Front Page Titles (by Subject) ROBERT TROUP TO JAY. - The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 3 (1782-1793)
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
ROBERT TROUP TO JAY. - John Jay, The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, vol. 3 (1782-1793) 
The Correspondence and Public Papers of John Jay, ed. Henry P. Johnston, A.M. (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1890-93). Vol. 3 (1782-1793).
About Liberty Fund:
Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.
The text is in the public domain.
Fair use statement:
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
ROBERT TROUP TO JAY.
Sunday, June 10, 1792.
My Dear Sir,
Upon looking over the memorandum you left with me I think I may venture to write you one letter more. This City at present is extremely agitated. The canvassing has proceeded so far as to reduce it to a certainty that you will be elected if the Otsego votes be counted. Albany County yielded you a majority of 734, which has proved decisive. Montgomery, Tioga, Otsego, Ontario, and Clinton Counties remain yet to be canvassed. In Montgomery we expect a majority of between 2 and 300. Ontario will yield a majority of about 100 for Clinton. Tioga will most probably not be canvassed, as the box was delivered by a person deputed by a deputy. All parties allow you the majority if the Otsego votes be received. I suppose from the best information I can get the final majority for you will be about 200 or 250.
As to the Otsego votes the question is extremely doubtful. Some say it is to be determined this day; others that it will be decided in the morning. There has been a great deal of writing upon the subject, and every possible maneuvri’g practised by Clinton and his partners, the Livingstons, to dull (?) the canvassers. Some days ago the Canvassers referred the question respecting the Otsego votes and some question respecting those of Clinton and Tioga Counties to Burr and King for their opinions. This reference was understood by us all as intended to procure a cloak for the Canvassers to cover their villainy in rejecting the votes of Otsego. They knew Burr to be decidedly with them, and that he would give them an opinion to justify their views. Burr and King were conferring together for near two days with a view to fairness (?) as Burr affected to wish.
The quibbles of chicanery he made use of are characteristic of the man. They finally departed, and have given opinions directly opposite to each other. King’s is bottomed upon sound legal and political principles; Burr’s is a most pitiful one, and will damn his reputation as a lawyer. It is flatly against canvassing the Otsego votes and is grounded upon the British Statutes respecting Sheriffs. A refutation of the principal ground of Burr’s opinion is contained in a publication just sent to the Printers. We all consider Burr’s opinion as such a shameful prostitution of his talents, and as so decisive a proof of the real infamy of his character, that we are determined to rip him up. We have long been wishing to see him upon paper, and we are now gratified with the most favorable showing he could have made.
After Burr’s and King’s opinions were received, the canvassers met and discussed the subject for upwards of two hours and then adjourned without coming to a decision. The next day, the lawyers, who are friendly to your interest, met, and we determined to address the public on the subject of the Otsego votes and give a formal opinion upon it as lawyers. The address, with our opinion and names subscribed to it, appeared yesterday. We have taken a bold and decisive part, and one which I think became us as independent citizens. Our address, which is short, concludes with a challenge to come forward with their case and argue the legality of our opinion.
The publishing a fair opinion threw the city into a greater ferment and increased the indignation against the attempt to reject the votes. It threw the Clintonian lawyers also into a ferment; they went about the city to and from the place of canvassing like mad men. The canvassers had early yesterday morning determined to go on with canvassing. They did so, and in canvassing the votes of Clinton’s strong town in Montgomery they found a majority of no more than thirty odd for Clinton, instead of between one and two hundred. Upon this discovery, they broke up in confusion and said they were determined to decide the question respecting the Otsego votes before they went further. They adjourned to Corre’s to be more private, and after several hours discussion broke up again without deciding the question. In this state the thing remains. It is said that to-day or to-morrow morning the determination will take place. The law required them to finish the business of canvassing on Tuesday next. We have hopes that the canvassers will not, at least that all of them will not, take so desperate a step as to reject the votes and declare Clinton Governor against the known and acknowledged voice of the people. My hopes, however, are not very strong, considering the situation of that infamous party. Jacob Morris is attending the canvassers as a special deputy from the county, and claims of them, as matter of right, that the votes be canvassed. I am persuaded if the votes be rejected the business will become very serious in the State at large. Clinton is now about 500 ahead of you; with the Montgomery, Ontario, and Otsego votes we are confident of success. This is admitted by Clinton’s adherents.
I am in the utmost haste and anxiety; our friend Jones is well prepared and reserves himself till the last meeting. He is as firm as a rock. Your friends have done every thing that was right and consistent with their own characters, and regard to yours.
God bless you,