Constitutional Whig

From the National Intelligencer.

TO THE PUBLIC.

Letter II.

Mr. Barry, in his late publication in the Globe, makes a prominent article of the charge, Indebtedness to the office over which he presides. In this he attempts to exculpate himself and inculpate me.—

During the investigation it was proven that my original charge was true. That was contained in the following words:

"Charge 1st. That he is indebted to the Government.

"Specification. In the year 1818, John Fowler, then Postmaster at Lexington, Kentucky, was indebted to the General Post Office. His sureties were applied to—they begged indulgence—proposed to pay a part of the balance then due—that a new bond should be given, and the old one should be cancelled. This was done. The new bond was joint and several.

"William T. Barry, now Postmaster General, was one of the sureties in the new bond. Mr. Fowler fell in arrears to a greater amount than ten thousand dollars, which was the amount of the new bond. These sureties had been repeatedly called upon, and at last suit was instituted against them, and among them, against Mr. Barry. All this will appear by the books of the Department, and by letters there filed. By the former it will appear that Mr. Barry is now indebted to the United States to the amount of ten thousand dollars.

"Remarks.

"It is said that the money paid by Mr. Fowler after the new bond was given, was applied to the extinguishment of the old debt, but should have gone to the credit of that under the new bond—

"And that the suit against William T. Barry was decided in his favor by the Court.

"Independent of the known rule of the common law, that when a man is indebted on two accounts, and pays money to the creditor, without directing to which account it shall be applied, the creditor may apply it to which account he pleases, it has been the usage of the General Post Office to apply moneys paid by a Postmaster to the extinguishment of the balance first in order of time, standing against him on the books.

"Again—it appears by the certificate of the Clerk of the Court in which the suit was brought, that although it was in the first instance decided upon the demurrer by the defendants in their favor: yet the judgement was afterwards opened, and the suit dismissed, so that the United States might begin de novo; and the indebtedness of the party still remains evident from the books and records of the Department over which he now presides."

During the investigation by the Committee of the Senate appointed to examine into the condition of the Post Office Department, I was particularly interrogated under oath, as to the truth of this allegation. I presented my statement to the Committee, and in reply to a question by Mr. Grundy, stated that I derived almost all my information upon this subject "from the books, papers, and correspondence of the Department." I referred the Committee for proof of my charge to "Post Office Ledger L, vol. 6, and suitbook, and letters from the officers conducting the suit;" I added, "the suit book and bond book for that period would elucidate the subject of the indebtedness of the Postmaster General, [Mr. Barry,] and that Mr. Joseph W. Hand, the Solicitor of the Department, had those books and papers, and can produce the books and correspondence on the subject." The majority of the Committee refused to send for Mr. Hand, or to require the production of these books and papers.

Subsequently, when the sub-committee, Mr. Grundy and Mr. Holmes, attended at the General Post Office to investigate the falsity of the Postmaster General's Report, I requested them as soon as that subject was concluded, to turn to the documents and papers in the office to see that my statement was fully supported by them. Mr. Grundy said "we have not time, but we admit it to be as you have stated it." I told him the books and papers were at hand, it could not take five minutes. He replied, "that it was wholly unnecessary, for we admit that your statement is exact."

After this proof and admission of the facts, what shall we say of the hardihood and audacity of Mr. Barry when he avers, "The decision in the case has never been reversed or opened." Is not this in direct accordance with the spirit and the total disregard of truth manifested in the fraudulent and false returns to Congress. If such was the fact, why did he not procure the certificate of the Clerk of the Court? My letter to the President has been more than a year before him; it is more than four months since its truth was sworn to, and since the facts relative to that particular were admitted by the Committee. A disregard to veracity was one of the charges preferred against him to the President.

He objects to the law and usage which allows a creditor to apply a payment to which debt he chooses, if not directed by the debtor. To this I need only remark, that he was a lawyer, and knew the law, and ought to have inferred that the usage was conformable to it. It would be wholly superfluous in me to go into an investigation of the justice and policy of the law, but any one who will take that trouble, will be satisfied that it cannot be altered to advantage.

Mr. Barry makes it a subject of charge against me, that I gave up the old bond, although he knew that I did not give it up. I recollect well that Mr. Morrison, one of the sureties, when urged as to the payment of the deficiency of Mr. Fowler, said that it must be done, and proposed that a new bond should be taken, and that a part of the old debt should be paid by a specific time; and that when an amount should be paid equal on the whole to the debt existing at the time, that the old bond should be given up. All this was accomplished. But Mr. Barry knew very well that I did not do it; in fact, that I was opposed to any deviation from practice or rule, which is always disadvantageous; and because there were good reasons for the rule, although Mr. Barry does not seem to have thought of them.

I do not know that I have succeeded in making my ideas plain on the subject. There was a plain bond for ten thousand dollars, the whole debt due; it was joint and several. Mr. Barry, the postmaster general a surety. The bond was put in suit: Mr. Bibb, who was the U. S. attorney, allowed it to be determined against the United States on an erroneous principle of law. Mr. Bibb resigned: there was no District Attorney. At a future Court a gentleman of the bar volunteered in behalf of the United States, and got the judgement set aside, but, as I conjecture, not having the documents, could go no farther. The case was called, and no one appeared in behalf of the United States. It was called out of court that the Postmaster General might begin anew, de novo, as the Clerk expressed it.

Need I ask any one whether the Postmaster General has shown anything which gives the color of contradiction to the proof advanced? Is not the debt perfectly clear? The situation of a surety is generally a hard one, if he has no consideration other than friendship; but every day's experience shows, that the harshness of the case does not satisfy the bond. He who makes promise for another, under hand and seal, must comply. But unfortunately for Mr. Barry, if he is to be believed, and every man's declarations are good against himself, there is not even a hardship for a considerable portion of the debt.

He stated to a gentleman now in Washington, that the Postmaster General and other sureties, a bank appointee, to select a successor to Mr. Fowler, and that the person we selected agreed to give four thousand dollars, to be paid in annual payments of $1000 each; and that the four thousand dollars had been received,' &c. The gentleman thinking that a circumstance so important might come into question, made a memorandum of the words immediately after, and told me also of the conversation. Now, justice would require the payment of the four thousand dollars, even if there had been a flaw in the bond—but not a cent has been paid. Mr. Barry, instead of paying the $10,000 dollars justly due by him, with interest has actually received $4,000 dollars: and, instead of losing, has been a gainer in this large sum. The payment of the debt cannot be enforced by suit, while Mr. Barry is Postmaster General; for, by law the Postmaster General alone can bring suits for such debt.

ABRAHAM BRADLEY,

Chevy Chase, July 6th, 1831.