THE court having met, the judge advocate produced his excellency the commander in chief's order, dated May 29, 1779; which being read, is as follows:

Brigadiers general Smallwood, Knox, Woodford and Irvine, colonels Wood, Harrison, Hall, Gunby, Moylan and Butler; lieutenant colonels Popkins, Simms and Harmar, members.

Before the court was sworn, major general Arnold peremptorily objected to brigadier general Irvine, colonel Butler and lieutenant colonel Harmar, which objection was allowed by the court The president and members then adjourned the court until to-morrow ten o'clock.

DECEMBER 23, 1779.

The court met at Morristown, in the state of New-Jersey, composed of the following officers

MEMBERS.

• Brigadiers general
• MAXWELL,
• KNOX,
• GIST;

Colonels

• DAYTON,
• BRADLEY,
• CORTLANDT,
• HALL,
• SHERBURNE,
• JACKSON,
• SPENCER,
• GUNBY;

Lt. col. comm.

• WEISENFELDT.
• JOHN LAURANCE, JUDGE ADVOCATE.

The judge advocate produced his excellency the commander in chief's orders respecting the court: which being read, are as follows

AFTER ORDERS.

THE general court martial, whereof major general Howe is president, to sit to-morrow morning ten o'clock, at Norris's tavern. Colonel Jackson is appointed a member, vice colonel Hazen; and lieutenant colonel commandant Weisenfeldts, vice colonel Humpton, on command.

The president, members and judge advocate being sworn, agreeable to the rules and articles of war, the judge advocate produced the proceedings of the council of the state of Pennsylvania, relative to major general Arnold, dated February 3, 1779, and a resolution of the honorable the congress, dated April 3, 1779; which being read, are as follow:

Major general Arnold requested that the proceedings of the council of the state of Pennsylvania, dated January 18 and 21, 1779, and his excellency president Reed's letter to the honorable the congress, dated January 25, 1779, might be produced. The judge advocate, at the desire of the court, pro­duced them; which being read, are as follow:

[Page 8] After these papers were read, the judge advocate exhibited as charges against major general Arnold, the first, second, third, and fifth articles contained in the proceedings of the council of the state of Penn­sylvania, to which the general pleaded NOT GUILTY.

In support of the first charge, the judge advocate produced a protection given by major general Ar­nold, to captain Robert Shewell, jun. and others, for the schooner Charming Nancy, dated, camp, Valley Forge, June 4, 1778, which being read, is as follows:

Major general Arnold admitted that he gave the protection while in the camp of his excellency gene­ral Washington at Valley Forge, without the knowledge of the authority of the state of Pennsylvania, or the commander in chief, though then present.

To prove the character and residence of the persons to whom the protection was given, the judge advocate produced Timothy Matlock, esq who, on his affirmation, says,

Q. Do you know the character of the person to whom general Arnold gave the permission?

A. Generally, I do.

Q. What was his character at the time?

A. Captain Robert Shewell, junior, was, at the time of that pass being given, generally reputed not to be well affected to the united states of America, as I understand. Captain Robert Shewell, junior, informed me, that he was ordered to leave general Washington's camp, in consequence of the charac­ter that had been given of him; and upon his appearing on parade afterwards, he was ordered to leave general Washington's camp on pain of imprisonment.

Q. Did captain Robert Shewell, junior, reside in Philadeiphia at that time?

A. He informed me he did voluntarily reside there at the time.

Q. court. Do you know whether general Arnold knew captain Robert Shewell, junior's, general cha­racter at the time he gave the permission?

A. I do not.

Q. court. Do you know whether general Arnold knew of captain Shewell's being ordered to leave the camp of general Washington, previous to his having given him the permit?

A. I had no opportunity of being acquainted with the circumstances of the case.

Q. Do you know the persons who were concerned in the vessel with captain Shewell at that time?

A. It was supposed mr. Shirtliff was concerned, and several others, whose characters I know nothing of and cannot give; and it was supposed that general Arnold was concerned in the vessel or cargo.

Q. Do you know mr. Shirtliff's character?

A. So little as not to be able to give his character generally.

General Arnold's question. What conversation introduced captain Shewell's mentioning to you, his being ordered from the camp of general Washington? and did he tell you the reason of it?

A. I believe the conversation took its rise from mr. Shewell's mentioning to me, that he was likely to be treated ill, upon a charge of his having ill treated mr. Paul Fooks at the coffee house in Philadelphia, while the enemy had possession of the city. The reason he assigned to me, for his being ordered to leave general Washington's camp, was, he supposed he had been represented to general Washington as being untriendly to America.

[Page 9] General Arnold's question. Have you understood, that upon several alarms captain Shewell turned out with the militia, and did duty with them?

A. I know nothing of that matter.

Q. Did you consider captain Robert Shewell, junior, at the time the protection was given, to be un­friendly to the united states of America?

A. I did.

The court adjourned until to-morrow eleven o'clock.

DECEMBBER 24.

The court met, according to adjournment.

Timothy Matlack, esq on his affirmation, says, That some time during the enemy's having possession of the city of Philadelphia, information was given to the board of war, that property belonging to captain Robert Shewell, junior, was arrived in Virginia, part of a vessel and cargo in which the Wykoffs, one or more of that family, was concerned. Upon the representation being made, an order was issued for their being seized, as belonging to captain Robert Shewell, junior, who was deemed unfriendly to the united states of America. They were seized on that order, and were detained: the length of time the cannot ascertain; neither does he know of their being delivered up to this day. This information he re­ceived from mr. Shewell and from mr. lsaac Wykoff.

Q. court. Was this order issued by the board of war before captain Robert Shewell, junior, obtained the permission of general Arnold?

A. Most probably several months.

Q. Do you know whether general Arnold knew of the board of war having issued the order respecting the seizure of captain Shewell's property?

A. I know of no circumstance that should afford me an opportunity to judge concerning that.

Q. court. Where did the board of war sit at the time?

A. I suppose at Yorktown.

Q. court. Do you know where general Arnold was at that time?

A. I do not, further than it was a general knowledge that he was with the army at the northward.

In support of the second charge, the judge advocate produced his excellency general Washington's in­structions to major general Arnold, dated June 18, 1778, a resolution of the honorable the congress, dated June 5, 1778, and a copy of a proclamation issued by major general Arnold, dated June 19, 1778; which being read, are as follow:

Major general Arnold admitted, that on his arrival in Philadelphia, the shops were shut by his or­ders, and the officers of the army in consequence of them, prevented from purchasing.

The judge advocate then produced the deposition of colonel John Fitzgerald, dated May 7. 1779. which being read, is as follows:

Question by general Arnold to Timothy Matlack, esq Is the deposition of colonel Fitzgerald, in your hand writing?

A. Yes; it was dictated to me by colonel John Fitzgerald, and while in the rough by him altered and amended, and afterwards copied fair. The next day he called at my house, and informed me he had seen you, in consequence of your request; that there was one or two alterations he wished to make, in consequence of the conversation with you, which alterations are interlined, and written precisely in the words he dictated, having I believe written them on a piece of paper, before me. Colonel Fitzge­rald was a perfect stranger to me, having to the best of my knowledge never seen him before to know him.

The judge advocate produced major Franks, aid de camp to major general Arnold, who was sworn.

Q. On general Arnold's arrival in Philadelphia, do you know whether himself or any person on his account, made any considerable purchases of goods?

A. I do not.

Q. At or before general Arnold's arrival in Philadelphia, did you receive orders from general Arnold to purchase goods, or do you know of general Arnold's having given orders to any other person to make purchases of goods?

A. I did receive from general Arnold, that paper which colonel Fitzgerald has mentioned in his depo­sition. There are circumstances leading to it which I must explain. I had, by being in the army, injured my private affairs very considerably, and meant to leave it, if a proper opportunity of entering into business should happen. I had several conversations on the subject with general Arnold, who promised me all the assistance in his power; he was to participate in the profits of the business I was to enter into. At that time, previous to our going into Philadelphia, I had several particular conversations with him, and thought that the period, in which I might leave the army with honour, and enter into business, I received at that time, or about that time, I think several days before the enemy evacuated the city, the paper mentioned in colonel Fitgerald's deposition that was not signed, as well as the other. Upon our coming into town we had variety of military business to do. I did not purchase any goods, neither did I leave the army. The paper was entirely neglected, neither did I think any thing concerning it, until I heard of colonel Fitgerald's deposition. General Arnold has told me since, which is since I came from Carolina sometime in August last, on speaking about the paper, that the reason for his not supporting me in business was, supposing that I had left the army, it was incompatible with his excellency's in­structions and the resolution of congress.

Q. court. Did general Arnold ask you upon his coming into Phiadelphia, or at any time after, why you had not executed the contents of the paper?

A. He did not.

Q. court. What day did you arrive in Philadelphia?

A. The 18th day of June, in the evening, the day the enemy left Philadelphia.

Q. court. Are you certain that the order for purchasing the goods was given to you several days before you went into Philadelphia?

A. I cannot be particular as to the time; it might have been three, four, five, or twenty days; but it was some time before.

Q. Previous to the enemy evacuating the city of Philadelphia, did you understand from general Arnold that be was to have the command in the city, on the evacuation taking place?

A. I did; but it was a short time before, I believe a day or two. The general, on his return from head-quarters, mentioned it was hinted to him at general Washington's, that he should, when the ene­my evacuated Philadelphia, have the command, and desired me not to mention it.

Q. Were the instructions to purchase goods given to you before the general mentioned this matter to you?

A. I believe they were, though I am not certain.

[Page 12] General Arnold's question. Were not my minute and invoice books always open to your inspec­tion?

A. They were.

Q. by do. Had you any reason to suppose that any purchases were made directly or indirectly by my orders or on my account, previous to the opening of the stores?

A. No.

Q. by do. Did you not suppose my showing you the instructions from general Washington to me, previous to your going into the city, a sufficient countermand of the order I had given you to pur­chase goods?

A. I did not form any supposition on the subject.

Q. by do. For what purpose were you sent into the city before me?

A. To procure quarters, and to provide necessaries for the family.

In support of the third charge the judge advocate produced Timothy Matlack, esquire's letter to major general Arnold, dated October 5.; the general's answer, dated October 6.; Mr. Matlack's letter dated October 10.; and the general's answer of the 12th of October 1778; which were read, and are as follows:

After the reading of these letters, the judge advocate produced Mr. William Matlack, who, having affirmed, says,

Q. Did you attend at general Arnold's quarters in Philadelphia as an orderly serjeant from the militia?

A. I did.

Q. Did you receive an order from major Franks, aid de camp to major general Arnold, while you attended in that station, to fetch a barber?

A. I received my first order from a servant girl, who came and asked me if I was an orderly serjeant? I told her I was. She said major Franks' orders were, that I should fetch his barber; which order I obeyed, as supposing it to come from him. Soon after my return, major Franks came to where I was stationed, and asked me if I had been for his barber? I told him I had, but he was not at home, and that I had left the orders that were necessary for his coming up, as soon as he should come home. Major Franks then said, he did not believe he would come, and then went away. Some considerable time after, he came again, and said he did not believe he would come, and he believed I had better go again; to which I made no reply, but walking back in the entry, after a few minutes, I asked a Negro man if it was customary to give such orders to the orderly serjeants? He said it was. I then replied, that major Franks ought to consider, that the militia could not be expected to do such duty, or words to that purport. Major Franks then came out of a back room, and said, serjeant, I thought I had ordered you to go for my barber. I told him I had received no such order. He then asked me why I did not go? I told him I waited his orders. He then told me to go, and I told him, with his orders I would go, and did go. Major Franks, on my return, asked me if I had been? I told him I had, and left the same orders as before. In the morning I made a complaint to the general, nearly in them words; and he informed me it was customary for serjeants to do such duty; and gave to me understand, not in an abrupt manner, that if I did not like such duty. I should not have come there. [Page 15]The general said, at the time, that if major Franks had insulted me at the time be gave me the order, it was wrong, and he did not approve of that.

General Arnold's question. Was any menial office imposed upon you, or upon any orderly serjeant, to your knowledge?

A. I conceived the office that was imposed on me as menial; and the orderly serjeant who stood at the same time with me, belonging to the continental troops, complained of major Franks giving him a small bundle of paper in his hand, bidding him follow him, which he did; and upon his coming to a house a small distance off, bid him give him the bundle of papers and return; which the man com­plained of to me, when he returned, as an insult.

The court adjourned till Monday, eleven o'clock.

DECEMBBER 27.

The court met, according to adjournment, and adjourned till to-morrow eleven o'clock.

DECEMBER 28.

The court met, according to adjournment.

In support of the last charge, the judge advocate produced letters from Messrs. Chaloner and White, and John Mitchell, esq to the waggon master of the state of Pennsylvania, dated September 25, 26, and October 1st, 1778, which being read, are as follow:

The judge advocate also produced a remonstrance from the state of Pennsylvania, against the enormous waggon service, dated October 1. 1778.; which being read, is as follows:

The judge produced an order from David S. Franks, aid de camp to major general Arnold, to Jesse Jordan, waggon master; depositions of Jesse Jordan, David Cochran, John Boyd and Stephen Collins; which being read, are as follow:

The judge advocate produced colonel John Mitchell's minute book, to shew that the original entry, the 22d of October, 1778, of Jesse Jordan's waggons, was altered, and the entry of their return from Egghar­bour, the 30th of October, 1778, was totally obliterated, and called on Timothy Matlack, esq to give evi­dence respecting these matters.

[Page 20] Q. To mr. Matlack, Do you know any thing respecting the erazures and obliteration made in colonel Mit­chell's minute-book?

A. Having had some business with mr. Mitchell, which remained unfinished, he called to me when I passed by his door, while this matter was altercation, informed me, that the business that was depending between us, was now settled in such a manner, that he could pay the money, and that his clerk would pay it; and re­quested me to step into a back room, as he wanted to say something to me upon the subject of the certificate of the entry of the waggons, said to be employed by general Arnold, for transporting private goods; he endea­voured to induce me to believe, that the council of Pennsylvania had, without a foundation, suspected that he had detained some certificates they had requested of him respecting these waggons: he declared, that there was no entry of the discharge of Jesse Jordan contained in his books, nor no other entry, but the entry that he had furnished them with. The only entry that he had furnished to the council was in these words: "1778, Oct. 22, Jesse Jordan w.m. 12 teams, Chester county, went to Egg-harbour, by the direction of general Arnold." This declaration surprised me, as I knew it otherwise, by such kind of evidence as I could not doubt. The evi­dence that I mean to allude to, is a conversation with Jesse Jordan, who could have no knowledge of any use that could be made of it at that time, who declared, that he saw and read in mr. Mitchell's memorandum-book, an entry of his discharge from the public service, which was after he returned from Egghabour; and as Jordan was a man of reputation, I could not doubt the fact. I told mr. Mitchell, that I had some reason to su­spect, that the copy he sent to the council was not a genuine one. He declared it was. The acquaintance I had with the fact, induced some surprise at the declaration, and I hesitated some time before I made him any re­ply. I told him, I should take it as a favour, if he would shew me the book, in order that it might remove the suspicions that were in my mind with respect to the fact. He expressed some difficulty, on account of his not being able to lay his hand on the book at that time, and some reasons of that kind, which appeared to me to be trifling; and I so told him. He ordered his clerk upon that to bring that book, and looked over the book in such a manner, as if he sound some difficulty in recurring to the entry. I mentioned, it was made the twenty-second of October, and he would find it, if he turned to that date. He opened the book at the date, and read the entry. We were sitting close together at the time, face to face, when he read the entry. I knew it con­tained the words of the certificate he had given; and he then laid the book upon the further end of the table, a­bout four feet from us. Upon his laying down the book, I observed the alteration, and asked him to hand me the book, that I might look at it. With some hesitation, he handed it. Upon looking at it, I told him, the al­teration had been made precisely in the manner I was informed it was made. He then declared that the altera­tion was nothing material, and it was made by his order. As the book lay open, the obliteration struck my eye; and such a one as I had never seen in a book before, according to my recollection: It struck me, that that obli­teration was on the thirtieth of October, the last entry made that day, the day the waggons arrived from Egg-habour, which had crossed after sunset. After considering the matter some time, I determined to mention what I had seen to the council of Pennsylvania, and mentioned it accordingly. Mr. Mitchell was sent for, and requested to bring the book of entries. He appeared and produced the book, and after he was examined, and much having been said on the subject, he acknowledged, that the entry on the twenty-second of October had been altered by his direction; that the note on the margin originally stood, Gone to Egg-harbour, by order. The word gone being altered to the word went, and the word order, to the word direction, abbreviated. Whe­ther he acknowledged, that the words, of general Arnold, were added or not, I cannot ascertain. And he ac­knowledged, that the obliteration of the thirtieth of October, in his book, was ordered to be made by him, and intended to conceal and destroy an entry of the discharge of Jesse Jordan, and his brigade, from public service.

Q Did mr. Mitchell acknowledge, that the words, of general Arnold, stood in the entry, previous to the al­teration being made?

A. I cannot recollect. At that day there appeared to be some difference in the ink, and I thought the words, of general Arnold, appeared to be added.

Q. court. Did mr. Mitchell say, or intimate, that the alteration of the entry of the twenty-second of Octo­ber, or the obliteration of the thirtieth of October, was made by the knowledge or advice of general Arnold.

A. I know of no circumstance that should induce a suspicion, that he had made the alteration either with the advice or knowledge of general Arnold.

Q. court. Did you enquire of mr. Mitchell what his motives were for making the alterations and obliteration!

A. Much was said upon the subject, and he put it off in this manner, that he wished not to have it known that such an entry had been made, as he thought the entry was an improper one.

Q. Did he assign any reason why he thought the entry an improper one?

A. I do not recollect that he ever assigned any clear, explicit reason on that subject. It appeared to me, that he was fearful, that if the waggons should be considered as being in public service, he should be blamed for the manner they were employed.

[Page 21] Q. by general Arnold. What were the reasons mr. Mitchell assigned to council for his making the alterati­ons and obliteration in the book?

A. After the acknowledgment of the alterations and obliteration, I believe there were not many questions put to him on that head; to those that were, he answered evasively. The answers, precisely, I cannot recol­lect.

Q. by ditto. Did mr. Mitchell inform the president and council, that the reason of the alterations being made, was, that the first entry was an improper one, and made by one of his clerks without his knowledge?

A. I am uncertain, whether he gave that as a reason to the council, but I am certain he gave that to me as a reason, and added, that it was a memorandum-book that lay in his office, and the entries were made in it by his clerk, without his knowledge, business being done in his office, as in other offices, by his clerks.

Q. court. Who were to pay for these waggons, and at what price?

A. The pay-rolls were made out at the common pay allowed for waggons in the public service, and the pay­rolls were sent to general Arnold, by order of mr. Mitchell, as I understood.

Q. by general Arnold. Did the president and council send for mr. Jordan, with respect to the pay of the waggons?

A. Not that I know of or recollect. I believe the fact was, they desired mr. John Mitchell to send for him to give evidence before the committee of congress.

Q. by do. Did Jesse Jordan complain to the president and council that he was refused payment, previous to their desiring colonel Mitchell to send for him, to give evidence before the committee of congress?

A. The general complaint respecting the employment of the waggons was made to council by An­drew Boyd waggon master of Chester county, through James Young waggon master of the state. The council expected that Jesse Jordan would be in the city in consequence of their request to John Mitchell to send for him, and did not send for him that I know of or recollect. When Mr. Jordan came to the city, information was given to the council of his being in the city, and a reference being had to the deposition of Jordan, it will appear the manner of his coming to the city. After the de­position was taken, application was made by him to council, to know how he was to receive his money? and he complained of the ill treatment he had received by a threat from mr. Mitchell of being confined. The council conceiving themselves bound to take care that the waggoners had their money, advanced to Jesse Jordan a sum to pay those who were in the greatest necessity, conceiving that general Arnold was bound to pay, and that a price would be received of him equal to the price of private hire, and the money so advanced stands charged accordingly.

Q. by general Arnold. Did Jesse Jordan at any time complain to the president and council that I had refused him payment of his account which he had presented to me for the hire of his waggons?

A. No otherwise that I knew of, but by his deposition which is before the court, and his applica­tion, which I have mentioned already, how he should get it?

Q. by do. Was not the complaint respecting the waggons instituted by the desire of the president and council, or some one of them.

A. It was not, to the best of my knowledge.

Q. by do. Do you know nearly the amount which Jesse Jordan charged at first for the hire of his brigade of waggons?

A. No otherwise than what appears by the original pay rolls, which were lodged in my office by Andrew Boyd, and which I now deliver to the court.

Q. by ditto. Did not the president and council advise mr. Jordan to charge eighty pounds for the hire of each waggon, and to send the account to the attorney-general to prosecute?

A. To answer the question generally, I say, not that I know; but, in particular, I believe they advised him to commence an action for the recovery of the pay, which was allowed for waggons in private service, and I myself told him, that ten pounds a day was the price paid in New-Jersey for that kind of service.

Q. by ditto. Did the president and council write an official letter to mr. Jesse Jordan, with these words: We make no doubt but you will be allowed eighty pounds for the hire of each waggon; and ordering, or advising him to send the account to the attorney-general to prosecute?

A. As I had no expectation of being questioned concerning a matter of that nature, and having none of the papers present, it is impossible I should give a precise answer with respect to the words of a letter written so [Page 23]long ago; but it was very probable something of that kind was written, as I recollect to have heard senti­ments of that kind expressed by members of the council of Pennsylvania.

The court adjourned until to-morrow, eleven o'clock.

DECEMBER 29.

THE court met according to adjournment.

Major general Arnold acknowledged, that captain Moore, to whom Jesse Jordan was ordered to apply for orders at Eggharbour, is the same captain Moore, who is named in the protection, as commanding the schooner Charming Nancy.

The judge advocate having produced his evidence with respect to the several charges exhibited against ge­neral Arnold, the general was desired to proceed in his defence; who called on Timothy Matlack. esq and asked the three following questions:

Q. Did not captain Shewell take the oath of allegiance to the state of Pennsylvania, agreeable to law, by the first day of June, 1778?

A. I do not know.

Q. Did he not inform you that he had?

A. Not that I recollect.

Q. Did captain Shewell produce to the president and council of the state of Pennsylvania, a certificate of his having taken the oath of allegiance to the state, as required by law?

A. Not that I know of or recollect.

Major general Arnold produced the depositions of col. Thomas Proctor, David Beveridge, and Mr. Stephen Collins, which were read, and are as follows:

Major general Arnold not having all his evidence with respect to the first charge, moved the court that he might go into his proofs relative to the second charge, and be at liberty to revert to the first charge when his evidence arrived, which was granted.

With respect to the second charge against him the general produced major Franks' and major Clark­son's deposition, which was read, and is as follows:

Q. to major Franks. Were you present at justice Paschall's when major Clarkson made oath to the contents of the paper you have heard read?

A. I was; and that is the paper which major Clarkson signed, it having been written by him.

Q. by general Arnold to major Franks. What do you know about she shutting up the shops and stores in Philadelpia?

A. The day after I came into town, which was the day general Arnold came, general Joseph Reed, who is now president of the state of Pennsylvania, and myself met. He told me that they were selling goods in town, and advised me to send a crier round to prohibit the sale of goods. I at first agreed to it, but afterwards thought it was doing more than I had a right to. I met him again, and told him that I would put it off until general Arnold came. When general Arnold came to town, general Reed came to his quarters, and upon consulting with him, wrote a proclamation, which I think was the same that was published, with some alterations.

Q. court. Were the alterations made in it, material?

A. I believe not.

Q. Are you positive that general Reed drew up the proclamation?

A. I saw general Reed at the table drawing it up; general Arnold and mr. Boudinott were in the room at the time.

Q. by general Arnold. Do you know of my having given licences to purchase goods, though applica­tions were made by my intimate friends for them?

A. I do not know of your intimate friends having asked for licences to purchase goods; but I know that many applications were refused, and I know of no licences being granted to any person to pur­chase goods.

Q. by do. Do you know at what time the shops and stores were opened, and every body permitted to purchase?

A. I do not know the particular time?

Q. by do. Do you know whether general Arnold, or any person by his orders, directed any goods to be laid by for his use?

A. No; except some trifling articles from the commissary and quarter master.

[Page 27] Q. by general Arnold. Do you know of any articles being laid by, except some trifling articles for my own use, the use of my family, for general Washington, and for one or two other officers?

A. No; except two pipes of wine, which were afterwards drank in the family!

Q. by general Arnold. Do you know whether the two pipes of wine were purchased or laid by previ­ous to the shops being opened?

A. I don't recollect that they were purchased before the shops were opened.

Q. court. Do you know whether any of the articles that were laid by, were taken from the shops previous to the legal opening of them?

A. I do not.

Q. by general Arnold. Were not all the articles of clothing of consequence that were supplied me, which are mentioned to have been for general Washington and several other officers, as well as myself, supplied by the clothier general or his agent?

A. I believe they were.

Q. by do. Do you know what time Congress arrived in Philadelphia?

A. I do not. They were there the fourth of July.

Q. by do. Were not the shops open at that time?

A. They were.

Q. by the court. Do you know whether general Arnold purchased any part of the Charming Nancy or her cargo?

A. I do not of my own knowledge; but I have heard general Arnold say he did, and I have also heard Mr. Seagrove say he did.

Q. court. Was it previous or subsequent to general Arnold's granting the pass?

A. It was subsequent.

The court adjourned until to morrow eleven o'clock.

DECEMBER 30.

The court met according to adjournment.

Major general Arnold adverted to the first charge, and proceeded to produce evidence respecting it.

Q. by general Arnold to Timothy Matlack, esq Do you know whether the owners of the Charm­ing Nancy voluntarily remained with the enemy?

A. Mr. Shewell did as I understand. I understood it from him.

Q. by do. Did Mr. Shewel assign his reason for remaining with the ememy?

A. If he assigned any reasons I do not recollect what they were?

Lieutenant colonel Hamilton being sworn,

Q. by general Arnold. Do you know Mr. Seagrove's general political character?

A. I have heard it frequently discussed, and very different opinions entertained of it. Many were of opinion that he was warmly attached to the American cause, and others that he was not. He had a com­mercial connection of a very delicate nature with a mr. M^c Evers, reputedly a disaffected person, which was supposed by those acquainted with him to have restrained his political conduct, and made him less active in favour of America than he otherwise would have been; others considered him as a man of address, who wished to stand fair with both parties, though in reality more friendly to the opposite party than to us. I have heard several liberal men speak of his situation with a degree of compassion, as producing an opposition be­tween his principles and his private connections. My own opinion of him was favourable, from a general idea of his integrity, and from a particular circumstance which happened as our troops were evacuating New York. I was among the last of our army that left the city; the enemy was then on our right flank, between us and the main body of our army. At about three miles from town, on our march out, mr. Sea­grove was at a house, the name of which I forget, in company with several ladies and gentlemen, he left them, and came up to me with strong appearances of anxiety in his looks, informed me that the ene­my had landed at Harlaam, and were pushing across the island, advised us to keep as much to the left as possible, to avoid being intercepted; the information he gave us, I believe, was not true, as to the place where he said the enemy had landed, they having in fact landed in a different place, but he could not have framed it for any bad purpose, because the advice he gave us must have been good and proper in any event, as it was known that the enemy had not landed any troops in the north river on our left, by inclining to which course we stood the best chance of avoiding that body which had landed on our right. The favourable impressions I before had of mr. Seagrove were confirmed by this incident, not so much from the nature of the transaction, as from an appearance of sincerity and concern strongly pictur­ed [Page 28]in his countenance; which had the more weight as he remained in the city, and might have run some risque from what he did. At an early period of the war he entered into an independent company, but the company afterwards came to nothing.

Q. by do. Has not the political conduct of Mr. Seagrove since confirmed the favourable impressions you had before of him?

A. It has, so far as it has come to my knowledge.

Q. by ditto to major Franks. Do you know Mr. Seagrove's general political character?

A. I knew nothing of his political general character of my own knowledge, previous to your giving the protection for the Charming Nancy; but I have understood that he was considered as a whig. Since that period I have been in actual service with him.

Q. by do. Do you know the political general character of the persons who were owners of the Charm­ing Nancy, previous to my giving the protection for her?

A. I never knew either mr. Shirtliff or mr. Constable before I went to Philadelphia, or saw them in my life before, that I remember. I knew mr. Shewell before the protection was granted, and always supposed him to be well affected to America. He was in one of the militia companies in Philadelphia, some time before the enemy got possession of it.

Q. court. Did he tell you his reasons for staying in Philadelphia?

A. He did.

Q. court. What were they?

A. The impracticability of removing at the time; his wife having been brought to bed and dangerously ill. He told me frequently that his intentions were to remove out of town.

Q. by general Arnold. Did captain Shewell inform you that he had taken the oath of allegiance to the state of Pennsylvania, previous to my granting him the pass?

A. I think he did, and said previous to the time directed by the state of Pennsylvania; and I under­stood from him that he had taken it out of town, and had a certificate of it.

Q. by the court. Did he inform you at what place and before whom he took the oath of allegiance?

A. He did not that I remember.

Q. by general Arnold. Did you understand, at the time captain Shewell applied to me for the protec­tion, that he produced to me a certificate of his having taken the oath of allegiance to the state of Penn­sylvania, agreeable to law?

A. I don't know what passed at the time, but I understood from him at that time, that he had a cer­tificate of that nature.

Q. court. Did you understand how long mr. Shewell had been out of Philadelphia before he obtained the protection from general Arnold?

A. He was time enough out to take the oath of allegiance to the state of Pennsylvania, as I under­stood from him, which was ordered to be taken, I think, by the first of June. I know that mr. Shewell gave his vote at an election in Philadelphia, which he would not have been permitted to give, had he not produced a certificate of his having taken the oath of allegiance by the first of June.

With respect to the fifth charge, major Franks produced in behalf of the general says, That he went to colonel Mitchell's by desire of general Arnold, to know whether he could spare him some waggons to transport some goods that were in danger of falling into the enemy's hands at Eggharbour. He was told, either by colonel Mitchell or his clerk, that waggons could not be spared at that time, but that soon it might happen, as they expected a number of waggons in town; he brought that answer to general Arnold, and some days after general Arnold told him to go to the quarter master's, to enquire and see if possible the waggon master who was to conduct a brigade of waggons for him, and to order them to go to Egg­harbour, or the forks, and there to take a captain Moore's directions, respecting what he was to do. When he got to the office he wrote a letter ordering the waggon master so to do, and signed it officially; after which the waggon master went.

Q. by general Arnold. Were not frequent applications made for the waggons before I procured them?

A. I went once myself, as I have said before, and I believe major Clarkson went once or twice, and I believe you went yourself. It appeared to me several applications had been made for them.

Q. by do. Did you not view the request made for the waggons of a private nature, and not officially?

A. I understood you were to pay for the waggons for the transportation of the goods, and that it was a matter of favour in colonel Mitchell to let you have them.

Q. de. How happened it that you signed the order to Jesse Jordan officially?

A. I had no particular directions from you so to do; that from custom I always signed aid de camp at [Page 29]the end of my name; I myself might have probably thought at that time, that it might have been the means of his executing the order with more alacrity, as dispatch was necessary.

Q. by gen. Arnold. Do you know of my sending to colonel Mitchell for the account of the hire of the waggons, previous to any charge or publication made against me?

A. I do; I went once or twice myself, and I believe you sent major Clarkson.

Q. by do. When I went to camp in February 1779, was not money left with major Clarkson for the purpose of paying for the waggons, and orders given to him accordingly?

A. I think, before we set out to go to camp, the waggon master brought an account against you for the hire of the waggons. You told the man to get it certified by colonel Mitchell, to come in the after­noon with the certificate, and you would pay him. Whether he came in the afternoon or not, I cannot say; but we set out for camp, and you informed me that you had left money with major Clarkson to dis­charge that account. Clarkson told you when you returned, that he had not paid the money, as the man had not called, or that he could not find him.

Q. court. How long was the account presented for the hire of the waggons, before you set out for camp?

A. I believe two or three days.

Q. by court. Was that the first time the account had been presented to general Arnold?

A. I think it was, as there had been frequent applications made for the account, and it could not be procured.

Q. by ditto. Did you at any time, through the course of the transaction, understand that general Ar­nold officially employed these waggons?

A. I understood that general Arnold was to pay for the waggons; that he got them as a favour, and that they were not to transport public stores, but private property for himself and friends, and that he did not order them officially.

Q. by ditto. When you went to colonel Mitchell for the waggons, did you inform him that they were wanted to transport private property?

A. I did. I told him that the goods were in imminent danger, and told him, that the loss of so many goods would be a loss to the continent, as we wanted goods.

With respect to the last charge against the general, Mr. John Hall was produced, who was sworn.

Q. Did you make the alterations in colonel Mitchell's minute book, of the twenty-second of Octo­ber, and the obliteration in the same book, of the thirtieth of October, respecting Jesse Jordan's wag­gon?

A. I did.

Q. Did you make the original entry yourself with or without orders?

A. I made it myself without orders.

Q. Did you make the entry in the margin respecting the waggon?

A. I did.

Q. With or without orders?

A. Without any orders.

Q. What was the original entry?

A. As far as I can recollect, it was, Gone to Eggharbour, by order; or went, I am not certain which.

Q. Were the words, of general Arnold mentioned in the first entry in the margin?

A. They were not.

Q. When was the addition of the words, of general Arnold made, and what was the reason of it?

A. It was made in the course of one day, or two days, and it was made to assist my memory.

Q. Did you make the alteration with or without orders?

A. I made it without orders.

Q. What was the reason of your making the alteration?

A. The first reason was, I thought it was not good English, and when I came to reflect on it, I made the alteration, thinking I worded the entry improper.

Q. What was the reason of your changing the word order to direction?

A. I can give no reason for it.

Q. To whom did general Arnold make application for waggons to go to Eggharbour?

A. Major Franks or major Clarkson came to colonel Mitchell's office, where I was, and made the ap­plication to me, in colonel Mitchell's absence.

Q. In what manner was the application made?

[Page 30] A. The application was, that he, general Arnold, wanted a brigade of waggons, and to send the waggon master to him for directions: It was not made in writing.

Q. Did either major Franks or major Clarkson mention for what purpose the waggons were wanted?

A. Not that I remember.

Q. court. Did colonel Mitchell speak to you respecting the waggons, previous to the application?

A. He did not.

Q. court. Did he converse with you on the subject afterwards?

A. Not until some time a January.

Q. court. What passed between you then?

A. When Jordan came to town, sometime in January, and had his pay roll made out, colonel Mit­chell told him, he must go to general Arnold, and get his pay. I then turned to the book, and saw he had been from the twenty second to the thirtieth of October. Colonel Mitchell told me, that it should not be there at all, and had no business in the book, as general Arnold was to pay the hire of the waggons, and he was angry with me on account of it, upon which I took up my pen and obliterated the entry of the thirtieth of October, determining in my own mind, that col. Mitchell should never give me a frown for it again, and that it should not appear in the book.

Q. court. Did you understand why the hire of the waggons should become a private charge to general Arnold?

A. I then understood by colonel Mitchell's mentioning what I have said to me, that they had been sent to transport property that was not the public's.

Q. Had you at any time any conversation with Jesse Jordan, or any of the waggoners employed in that affair, on the subject?

A. Not until after Jordan returned from Eggharbour: When he returned, I went and made a mark of his return, and told him to make his pay roll out: He said, he had not time to do it then, but would when he came to town again.

Q. court. What conversation passed between you and Jordan when he returned again?

A. Col. Mitchell was in the office when he produced his pay roll; he handed the pay roll to colo­nel Mitchell, who looked at it. Colonel Mitchell turned to me, and asked, whether Jordan had receiv­ed any orders for forage? I answered, No; and he asked Jordan himself whether he had received any forage? he said, he had got an order for forage, and on being asked by colonel Mitchell from whom, he said, from colonel Hilzeimer at the stables. The colonel sent up to mr. Hilzeimer, to know what number of days he had got. I don't recollect the number of days that he got an order for from mr. Hil­zeimer, but colonel Mitchell mentioned, that he must make out his pay roll at the price, as if he had got no forage, and was angry at his having got forage, and that general Arnold was to pay him, and desired him to go and repay mr. Hilzeimer the amount of what forage he had received from him. Jordan, as far as I recollect, made out another pay roll.

Q. court. Had you ever any conversation with general Arnold, about the waggons?

A. No.

Q. Did general Arnold know of any of these entries being made, or the alteration of them, previous to your doing it?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. court. Did general Arnold ever see the book, to your knowledge?

A. Not to my knowledge; it was a book that lay on the desk in common, to make memorandums.

Q. court. Did Jesse Jordan, or any of the waggoners employed at that time, tell you whether they considered themselves in public or private employ?

A. I don't recollect that he or any of them did.

Q. court. Was the original entry in the margin the usual mode of entry?

A. I do not recollect.

Q. by general Arnold. Did I not make several applications for the waggons before they were sent?

A. I do not recollect that you did.

Q. When was the obliteration made?

A. About the latter end of January.

Q. Do you know of the council of Pennsylvania making application for a transcript of the entries?

A. I did hear colonel Mitchel say something about it, but not previous to the obliteration being made.

Q. Did colonel Mitchell or any other person direct you to make the alterations or obliterations?

[Page 31] A. He did not, nor any other person.

The court, for want of evidence, adjourned until Tuesday next eleven o'clock.

JANUARY 4. 1780.

The court met according to adjournment, and adjourned for want of evidence until Friday next, eleven o'clock.

JANUARY 19.

The court did not meet agreeable to the lest adjournment, but met this day agreeable to his excellency the commander in chief's order, which is as follows:

Major general Arnold proceeded in his defence, and with respect to the first change against him, pro­duced an exemplification of the decree of the court of admiralty for the state of New Jersey, respecting the schooner Charming Nancy, which being read, is as follows:

The general, with respect to the second charge, produced a deposition of Elias Boudinot, which being read, in as follows:

With respect to the last charge, the general produced colonel Mitchel, d. q. m. g. who being sworn, says, About the middle of October last, general Arnold sent for me; on my waiting on him, he informed me he wanted ten or twelve waggons to go to Eggharbour to bring some goods, which were in danger of fall­ing into the enemy's hands, and that he would pay the expence. I informed him, I had none at that time could be spared from public service; but when there was, I would send the waggon master to him. He asked me, if there was not waggons sent to Eggharbour with forage and provisions, and if they could not bring a load back for him. I answered, yes, there were several sent, but I believed they were now re­turning, that if I had occasion to send any more with either provision or forage, and there was no public storm to bring up, they might load for him, and it would save the public half the expence, as he must pay the hire back; this he seemed pleased with, but not having occasion to send any of the articles above-mentioned, the general sent to me several times to know, if I could let him have the waggons; my an­swer was, he should have the first could be spared without injury to the public service. On the 22d of October, Jesse Jordan, a waggon master from Chaster county, came to town with twelve towns; a me­morandum [...] which was part in the memorandum book. A considerable quantity of stores being for­warded to [...] river, and some continental terms coming in, which were not expected, and the gene­ral being desirous to have the waggons sent, to save the property at Eggharbour from falling into the hands of the enemy, I desired mr. Jordan to go to general Arnold, who wanted him to go to Egghar­bour, and that he would pay him, and give him his directions. Mr. Jordan accordingly want from me, and, I believe, called on the general. From that time I heard nothing farther on the subject, till mr. Jordan had returned, when he was told to call on general Arnold for his pay; in answer to which he said he would not stay at that time to make out a pay roll, but would return and get his pay, or words to that effect. And after he was gone home some time, I asked one of the clerks if he heard whether Jordan was paid by general Arnold. I think he said he did not know. I afterwards saw the general, who told me the waggon master had not called on him for his pay, and desired when I saw him I would let him know, or words to that purpose. I desired my clerk to be careful that mr. Jordan's hire was not paid in my office, and to pay no rolls without my approbation. From this time, about the beginning of November, I heard nothing of the matter that I can recollect, till the secretary of the executive council wrotes me for what information I could give them respecting the waggons sent by general Arnold to Eggharbour, to which request I gave the following answer, dated the 19th January.

Which I afterwards learned they sent a copy of to general Arnold. His excellency the president and coun­cil requested general Greene to direct that mr. Jordan, a waggon master in his service might be sent for; on which I sent two expresses to enquire if he was in the quarter master's department, and if so, to send him up to wait on the president and council; but they returned with information that he was not in the service. This I informed his excellency of, who, if I can recollect, and to the best of my memory and recollection, said the council had laid the matter before congress, and therefore it was not necessary to send again for him. I offered to send any orders of his, by express or otherwise, as he thought proper. The next I heard of this affair was on the 30th of January, when mr. Jordan came to town, and called at my office. I told him to go to general Arnold for his pay, that I had nothing to do with it, and asked him why he did not call for it long before that time. He answered he had been sick, and could not come to town, and I think said he was sick when he returned from Eggharbour. I told him he must wait on the president and council before he left town; that they had sent for him, and it was necessary he should call on them. I also asked him if he had made any complaints to colonel Boyd, and for what reason he did make such complaints. He said, he had made none, nor had he seen colonel Boyd since his return from Eggharbour; but he believed some of the waggoners had made some complaints which he had never seen. On this he went from me, as I believe, to general Arnold, and returned with a note from him to me, as follows, viz.

To which I answered immediately,

This answer was sent directly to the general. Whether mr. Jordan went to him then or not, I do not recollect; but on producing his pay roll, I found he had charged as if he received forage, which surprized me much, not having been informed or known he had drawn any forage for more than one day; on which I sent to the forage master to know the truth of it, who returned me an account that he had drawn forage. I then desired he would make out his pay roll as if he had not forage, and to pay the amount of the forage to Owen Biddle, Esq agent for the com. gen. of forage. Mr. Jordan had made [Page 34]an account out for two days more than he was entitled to. I told him of it, and the mode established for payment of teams, and that it was agreeable to the waggon law, and the opinion of the late waggon mas­ter general, James Young, esq He seemed not contented with this deduction of two days at first, but on my assuring him it was the usual and customary time, and offering to shew him several pay rolls settled agreeable to the law, and what I then said, and that I insisted on the matter being settled before he left town, as I wished to be clear of any further trouble with it, and desiring him not to neglect to call on the president of this state, and informing him where he lived, he asked for paper, pen, and ink, and liberty to make out his pay roll in the office, all which were granted him, he seemed to me perfectly satisfied, con­tented, and in good humour. I assisted him in bringing out the amount, and I believe the clerk cast it up for him. He left me in this disposition, and went to general Arnold to receive his money, but soon return­ed and said, the general was out. I told him to call on him again, and let me know if he refused to pay him. From that time I never saw mr. Jordan, but once at some distance. General Arnold called on me on the Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday following, I cannot recollect which, and asked me if I heard anything of mr. Jordan; that he wanted to pay him; that he was going out of town; that he would leave the money with major Clarkson, and requested I would send mr. Jordan to him to receive his mo­ney; but if he would not come, begged I would send for major Clarkson, who would bring the money. I have omitted to mention in the proper place, that on mr. Jordan's return, he was told to call on general Arnold for his pay; in answer to which he said, he would not stay at that time to make out his pay roll, but would return and get his pay, or words to that purpose. On looking at a memorandum book in the office, kept to assist my memory and my clerks only, I saw the words, "Gone to Eggharbour, by order of general Arnold," opposite to the word Jesse Jordan, w. m. 12 teams, Chester county, as here put down. I told the clerk, general Arnold did not give me orders to send him, and therefore it should be, "Went to Egghar­bour by directions of general Arnold," which he immediately altered; and on observing on the other side, 30th, Jesse Jordan returned from Eggharbour, I told the clerk, as I did not think I had any concern with the waggons after they had been sent to general Arnold, that those words were unnecessary, and desired he would strike it out, which he did immediately. This happened the week after Jordan was at my office last. On general Arnold's return, he sent to let me know, he wanted a certificate of what passed respect­ing the waggons and the payment. As I wished to avoid any further concern in this matter, I did not go to wait on him, till he sent several times. When I waited on him, He was in his chamber; he told me what he sent for me was, to give him a certificate of what I knew respecting the waggons he sent to Egg­harbour, and what I knew respecting his desire to pay them, as the council had charged him with refusing to pay them. I answered, I was very desirous to have no further concern in the affair; that I had in­formed the president and council what I knew of it, a copy of which I believed he had, and that I had also given a committee of congress what information I could; that I would freely go before any authority that had right to enquire into it, and give my testimony, but I could not give any certificate, or have my name in the public papers, which might subject me to disagreeable answers, as the papers were full of vindictive and abuse on many respectable characters. He said, it was very cruel and hard to be refused a true state of the matter, and shewed me a paper he had wrote, I believe read it, I also read it, when he ask­ed me, if it was the true state of the matter. I answered, it might be near it, but if I signed any I would write it myself; that the words were not expressed as I would do, if I gave any, but still requested he would not insist on it, and wished he would excuse me; and also said, I would relate the matter, if he would not publish it; but his answer was, that would not do, as he wanted the facts to publish. I endeavoured to excuse myself, but he earnestly requested, as a gentleman, I would give him a state of the matter, and requested I would take the paper home, and send him a certificate. I told him, I would consider of it, and let him know. On full consideration, I was still desirous of avoiding any thing that was to be pub­lished with my name; but on his sending to me several times for a certificate, I wrote one, which, on consulting a friend, whose opinion I esteemed, he thought an improper one, on which I was deter­mined to give a copy of my letter to his excellency, of the 19th January, which is before recited; but from the words, on Saturday, the 30th January, as recited in the former part of this narrative, was added as what passed respecting the payments. This I sent to the general, who returned it the next morn­ing, desiring I would send him a certificate. I told the gentleman who brought it, I could give no other than that. He said he believed it would not do. I answered I would do no more. After­wards the paper he gave me, was sent for, (as I kept no copy, do not recollect the contents) which I returned. The general afterwards called on me, and requested I would give him a certificate. I assured him I could give no other, and wished he would excuse me. He seemed displeased at my [Page 35]answer, and said another gentleman's influence, naming him, was greater than his. I assured him I was not influenced by any one, and only wanted to avoid any publication, but that he might have the let­ter I wrote him. He took it, and left me, as I thought displeased. And thus this matter ended, having had no conversation with the general on the subject since.

On the 18th of February, I received a letter from colonel Pettit, a. q. m. gen. enclosing a letter from the secretary of council, desiring a certificate of the entry of the waggons sent to Eggharbour, of the fer­ries they crossed, and of their return; to which gave the following answer:

On the 23d or 24th of February, colonel Pettit called on me for a certificate of the entry; as it was esteemed by the council to be one, I gave him one immediately. The 22d I received another letter from colonel Pettit, requesting I would give a certificate of an entry of discharge of the waggons, or that there was none. To this I gave the following answer, vis.

On the 23d of February, colonel Pettit called on me to ask me for the memorandum book, to shew to the council. I told, he should have any book I had, with pleasure, from this time to the 25th, when I was directed to appear before council, by their order of the 24th.

Q. by general Arnold. After the waggons had been employed, and previous to any charge made a­gainst me for the same, did I not several times send to you for the account, or to direct the waggon master to call on me, that I might pay him?

A. You did.

Q. by ditto. Did mr. Jordan ever inform you that I had refused payment?

A. Jordan did not tell me that you had refused to pay him, but had refused to pay the pay roll, as it was made out, and I understood from you, that you wanted to know what you had to pay him.

Q. by ditto. Do you know whether Jesse Jordan saw me, after his pay roll was properly made out?

A. I do not; but he told me he called, and you were not at home.

Q. by ditto. Do you know the reason why he did not see me after his pay roll was made out, to get his money?

A. I do not know, having no conversation with him after the answer before given.

Q. by ditto. When you gave Jesse Jordan orders to call on me for instructions, did you think he un­derstood that he was discharged from the public service?

A. I am not certain that he understood it so, but that was my meaning, as I was busy at the time, and did not explain myself more particularly. I had usually given written instructions, but did not give Jor­dan any, and for this reason I thought he understood he was discharged from the public service.

Q. Were these waggons drawn from the state of Pennsylvania for the public service?

[Page 36] A. Yes.

Q. Was not a great demand made on the state of Pennsylvania by you, about that time, or a short time previous to it, for waggons for the public service?

A. Yes, for a considerable number, but the number I do not recollect, in consequence of applications made from different departments to me for that purpose.

Q. Were these waggons part of the number that were demanded?

A. I believe they were.

Q. Did general Arnold know of there having been a great demand made on the state for waggons, when he applied to you for a number of them?

A. I believe he did.

Q. Did you consider general Arnold's application to you for waggons as a request, or an official order?

A. General Arnold being commanding officer in the state, he made that request to me, and I conceiv­ed it as my duty to oblige him as my superior officer in every thing in my power, which I would not have done to any others officer in the united states, who was then present. General Arnold having made that request to me, and telling me the reason, that it was to remove property that was likely to fall into the hands of the enemy, I complied with it, thinking it was my duty to do so, he paying all the expence.

Q. Were not general Arnold's orders during his command in Philadelphia generally couched in terms of request or desire?

A. They were generally polite, and such as one gentleman would write to another.

Q. Did you conceive that you would have been accountable officially to general Arnold for your con­duct, had you refused a compliance with his request for the waggons?

A. I did not consider that matter at the time the request was made.

Q. Did you conceive yourself at liberty either to comply with the request or refuse it?

A. From the request being frequently repeated, I conceived that I would not refuse it without incurring his displeasure, as commanding officer.

Q. Had you thought the request official, would you not have complied with it without a repetition?

A. Had it been communicated to me in writing, I should have complied with it immediately.

Q. court. Did you think the refusal of the request would or could have been treated as a disobedience of orders?

A. I did not think of it in that point of view at all. General Arnold having requested of me waggons to bring off property them in danger of falling into the hands of the enemy, I conceived it my duty to let him have them, as soon as it could be done without injury to the public service, be paying the whole expence.

Q. Did you put these waggons into general Arnold's hands in the usual course of your official business?

A. General Arnold having requested of me waggons to bring off property then in danger of falling into the hands of the enemy, I conceived it my duty to let him have them, as soon as it could be done, without injury to the public service, he paying the whole expence.

Q. Did not the waggon master of the state of Pennsylvania, in his letters, tell you, the waggons could not go out of the state, and remonstrate against the great call?

A. There was a hundred and fifty waggons called for from the quarter master of the state of Jersey; the time I do not recollect, but believe it to be some weeks before Jordan's waggons were sent to Egg­harbour. Upon that request being made to furnish them the waggon master general of the state of Penn­sylvania remonstrated against the great call for waggons, and gave as a reason that no waggons were to be sent to the state of Jersey, to carry stores from thence to the army, in consequence of which, none were sent to my knowledge.

Q. Do you know whether general Arnold knew of this remonstrance?

A. I believe he did, but cannot be certain of it.

Q. What reasons had you to suppose the general knew of the remonstrance?

A. No other than that the general was usually acquainted with every transaction I was, in the de­partment, of that nature, and this matter was much talked of, not in his presence that I recollect; and I believe some of the delegates of the state of Pennsylvania had a meeting with the waggon master general on that subject.

Q. by general Arnold. Don't you recollect when I applied for the waggons, that I requested the favour of you, if they could not be spared from the public service, to let your people hire me private waggons?

A. At one time when you spoke to me upon the subject, you mentioned the words than you have now mentioned, and I told you it was impossible it could be done, or I would do it with pleasure. You then said, as soon as they could be spared from public service, you would be glad to have them.

[Page 37] Q. When you sent the waggon master Jordan to general Arnold, did you inform general Arnold that he was in public service with the waggons?

A. I sent no notice to general Arnold at all; only told the waggon master to call on him for his instruc­tions, and that he would send him to the Jerseys and pay him.

Q. Had Jordan refused a compliance with your orders to go to general Arnold, would you have es­teemed him accountable to you for his refusal?

A. I would not.

Q. court. Did you on reading general Arnold's note of the 30th of January, conceive that it was ge­neral Arnold's intention that the public should pay any part of the hire of Jordan's waggons?

A. I conceived from general Arnold's note, that he thought he only ought to pay for the time the waggoners were sent to him until the day they returned; but my opinion was, that he should pay from the time the waggons were called out into public service until they returned home. But I did not conceive that general Arnold meant by that, that the public should pay any part, but that it was a mistake in the man­ner of calculating the pay.

Q. If you conceived that general Arnold did not expect that the public should pay for any part of the hire of Jordan's teams, what was the reason of your mentioning in your's of the 30th of January, 1779, that if he ordered you should pay any part of the time due Jordan for the hire of his teams, you would obey be order?

A. Because, as commander in chief, I should have considered his written order for that purpose, as a sufficient voucher to produce to the public.

Q. court. Did general Arnold know any thing of the entries made in your memorandum book, or of the alterations or obliteration made afterwards?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. court. Were these alterations or obliterations mode in the book previous to an inquiry being made into the general's conduct, or subsequent?

A. The alterations was made immediately after the entry; the obliteration within a few days after the 30th of January, but the particular day I cannot recollect.

Q. Do you know the political general characters of mr. James Seagrove, or captain Robert Shewell, junior?

A. I know very little of either of them, but I have heard and thought before we got into Philadelphia that they were disaffected persons. Captain Robert Shewell, junior, was always thought to be a dis­affected person. Mr. Seagrove, at New York, paid particular respect to general Washington, and I con­sidered him at that time as a good whig, but his coming into Philadelphia, while the enemy were there in­duced me to alter my opinion of him.

The court adjourned until to morrow eleven o'clock.

JANUARY 20.

The court met agreeable to adjournment.

Q. to colonel Mitchell. What time was Jordan's brigade of waggons to continue in the public service, whom they were ordered out?

A. I think the law of the state, to the best of my remembrance, says thirty days.

Q. Did Jordan's brigade of waggons or any part of them continue in the public service, after their re­turn from Eggharbour?

Not one of them, to my knowledge. I was afterwards told, some of them came out in another bri­gade, but I did not know them as such.

Q. Was the time they were employed by general Arnold considered by you, or the waggon master of the state, as part of their tour of duty?

A. It was not considered by me, otherwise I should have detained them until it was over; but as they were sent to general Arnold, I did not consider I had any charge of them, not considering them to be in public service. I do not know how the waggon master considered the time they were employed, hav­ing had no conversation with him upon the subject, to the best of my recollection.

Q. In what manner were waggons usually discharged from the public service, after they had com­pleted their tour of duty?

A. By paying them for the time they served, and letting them go home. No written discharge being given.

[Page 38] Q. How long had mr. Jordan been in town with the waggons under his care, before he was ordered by you to go to general Arnold for instructions?

A. To the best of my recollection, he was ordered to go to general Arnold for instructions the morning I knew of his arrival, but the hour of the day I do not recollect.

Q. Did you not order Jordan to proceed with his waggons to one of the public stores, on his arrival in town, to take a load of stores for camp?

A. To the best of my recollection or knowledge, I did not.

Q. by general Arnold. When I applied for the waggons, did not you tell me, that there were fre­quently public waggons lying idle in town, when provisions did not arrive to load them, as expected, in which case, they could be spared and it would be a saving to the public, as they were obliged to pay for the hire of the waggons when called out, whether they were employed or not?

A. I do not recollect my telling you so, but the circumstances have happened. At that time there were no more waggons called for from the state, but what could be employed; but a number of conti­nental teams coming in, which I did not expect, enabled me to let you have the waggons at that time.

With respect to the last charge, dr. Gardiner was produced by the judge advocate, and sworn, upon his being desired to give the court what information he was possessed of concerning it: he said as follows;

That upon the return of Jordan's brigade of waggons from Eggharbour to Philadelphia, he then being in the city, upon public business, was called upon by some persons belonging to the brigade, to visit a sick wag­goner; be went with them to the continental yard, where the waggons were standing, and finding the man very ill, in the first stage of a nervous fever, he proposed giving him some medicines, and at the same time advised them to send him home, as he, the deponent, supposed his disorder would be tedious. Some diffi­culties arising with respect to the method of sending him, they at length agreed to try, if the whole brigade could obtain a temporary discharge, upon their promising to return again in a short time, and perform the remainder of their tour. They told him, they did apply, and were accordingly discharged or permitted to return, upon the aforesaid condition. Sometime afterwards, a complaint was made by col. Young, waggon master general of the state of Pennsylvania, to some members of the general assembly, then sitting, with re­spect to some abuses of the waggons, called out under the law for public service, being employed in private service, and particularly with respect to the misapplication of Jordan's brigade, in removing private proper­ty from Eggharbour, and at the same time drawing forage and rations from the public magazines. The mem­bers seemed disposed to have taken up the matter, but being about to rise in a short time, and thinking that the matter might be taken up in another channel, some of the members advised colonel Young to lay the case before the executive authority of the state, which he, the deponent, afterwards heard he did. He then heard but little more of the matter, 'till, he thinks, in the latter end of January, or the beginning of Febru­ary, when Jordan called at his house in Philadelphia, and told him, that he had considerable delays in receiv­ing pay for the service of his brigade last fall, and requesting his advice as a friend, what steps would be most adviseable for him to take, to have the matter settled. He, the deponent, asked him for his papers; he shew­ed him two pay rolls, or one altered pay roll; one charged to the united states, and the other charged to ge­neral Arnold. The latter, or the alteration, Jordan told him he made in consequence of colonel Mitchell's directions. He likewise shewed him, (the deponent) his orders from general Arnold, signed by a mr. Franks as one of his aides. He asked Jordan what reason general Arnold gave for not discharging the debt. He answered, that general Arnold was not willing to pay for more than six or seven days service, which was the time he was performing his journey from Philadelphia to Eggharbour and back again. He advised Jordan to apply to the executive authority of the state, and accordingly went with him to mr. Bryan's, who was then vice president of the state. He likewise accompanied the vice president, and mr. Clingan, one of the dele­gates of the state of Pennsylvania, and Jordan, to the president's.

Q. Had you any other information that Jordan's brigade of waggons was discharged from the public service, or permitted to return, upon their promising to return again in a short time and perform their tour of duty, but what you had from the waggoners?

A. None.

Q. court. Do you know to whom they applied for permission to return home?

A. I do not; but I was present when they made the agreement to apply, and they agreed to apply to colonel Mitchell.

Q. court. Do you know whether Jordan's brigade returned to complete their tour of duty?

A. Not as Jordan's brigade. One of the waggoners being sick, and Jordan's quitting the service at that time, several of the waggoners came out under another waggon master; but I cannot say whether they came out to complete their former tour of duty or not.

[Page 39] Q. by general Arnold. Did Jesse Jordan inform you that I had refused him payment for the hire of his waggons?

A. Jesse Jordan informed me that he went to colonel Mitchell to get his pay, having his pay roll drawn in its usual form; that colonel Mitchell informed him that the pay roll was wrong, that the united states were charged, but you ought only to be charged; that agreeable to colonel Mitchell's orders he altered the pay roll or drew a new one, I cannot tell which, in which he charged you instead of the united states; that after the pay roll was made out in that manner, colonel Mitchell gave him a note to you, and desired him to call on you, which he said he delivered to you, and when be called, you refused paying him for the number of days charged in the pay roll, which were twelve or thirteen, and made some difficulties as to paying him for six or seven days; that he then returned to colonel Mitchell with a note or message from you, with respect to the number of days he was in service; that when he came to colonel Mitchell he again sent him back to you; not finding you at home, he returned to colonel Mitchell's, and after telling him of it, Jordan said he would give over any attempts to get the money in that manner; that he was employed by Mr. Boyd, and would apply to him about it; upon which colonel Mitchell told him he must not attempt to go away without settling it, or he would put him in the guard house; he further told me, he put his papers quiet­ly in his pocket and slipped off, being fearful that he should be put in the guard house, and he told me he did not make any other attempt to get payment at that time.

Q. by general Arnold. Did you not understand that there was some intimation given by some of the council to colonel Boyd, colonel Young, or Jordan, or some other person, to make a complaint respect­ing the waggons; or was the complaint made without the knowledge or desire of the council or some member of it?

A. No member of the council, to my knowledge, influenced any person to make the complaint.

Q. by do. Do you know whether Jesse Jordan called on the president and council voluntarily, or was sent for when he was paid a sum of money for the hire of his waggons?

A. I believe he came voluntarily.

Q. by do. Do you know whether the president or any member of the council advised or wrote a letter to Jordan desiring him to make out his account, and charge eighty pounds for each waggon, and to apply to the attorney general to commence an action for the money?

A. I do not.

The judge advocate, in addition to the other evidence before the court, desired permission to produce a certificate of the speaker of the house of assembly of the state of Pennsylvania, to shew how the com­plaint by the executive council of the state of Pennsylvania against major general Arnold, for employing Jesse Jordan's brigade of waggons, originated, which was granted. The certificate was produced, and authenticated by dr. Gardner. On being read, it is as follows:

The court adjourned until to morrow eleven o'clock.

JANUARY 21.

The court met agreeable to adjournment.

Mr. Nicholson was produced by the judge advocate relative to the second charge against the general and sworn. After he was examined, the judge advocate moved that the matters he mentioned be not insert­ed in the proceedings of the court, as not applying to the charge against the general. The court having considered them were of opinion, that they did not apply to the charge against the general, and should not be inserted in the proceedings.

The evidence being closed, major general Arnold addressed the court, as follows:

JANUARY 22.

The court met agreeable to adjournment. The judge advocate having stated the evidence relative to the several charges exhibited against the general, the court adjourned until Wednesday eleven o'clock.

JANUARY 26.

The court met agreeable to adjournment, and having considered the several charges exhibited against general Arnold, the evidence produced on the trial, and his defence, are of opinion, with respect to the first charge, that he gave permission for a vessel to leave a port in possession of the enemy, to enter into a port in the united states, which permission, circumstanced as he was, they are clearly of opinion he had no right to give, being a breach of article 5th, section 18th of the rules and articles of war. Respecting the second charge, that although it has been fully proved, that the shops and stores were shut by general Arnold's orders on his arrival in Philadelphia, they are of opinion, that he was justifiable in the order by the reso­lution of congress of the 5th of June, 1778, and his excellency the commander in chief's instructions of the 18th of June, 1778: and with respect to the latter part of the same charge, the making considerable purchases while the shops and stores were shut, they [...] clearly of opinion, that it is entirely unsupport­ed, and they do fully acquit general Arnold of it. They do acquit general Arnold of the third charge, Respecting the fourth charge, it appears to the court, that General Arnold made application to the deputy quarter master general, to supply him with waggons to receive property then in imminent danger from the enemy; that waggons were supplied him by the deputy quarter master general on this application, which had been drawn from the state of Pennsylvania for the public service; and it also appears, that ge­neral Arnold intended this application as a private request, and that he had no design of employing the waggons otherwise than at his private expence, nor of defrauding the public, nor injuring or imp [...]ing the public service; but considering the delicacy attending the high station in which the general acted, and that requests from him might operate as commands, they are of opinion, the request was imprudent and improper, and that, therefore, it ought not to have been made. The court, in consequence of their determinations respecting the first and last charges exhibited against major general Arnold, do sentence him to [...] a reprimand from his excellency the commander in chief.

The court adjourned without day.