm and style of Lawrence Dayton, and Co. That the said Jonathan Dayton was then Speaker of the House of Representatives in Congress, and resided, at that time, in the city of Philadelphia; and from his situation in public life, well knowing the advan tages which would result from speculating in land-office warrants, projected a speculation, and wrote to this defendant, in the city of New-York, to purchase a quantity of paper of that descrip Cc |