I further certify, that thereupon on the nineteenth day of Aug. Anno Domini, eighteen hundred and two, a writ of Fieri Facias illued, to the fheriff of Philadelphia county directed, to which no return has been made; and, that on the fourth day of September, eighteen hundred and two, exceptions to faid report, with an affidavit thereto fubfcribed, were filed in my office in the following terms, viz :

Thomas Passmore,
verfus.

Andrew Pettit Andrew Bayard.

Exceptions to the report of referees in the above cafe

First. For, that the faid referees had a meeting on the fubject of the reference with the plaintiff, when the defendants were not prefent nor notified; but one of the defendants going into a room to find a friend, difcovered the plaintiff engag ed in fhewing his papers to the referees.

Secondly. For, that the plaintiff communicated to the referees, his affidavit, of what another perfon told him, refpecting the object of the reference, in the abfence of the defendants, and without the fame having been communicated to them, or either of them, by the plaintiff.

Thirdly. For, that the referees have allowed a claim for a total lofs on an infurance upon a fhip, although the plaintiff did not produce the account of the expences incurred for repairs, and the defendants, or one of them, defired the referees not to come to a conclufion in the bulinefs, until fuch accounts were produced by the plaintiff.

Fourtbly. For, that the referees have decided in favor of the plaintiff, when they ought to have dedided in favor of the defendants.

J. INGERSOLL, for defendants.

Philadelphia, September 3d, 1802.

Andrew Bayard, one of the defendants, being duly fworn, declares and fays, that the facts contained in the above affidayit, are true, to the best of his knowledge and belief.

Before me,

JOHN INSKEEP, Aldermang

ANDREW BAYARD.

And that at a Supreme Court, held at Philadelphia, the oth day of September, 1802, before the honorable Edward Shippen, Doctor of Laws, Chief Juftice, and his affociates, Juftices of the faid Court, on motion of Mr. M'Kean, and by confent of Mr. Levy, the execution aforefaid was fet afide, and on mo. tion of Mr. Levy, a rule was obtained and entered for taking depofitions in faid caufe, in twenty-four hours notice, and the hearing of the argument was poftponed till the enfuing term.That on the 27th of October, 1802, a paper in the faid cause, whereof the following is a true copy, was filed in my office.

LEVY S. LEVY, Thomas Passmore,

264.

M'Kean.

verfus Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard.

In the Supreme Court

amicable action cafe. To Sept. 1302. Aug. 6, 1802, judgment.

I do hereby acknowledge and declare, that the above action is for the ufe of John Travis, of the city of Philadelphia, merchant.

THOMAS PASSMORE.

Philadelphia, October 26, 1802.

(Witness) JAMES GIBSON.

And that on the 16th day of November, 1802, the depofition of Edward V. Miller was filed, whereof the following is a true copy,

Thomas Passmore,
Verfus

Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard.

In the Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania.

Edward V. Miller, being folemnly fworn, doth depofe and fay, that he hath been clerk to Meffrs. Pettit and Bayard, the defendants, fince the month of July, in the year 1801, and is ftill employed by them in that capacity; that, the deponent has been the only clerk in the counting-houfe of the faid defendants, fince the month of December last-that he can fay, upon his oath, that he is careful of, and attentive to the bufinefs of his faid employers, generally; that he cannot fay, whether any letter from the plaintiff to faid defendants was delivered to him, at the counting-houfe of the latter, in the courfe of last fummer, but doth pofitively declare, that he uniformly and steadily, places all letters put into his hands for the defendants at their counting-house, in one certain place—that is, on a desk in the faid counting-houfe, at which the defendants write, and if any letter from the plaintiff to the faid Pettit and Bayard, was left with him la fammer, at faid counting-houfe, he is confident

he must have placed it for their infpection, in the ufual place, and further, faith not.

EDWARD V. MILLER.

Sworn this 16th November, 1802, before me,

EDWARD SHIPPEN.

I further certify, that the exceptions to the faid report. were fet down for argument at December term, eighteen hundred and two, but that the argument thereof, was deferred till March term following, and that the foregoing contains a true ftatement and copies of all the proceedings and papers in the action aforefaid, up to, and including the twenty-eighth December, eighteen hundred and two, and that

I will now, fir, proceed to read another record, which alJudes particularly to another fuit, in a criminal cafe.

I, Edward Burd, Prothonotary of the Supreme Court of the ftate of Pennsylvania, hereby certify, that at a Supreme Court held at Philadelphia, for the faid ftate, the eighteenth day of September, eighteen hundred and two, before the honorable Edward Shippen, and his affociates, Juftices of the faid Court, affidavits were filed, whereof the following are true copies :

The subscriber publicly declares, that Pettit and Bayard, of this city merchants, and quibbling underwriters, has basely kept from the subscriber, for nine months, about five hundred dollars, and that Andrew Bayard, the partner of Andrew Pettit, did, on the third or fourth instant, go before John Inskeep, Esq. alderman, and swore to that which was not true, by which the said Pettit and Bayard are enabled to keep the subscriber out of his money for about three months longer; and the said Bayard has meanly attempted to prevent others from paying the subscriber about two thou'sand five hundred dollars-but in this mean dirty action, he was disappointed in: I therefore, do publicly declare, Andrew Bayard, a lier, a raschal, and a coward; and I do offer two and a half per cent. to any good person or persons, to insure the solvency of Pettit and Bayard, for four months from this date.

Philadelphia, September 8th, 1802.'

Thomas Passmore,
Verfus

Andrew Pettit & Andrew Bayard.

THOMAS PASSMORE.

Supreme Court, September term, 1802.

James Kitchen, of the city of Philadephia, innkeeper, being duly fworn, declares, and fays, that, on Wednesday, the eighth day of September, inftant, he faw Thomas Paffmore, of the city of Philadelphia, whofe name is fubfcribed to the writing on the other fide, place, and affix this paper to a board in the exchange room, in the city tavern, and that the faid Thomas

Paffmore, in the prefence of the deponent, attached the fame by wafers to the board in the faid room, in manner, as advertisements are ufually posted up,

JAS. KITCHEN,

Andrew Bayard, of the city of Philadelphia, merchant, being duly fworn, depofeth and faith, that the annexed paper, fubfcribed with the name of Thomas Paffmore, is in the proper hand writing of Thomas Paffmore, of the city of Philadelphia; that the contents of the faid paper relate, as this deponent verily believes to a fuit depending in this honorable Court, wherein the faid Thomas Paffmore is plaintiff, and Andrew Pettit and this deponent are defendants; and this deponent further faith, that the affidavit taken before John Infkeep, Efq. alderman, in order to fubftantiate the exceptions to the report in the faid fuit, is the oath taken by this deponent, to which the faid paper refers; and this deponent further faith, that he has no fuit, controverfy, or difpute with the faid Thomas Paffmore, other than what arifes from the faid fuit depending in this Court. ANDREW BAYARD.

Sworn in open Court, this 17th Sept. 1802.

EDWARD BURD, Frot.

That, thereupon, on motion of Mr. Dallas, a rule was granted by the court aforefaid, that Thomas Paffmore fhould fhew caufe on the first day of December term, then next following, why an attachment should not iffue against him for a contempt; that afterwards at a Supreme Court, held at Philadelphia before the faid juftices, on the eighth day of December, eighteen hundred and two, after argument of counfel, an attachment was awarded against the said Thomas Paffmore, that thereupon the faid Thomas Paffmore, with Hugh Henry, as his furety, entered into a recognizance, before the faid Court, whereof the following is a true copy :

Thomas Passmore, tent. refpublica,in 300 dollars. ON CONDIHugh Henry, tent. refpublica, in 300 dollars. S

TION,

That if Thomas Paffimore, fhall perfonally be and appear from day to day, during the continuance of this Court, to answer fuch interrogatories as fhall be exhibited against him; and alfo to abide the judgment of the Court in the charge exhibited against him, this recognizance to be void, otherwife of force, &c.

That during faid December term, to wit, on the thirteenth day of December, in the year laft aforefaid, interrogatories were filed, whereof the following is a true copy :—

These interrogatories, and the answers thereto, will be found in pages 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19-of this book.

And that at the fame Court, held on the fame day, Mr. Levy argued in behalf of the faid Thomas Paffmore, Mr. Dallas argued in behalf of the commonwealth, and that afterwards, to wit, at a Supreme Court held at Philadelphia, on the twentyeighth day of December, eighteen hundred and two, before all the juftices of the faid Court, it was adjudged, that the faid Thomas Paffmore fhould be committed to the custody of the fheriff of Philadelphia county, in the debtor's apartment of the common jail of faid county, for the space of thirty days, and pay a fine of fifty dollars to the commonwealth, and in the mean time that he fhould be committed, &c.

(Seal)

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I, the faid Edward Burd, have hereunto fet my hand, and affixed the feal of faid Su preme Court, at Philadelphia, this twenty-fecond day of December, in the year of our Lord MDCCCIII. EDWARD BURD, Prot.

I believe, with fubmiffion to the Court, that this is the only record teftimony that we fhall offer at this time, and having fpoken to the gentlemen of the counfel, concerned for the refpondents, it appears they are not quite prepared for proceeding with the teftimony, and as it would be equally convenient for us

Mr. DALLAS. No, fir, we do not wish any delay on our

account.

Mr. RODNEY. It feems then, that I have miftaken the gen tlemen. We fhall proceed to examine the witneffes, on the charges read in the article of impeachment. The Court will pleafe to have Thomas Paffinore called.

The oath was administered by Mr. Bryan, the clerk, to THOMAS FASSMORE.

He was requefied by Mr. RODNEY, the counsel for the profecution, to flate to the Court all that he recollected, relative to the action between himself, and Pettit and Bayard, fome time between "the 18th of September, and December 1802."

Mr. PASSMORE's teftimony was as follows: