■
 
 t^-^ J§. 
 
 NARRATIVE 
 
 O F A 
 
 TRANSACTION 
 
 WHICH PASSED IN 
 
 B E N G A L in 1782-3, 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 JAMES FRASER, ES^ 
 
 A N D T H E 
 
 Executors of the late Lieutenant. 
 Colonel HAN NAT. 
 
 B Y 
 
 ROBERT STEWART, ESQ^ 
 
 CAPTAIN IN THE MILITARY SERVICE OF THE EAST- 
 
 INDIA COMPANY. 
 
 ¥iat jfujlitia^ mat Qslum. 
 
 I 7S7.
 
 N.B. This Narrative was publiflied inLondon, in the month 
 of April laft. Only a few copies were fent to Scotland, for the pe- 
 rufal of Mr Stewart's friends. Within thefe ten days, an Anfwer 
 to that Narrative has been difperfed in this City. To that Anfwer 
 a Reply will foon be made and publifhed. In the mean time, Mr 
 Stewart has publiflied a fecond edition of his Narrative, that it 
 may be as generally in the hands of the Public as the Anfwer. 
 
 • £i>iM«uRG»j 2i Aiiguji 1787, 
 
 ^ 8 ^ T
 
 >• 
 
 SIR, London, Manchejler Square, ^tf> April 1787. 
 
 "When I left town laftfummcr, I had determined never more to trouble myfcif with 
 regard to your conduft towards the Executors of the late Colonel Hannsy. But as, 
 upon the prefent occafion of your canvafling for a place in the direftion of that Com- 
 pany, which I had the honour to ferve, I undedland, that you and your friends, to 
 palliate and throw a veil over your condu<V, have attempted to queftion mine. 1 feel 
 myfelf authorifed, nay called upon, to undertake, in the face of the Public, lojujlify 
 the charge I made, by fuch an authentication, as will at once fix it upon you, in the 
 underftanding of every man who is intererted to form an opinion about it ; and, at the 
 fame time, explain why I declined meeting you as a Gentleman, whether in private fo» 
 ci€ty, or in the field. 
 
 1 NEED fcarcely obferve to you, that the largeft poffiblc bounds of a letter will not 
 admit of fuch a fpecification of circumfl:,inces, and fuch a producftion of proofs, as I 
 am prepared to fubmit to the Public, relative to the fubjecT: in queltion. But I take it 
 to be fufficient for the purpole of this letter, that I apprife you and the Public, as I 
 now do, that a full Narrative of the tranfadion I allude to, referring to proofs and w//- 
 TieJJes, is now preparing for the prefs. 
 
 In the mean time, I Ihall content myfelf with re-afTcrting, in this brief but public 
 manner, that it is true, that a few months after the death of the late Colonel Hannay, 
 of Bengal, who left his eftate indebted to you only in a fmall balance of between thirty 
 and forty pounds, you made an attempt to recover of his Executors (the brothers of 
 your deceafed friend) the value of a Note of hand, of about One thoufand pounds, 
 with intereft upon it at 12 percent, for fix years back, confcious, as you were, of its 
 M having been paid by the Colonel during his life. 
 
 ""' That, in fupport of this claim, you praftifed every art that the nature of the tranf- 
 
 aftion would bear, for the recovery of this pretended debt ; but afterwards betrayed, 
 by your fubfequent conduft, a confcioufnefs that it was not juft. When called upon 
 by the Executors to give fome further account of the demand than what the Note im- 
 ported, you conftantly evaded their application— you mutilated ont letter, znd fabrica- 
 ted ■inoihcv. Availing yourfelf of the eafy confidence of your friend, who had nc- 
 gle(n:ed to take up his Note, and of the ignorance of the Executors refpecting the juftice 
 of the claim, you flood upon your Note merely, as the Jew in the play does upon his 
 bond; and having, under the perfuafion that the Executors would never get-deeper in- 
 to the affair than the Note itfelf, at one time anfwered their reafonable demand of 
 fome account of the debt with the Ihort, but fignificant monofyllables of " wj Ncte,"" 
 and " tJje law," at another time, hazarded the daring offer, that you would confirm 
 the faft of non-payment by your oath ; at length, when it was known that the lixtcu- 
 tors hadthemfelves difcovered among the papers of the deceafed, the accounts you had 
 thought proper to withhold, you deemed it piudent, like the fame Jew, «' to rtay no 
 longer queftion," went at once to the Executors, and not only offered to deliver, but 
 preffed their acceptance of the Note, and readily paid their Attorney the expences in- 
 curred by fome legal Iteps taken, hitherto in vain, 10 compel you lo to do. 
 
 The Executors, upon whom this claim was made by you, are now rcfident in Lon- 
 don, and when called upon can bear tettimony to the account I have given of your 
 conduft, as well as authenticate the letters atid other papers I have in my poffcffiouj. 
 which will fpeak for themfelves. 
 
 It is true, that this affair has been referred to arbitration, and your friends have 
 availed themfelves of the award given, as they fay, in your fav,our ; but upon what 
 principle, and under the operation of what motives fome of the arbitrators gave this 
 award, will foon appear by a letter in my poffelhon, which I am authorifed to pubiiih ;■ 
 andunder the fandlion of which, agreeing with me, as it does, in- thinking that your 
 fiibfequent condudt has opened the tranfaction again, and removed the reltricT:ion of 
 the award, I now appeal to the impartial tribunal of the Pu£>l;c, who will decide wjie- 
 ther your charadler fuffers by falfehood or by truth. 
 
 3> 
 
 CJ 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 IW 
 
 p R O B E R T S T E W A RT. 
 
 James Eraser, Efq; 
 
 35739a
 
 To tlie PROPRIETORS of EAST-INDIA STOCK, 
 
 LADIES and GENTLEMEN, 
 A S I have now, in vindication of myfelf, publiflied the Narrative of Mr Frafer's 
 •^ ■^ conduct, and have appealed from the Award, on which alone he feems to reft his 
 charailer, to the impartial tribunal of the Public ; I leave to their decifion, whether I 
 have fpoken the language of calumny or of truth. 
 
 Mr Frafer has alledged, that I brought forward thefe charges againft him with a 
 view to injure him at the approaching eledlion of Eaft India Direftors. It is evident, 
 that as I am neither myfelf, nor any of my particular friends, candidates for the India 
 Direction, I can have no private intereft to ferve in fo doing : Yet I am free to coq- 
 fefs, that I fhould fee, with great regret, a man of Mr Frafer's charaEler* in the Direc- 
 tion of a Company which I have the honour to ferve, and in the profperity of which I 
 Ihall ever feel myfelf particularly interefted. 
 
 As to the abuCve language in his letter, it is what I might cxpeft, and what I treat 
 with the contempt it deferves. One thing, however, it is neceflary to take notice of; 
 he reproaches me with cowardice, becaufe I declined meeting him as a gentleman. 
 Thofe who know me will acquit me of being under the influence of any fuch motive ; 
 and I challenge Mr Frafer, in the courfe of a long acquaintance, to produce a fingle 
 inftance in fupport of his charge. It is well known, that an appeal to the laws of ho- 
 nour, can only be admitted among honourable men. The man who commits, or at- 
 tempts to commit a crime againft fociety, which the laws of every fociety punilh, pro- 
 ftitutes his honour with his integrity, and renounces for ever the claims of a gentle- 
 man. To meet him, therefore, in the field, would be to contradict by my actions, the 
 charges which I have brought againft him, and give the world room to fufpe£t, that I 
 wanted to perfuade others of the truth of what I did not believe myfelf. 
 
 There is, however, another appeal which Mr Frafer may yet make : I mean to 
 the laws of his country ; where, if I have mifreprefented his conduct, he will certain- 
 ly obtain redrefs. 
 
 As to his threats of infult, I am perfuaded he knows me too well, ferioufly to en- 
 tertain any fuch idea. I fliall neither feek him, nor avoid him ; but if his prefent fi- 
 tuation Ihould drive him to take any fuch defperate ftep, he may try it once ; it will 
 be my fault, if he attempts it a fecond time. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 Londsn, Ajril 10. i-jSj. ROBERT STEWART. 
 
 • Nam gloriam, honorem, imperhim, bonus ignavus aqtte fibi exoptant. Sed ille vera 
 via. nititiir; huic quia bona artes defunt^ dolis, atquc fallaciis contcndit, SitLUST. Belli 
 Catiljn.
 
 IT is, perhaps, expedient for every man who addrefTes, or who- 
 expe<5ls to attradl the notice of the Public, to fliew, either 
 that the fubjedl upon which he addrefTes them is interefting in 
 itfelf, or that, by lome confequence, the PubHc is interefted in 
 it. 1 feel fenfibly, therefore, the delicacy of my fituation, while 
 I am about to Jhliclt at leaft the favour of that notice and at- 
 tention, to tranfadions, certainly neither in their own nature 
 interefting, or in which the Public can be properly confidered 
 to have any very deep concern. But I know that there is in 
 men a natural principle of juftice, to which we may fafely appeal 
 where-ever fraud and artifice are triumphant. The tribunal of the 
 Public, therefore, is peculiarly open to the vindication of men's 
 charaders, whenever they are publicly traduced ; and, though it 
 is neither to be amufed nor inftrudled, neither to be alarmed up- 
 on the fubjed of any great impending evil, nor congratulated 
 upon any important good ; it is yet always the great and willing 
 arbiter of right and wrong between man and man, and with 
 whom nothing is infignificant, and none inconliderable, when 
 fraud and falfehood are to be deteded, or the charader of an ho- 
 neft individual is to be fet right. 
 
 Under thefe perfuafions, and purfuant to an engagement i 
 brought myfelf under, in a letter addrefled by me to James Fra- 
 fer, Efq; oi yefterday's date, I proceed to give an account of 
 certain tranfadions which rook place at Bengal, about the end 
 
 A of
 
 ( ^ ) 
 
 of the year 1782, between Mr Frafer and the executors of the 
 late Col. Alexander Hannay. To a confiderable part of this bu- 
 finefs I was myfelf a witnefs ; but, in relating it, I fliall alledge 
 no fa(51: for which I do not refer, either to Gentlemen of the moft 
 unimpeachable credit, now upon the fpot, who were themfelves 
 concerned, or to authenticated copies of original documents. 
 In the courfe of this narrative, I think it will appear, beyond 
 the poffibility of doubt, that Mr Frafer was guilty of the grofleft 
 falfehood, which he offered to confirm by his oath, in fupport of 
 a foul and deliberate attempt to defraud, of a confiderable fum 
 of money, the brothers and relations of his deceafed friend, 
 whofe confidence he had poffeffed, and with the management of 
 whofe affairs he had been entrufted. 
 
 But before I enter into the particulars of thefe tranfa<5lions. It 
 may be proper to flate how.it became neceffary for me to lay them 
 before the Public. 
 
 Soon after the inflitution of the Bengal Society here, of which I 
 was an original member, Mr Frafer was propofed for admiflion. 
 I confidered it as my duty to take the Gentleman who propofed 
 him, afide, and having difclofed to him thofe circumflances of 
 Mr Frafer's condudl which I am here about to relate, I fatisfied 
 him how improper a man he was to be admitted into any fociety ; 
 and from this reprefentation he relinquiflied his intention. Soon 
 after this, I received a letter from Mr Frafer, arraigning me for 
 my illiberal attack, as he called it, upon his charader. This 
 letter produced fome interchange between us upon the fubjedl, 
 that terminated in a reference to arbitrators, who, by their award, 
 dated 30th of March 1785, (vide Appendix, E e) declared their 
 opinion, " That Mr Frafer was acquitted of any intention to de- 
 fraud ; but, at the fame time, that the inaccuracies in his ac- 
 counts and corrcfpondence were fufficient to have mifled Captain 
 
 Stewart j
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 Stewart; and that they unanlnioufly agreed that the difpute fhonld 
 not be carried any farther by either of the parties, and that Mr 
 Frafer fhould not feek any farther fatisfadion." 
 
 Notwithflanding the terms of this award, which exadled entire 
 fubmifhon from, and impofed abfohite filence upon both of us, 
 as to this affair, which, out of refped to fome of the perfons by 
 ■whom it had been made, I determined to obferve, I received a 
 letter from Mr Frafer, dated 31 ft March 1785, (vide Appendix, Cc) 
 in which, quoting the very words of the award, and thus turn- 
 ing it againft itfelf, he availed himfelf of the acquittal he derived 
 under it, to refle(fl upon that condudl of mine which gave rife to it, 
 in terms of the moft triumphant infolence. He has fince talked of 
 infulting or chaftifing me, or held fome fuch language. He has, 
 fince his beginning to canvafs for the India Direction, taken the 
 liberty to fliew the award upon all occafions ; attributing, as I 
 have been informed, the charge from which it acquits him to 
 mahce, and my forbearance to cowardice. 
 
 Under thefe circumftances, confcious as I am, not only of the 
 recflitude of my motives, but of the truth of whatever 1 had faid 
 againft Mr Frafer, I need not defcribe my feelings on this occa- 
 fion. I was, of courfe, impatient to vindicate myfelf from thefe 
 unjuft afperfions of my accufer; and being reftrained by nothing 
 but the obligation I felt myfelf under by the award, I applied 
 by letter, a few days ago (vide Appendix, F f ) to three of the 
 gentlemen who made it, for the purpofe of being enabled to fub- 
 mit the affair to a public decifion, which the award, as it ftood 
 unexplained, feemed to prevent. I received from them the an- 
 fwer that will be found in Appendix, G g; in confequence of 
 which, I now feel myfelf at liberty to do what I ought to have 
 done long ago. 
 
 Mr
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 Mr T " mes Frafer being fettled at Patna, in Bengal, in the cha- 
 racter of a merchant and agent, began, about the year 1773, to 
 tranfacl bufinefs for the late Lieut.-Col, Alex, Hannay, as ap- 
 pears by letters and other documents found amongft the decea- 
 fed's papers. 
 
 He was llkewife employed, about the fame time, as agent for 
 Col. Harper, who was jointly concerned with Colonel (at that time 
 only Major) Hannay, in a contradl for fupplying the Nabob, Su- 
 jah Doisjlah, with elephants ; the performance of which, for their 
 mutual benefit, upon Col. Harper's leaving India in 1774, devol- 
 ved principally upon Col. Hannay. 
 
 On the 30th of April 1775, Mr Frafer appears to have deliver- 
 ed in to Col. Hannay, his firft account-current with him, of that 
 date, (vide Appendix, N° I.), by which a balance was due to Mr 
 Frafer of CtRs 8294 8, or£829, 9J:. 
 
 The next account that appears to have been fent in, was of the 
 30th of April 1776, (vide Appendix, N° II.), which commences 
 with the balance of the former account, and by which the balance 
 due to Mr Frafer was Ct Rs 9233 3 8, or ^923 6 s. 6d. 
 
 On the 9th of Ocflober following, another was delivered in, be- 
 ginning with the balance of the preceding one, when the fumi 
 due upon the whole to Mr Frafer was Ct Rs 10,120 8 6, or 
 £ 1012, I /. ; for which balance, it is material to obferve, that in 
 the letter with which Mr Frafer accompanied this account, he 
 requefts Col. Hann:vy to give him fome written acknowledgement. 
 " If you approfve^ (J'^ys be) , fend me a chit^ or Jometh'ing in the pro^ 
 niijfory zi'aj'y acknoiv/edging, that you this day otve me Jo much mo- 
 vey." A larger cxcrad of the letter will be found in the Appen- 
 dix, [B], 
 
 Colonel
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 Colonel Hannay's anfwer to this letter does not appear; but a 
 note, dated three days thereafter, and for that fum, was, in fad\, 
 given by him. 
 
 Thus matters flood till 1781, when Mr Frafer appears again, 
 delivering in another account-current. It might be expecfled, that, 
 according to the example of the former ones, this, which was da- 
 ted the 30th of April in that year, fhould ftart with the balance 
 flruck the 9th of Odober 1776, for which the note had been 
 given. That, however, was not the cafe ; but it conftitutes the 
 very foundation of the charge now made againfl Mr Frafer, that 
 every article of the account given in and balanced the 9th of Oc- 
 tober 1776, was flated over again from the beginning in this of 
 the 30th April 1781. This will appear manifeflly \ipon a fimple 
 comparifon of the two accounts, (vide Appendix, N° IV.j, which 
 will be found to anfwer down to the 9th of Oc5lober 1776, article 
 for article, fum for fum, date for date ; fo that of the fad there 
 can be no doubt : and it is one of thofe fa<5ls in the cafe, the 
 mofl material to be attended to. The reafon of it will appear 
 by Mr Frafer's own letter of the 13th of July following, (which 
 likewife, is therefore worthy of being attended to, vide Ap- 
 pendix, [C]), to have been, that he might be thereby enabled 
 to charge inter eji upon each of thefe fums from their refpedive 
 dates ; which he had not, it feems, done in the account fent in 
 1776. 
 
 In a year after, viz. on the 30th April, which was within four 
 months of Colonel Hannay's death, Mr Frafer fent in the lafl ac- 
 count that was flated in the Colonel's lifetime, commencino- with 
 the balance flruck the preceding year, (vide Appendix, N° V.) ; 
 and upon the balance of this lafl account, Mr Frafer's claim upon 
 the Colonel appeared now to be reduced to Ct Rs 314 15 8, or 
 £31, 9 f. It cannot be too much enforced, that, as this lafl Ac- 
 
 B count
 
 ( 6 } 
 
 count of April 1782, fo balanced, began with the balance of the 
 preceding one of April 1781, which balance was ftruck upon the 
 ivhole of the accounts between the parties, from the firft com- 
 mencement of their connedlion in 1773, it follows, that in thus 
 balancing accounts on the 30th April 1782, juil previous to Co- 
 lonel Hannay's death, this note, which was an acknowledgement 
 of a balance due the 9th of Odober, was included, and confe- 
 quently that the fum of Ct Rs 314 15 8 above mentioned, was 
 all that was at that time due from Colonel Hannay to Mr Frafer. 
 
 Colonel Hannay died in the beginning of September following, 
 leaving feveral executors, and Mr R.amfay Hannay, his brother, 
 the aCling one. 
 
 It has been mentioned, that Mr Frafer, befides being agent to 
 Col. Hannay, was concerned for Col. Harper, relative to a con- 
 trail for elephants, in which that gentleman and Col. Hannay had 
 a joint intereft. Soon after the death of Col, Hannay, Mr Frafer 
 delivered in to his executors, the claim he had upon the eftate, on 
 the part of Col. Harper, in refpedl to the above contradl. As 
 this narrative is to comprehend fome account of that claim, the 
 order of time feems to require that what is to be told concerning 
 that claim fliould have priority. But, as part of the evidence 
 of what is to be objedled upon it, arifes out of what regards an- 
 other claim of Mr Frafer's upon the executors of Col. Hannay, 
 made in his own right, I fhall, for obvious reafons, invert the 
 order of time, and begin by reprefenting Mr Frafer's conduct, re- 
 fpedling the claim made by him upon Col. Hannay's executors, ia 
 his own right. 
 
 Mr
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 Mr Frafer's claim, as agent of Col. Harper, was made on the 
 26th of Oclober 1782, and difcharged. 
 
 While this, however, was depending, Mr Frafer took an oppor- 
 tunity of mentioning to Mr Ramfay Hannay, that he had a demand 
 on his brother's eftate in his own right; but that the bufniefs of 
 Colonel Harper might not be interrupted, he agreed to poftpone 
 it till that Ihould be finally difpofed of. Accordingly, foon after 
 the fum that had been agreed to be due to Col. Harper had been 
 paid Mr Frafer, he called upon Mr Ramfay H^innay; and after 
 fitting with him a fhort time, prefented him with an account- 
 current between himfelfandMr Hannay's deceafed brother, which 
 was exa(flly fimilar to the laft that had been delivered in to Col. 
 Hannay himfelf in his lifetime, (vide Appendix, N^ V.), the ba- 
 lance of which, in favour of Mr Frafer, was Ct Rs 314 15 8. 
 Mr Hannay, obferving that the balance was about what he had 
 believed it to be, immediately agreed it fliould be paid ; upon 
 which Mr Frafer faid, that this, however, was not all ; for that 
 he had another demand upon the eflate, for a promilTory note 
 which the deceafed owed him, for the principal fum of Ct Rs 
 10,120 8 5, or ;^ 10 1 2 IS. ivhich he accordingly produced. This 
 note v>ras dated, Buxar, Odober 13. 1776, and was the fame 
 that had been given him by Col. Hannay, for the balance ftruck 
 between them on the 9th of that fame month. 
 
 Mr Ramfay Hannay, having flrong reafons for being perfuaded 
 in his own mind, that the claim of the note was not juft, ex- 
 preffed his furprife to Mr Frafer at this additional demand, con- 
 fidering that a balance had been ftruck juft before his brother's 
 death, and the eafy circumftances in which he had died. Mr 
 Frafer agreed, that it might feem furprifing, but obferved to Mr 
 Hannay, that he could be no ftranger to the indolence of his bro- 
 ther's difpoiition; adding, that he had often promifed to pay 
 
 him.
 
 ( 8 ) 
 
 him, but had never done fo. Mr Ramfay told him, he (hould 
 make Inquiry about it, and would let Mr Frafer know the refult; 
 and upon this they parted. 
 
 Mr Ramfay Hannay was not long in communicating the affair 
 to his brother Mr Johnfton Hannay, who had ftill flronger rea- 
 fons for being ftruck with the demand than Mr Ramfay. Colo- 
 nel Hannay's engagements had taken him to Luckno'w early in 
 1782 ; he left that place in June, arrived at Calcutta in Auguft, 
 and died there the September following. But, before leaving 
 Lucknow, where he had remained fome time to fettle his affairs, 
 he had exprefTed his fatisfadion to his brother Mr Johnfton, 
 (who was there with him), that he had fettled accounts with Mr 
 Frafer, and that he owed \\\x:a. nothing of any Jize . Mr Johnfton 
 Hannay knew that his brother had brought a very large fum in 
 fpecie with him from Lucknow. The Colonel pafled in his way 
 to Calcutta through Dinapore, where Mr Frafer then was, wind- 
 ing up his concerns to proceed to Europe. It ftruck the two bro- 
 thers, therefore, as very lingular, that Colonel Hannay, with a 
 large fum of money in his hands, fhould have pafled Mr Frafer's 
 door, and yet left a debt of that magnitude unpaid ; and that Mr 
 Frafer himfelf fhould not, had it been really due, have demanded 
 it, which yet had not been pretended. On the other hand, the 
 Note purported to be an unpaid one, and they could only deter- 
 mine between themfelves to make every poflible fearch among the 
 deceafed's papers, that might lead to a diicovery of the truth. 
 But, in the mean time, that there might be no mifapprehenfion 
 as to the way in which the Note was claimed by Mr Frafer, Mr 
 Frafer, who was adling executor, wrote him the letter in the Ap- 
 pendix, marked E. 
 
 The purpofe of this letter was to know categorically^ whether the 
 promiflbry Note was claimed independent of the Account Current. 
 
 —What.
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 - — What is the anfwer to it ? Does he fay yes or no, or give any 
 dire(5l anfvver to the qiieftion ? — His anfwer is too curious not to 
 be inferted here •verbatm. — 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY, Esq; 
 
 Jt> 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 The Promiflbry Note, being neither Jlated nor charged in the 
 Account^ miijl necejfarily be independent of that Account^ and the Ba' 
 lance of it. If you wifh for any elucidation of the Account ^ or the 
 mode, or the amount of my receipts, be pleafcd to inform me. 
 
 I am, dear Sir, your's moft obediently, 
 
 ■ m.-n J. FRASER* 
 
 The language of truth is bold and fimple. It is needlefs to ob- 
 ferve, that this anfwer, like the ufual anfwers of guilty men even 
 to indifferent queftions, is indirect and argumentative. 
 
 The Meflrs Hannays, however, having got their anfwer, fet 
 about fearching amongft the deceafed's papers, for any thing that 
 might juflify the perfuafion they had in their own minds on the 
 fubje(n: ; but not meeting with the fuccefs they expe<^ed, they 
 determined to try what they could get by applying to Mr Frafef 
 himfelf, and accordingly wrote him the letter marked G in the 
 Appendix. 
 
 Mr Frafer's anfwer to this letter is that marked H in the ap-* 
 pendix ; upon which this is obfervable — Had Mr Frafer's de-* 
 mand of this Note been a fudden one, and immediately, complied 
 y?ith by the Executors, fo as to have left him no occafion to think 
 
 C any
 
 (r 16 ) 
 
 any more about it, it might here be granted him, for argument's 
 fake, (though it is evjen jri that fuppofition fcarcely pofljble\ that, 
 notwithftanding it had been included, in his account-current but 
 a few months before, the demand over again was a miftake and 
 an overfight. But what is very remarkable of the letter now un- 
 der confideration is, the deliberation and particularity with which 
 he talks of the Note ; afFecling to explain its hiftory, and to com- 
 municate every circumftance attending it. How confiftent this 
 is with the idea of an overfight, let thofe who read it judge ; and 
 how poffit>le it was that his mind fliould have dwelt upon it 
 with the particularity with which it appears to have done, and 
 •under the reference which this letter fuppofes to his books, and 
 yet that he fhould neither have met with, nor recolledled how it 
 was liquidated, let thofe believe who are totally unacquainted with 
 the operatioa of the human mind, and with human affairs. 
 
 But Mr Frafer's mind had not yet done thinking of the Note, 
 however lalling the illufion of it might be. hmboldened by the 
 perfuafion that the Executors could not difprove it,, he faw np 
 reafon why, if the /)rmci/>^/ demand wa,s lu(tained, it fliould not 
 carry interejl; and he accordingly wrote the letter in the Appen- 
 dix marked I. 
 
 About this time, however, the Executors having, in the courfe 
 of their fearch among their brother's; papers, got lome farther ii;r 
 fight into the affair, tending to confirm them in the fufpicion 
 they had eiltertained of it, they determined they would call upon 
 Mr Frafer again, to fupport his demand by vouchers of fome 
 fort ; and particularly applied to hitn to produce the account that 
 had been balanced the 3Dth of April 178 1, which the reader will 
 recolledl included the particulars for which the Note had been 
 giveu. TKis they did by the letter marked in the Appendix, K. 
 
 \i\i\ His
 
 ( >« ) 
 
 His anfwer (L) to this letter might be left to fpeak for itfelf, 
 without any comment — Hut I cannot omit making this obferva- 
 tion upon it — The conclufion of it fays, " I will fend the account 
 you v/ant, as foon as I can get it copied ; but my writer has been 
 fick, and abfent from me thefe three weeks." Firft, the fad is, 
 that, whether it was that Mr Frafer's writer never recovered, he 
 never did fend the account demanded of him. — But the point is, 
 that this conclufion admits that he was in polTefliGn of the ac- 
 count demanded ; which, having been demanded, and being 
 thus recognized by him, it is impoffible but he muft have refer- 
 red to ; namely, to an account which flated the feveral articles, 
 for the balajice of which the very note had been given, which he 
 was ftill charging as unpaid. 
 
 This lafl. letter was dated the 22d of March 1783. But it was 
 fcarcely written when Mr Frafer appears to have thought he had 
 been a great deal too condefcending to the MefT. Hannay upon 
 the occaiion, if he had not indeed been rather in a dream when 
 he wrote it. For, the very next day he writes them another let- 
 ter, in which, beginning thus: '"'' On a reference made to your note 
 of ycjierday, 'which ivas deli'vered to me jifl as I got up from fleep" 
 (vide Appendix, M) recollecfling himfelf on the «(7/'«;r of his de- 
 mand, that it was upon a title that proved itfelf he corredls the 
 too eafy compliance with which he had liUened lo requifi- 
 tions o{ 'vouchers ; he no longer excufes himfelf upon the ficknefs- 
 of his writer, but difclaiming at once all obligation to give any 
 fatisfa(5lion whatever about it, more than what the Note itfelf af- 
 forded, he throws the gauntlet at the Gentleman to whom he 
 •writes ; with much decency tries to terrify him and his col- 
 leagues, by putting them in mind of the oath under winch they 
 •were afling ; and boldly challenges his demand as a legal one. 
 But this is not all. In this fame letter, written with much eviii^ 
 dent determination upon the fubje<f>, Mr Frafer takes upon him- 
 felf
 
 ( 12 } 
 
 fdf to " kno%u that which he demands to be juflly his right ;" w^ich 
 at the fame time, however, it is obferveable, " he oives it injujlice 
 to himfelf to adopt the mojl expedient manner of fupporting'' — which 
 is, by with-holding all information whatever upon the fubjedl, 
 though confeffedly pofleffed of that which was requefled of him,, 
 and throwing himfelf upon the laiv. Being to appeal to the law 
 upon it — 'Jafla ejl Alea — he thinks he may as well take all the law 
 will give him-— as he gets bolder in his remedies, he rifes in his 
 demands ; and " knowing this Note of Hand to be very clearly 
 his right," whereas he had at firfl: declared only for lo per cent. 
 upon it, he has now been told, that " 12 per cent, is the intereft 
 allowed by the Court," and 1 2 per cent he will have. And that 
 thefe Executors may want no warning of the folly of withftand- 
 ing a Gentleman's legal and rightful demand, he is candid enough 
 to give them notice, that " the refufal of a demand authorifes the 
 charge of intereft to the day of payment." — " As thefe circum- 
 flances (he goes on) make a confiderable difference, I think it ne- 
 ceflary to mention them, that they may not afterwards appear 
 novel." 
 
 Such was the laft letter, in which Mr Frafer even ventured to 
 afTert his title to recover upon the note in queftion; and, to be 
 fure, it left little to be faid on that fide. But, vmfortunately for 
 him, at this very time, the executors had actually found all the 
 accounts referred to in a preceding part of this narrative ; by 
 which it appeared moft manifeftly, that the fpecific note, now- 
 claimed, had been merged in the accounts given in the 30th of 
 April 1781 ; the balance of which having been carried to a fub- 
 fequent, and the lajl account delivered to Col. Hannay himfelf on 
 the 30th of April, the year after the balance of this lajl account 
 was ftruck at Ct Rs 314 15 8 ; which was, confequently, all that 
 was now due to Mr Frafer on Col. Hannay's eft^te. 
 
 Indignant
 
 ( M ) 
 
 Indignant at the claim itfelf, but much more fo at the refufal 
 of all information concerning it, which they were now fatisfied 
 Mr Frafer himfelf knew to be falfe, they did not think themfelves 
 at all bound to give him notice of this difcovery ; but, having 
 been in a manner bullied by him with the bugbear of the law, 
 they determined they would turn the tables upon him, and allow 
 him to tighten with his own hand the cord with which he was 
 evidently (Irangling himfelf. They accordingly, without faying 
 any thing further to Mr Frafer, forthwith retained Mr Davies, of 
 Calcutta, as their counfel, and Meffrs Stark, as their folicitorSi 
 and gave them the requifite inftrudions for lliing for the recove- 
 ry of the note in queftiori out of Mr Frafer's hands. 
 
 The matter being put in this train, it occurred to the execu- 
 tors, that Mr Frafer, in his letter to them of the 22d of March 
 preceding, (vide Appendix K), had left it uncertain whether he 
 fhould profecute for the note in Bengal or in Europe. They, 
 therefore, judged it expedient, left he fhould pretend to have fent 
 the note to Europe to be recovered there, to anticipate him in 
 any plea of that fort; and they accordingly wrote to one of the 
 Mr Starks the letter marked N in the Appendix, 
 
 It appears by Mr Frafer's anfwer to Meflrs Starks', (vide Ap- 
 pendix O), that thofe gentlemen had obeyed the inftrudlions gi- 
 ven them by their employers; and it may be prefumed, in the 
 want of any copy of their letter, that they did it in the terms moft 
 proper for the occafion. Mr Frafer's anfwer, though fliort is 
 pregnant with obfervation. The guilty mind, unlefs where the 
 art is equal to the wickednefs, (which feldom happens), betrays 
 itfelf alike, by what it fays, and by what it does not fay. This 
 anfwer is exa6lly of a piece with that returned by Mr Frafer to 
 the firft letter he received from the executors on the fubje<5l, upon 
 which I obferved in page 9. It is no anfwer at all to a plain ap--* 
 
 D plication.
 
 ( 14 ) 
 
 plication. An attorney writes to a man by inft;ru(5lion, to deliver 
 up a particular note, which the holder of it has faid, " he knows 
 to be clearly his right," and which he has challenged to go to 
 law upon. Can there be two opinions, what the anfwer would 
 be to fuch a demand, fuppofing the holder to have really believed 
 himfelf to be entitled to it ? If a man demands my property of 
 me, or the evidences of my property, be he an attorney, or be he 
 the firft judge in the land, the anfwer is obvious ; there is no 
 caufe for deliberation, or neceflky to confult a lawyer on the oc- 
 cafion ; but the probability is, that Mr Frafer now began to ap- 
 prehend that the accounts had been difcovered. With this ob- 
 lervation 1 fliall leave the reader, to tui'n to the fingular anfwer 
 JNirPraier made to this letter. 
 
 That Anfwer, the Reader will find, promifed a further one, as 
 foon as Mr Frafer fliould have had time to look about him a little. 
 Accordingly the Thurfday following produced a further one; but 
 that one, fuch a compofition of unparallelled fophiftry and falfe- 
 hood, at the fame time, of guilty fear, as I defy the imagination 
 to anticipate. The letter will be found in form, in the Appen- 
 dix, P. But I mud be permitted to detain the Reader, while I ex* 
 hibit it to him, paflage by paflage, in the order of my narrative. 
 
 Having begun by referring to the promife he was about now 
 to fulfil, he takes the matter up thus : " The executors of Colonel 
 Hannay never intimated to me, that the deceafed's promliTory note 
 was difcharged in his lifetime." What then ? What was it to 
 the purpofe, whether they had ever fo hitimated or no ? Exprefs 
 doubts about it, they certainly did, from the firfl moment it was 
 produced ; doubts which, unlefs they fufpe6led Mr Frafer of 
 \\!iv\r\^ forged it, neceflarily implied their opinion, that it had been 
 difcharged in the deceafed's lifetime. It is therefore, in the firft 
 place, falfe in point of fad, that they had never intimated this to 
 
 him.
 
 ( rs ) 
 
 him. Had Mr Frafer been a little more guarded in his expreOion 
 upon this occafion, and faid, they had never exprefsly allcdgcd 
 that it had been difcharged in the Colonel's lifetime, he might 
 perhaps have been corretlly right. — But intimate it, it appears tr.ey 
 did, mofl: ftrongly. What elfe but intimations to this purpofc are 
 all their letters to him upon the fubjedl ? 
 
 But what if, in truth, they had never intimated to him any thing 
 of the kind, but, on the contrary, had even fubmitted to the de- 
 mand from the beginning— What then? — If this palFage of Mr 
 1-rafer s letter means any thing, ic means this — " The Lxecutors 
 (fays he) of Colonel Haanay never intimated to me, that the de- 
 ceaied's promilFory note v^\as difcharged in his lifetime — Had 
 they fo intimated, it would have put me to have confidered whe- 
 ther it was fo or not ; and, in that cafe, (I no longer pretend now 
 to be fo politive about it as I was before) it might have occurred 
 to my recolledlion, (as the fadl, after all, may poiGbly be), that 
 it was fo difcharged." This I take to be the reafoning contained 
 in this pafTage, though not drawn out in form — What then ?— 
 Was it not Mr Frafer's duty, as an honed man, and a man of 
 bufinefs, to have put this queflion to himfelf, before he demand- 
 ed payment of the Note, whether it was really an outftanding 
 one, or whether it had not been already difcharged? Does it ap- 
 pear, that he needed any intimatioji from the Executors, to put 
 him to confider about it, whether it had been difcharged or not ? 
 Are not every one of his letters upon the fubjecfl evidences of the 
 greatejl confideration upon it ; fo that it could not be for want of 
 confuleration at leaft, if he had not difcovered, before this, the fadt 
 of prior payment, or non-payment ? Whereas, was it poflible, 
 under all the clrcumftances of the things, the f tie oi the fum, 
 (towards looo /), the proportion it bore to the whole of the ba- 
 lance it had been included in, viz. no lefs tha.n four- fifths, and 
 which had been reduced in the lifetime of Colonel Hannay 
 
 within
 
 ( i6 ) 
 
 ■within 50 /. — the correfpoudence of the date and fum with the ba- 
 lance ftruck in 1 776, for which it was given, fo as to identify 
 that it was the fame note that was afterwards funk in the current 
 account delivered in in 1781 — the recent time within which it had 
 been fo funk — Was it pofTible, I fay^ under all thefe circum- 
 flances, for a man of bufinefs, like Mr Frafer, with the very do- 
 cuments of the tranfadion before him, as he confefTes in his let- 
 ter noticed fupra, ta have had his mind working upon it with all 
 the circumfpecStion it appears to have done, and warned fo to 
 work, by the ftyle of MeiTrs Hannays letters to him, and the re- 
 ception they gave the claim from the beginning — Was it pof- 
 fible, I fay again, for him, to have fo confidered the matter, and 
 yet not have recolledled that the note had been difcharged in the de- 
 ceafed's lifetime ? Credat Judaus — and yet does Mr Frafer affedl to 
 complain, " that the Executors of Colonel Hannay had never in- 
 timated this to him."— That is, where it is as palpable as the fun 
 at noon-day to the maker of a claim, that it is a falfe one ; 
 where he muft know it to be falfe with irrefiftible certainty ; yet 
 if the party upon whom it is made does not objedl to him, in 
 terms that it is falfe, (whether it is that they do not as yet ex- 
 adlly know the fad, or do not choofe to be fo uncivil) ^ this will 
 be a fufEcient defence for him whenever he is accufed. — Mr Fra- 
 fer has declared himfelf " little verfed in matters of law." — He 
 is no orator, as Caffius is — But at leaft he is no contemptible ca-* 
 fuift. 
 
 The next pafiage is, *' They demurred on a plea of infufficiency of 
 vouchers ; andy hurt at it^ I ftgnifed an intent ion^ if I found it prac- 
 ticabkj to enforce payment in Europe ; but I have fince done nothing 
 et all in the buftnefs" The Reader will obferve, that the letter, 
 to which this was an anfwer, was a letter from MefTrs Hannays 
 attorney, demanding up the note ; alledging, as it (hould feem, 
 that it had been difcharged in the deceafed's lifetime. Why, 
 
 then,
 
 ( r? ) 
 
 then, what docs Mr Frafer mean by this paflagc ? What fignifies 
 on what plea the executors demurred, or what intention Mr Fra- 
 ler had fignified about it ? Thefe are vague fadls, that have no- 
 thing to do with the letter he is anfwering, and are meant only 
 to amufe the attention, and to cover, though they betray, the 
 writer's embarraffment. That he was hurt at the demurrer of the 
 executors, may well be believed : Whether the pain he felt was 
 that of a wound given to the pride of confcious innocence, or 
 not, every man will form his own judgement. " But I have 
 fince, (ays he, done nothing at all in the hujinefsy How dlfFerenc 
 from the ftyle but a few days before, when all was for latv^ and 
 men were put in mind of the oaths they were bound by ! 
 
 The paflage that follows is of a very ferious nature indeed. 
 *' / think the plea noiv jet up in the requifttion through jon, is in- 
 tended to compel an adju/lment in this country ; but^ taking the literal 
 meanings it con'ueys, you tnay believe, a very unpleafing imputation ; 
 and I affure you, upon my word. Gentlemen, as I am ready to con- 
 firm upon oath, that I am not confcious of any ground in the vuorld 
 the Executors of Col. Hannay can found fuch a fufpicion on. I am 
 fofttively clear, I never charged this Note to Col. Hannay s account in 
 any mamur ivhatever, nor ever received value for it from hi7n, or any 
 body elfe, by my/elf or any perfon authorifed by w^." 
 
 To take the latter part of this palTage firft, it is a pofllble cafe, 
 that might have arifen upon this tranfadion, that Mr Frafer 
 might have taken the oath judicially, which he tenders in this 
 letter. — If the Executors had been driven ultimately xo file the bill 
 they meditated, and Mr Frafer had been iincere, when he made 
 the offer of confirming his ajfurances upon his -word. Gentlemen, 
 with his oath, he would of courfe have put in his anfwcr; which 
 a lawyer could not have drawn for him better than he has drawn it 
 forhimfelf, though fb little verfed in matters of lav^, viz. " That 
 
 E he
 
 ( i8 ) 
 
 he was pofitively clearly he had never charged this Note to Col. Hannay's 
 account y in any manner ivhatever, nor ever received value for it from 
 him, or any body elfe, by hiirfelf or any perfon authorifed by hiin ;" 
 to the truth of which he would necefTarily have fworn. — And fup- 
 pofing him not to have at this time fufpe(fted, what he afterwards 
 found to be the fadl, that the Executors had difcovered the at- 
 tempt, and were in poffeffion of what would expofe him, can any 
 man doubt but that, with his note in his hand, he would have 
 fuffered the bill to have been filed, and would have flood upon 
 his oath ? It was for his credit that he fhould do fo — it was 
 clearly for his intereji. — But it feems, notwithflanding all his po- 
 fitivenefs, confidering the prefent afped of things, hedidnotjuft 
 like to pufli the matter fo far. For had he taken his oath, (even 
 admitting that he really believed his claim to be due), nothing 
 could have faved him from the ignominious confequences which 
 muft have followed. But, 
 
 " If imputation, and ftrong circutnftances, 
 " Which lead direftly to the door of truth, 
 " Will give fatisfaftion," — 
 
 I pledge myfelf to demonftrate, before I have done, by indications 
 which cannot deceive, that Mr Frafer, at the time he flated him- 
 felf to be " pofitively clear he had never charged this Note to 
 Colonel Hannay's account in any manner whatever, nor ever re- 
 ceived value for it," " and that he was not confcious of any 
 ground in the world the Executors of Colonel Hannay.had to 
 found the fufpicion upon they Teemed to entertain of him," I 
 knew, in point of fadt, that he had charged the Note, and had re- 
 ceived the value of it ; this, I fay, I pledge myfelf to demonftrate, 
 if it has not already appeared. In the mean time, if any thing 
 can confole a man, who muft: ftand convided in the opinions of 
 all who know this affair, of an intent to commit a fraud, and of 
 
 a.
 
 ( 19 ) 
 
 a kind of /wrijo^/t' perjury, let him congratulate himfelf, tTiat he 
 is not at prefcnt in the peril, if not in a<5lual fulFcrance of the 
 pains of one of the mofl dangerous crimes that is committed in 
 fociety. But if whatever a man deliberately offers to do, may 
 be confidered as done by him, which mofl imdoubtedly is true,. 
 fo far as the will is concerned, then Mr Frafer ftands virtually 
 convidled of this crime. After this, will Mr Frafer expedl it to be 
 believed, that he " really thought the plea noiv fet up by the Execu- 
 tors ivas intended merely to compel an adjujlment in the Eajl Indies ?" 
 Will he venture to fay, that he did not begin, by this time, to 
 dread that the Executors had difcovered him, and meant a little 
 snore than a mere adjujlment ? He fl^all fpeak for himfelf. 
 
 How then does he go on? " But (fays he) if the Executors think 
 they ha'Oe any jujl grounds to fu/peil the contrary, I tvill be mojl ready 
 to give fatisfaBion in every reafonable point. And, if they have any 
 proof I ivill, they may he affured, not only he ready to give up ths. 
 Note, but render afiy recompence fuitable to the occnfton. After this 
 declaration, I think it ivill be candid to tell me ivhat is meant or al- 
 luded to ; and from you. Gentlemen, I beg the favour to be irformed^ 
 Jf the 'Executors thi7ik they have anyjufl grounds to fufpecl the 
 contrary, I will be mofl ready to give fatisfadlion, 8cc. — Why, is 
 it poffible that Mr Frafer, when he wrote this, could have recol- 
 le(5led what he had been faying but the pafFage before ? Do men 
 cuflomarily give up claims which they are pofitively clear about, 
 and are ready to fubflantiate by their oaths, upon the objeds of 
 thofe claims thinking they have juft grounds to fufpe^ the con- 
 trary ? What fignifies what the obje(5l thinks or fufpe6ls to the 
 contrary, where the party is fo pofitively clear of his claim, that 
 he can fvoear to it ? efpecially too, while yet the other party has 
 not difclofed, in the fmallefl degree, his fuppofed grounds of fuf- 
 picion. The thing is impofTible. — Mr Frafer is a clear-headed man, 
 of accuracy in bufinefs, as his accounts with Col. Hannay demon- 
 
 ftrate.
 
 ( 20 ) 
 
 flrate. I iubmlt then, that it is contrary to all experience, and 
 therefore not to be believed, that a man of this defcription, ba- 
 ting himfelf to be fo pofitively clear of his cLiim, as to be ready- 
 to " confirm it upon oath," fliould, upon the very firft breath 
 of its not being due, at once abandon it, fuppofing him to be ho- 
 neft. " And if they have any proofs^ I will, they may be affured, 
 not only be ready to give up the Note, but render any recompence 
 fuitable to the occafion." What are all thefe ifs about ? Either the 
 Note had been paid, or it had not. Mr Frafer had only to h ive 
 referred to his Ledger, to fatisfy himfelf of the fadl. — If he had 
 not referred hitherto, it was now at leafl: full time. — If it had not 
 been paid, what fignified proofs, which, as yet, his own mind 
 only had brought before him, or grounds of fufp'icion which he 
 might think were entertained by others. But Mr Frafer kneiv 
 from the beginning, that it -was not due: the present condudl of 
 the Executors alarmed him with the apprehenfion that his know- 
 ledge was now detedled, — He who but lately talked of nothing 
 but legal vindication, and of the folemnity of others oaths, and 
 who even at this moment was ready to f'port his own, is ready 
 at once to give fatisfa(flion on every reafonable point," and, 
 " provided they have any proofs, not only to give up the Note, but 
 render any recompence fuitable to the occafion^ The next fentence is 
 the key to the whole letter. — " After this declaration, (fays he) 
 I think it will be candid to tell me what is meant or alluded to, 
 (that is, the prefent condufl of the Executors) ; and from yQu,Gtn- 
 tlemen, I beg the favour to be informed." Why all this folici- 
 tude, if he was clear he had done nothing but what he could 
 juftify ? Why this winding and fifting, but that he knew he 
 could not juftify what he had done, and began to fufped that he 
 was deteded ? 
 
 After having fald fo much upon the other parts of this notable 
 letter, the concluding paragraph of it is what one might expeiSl, 
 
 and
 
 ( 2» ) 
 
 and may be left pretty nearly to fpeak for itfelf. He concludes, 
 then, " I am quite ignormit of laiv^ as I believe you. are acquainted: 
 andy added to my general aver/ton to litigation, IJhould be particular^ 
 ly relaxant to engage noiv in any controverfy, that may probably re- 
 quire more time to decide than J propoje to remain in the country. I 
 Jhall not feck any information in the bufinefs till I hear from you in an- 
 
 fiver to this. 1 am, Gentlemen," &c Upon this 1 will only 
 
 obferve, that here has, indeed, a Grange alteration taken place 
 in his mind, (Mr Frafer will explain how), within a very few- 
 days. But a very few days ago, and none fo ready for, none fb 
 determined, none fo well informed upon law — at lealt the law of 
 his own cafe, as Mr Frafer. But now, all of a iudden, the lu- 
 cid interval, and the hour of confidence, is palled. He is " quite 
 ignorant of law" — " added to his general averfion to litigation, 
 he fiiould be particularly reludant to engage now in any contro- 
 verfy, that might probably require more time to decide than 
 he propofed to remain in the country" — that is, I fuppofe, he 
 was not afraid of any aBion upon his note; but he had heard 
 ftrange ftories of the endlejjhefs of bills iti equity. And he who 
 was lately all forwardnefs upon the bufinefs, and ading upon the 
 offenfive, fnall now '^feek no ivformation about it till he hears from 
 Mcp-s Starks in anftver to this -f that is, till they tell him what 
 proofs or ground oi fnfpkion MefTrs Hannay had difcovered. One 
 is really much induced to fufpedl, if it might not be wronging a 
 gentleman, that Mr Frafer, at that very time he was fo pofitivcly 
 clear of his claim, that he was ready to take his oath upon it, had 
 ■had fome ftrange mifgiving in his mind, that there were accounts 
 ■j-n the queftion; and that thefe accounts were now adually dil^ 
 covered by, and in the hands of Mefirs Hannay. 
 
 Such is the important letter, which Mr Frafer took time to 
 write the Mefils Stark ; and had he taken as many years to it as 
 he took minutes, he could not (not to have done it in terms) 
 
 Is liavs
 
 ( 22 ) 
 
 have more completely recorded his own guilt. It is manifefl, 
 that every nerve was trembling while he wrote it ; and though it 
 is v/rltten with evident marks of care, it is the care of confcious 
 guilt, that almofl conftantly betrays itfelf. 
 
 The MefTrs Stark having communicated this letter to the Exe- 
 cutors, it will be readily imagined, that they did not helltatc 
 long in determining how to a<5l. They in fa(5l wrote their attor- 
 ney the letter that will be found marked Q^in the Appendix ; 
 which will at once fliew what opinion thofe Gentlemen entertain- 
 ed of Mr Frafer and his claim from the beginning, and how 
 completely that opinion was now confirmed. 
 
 The letter, the Reader will find, concluded with dlredling their 
 attorney to communicate the contents of it to Mr Frafer ; which 
 they accordingly did. Upon which Mr Frafer immediately called 
 upon Mr Hannay, at his houfe in Calcutta, and faid, a gentleman, 
 an acquaintance of his, (to whom the Hannays had communica- 
 ted the circumftance), had informed him, that the Executors had 
 difcovered proofs of the promifTory note having been already paid. 
 He proceeded, under much apparent embarraifment, to acknow- 
 ledge that it was fo, and to exprefs great concern at what had 
 happened ; but would willingly, at the fame time, have had Mr 
 Hannay believe, that his demand of the payment of it had arifen 
 from a miftake ; in order to perfuade him of which, he attempt- 
 ed the befl explanation he could, by words, and by a book of 
 accounts, which he had brought with him for the purpofe. 
 Whether, however, it was owing to any Jloivnefs of comprehenfion 
 in Mr Hannay, or to want of ability in Mr Frafer, 
 
 *' to grace his caufe, 
 
 *' In fpeaking for himfelf j" 
 
 Or
 
 Or rather that he did not exadly 
 
 • A round 
 
 " Unvarniflied tale deliver ;" 
 
 certain it is, he did not produce the conviclJlion, upon that gentle- 
 man's mind, of his innocence, that might have been expeded of 
 a man pofitively clear of the jujlice of his claim, not confcious of any 
 ground in the ivorld that any one could have to fufpecl him, and 
 ijvho had been al-ways ready to have confirmed all his affurances upon 
 the JiibjeB with his oath. 
 
 Mr Frafer had upon this occafion brought the note with him, 
 and now offered, as of courfe, to deUver it up to Mr Hannay ; 
 but Mr Hannay decUned at prefent receiving it, as well becaufe 
 the recovery of it was now in the hands of lawyers, as becaufe he 
 did not choofe to take any ftep without the concurrence of the 
 other Executors. He told Mr Frafer, however, that, as foon as 
 he had feen the other Executors, he would let him know their de- 
 termination. 
 
 Upon this Mr Frafer took his leave ; and within a day after, 
 without any further notice from Mr Hannay, who had not yet 
 had an opportunity of conferring with the other Executors, as he 
 had determined, he at once wrote Mr Hannay the following 
 letter. 
 
 To RAM SAT H A N N A T, Efq; 
 
 S I R, 
 
 I Expected to have had the pleafure of hearing from you 
 yefterday. To put an end to this hufinefs of your Brother's Note alto- 
 gether, I here inclofe it to be cancelled, which, I fuppofe, is all 
 that can be required. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 Thus
 
 ( H ) 
 Thus the Jew in the play fays, with the like fulleanefs, 
 " Give me my principal, and let me go." — 
 
 But, like the fame Jew, he was bid 
 
 Tarry — 
 
 The law had yet another hold on hira,** 
 
 Upon the receipt of this letter, Mr Hannay wrote him the re- 
 turn, which is marked S in the Appendix, acknowledging the 
 furrender of the note ; but acquainting him, at the fame time, 
 that he was expe(5led to pay all the law-cliarges that had been 
 incurred towards the recovery of it. This Mr Frafer inflantly 
 complied with: And thus was dropped in an in flan t, in confe- 
 quence of the information Mr Frafer had received of the difcove- 
 ry of the accounts he had refufed to produce, a claim, that had 
 been aiTerted with fuch aflurance, and offered to be eftabliflied 
 under the folemn fanflion of an oath. It was dropped at once, 
 after all this pofitivenefs, and all this perfeverance in it, without 
 ever fo much as once calling upon the Executors to give him the 
 fatisfa<51ion of feeing the proofs that it was not j\ift; v/hich was 
 certainly giving them a credit, which they had been very far 
 from fetting him the example of. But the difference was, that 
 Mr Frafer hneiv it was founded in downright faljehood, and only 
 not in perjury ; and he had, by this time, good information that 
 the Executors knew this. 
 
 Though the hiilory of this claim feems to be now at an cm\, 
 there are yet two circumftances to be brought forward rcfpeeTing 
 it, more material, perhaps, than any that have been yet adduced, 
 to fhow that it was falf'e from the beginning; at the fame time 
 that they manifert, at once, the cunning art,, and the bold prac- 
 tice with which it was carried on, anxl endeavoured to l)c miin- 
 taiued ; but, as they are blended, in fome meafure, wicli the 
 
 charge
 
 ( ^5 ) 
 
 charge upon Colonel Hannay's eftate, that has been already open- 
 ed, as between Colonel Harper and Colonel Hannay, by the me- 
 diation of Mr Frafer, it becomes neceflary now, in order to in- 
 troduce them, to go back to that. But, as I perfuade myfelf that 
 I have already difplayed Mr Frafer's conduct in colours fufficient- 
 ly intelligible, and upon reafoning which I defy him to anfwer, 
 I '{hall be as fliort as poffible on what remains. 
 
 The Reader will recolleft what the nature of the cqntradl was, 
 xipon which Mr Frafer, immediately upon the death of Colonel 
 Hannay, delivered in a charge to his Executors, on behalf of Co- 
 lonel Plarper. Some difficulties ariling as to the fettling of this 
 charge, it was agreed between the parties to refer it to arbitrators; 
 of which I was named for one. We made the beft award we were 
 able, vtpon fuch materials as were laid before us; and the mo- 
 ney awarded by us to be due to Col. Harper, was paid into the 
 hands of Mr Frafer, his agent. 
 
 It happened, however, foon afterwards, that in the fearch made 
 amongft Col. Hannay's papers, for the purpofe of afcertaining 
 the claim of the note, fome letters were found, which, coupled 
 with the refult of the demand made upon the note, induced more 
 than a fufpicion in the minds of the MelTrs Hannay, that Mr 
 Frafer had not condu<fled himielf with the mofi: exemplary cor- 
 rednefs, relative to the charge he had been making in the name 
 of Colonel Harper, before the arbitrators ; and they accordingly 
 defired, and obtained, a re-confideration of our award. 
 
 Upon the original arbitration, however, it was the duty of Mr 
 Frafer, and he accordingly undertook, to deliver in to the arbi- 
 trators, every letter and paper in his pofleffion, that would tend 
 to throw light on the claim refpeding the elephant contracfl. It 
 was his duty, no doubt, to deliver in the whole, and to deliver 
 
 G them
 
 ( 26 ) 
 
 them in religioufly ; how faithfully he difcharged this duty, the 
 Reader will have an opportunity of judging. 
 
 Among other letters delivered in by him upon this occafion, 
 was that marked U in the Appendix, which profejfed to be a copy 
 of one from himfelf to the late Col. Hannay. Wliether he deli- 
 vered it in for the purpofe of elucidating the fubjed of the arbi- 
 tration, may perhaps be doubted. In truth, there can be no 
 queftion, but the purpofe of it, delivered in as it was, was to 
 give colour to that demand of the Note, which it thus appears he 
 had it even now in contemplation to fet up ; for, it is to be obfer- 
 ved, that the letter, according to Mr Frafer's copy of it delivered 
 in, bearing date i2th September 1780, having begun concerning 
 Col. Harpers AS?i\vSy concludes thus, concerning his oivn. " / 
 begged oj yoii alfo in my loft (he fays) to let me have a bill on Calcutta 
 for 5 or 6000 Rupees, 07i my oivn account. Should you have any cafh 
 in Calcutta that you can command^ ivill you oblige me by an order for 
 20,000 Rupees, and I "will tha7ik you if you do: but at all events, my 
 friend, fail not -writing me tivo or three lines in reply, 8cc." 
 
 Now tliis copy, upon comparifon with that marked T in the 
 Appendix, which is the very anginal, as found among Col. Han- 
 nay's papers, in the fearch alluded to, turns out to have been a 
 partial and mutilated one. — It is mutilated in this, that fubfequent 
 tathe words, " will you oblige me by an order for 20,000 Ru- 
 pees," the original goes on, " to be replaced V-'ithin tijuo tnonthsy^ 
 which are entirely omitted in Mr Frafer's copy. It is evident, by 
 the terms of the original letter, that Mr Frafer was requeiling a 
 loan, not demanding a debt. This is further confirmed by the 
 fa(ft, wh^ch will appear to any one, upon reference to the ac- 
 CQunts of the lime in the Appendix ; — chat, at the date of this 
 letter, "Colonel Hannay's debt to Mr Frafer was witlvin 3000 Ilu- 
 nees^ wli,§rqas the fuui applied for was 20,000. But as Mr Fra- 
 fer
 
 ( 27 ) 
 
 fer was fbon to bring forward a claim of above 10,000 Rupees, 
 in his own right, which he was aware might need fupport, it be- 
 came convenient for him to lay fome ground for it. As far as 
 the letter in queflion was inconfiftent with the intended claim, 
 he might indeed have kept it back altogether, as he a<flually did 
 feveral others : but he thought that, by leaving out the material 
 words, " to be replaced within two months," the letter would 
 {land as an application to Colonel Hannay, Cmply, for 20,000 
 Rupees, in September 1780. Such an application would fuppofe 
 a debt; and that debt vfouXd. reprefent or account for the tiote he 
 was fliortly to put in his claim upon. 
 
 That the letter was mutilated by him is evident ; that it was 
 mutilated for any other purpofe than that which I have affigned, 
 it is for Mr Frafer to fliew. 
 
 This was one of the circumftances by which Mr Frafer appears 
 to have been preparing his way gradually for his fubfequent de- 
 mand of the note, even while he was pretending to furnifh mat- 
 ter for the judgement of the arbitrators, upon the claim made 
 by him in the name of Colonel Harper, But the other, which I 
 am now about to ftate, at the fame time that from the depth with 
 which it was laid, it will require fome accuracy of deducflion on 
 my part, and fome attention in the reader to decedl it, will yet,, 
 with thefe refpevSlive obfervances, come out on the mind of every 
 man in i'o fenfible a form, as will amply juftify me in the confi- 
 dence with which 1 pledged myfelf to demonftrate, that, at the 
 time Mr Frafer was offering to fwear, that he was "confcious of 
 no ground in the world that the executors of Colonel Hannay 
 could have to fufpedl him," he knew he was oflering to fwear 
 that which he could not have fworn with truth. I now go fur- 
 ther, and take vipon myfelf to fay, that he knew the contrary 
 a conftderahle time before ; and that the demand of the note was>
 
 ( 28 ) 
 
 as deep as it was falfe; not arifing upon the fudden and acci- 
 dental difcovery of it in his pofTeflion uncancelled, and claimed 
 without thought; but conceived with great deliberation, gone 
 about at a diftance, indiredly, and with exquifite caution ; and 
 not ultimately made, till he had tried whether the ground he 
 was about to tread would bear him ; and had fatisfied himfelf 
 he could not be deteded, with a degree of certainty, that 
 prompted the affurance with which he appears to have afTerted 
 it. 
 
 It will be found, upon a reference to the correfpondence be- 
 tween Mr Frafer and Mr Ramfay Hannay, relative to the fubjedl 
 of the arbitration, inferted in the Appendix, particularly to the 
 letter marked Z, that a principal difficulty in the way of a final 
 adjuftment of the Elephant account, was to a/certain the aHual 
 disburjanents for conduBing the Elephants up the cotmtry, in different 
 herds. " It is unlucky," fays Mr Frafer, in the letter referred to, 
 (which is dated 29thO(5lober 1782) "that this account of the charges 
 had not been afcertained, as it may prove the moft difficult part in 
 any prefent arrangement." 
 
 In a fubfequent letter, dated 4th November following, to the 
 fame gentleman, he fays, (See Appendix, A a), " / ivas happy to 
 tinderjland by your letter of the 30^/j, that you had found fome ac- 
 counts relative to the Elephant concern; and I fondly hope that^ on 
 a proper arrangement of the materials ivhich that bundle may pro- 
 duce^ the Executors will be able to form a decided view of the bufi- 
 nefsT And, in a third letter upon the fubjedt (fee Appendix, B b), 
 " dating his idea of Captain Harper's claim on the eflate of Co- 
 lonel Hannay," he fays, "Thefe are the articles which compofe 
 the account ; and if you can afcertain the amount -of cofs and char- 
 ges upon the Elephants ^ the principal difficulty will be removed''' 
 
 Who
 
 ( =9 ) 
 
 Who would believe, that reads thefe extradls, which are fairly 
 taken from Mr Frafer's own letters, that Mr Frafer hiinfelf was 
 the very man, who, as agent to the parties, onually made the dif- 
 burfements which now created the great difficulty in fettling the 
 accounts; of which, however, he affeds, by thefe letters, as 
 total an ignorance as could be attributed to the Executors them- 
 felves. 
 
 But, it will aflced, how does this fad appear, and to what 
 purpofe fliould he afFedl to be thus ignorant ? If the fad was fo 
 his affeclation of ignorance is of itfelf a fufpicious circumftance. 
 Now, upon reference to his letter to Colonel Hannay, of the 
 13th July 1 78 1, (Appendix, B) it will be found, that that letter 
 inclofed the very account I am now fpeaking of which was 
 wanting to adjuft finally the fubjed in arbitration. " The ac- 
 companying (he fays in that letter) is, I klicue, an extracl of my dif- 
 burfements for Elephants." Such is the evidence of the faft. But 
 the very fame letter betrays the reafon of this afi'edation. This 
 fame letter that inclofed an account of the dishurfements made by 
 him as comjuon agent for Colonel Hannay and Colonel Harper 
 refpedively, inclofed likewlfe his own account-current, up to 
 the 30th April preceding, with Colonel Hannay alone; that very 
 account, in which the confideration of the promiffory note was re- 
 fated, and re-charged to Colonel Hannay ; and, by the refult of 
 which, it came to be put an end to, though it was never foeci- 
 fically demanded up. — *' lam juft arrived (fays the letter) on 
 board my boat ; and write principally to inclofe your account-cur- 
 rent, 2,0th April laf, balance in my favour Ct lis 6842 3 2." This 
 was the very account I have defcribed it to be, as will appear by 
 a reference to it, N° IV. in the Appendix, It is here obfer- 
 vable, that it was the pradice of Colonel Hannay, as can be 
 teftified by thofe who are mod competent to know it, to keep 
 all papers or accounts, chat he received, together, in. the fame 
 
 K cover
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 cjver in ivbich they ijoerc inclofed to him ; and, ia faiSl, tliefe two 
 accounts were found at the fame tinie in the fubfequent fearch 
 made amongfl the deceafed's papers. Mr Frafer then, who of all 
 men knew Colonel Hannay's pratflice befl, forefaw, that if the 
 ^iccount of difburfements fent in by him on the 13th of July to 
 Colonel Hannay, fliould cad up in tlie hands of his Executors, 
 the concluiion would be, that they were in pofTefTion, and had 
 notice of his other account of the 30th of April ; in which cafe, it 
 would be impofllble for him to make the claim of his Note with 
 any degree of fecurity 5 inafmuch as, by that account, the Note 
 was completely liquidated. In this view, it became of infinite con- 
 fequence to Mr Frafer, to found the Executors well, whether thcy 
 were in poffeflion of any account of difburfements or not ; and in 
 this view, it may be prefumed he began by preferring his claim 
 as agent ^ and pojlponed his oivn ; which is not, perhaps, the ufual 
 courfe of men full as honed: as Mr Frafer. He accordingly urges 
 to the Executors in all his letters, the importance that thefe ac- 
 counts are of to the fettlement of the arbitration; and in every 
 letter provokes an inquiry concerning them. In his letter of Oc- 
 tober 29. 17S2, before referred to, he fays, ''^ Luckily^ indeed^ 
 your Brothers letter to me of the I'jth September I'^^o, takes ficch 
 a range of the tranfa&ion as nvill carry to yon a general idea of the 
 •whole. I therefore enclofe a copy of it, together ivith copies of fuch 
 of my letters to him as neceffarily form a conneflion. I alfo inclofe a 
 copy of the receipt alluded to; and, on a perujal of the ivhole, and fuch 
 further materials as you 'may he able to difcover among the papers of the 
 deceafed, my arrangement of the accounts uuill, I hope, be approved and 
 completed." Among thefe copies fo fent in, tliere was not a word 
 of his letter of the 13th July. This was carefully kept back; be- 
 ing to be produced, if produced at all, by the Executors them-r 
 felves. If it was produced by them, which he purpofely gave 
 them every reafon for endeavouring, the claim of the Note was 
 then at aca end. If it was not produced, it might fairly be con- 
 cluded,,
 
 ( 31 ) 
 
 ckided, that they knew notliingof tlie Account balanced the 3otli 
 April 1781, and the Note might be demanded with fafety. 
 
 In fi\Si, fome fearch was made by the Executors for the purpofe. 
 But Colonel Hannay's papers, from the circumftance of liis ha- 
 ving come to Calcutta fo recently before his death, were in the ut- 
 moft confufion; heaped together in trunks and balkets, without 
 any order or arrangement; and Mr R. Hannay having found one 
 bundle, indorfed, " Papers relative to the Elephant- concern," was 
 the rather content to give himfelf no farther trouble, in fearching 
 amongft fuch a mafs of confufion. 
 
 o* 
 
 The bundle, however, not containing Mr Frafer's original let- 
 ter to Colonel Hannay of the 13th of July 1781, inclofing an ac- 
 count of his difburfements, did not ferve much to clear up the 
 difficulties of the arbitration ; for thus Mr Frafer writes about 
 it. " It is ivith much regret (the letter is to Mr Ramfay Hannay, 
 dated 061. 29. 1782, before referred to, Appendix, Z**) I read in 
 your note^ that your late brother s papers do not throiv any light on the 
 tranjaclion -with Captain Harper ; atid I mojl fincerely lament the re- 
 hiflance your Brother had to Jetting about an adjujlment of it. It pro- 
 €eeded, I believe y and indeed 1 am pretty certain he told me fo, from 
 the difficulty he found in afcertaining the atlual disburfements made 
 for the concern of the Elephants, proceeding up in three different herds. 
 When he was himfelf in Oude, he ivas obliged to rcquefl different 
 friends at the different Jlations to fupply their keepers, which made 
 the account branch out, and probably it became blended 'with other con- 
 cerns. It is unlucky that this account of the charges had not been 
 afcertained, as it may pro-ve the mojl difficult part in any prefent ar- 
 rangement." Again, I afk, would any man believe, that with all 
 this fenfe of the importance of this account towards fettling the 
 arbitration he had fubmitted to, and all this lamentation for the 
 want of it, Mr Frafer fliould have been himfelf the man, who, 
 
 within
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 within lefs than a year and a half of this time, had adually da- 
 ted this very account to Colonel Hannay, which he thus leaves it 
 entirely to the Executors to bring to light. Mr Frafer, to repeat 
 it again, was much interefled, confidering the company ic was in, 
 whether the Executors could bring it to light or no. In fa6l they 
 fearched in vain ; and the firft award was made without it. Mr 
 Frafer immediately took courage, and claimed his note. In the 
 learch that was recommenced in confequence of this claim, the 
 account of the dlfburfements for the Elephants was found at the 
 fame time with the account by which the claim of the Note was 
 dete<5led ; and this was one reafon for having the award upon the 
 Elephant-concern reconfidered. I perfuade myfelf I need not make 
 another obfervation upon this condu6l of Mr Frafer's upon the 
 fubjed of the Elephant-concern. 
 
 Another reafon with the Executors for having the award that 
 had been made reconfidered, was (added to the fufpicion they 
 now began to entertain of Mr Frafer's charadler) the variance be- 
 tween the original oi Mr Frafer's letter of 12th September 1780, 
 to Colonel Hannay, which likewife they had now difcovered a- 
 mong their brother's papers, and the copy of it that had been 
 delivered in to the arbitrators by Mr Frafer. Upon this variance, 
 produced by a mutilation, I have already fubmitted my obfer- 
 vations. 
 
 But the third and principal reafon that determined thofe Gen- 
 tlemen to the meafure they took, was, in the courfe of the fatal 
 fearch that arofe upon the demand of the Note, the difcovery of 
 as palpable a fabrication^ furely, as ever was pradifed. What /«- 
 terejl Mr Frafer had in fuch a fabrication, if I prove the fadl, I 
 {hall think myfelf perfecflly difcharged from fliewing. That it 
 was apparently done to fupport a claim made in favour of an- 
 other, every man feels, if it was done^ is faying nothing. Whe- 
 ther
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 ther Mr Frafer really meant to carry the benefit arlfing from 
 this fabrication to the account of another, in whofe caufe it was 
 made, every man will judge for himfelf who has got fo far in 
 this Narrative. I have only pledged myfelf to bring forward the 
 fad. 
 
 The fubjecfl of the claim made by Mr Frafer on Colonel Han- 
 nay's eftate, in the name of Colonel Harper, the Reader will recoi- 
 led, was, what lliould be due to Colonel Harper upon his fhare 
 in the Elephant contradl, in which he and Colonel Hannay had 
 been jointly concerned. The management of this contra<fl has 
 been already dated to have been left principally to Colonel Han- 
 nay, who had received the profits of it ; and therefore, befides 
 the grofs fum that was due upon it to Colonel Harper, Mr Frafer 
 claimed intereft in his behalf, on the proportion due to him, du- 
 ring the time it had been in Colonel Hannay's hands. And I 
 fcarcely mean here to difpute the reafonablenefs of fuch claim, if 
 Mr Frafer had not fabricated evidence in fupport of it. For tho' 
 the Executors of Colonel Hannay, ai Executors^ demurred to al- 
 lowing it, on the ground that intereft was not allowed upon open 
 accounts in the Courts ; yet they referred this, as every other mat- 
 ter in difpute upon the fubjedl, to me and the reft of the arbitra- 
 tors; and I, for one, was, in the end, of opinion, upon the equi- 
 ty of the cafe, that this claim fliould be allowed ; and it was al- 
 lowed accordingly. But while the matter was in arbitration, it 
 occurred to me, to afk Mr Frafer, Whether, as it was a matter of 
 long ftanding, he had ever claimed this interejl for Col. Harper, of 
 Col. Hannay himfelf? To which he rephed. That he had ; but that 
 the Colonel had not agreed to it. And, upon my afking him what 
 his objedions had been, for thefe, and every thing elfe relative to 
 our enquiries, he referred us to Col. Hannay's and his corre- 
 fpondence on the fubjed. 
 
 I Among
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 Among the copies of this correfpondence given in by Mr Fra- 
 fer, was one, purporting to be the copy of a letter (vide Ap- 
 pendix, Y,) written by him to Colonel Hannay, dated, Calcutta, 
 I ft December 1780, in anfwer to one written to him by the 
 Colonel, from Atterowlee, (vide Appendix, p. 20.), on the 17th 
 of September preceding ; in which copy, alluding to his claims 
 upon the Colonel on behalf of Colonel Harper, he fays, " The 
 only thifig ive differ upon is, his right to inter eft on the funis you recei- 
 ved through Middkton, and had the ufe of until your payment to me 
 at Luchioti', 0/" 35, 000; and this ive can, at mutual convenience, re- 
 fer to the opinion of fome friends" 
 
 This, the Reader fees, completely verified, in appearance, the pre- 
 tence made by Mr Frafer, that he had demanded this intereft of 
 Colonel Hannay in his lifetime; and, as 1 intimated before, it was 
 allowed in our Award. 
 
 But this was not the only purpofe anfwered by this pretended 
 copy. Col. Hannay, as will appear by references to his letter 
 (vide Appendix, p. 20.) from Atterowlee, as well as by this pre- 
 fent anfwer of Mr Frafer's, had advanced Mr Frafer the fum of Ct 
 Rs 35,000, on account of Colonel Harper j for which, however, 
 he had taken a conditional receipt from Mr Frafer, ftating, that 
 if that fum fhould turn out to exceed the fum due to Colonel 
 Harper, the furplus fhould, upon the final adjuftment of accounts, 
 be repaid. The paffage that imports this will be found in the 
 letter referred to, beginning, " All thofe circumftances I men- 
 tioned to you before," &c. Upon which conditional receipt, a 
 doubt might have arifen, whether any thing was now due to Co- 
 lonel Harper, and whether Colonel Harper himfelf was not the 
 Debtor. 
 
 ^ow, the pretended copy of Mr Frafer's anfwer, dated ifl De- 
 cember
 
 ( 35 ) 
 
 cember 1780, ferved to anfwer this doubt in favour of Kls prin- 
 cipal; as will appear upon turning to the paragraph in it begin- 
 ning, " The claufe in my receipt was very proper, becaufe," Sec. 
 
 A third end it anfwered was, to -confirm the impreffion intended 
 to be made by Mr Frafer's letter of the 12th September prece- 
 ding, in the mutilated ftate in which the copy of it had been deli- 
 vered in by him, namely, that he had, by that letter, been demand- 
 ing a debt of Colonel Hannay ; the policy and application of which, 
 in fupport of the claim he was at this time meditating upon the 
 Note, I have already pointed out. The pafiTage of this pretended 
 letter that was to confirm that impreffion, is to be found at the 
 end of it. (Appendix, Y.) " You have not, (he pretends to fay) 
 replied to my \d.^ reqnifition oi 20,000; but it is immaterial, as 
 1 am at prefent fufficiently provided:" Never, (the Reader will 
 obferve) faying any thing of the undertaking " to replace it 'with- 
 in fwo months^'' which would have clearly proved it to have been 
 borrowing ; but, on the contrary, referring to his application by 
 a term peculiarly defcriptive of an application for money due. 
 
 Such were the ufeful purpofes which this letter might ferve, as 
 -well upon the occafion of his future claim upon the Note^ as upon 
 the arbitration, with refped to which it was delivered in. Among 
 which, too, it was perhaps not the leaft, that it is certainly writ- 
 ten with a tendency (and is indeed a mafter-piece in this view) 
 to imprefs the Reader with the moft favourable fentiments of the 
 Heart and Plain-dealing of Mr Frafer. The only queftion is 
 whether it v/as -^^ genuine copy of the, letter it affetfts to reprefent ? 
 
 Among other unexpeded difcoveries made by the MeiTrs Flan- 
 nays in their fearch relative to the Note, was that of an original 
 letter from Mr Frafer to Colonel Flannay, dated 24th December 
 1 780, written in Mr Frafer's own hand, and now in the pofleffion 
 
 of
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 of the Executors. If this was the real anfwer to Col. HannayV 
 letter to him from Attsroivlee the 17th September preceding, it 
 follows, that the copy given in by Mr Frafer, dated ift December, 
 was Tifditioiis one. Whether it was or not, (hall now be fubmit- 
 ted to the judgement of the Reader. 
 
 I will endeavour to be as fliort as poffible in the proofs. I might 
 content myfelf, indeed, with referring the moft inattentive, and 
 indifferent reader, to the comparifon of the two letters, with refe- 
 rence to Colonel Hannay's, and leave him to judge. Firft, Colonel 
 Hannay's letter of the 17th September, related, as will appear 
 upon turning to it, almoft entirely to CoL Harper s affairs ; fo that, 
 next to the date itfelf, it could not poffibly have been defcribed 
 more properly than by that circumftance. How, then, does Mr 
 Frafer's real letter, of the 24th December, begin ? It begins by 
 apologizing for not having replied before, to the Colonel's letter, 
 on the fubjecl of Harper s affairs. " Let this Jl ate of mind ^ (he fays), 
 and your o-wn experience^ plead my apology^ for not replying to your let- 
 ter on the fiibjeil of Harper s affairs." Now, it has already ap- 
 peared to the Reader, that, giving Mr Frafer credit for his pre- 
 tended letter, of the ift December 1780, delivered in by him to the 
 Arbitrators as a true copy of his anfwer to Colonel Hannay's of 
 September, that he had replied to that of Colonel Hannay's mojl 
 particularly. The letter, therefore, of the 17? December^ and that 
 
 of the 24^/7, are inconfiflent. But that that of the 24th was really 
 
 written by Mr Frafer, there can be no doubt ; becaufe it exifts in 
 his oivn hand. It follows, therefore, by confequence, that that 
 of the ijl December was a pretended one. 
 
 Again — In his letter of the 24th, he goes on, " I received it 
 (meaning Colonel Hannay's) when I was bufy preparing for my 
 trip hither (to Calcutta) ; and not having brought it ivith me, I can 
 mly tell you that you were ivrong in all your po/itions and fuppoftions. 
 
 — /
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 —~I never in my life fent the copy of a letter from one friend in the 
 country to another out of it ^'' Sec. 
 
 Here he afTigns the want of Colonel Hannay's letter, as a rea- 
 fbn for not entering more minutely than he does into the fubjedl 
 
 of it. But this is abfolutely inconfiftent with his pretended an- 
 
 fwer of the ifl of the month; in which, equally without Colonel 
 Hannay's letter by him, he appears to have replied to his pofitions^ 
 TiVid fuppofiiiojis, very particularly — and that of the id turns out 
 mod manifeftly to have been a partial only, and fabricated copy 
 of that of the 24th. In that of the 24th, he goes on from the 
 part I laft broke off at, to fay, " I never in my life fent the copy of 
 a letter font one friend in the country to another out of it, in eluci- 
 dation of bufinefs ; and fhould be little plcafed ivith any man that 
 ivould ife any part of my private cor ref pond ence in that ivay. When I 
 fhall have occafwn to make ufe of my correfpondence ivith you, I ivill 
 fgn my/elf as attorney for Harper y and not as your friend^ claiming 
 your confidence. I ivill hereafter reply to your letter. — This is an apo- 
 logy for the delay only. 
 
 Now mind how he pretends to have written on the i ft of De- 
 cember.—" / am -writing to Harper (he fays) by thefe flnps ; but^ 
 my friendy I never fent him any part of our correfpondence. I have 
 alivays conftdered it of a private nature. — When it becomes necejfary 
 to fend him any correfpondence, it may be formally carried on, and 
 ftgned by me as his acling attorney, and not your friend. This necef- 
 fity, however, I hope, vuill never occur. — The only thing ive differ 
 upon is^ his right to interef, &c. 8cc. 
 
 Now, is it poffibk to believe, that both thefe pafTages could 
 really have been written, the one on the ift December, the other 
 on the 24th, without fuppoling Mr Frafer in his dotage? They 
 are almoft exad repetitions, the on« of the other. — It is aRum 
 
 K agere ; 
 
 o^VoSo
 
 ( 3S ) 
 
 agere ; and to be accounted for only upon the fuppofition of that 
 of the ift having been copied from that of the 24th, which we 
 know to be a real one. But an honeji copy we likewife know it 
 not to be ; for it is not only different in point of date, but mate- 
 rially different in every other part, except that which I have this 
 moment been extraifling; it follows, therefore, that it is 2i pre- 
 tended one only, fabricated to ferve a purpofe. 
 
 The Executors of Colonel Hannay, as I obferved before, were, 
 upon the difcovery of the real letter of the 24th, fo fatisfied of 
 this, that it became one of their principal reafons for requiring 
 our Award to be reconfidered. 
 
 Upon the difcovery made, and its being mentioned to Mr Fra- 
 fer, he agreed that there was a miftake; but alledged that it was 
 only in the date; and. that the pretended copy was, in truth, not 
 an immediate anfwer to the Colonel's letter of September, but 
 the copy of one written by him to the Colonel on the iji of Ja- 
 nuary 1781. This, perhaps, is rather fufpicious, by way of 
 amendment ; but let us take it fo for a moment, and try how it 
 will fland the tefl. 
 
 In. the firfl: place, it is a fa€l, that the Executors fearched purpofe- 
 ]y, to iee if they could find the original of any fuch letter, dated 
 the ift of January J 781 ; but they neither found any of that date, 
 or of any other correfponding with it. But, to try this amendment 
 by the tell of reafoning, it is now agreeil, that Mr Frafer wrote to 
 Col. Hannay from Calcutta, the 24th of December 1 780 ; excufmg 
 himfelf for not anfwering him more particularly than he was do- 
 ing, on tlie fubjedl of Harper's affairs, by the circumflance of his 
 not having the Colonel's letter immediately by him to anfwer, but 
 promifing to fupply the defedl hereafter. Here is, then, a copy, 
 pretended to be the copy of a letter, written by Mr Frafer, only 
 
 fevcn
 
 ( 39 ) 
 
 fe^en days after, viz. on the ift of January 1781 ; in which, ■with- 
 out taking the fmallefl: notice of his having written the Colonel a 
 very long letter but feven days before, without afFecfling that lie 
 had fince received the Colonel's letter at firfl, he yet enters into a 
 minute detail on the fubjedl of Harper's concerns ; in reply to the 
 very letter, which, only feven days before, he had apologifed for not 
 anfwering, becaufe it was not then in his poileflion. But the mod 
 curious circumflance of all is, that, in this fuppofed letter ot the 
 I ft of January, he repeats almofl 'verbatim what he had already 
 written to the Colonel but feven days before; and this not upoa 
 any article of bufinefs that might require to be repeated, but upon 
 a matter of obfervation only, without any thing new or varied con- 
 cerning it. Polllbly, if Mr Frafer fliall think it worth his while 
 to try his recollecflion again at the date of this letter, he may be 
 more fuccefsful. But till he does, I leave it to be judged, whe- 
 ther it was or was not a fabrication. 1 had fet out with fuppo- 
 fing, that Mr Frafer had himfelf no apparent intereft in the fabri- 
 cation of it. But it now turns out, that it was calculated, in fome' 
 degree, to give countenance to his fav9urite claim upon the Note. 
 
 Thus have I brought to a conclufion my narrative of a claim,, 
 loaded with fuch badges of an attempt to defraud, as I perfuade 
 myfelf no underftanding, that applies itfelf to them, will doubt 
 for an inftant the effed of it. 
 
 That the claim was in fa<fl not founded, (lands confefTed by- 
 Mr Frafer. That he kneiv it not to be founded, who can doubt 
 that confiders the circumflances ? 
 
 Firft, the Time at which it was made — not immediately upon the 
 death of Colonel Hannay, and when he was delivering in his 
 accounts on behalf of Colonel Harper— but poflponed till he had 
 
 everjf
 
 (■ 40 ) 
 
 every reafon, tliat the nature of the thing could afford him, to be' 
 fttisfied that he was in no danger of having it deteded. 
 
 The. defcriptton of Per/on by ivhom it was made^-^not a female^ 
 of whom precifion in accounts is not exacted — not a prmate gen- 
 thman merely^ unufed to Money- tranfadtions, who might perhaps 
 be heard to alledge the plea of oveijigbt-^—noX. a boy^ but lately 
 iiiitiated into them-.— But a Man regularly bred to bufinefs, and long 
 converfant in it ; of natural talents, of acquired fkill, and of 
 accuftomed accuracy — who mufl: be prefumed to have had his 
 Ledger ; and who could not have looked to that Ledger, to which 
 his attention was upon this occafion over and over again called, 
 without feeing that the Note claimed had been liquidated : 
 
 The Sum in qiiejlion — not a trifling one, that might have flipped 
 a man's memory — liquidated not a length of time back, which 
 the memory might not have reached, fuppofing the Ledger to 
 have afforded no trace of it — bnt a Sum of confidcrable magnitude^ 
 included in an Account balanced within lefs than two years of 
 the time at which it was now claimed over again, and conftitu- 
 ting the proportion of no lefs than four-fifths of the ivhole fum 
 debited previous to any Balance : 
 
 The Precautions taken, and Means ufed to favour it — a conceal- 
 ment of evidence, and the moft affecSled ignorance — the Mutilation 
 of one letter, and Fabrication of another : 
 
 The Manner in which it was made, and afterwards dropped — 
 Madcy not in the open, fober method of one friend claiming a juft 
 debt of another, but in obftinate concealment of all fatisfidion to 
 the Executors concerning it — infilling upon the title of the note 
 itfelf ; endeavouring to ftifle their doubts, and hurry on the pay- 
 rnent of it, by indecent menaces of law, and claims of legal intereft 
 
 — afferting
 
 ( 4^ ) 
 
 ■ — afTerting it, with the moft deliberate and determined aflurance, 
 till the refolute condudl of the Executors began to excite alarm; 
 and even then, taking upon himfelf to be pofitlve as to his conecfr- 
 nefs about it, and offering to confirm his teflimony upon Oath— 
 Dropped^ not upon a convi(fllon reafonably demanded on his parr, 
 and reafonably afforded by the Executors, that he had not been 
 corredl ; but upon information only of a difcovery by the Execu- 
 tors, of accounts, by which it appeared to have been liquidated; 
 — dropped injiantly^ with a confeffion of the miflake, a fruitlefs 
 attempt to explain it, and a fubmiffion at once to the Terms 
 impofed upon him : 
 
 Laflly, the Pcrfons vpon whom it was made; not his enemies — 
 not Perfons indifferent to him ; but the Reprefentatives of his de- 
 ceafed Friend^ by whom he had been trufled. 
 
 If thefe are Badges of fraud, and of aggravated fraud, which 
 there is no miftaking, Mr Frafer, before he can get rid of them, 
 muft get rid of his own Letters, and of the teftimony of the Exe- 
 cutors : for to thefe only have 1 appealed for my affertions. 
 
 That it fhould have fallen to me to have publiflied them, I re- 
 gret fincerely. I know the. value of charader, and the bleffed en- 
 joyment of Friends. But 1 know likewife my duty to the Public, 
 and what I owe myfelf. I am nor confcious I ever had a difference 
 with Mr Fr<ifer in my life; or ever difliked him, but in that fpi- 
 rit of indignation, which I would not but feel againft every marr 
 whofe Integrity I have the flrongeft reafon to quedlon. When I 
 firft objected ihi's charge to Mr Frafer's propofer at. the Bengal 
 Society, I wa^ not confcious, I am not confcious now, that I was 
 difclofing any thing not perfetflly notorious to every man in Cal- 
 cutta at the time Mr Frafer gave rife to it. I was fulsfied to 
 •liav.e acquiefced in the Award made between us, howfoever I ap- 
 
 ■^ pealed--
 
 ( 40 
 
 pealed from it to my own Convidlion. But Mr Frafer, In a rafh 
 confidence that has more than once betrayed him, has chofen to 
 <lraw me out again, by his infulting contumely. For the peril 
 into which he brings my Life^ he knows me little, if he thinks I 
 elUm'ate it. Whether his charaSler or mine will beft bear the fearch- 
 ing Eye of the Public, it is, perhaps, too late for him to confider. 
 1 can at beft; fay to him, in the memorable words of Junius^ (whofe 
 concealment of himfelf, however, / have difdained to imitate), 
 that, " from the Leflbn I have given you, you may colle<fl a pro- 
 fitable Indruftion for your future life. It will teach you, either Co 
 to regulate your condudl, as to be able to fet the moft malicious 
 enquiries at defiance; or, if this be a lofl: hope, it will teach you 
 prudence enough not to attradl the public attention to a charader, 
 which will only pafs without Cenfure when it palTes without 
 Obfervation." 
 
 April gth 1787. 
 
 ROBERT STEWART. 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 The fum of the Promlflbry Note is fuppofed, in p. 15. to have borne the propor- 
 tion of four-fifths to the balance of the account delivered in in 1781- But this is a 
 miftake. The fa£V is much ftronger. It bore that proportion even to the fum 
 debited to Colonel Hannay in that account, (which was but Ct Rs 2193, 9, 7) be- 
 fore the deduftion of the credit fide was made from it, and any balance ftruck. 
 The balance of that account was only Ct Rs 6842, 3, 2, (equal to 684I. 4s.), a lum 
 evidently much below the Note. 
 
 AP-
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 The Account Current^ N° II. nvas inchfed in this Letter. 
 
 Dear Major, 
 
 Many fruitlefs letters have I written you. Accompanying I 
 have the pleafure to tranfmit your Account Current, Balance in 
 my favour, 30th of April laft, Ct Rs 9233, 3, 8. In part of 
 which I have this day drawn on you for Current Rupees nine 
 thoufand, at thirty days fight, in favour of Captain Samuel Kirk- 
 patrick, to whom I am indebted, and paying intereft, and which, 
 I hope, will put you to no inconvenience. 
 
 I am, 
 
 Your's affedionately, 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 Dinaporcy 
 June igthf 1776. 
 
 Major Hannay. 
 
 Extras
 
 C 2 ) 
 
 B 
 
 Extra^ of a Letter from Mr fames Frafer to Major Alexander Han- 
 nay^ dated Olioher 9, 1776. 
 
 (The Account, No. III. for the Balance of which the Note of Hand was granted, 
 
 was inclofed in this Letter.) 
 
 As it is faid that fhort accounts make long friends, that I do 
 not intend to alter towards you, until you land in the King's 
 Bench prifon for bribing and corrupting, and that I believe I 
 Ihall not even quit you then, I hurry my account, or rather the 
 continuation, to your hands. \{ you approve^ fend me a chltyor fome^ 
 thing hi the prom'iffory ivay^ acknoivledging that you this day otue 
 me Jo much money ^ that, Ibould we walk off, our heirs may have 
 no difpute. 
 
 Not, pleafe God, \ hope that either of us fhall. I return you 
 my draft in favour of Kilpatrick, v/hich you accepted. We fhall 
 meet above next month, I fuppofe. When you leave Chunar, or 
 are preparing for it, write me. Here is a letter from Cockaell. 
 Anderfon very ill, he fays. 
 
 I am, 
 
 . Your affedionately faithful friend, 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 The
 
 ("3 ) 
 
 The Account-Current^ N° IV. nvhich contains the fame principal Sums 
 as the preceding Accounts, N° I. II. and III. on which a Charge 
 of Inter ejl is madcy ivas inclofed in this Account, 
 
 My dear Colonel, 
 
 Report flattered me with the expecStation of feeing you at 
 Lucknow, which prevented me the pleafure of writing you du" 
 ring my l\ay there. 
 
 I am juft arrived oh bdar'difiy boat, and write principally to 
 inclofe your Account- Current, 30th April laft, Balance in my fa- 
 vour, Ct Rs 6842, 3, 2, or ;^684 4J. 6d. 
 
 It was not my intention, originally, to have charged you in- 
 terefl ; but as fuch a length of time has intervened, and that I 
 have invariably paid interefl to every man of whom I ever had 
 money, you would not, I am fure, thank me for omitting to 
 ftate an Intereft-Account with you. It is in this perfuafion that 
 I have adopted the general cuflom of bufinefs, and my own in--, 
 variable mode of Hating Accounts. I believe I have paid as much 
 money for intereft of money, thefe fourteen years, as would pur- 
 chafe me a German Principality. Should I have committed any 
 miflake, or that you have no time to examine the Account, I b^ 
 you will, at all events, on receipt of this, tranfmit me a bill toPat- 
 na, on Calcutta, forCtRs 4614, 5, payable, if you pleafe, to James 
 
 M Grant
 
 ( 4 } 
 
 Grant or order, I received fo much on his account, now at 
 Lucknow, and expended it. I cannot conveniently draw upon 
 my own Attorney for tlie money, which makes me fo defirous 
 for a bill from you for the nett ibm. If you' cannot draw, write 
 me three words, that. I may not neglecl to refund Grant .foine 
 other way. Your books I have returned to Hoolas Roy, to wait 
 your orders. The book-cafe is ftill in my pofTeffion, and you 
 may charge me what you pleafe for it, if you are not delirous to 
 have it back. 
 
 Harper's accounts I {hall be infinitely obliged to you to tranf- 
 mit. There is an account between him and the eftate of Burton, 
 which I cannot adjuft till I fee your's. The accompanying is, I be 
 lievCy an extra ff of my disburfements for elephants. If you will make 
 out a general account, in this manner, of all the difburfements by 
 individuals, added to your own remittances and difburfements, the 
 whole coft of the concern is at once afcertained. Dedicate an hour' 
 to this bufinefs, and oblige 
 
 Your affedionate Friend, - 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 Fayfahady 
 
 "July i^th, 1781, 
 Col. Hannay, 
 
 The
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 D 
 
 The open Account - Current^ N® V. the Balance of nvhich, 
 Ct iiJ 314, 15, 8, xvas the only Sum aciually due to Mr Frafer 
 at Col. Hannays Death, was cnclofed in this Letter, 
 
 My dear Colonel, 
 
 CLOSING and BALANCING ACCOUNTS, I find my- 
 felf confiderably in arrear with Martin ; and to affifl in liqui- 
 dating a debt I contraded to him lad year at Lucknow, I this 
 day gave him a bill on you for Ct Rs 1500; which 1 beg the fa- 
 vour of you to duly honour, credit being given you for the fame 
 in account, as per accompanying Extra(5t, or Sketch of Ac- 
 counts. 
 
 I remain invariablyj 
 
 i , j I 
 
 Your s, mofl affedlionately, 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 April 30/^, 1782. 
 
 LiEUT.-CoL. Alex. Hannay. 
 
 Dr>
 
 Dr, 
 
 ( i ) 
 
 MAJOR HANNAY, in Account Current wItKJAMES FRASER, Cr. 
 
 To fuadry Charges as per the foregoing, 
 
 Thomas Motte, for Cafh advanced by 
 him to Mr Coruack, by my defiie 
 and charged againft me. 
 
 'I 
 
 8;3> 
 
 554 
 
 One Mangee, and Six Dandies with your 
 Horfe to Calcutta, Sa Rs 22, or 
 
 Cafli advanced Mr Turnbull, per Re- 
 ceipt, Sa Rs 300, or 
 
 Ditto to Attacanah from the Hill Rajah, 
 Sa Rs 10, or - - 
 
 C Rs 
 
 24 ( Q 
 
 333 
 
 II 
 
 9454 
 
 I 
 
 By Cafh from Mr Burgh, Sa Rs looo, or 
 
 Balance at your Debit in new Account, 
 
 1 160 
 
 8294 
 
 C Rs 
 
 I 
 
 915 
 
 Errors Excepted, Dinapore, April ^o. 1775. ''^ 
 
 (Signed), J. FRASER. 
 
 N**!!.
 
 
 en 
 
 < 
 
 Pi 
 en 
 
 a 
 
 u 
 
 U 
 
 4-1 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 «J 
 u 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 
 erf 
 
 w 
 
 Q 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 o 
 
 
 o o 
 o o 
 
 .^4 
 
 o . 
 
 O N 
 
 ■ (A 
 
 o o 
 
 O 00 
 
 o 
 
 
 a, 
 
 ■J! 3 
 
 O CI 
 
 O O 
 
 o - 
 oo 00 
 O 
 
 P 
 
 D 
 
 00 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 a. 
 
 
 Li 
 
 rt 
 
 " o 
 
 
 o 
 
 z 
 
 
 ooooocxooouoooo 
 
 'S-OOOoooOOOOOOoomoO 
 00 0\0 t^u^w i^OVOvOOO O O '-' 
 
 O MM 
 
 O o 
 i^ao 
 
 0\ 
 
 ^' O O 
 
 ■ *c 
 
 nO 
 
 ■- 
 
 O O CO 
 
 O cr. 
 
 •V 
 
 a-. 
 
 ^2- 
 
 
 o 
 
 C on 
 
 O M 
 
 M 
 
 O ^J^ 
 
 j 
 
 
 «^ 
 
 .^ 
 
 
 *-• 
 
 
 
 'i- 
 
 o- 
 
 
 O •o o VO o 
 
 .S 3 
 
 -« § 
 
 ■5 3* c 
 O *■* 
 
 U 'rt Q .« 
 
 c 1/5 .2, 
 
 »i 3 Kl, 
 
 M ' 
 
 OOOOOoOOOOO 
 
 _ ' 00 « m 1^00 
 
 u N ■* m m O 
 
 
 ti Pi 
 
 
 CO 
 
 VI 
 
 E 
 n 
 U 
 o 
 
 5-4; 
 
 rt.i;'^ « S S 
 
 a, 
 o 
 
 oi 
 
 [_ CO 
 
 ,0 H 
 
 "*- 3 
 
 3 a 
 
 a 
 
 u — 
 
 CO u. 
 
 O u 
 
 flj "^ 
 
 c " 
 
 
 3 
 
 u 
 
 4) — 
 
 Ci 1* en 
 4j u di 
 
 o .^ 
 
 cqoq 
 
 
 u 
 
 O G ( 
 
 M 
 
 hh h 
 
 o 
 
 bC^ p « 
 
 t- u h ^ 
 "J 3 - ti 
 
 U >s"S o 
 
 ^ rt S 2 S 
 W CJ .t: .ti .t: 
 
 o oQQQ 
 
 b 
 
 
 3 
 
 O O 03 O C •:)- 
 
 O - M \ ^ 
 
 ■U 4-1 
 
 o 3 
 o (J 
 
 s ■- 
 
 
 
 Ji S 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 a. 
 o -W 
 
 ^ ^ 3 <- 
 O 
 
 u r 
 
 ^g^ 9 
 
 « t; u rfl 
 ^ « S 2 
 
 'J 3 «. 
 
 :5 o 
 
 o 
 
 6 
 
 .0 oQQ 
 
 o o' 
 
 « " s 
 
 TO ij ^J 
 
 Ci-:^ •- 
 
 ^ -a .-J 
 
 M -^ ii 
 
 Jo 
 
 '^ O 
 
 o o 
 
 So" 
 
 o o 
 
 QQ 
 
 
 
 "3 
 
 M 
 
 3
 
 
 ui 
 
 < 
 
 CO 
 
 c 
 u 
 
 U 
 
 c 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 Q 
 Z 
 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 04 
 
 ^o 
 
 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 <?^ 
 
 
 
 N* 
 
 f4 
 W 
 
 CO 
 
 < 
 
 (24 
 
 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 s 
 
 9 
 
 u 
 
 na 
 
 
 a> 
 
 
 4-< 
 
 
 cu 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 o 
 
 t; 
 
 »4 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 a 
 
 c/) 
 
 bxj 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 - Q 
 
 o 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 M t; 
 
 « 
 
 ° I 2 
 
 M 
 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 v. 
 
 O 
 2 
 
 Q 
 
 u 
 
 re 
 
 OOCOOOOO Ov 
 
 O OoO O cnOCOOO 
 
 OO>-->>CO00>-' 00 
 O ^ O "^ o »- 
 
 o o o o 
 
 
 
 o o 
 
 o 
 
 O 00 o 
 
 00 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o o t^oo 
 o o 
 
 v^ 
 
 o - 
 
 O N 
 
 n 
 
 OOO 
 OOO 
 
 - o - 
 n O N 
 
 
 ffl 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 r! 
 p O 
 
 o tJ 
 
 ai 
 
 
 
 FQ 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 -3 
 C 
 
 a 
 
 c 
 
 c r s 
 
 rl 
 
 ^ .0 
 
 hr-'r-h 
 
 
 o 
 c o 
 
 -5 C .= .5 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 rt " 2 2 
 U '-u .t; .^ 
 o cCQ 
 
 
 c 
 
 13 
 
 P3 
 
 
 
 re 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 PQ 
 
 
 
 ,0 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 ■3 
 
 
 
 Ho 
 
 Oii; 
 
 Q 
 
 o .i: 
 
 -5 :_ 
 
 oQO 
 
 000c 
 
 O 00 'T O 
 
 O O o - 
 U -^ c» w 
 
 « t>-, 
 
 • uS 
 
 o « 
 
 3 5 
 
 fCcS 
 
 c '^ 
 
 10 _, o 
 
 -^ >E — 
 "> X «- c 
 
 o = s « 
 rs g •-- = 
 
 « S « Q 
 c= O c o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 r* 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 M 
 
 - c 
 
 CO 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 O' 
 
 ^'5 
 
 C ' 
 
 -d 
 
 c 
 
 u 
 
 » 
 
 at 
 S « 
 
 rs 3 
 "a 
 
 ^5 
 

 
 _Q. 
 Ot 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 > 
 
 3 
 O 
 t-. 
 
 o 
 
 Q 
 B 
 
 QQ 
 
 ■§ 
 
 Q 
 
 o 
 
 a. 
 
 9 
 Pi 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 CQ 
 
 o o o o o c 
 
 O O O O 00 00 
 
 o 
 
 OS 
 ca 
 
 6 „^ 
 
 •« o u g 
 ci- 5 r\ 3 
 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 rt u 
 
 oo 
 
 CQ 
 
 rt •- 
 o "S 
 
 = W 
 
 a. o 
 „■« 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 o o 
 o o 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 O 
 
 O 00 
 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 fT\ to 
 
 rS 
 C/3 
 
 cri rrj en 
 crj rr^ m 
 
 O O O 
 O O O 
 
 O 
 
 N 
 
 4> 
 
 ■5D 
 
 Oc/5CQ 
 
 ^ c e ■ 
 U -^ ■- a c a 
 cQQOOO 
 
 CQ 2 
 
 "rt '^ r^ 
 OS n) <U 
 
 '5 
 
 B 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 H 
 
 g.c4 
 
 bJco ' 
 
 5 ' 
 
 _o 
 Hi 
 
 bO 
 a 
 
 3 • I I 
 
 PQ 
 
 3 
 O 
 >> 
 
 u r*. , 
 , O -To 
 
 £^- .-i 
 
 5 12 2^ 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 
 « 
 
 w 
 
 c* 
 
 ^a 
 
 t^ 
 
 1^ 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 K 
 
 
 
 
 Ji 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 • 
 
 
 4^ 
 
 
 
 o 
 a. 
 
 5 
 
 o 
 
 rt - =- ^ 
 
 o 
 
 o c o 
 
 F- f-f- 
 
 
 o 
 
 n, 
 
 3 
 
 erf 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 O O 
 
 1° 
 
 3 
 
 O O 00 
 
 00 
 
 
 * I** 
 
 
 
 ^ r»^0 k" 
 
 00 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 m . . 
 
 
 
 
 C£i 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 C/5 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 cs; 
 
 
 • 
 
 ut 
 
 
 TS 
 
 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 
 t-t 
 
 • 
 
 
 Cl—i 
 
 T 
 
 (U 
 
 
 d 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 y. 
 
 
 C 
 
 <u 
 
 
 1. 
 
 v> 
 
 ,»^ 
 
 b 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 (5 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 CO 
 
 -c 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 I-^ 
 
 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 U4 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 ■*^ 
 
 
 u 
 
 L> 
 
 
 4^ 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 iz: 
 
 o 
 
 
 OJ 
 
 tt^ 
 
 
 rj 
 
 O 
 
 
 rj 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 ts 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 o 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 f^ 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 o 
 ,o 
 
 c 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 < 
 
 2: 
 
 - a. 
 
 *3 
 O
 
 
 00 
 
 (£4 
 
 
 
 r* 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 W^ 
 
 
 
 
 o^ 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 <N 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 •-* 
 
 ^r 
 ^-^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 o 
 
 J3 
 
 pq 
 
 
 O 0-. 
 
 o - 
 
 00 CO 
 
 o 
 
 o o 
 
 O O 
 
 S o 
 
 o 00 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 'a _ 
 
 Di. 
 
 £2 « T3 rt 
 •^ re ,c 
 
 ™ "^ «i 
 
 g O T) 
 .SOU 
 
 J •- .- 
 
 CQ 
 
 O 
 
 O CQ 
 
 &< o 
 
 — : o 
 
 u 3 
 
 S ° 
 
 u -^ 
 
 Oi3 
 
 CO 
 
 g 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 o 
 
 § 
 
 o 
 u 
 
 a. 
 >, 
 
 E 
 
 > 
 
 i^ O « o 
 
 I-' M ^ O 
 
 to r^ O "^ 
 00 — ci 00 
 
 r^ r^ t^ r^ 
 . r^ c^ i^ i^ 
 
 s 
 
 c4 C^ 
 
 
 u 
 
 C 
 C 
 
 o 
 
 - S 
 
 iJ o 
 
 - o 
 
 S 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 ^00 
 
 cu 
 
 s 
 0: 
 
 9 
 O 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 u 
 
 • - .b 
 
 £< "'^ 
 
 ■^ O '-' 
 
 § -^ 
 
 -33 -So 
 2 s 
 
 c 
 
 ■& 
 
 o 
 
 X o 
 
 z 
 
 
 . o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 00 OOfoO'.-^cVOO-<5<:''«-^ \OnOO>oI 
 
 cr\ O -^ ^ i-^ t^ i.^ Wrt M ^J- I 
 
 r* >-> r« M i i^ 
 
 00 ^ O ^00 CI « O O O <^ Ov 
 
 
 
 'T 
 
 ir> 
 
 i^ 
 
 W) 
 
 
 C) 
 
 n 
 
 M 
 
 Ci 
 
 M 
 
 CI 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 •0 
 
 
 
 e 
 
 3 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■2 
 
 Id 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 so 
 
 vO 
 
 ( 
 1 
 
 OvO 
 
 >> 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 * 
 
 • 
 
 I^ 
 
 w>00 
 
 M 
 
 us 
 
 i^ 
 
 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 
 
 "* 
 
 
 •-« 
 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 t^ 
 
 « 
 
 ■<1- 
 
 <!• 
 
 W) 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 a 
 
 3 
 o 
 >> 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 Oi 
 4-* 
 
 a 
 
 3 
 O 
 
 .E ?; 
 
 u u r* 
 
 ^ cn 
 
 -. -" PS 
 
 (t: O t> 
 
 ir :- 3 
 
 *-. '*j 'I 
 
 -'-Jo 
 
 i I I I I I I I [ I I I 111! 
 
 i I I I I J I I I ! I I I I I i 
 
 » o 
 o 
 
 OO 
 CO 
 
 \0 O - 
 
 M 
 
 „ OOoOOOOOCOOO oCOO 
 
 CDCQQQCQOQQQ QQQQ 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 <^ M^ 
 
 
 OOOOOOOOOOCO 
 
 2 2 2 
 QQQ 
 
 3 .-2 
 o ' ■— ' 
 .a 
 
 S 
 o 
 
 o c o o o 
 
 o o c o o o 
 
 C Q O O 
 
 '^Q PCDQCCQCOQQQ OOCQ 
 
 CCCOCOOOoOOO 
 
 r- h h h h r h h h r- h h 
 
 o c o 
 
 = ^ri t3 3 3 
 
 =« >» reus 
 ^ S « " oH 
 
 O^ c c >« i 
 •2-S.ES fe^ 
 
 •i £ 5: ^ a: S - 
 
 ^. X &-^ 2--^ 2,-^ 
 
 E o -=tc-; 2.0.0 
 S " " ™ * " s a 
 
 p E-go.sQ 5iQ 
 
 cJ3 ™ o"5 of^ o 
 
 ^ 
 rt 
 
 
 ™ o ^ c ^ o 
 
 h h h 
 
 00 
 
 0000 00000 
 000000 «)0oor~o 
 
 O " CI _ 
 
 a, I ■" 
 o >-, 
 u a , 
 
 .2, <* 
 J3 _ 'o 
 
 >^02 
 
 DQ 1- 
 « ^ 
 
 >o 
 
 K S 
 
 O 5 « 
 
 Q2c^ 
 o .r 
 
 o w 3 
 
 i-h 
 
 N J3 
 
 c « g 
 
 C-' > I 
 
 ■^ Ji -o 
 cW « 
 I - '"^ 
 
 ^ =* 1^ '9 
 
 lu re "= c: 
 
 I § 
 
 *- ^ (-] 
 
 O 
 
 r, to 
 
 ." a< 
 o 
 
 C/1 
 
 . . . • u • 
 
 ** • - CO ~ <« ■" 
 
 V 
 
 '>__■ in m m "^ '^ ^ to «^ •- to ,1 
 
 CO
 
 
 c 
 
 u 
 
 c 
 o 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 
 Q 
 Z 
 
 < 
 
 I-} 
 < 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 m 
 
 m 
 
 O 
 
 en 
 
 rri 
 
 ro 
 
 r^ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o o o 
 
 CV 
 
 t^ 
 
 o 
 
 ^ 
 
 y^ 
 
 c^ 
 
 e\ 
 
 •^ 
 
 O 
 
 ^o 
 
 l^ 
 
 o 
 
 S3 
 
 k^ »^ -o 
 
 o 
 
 N- 
 
 SO 
 
 OS 
 
 
 o o o 
 
 O O oo 
 
 i- r^ O »^ 
 
 D 
 O 
 
 aq 
 
 o u 
 
 60 5 
 
 o £! «i 
 bCc Si 
 
 •" 5 != 
 
 5-g « 
 
 J5 .i: C/5 
 
 <L> O a> 
 
 ^ °2 
 
 <£ t! . - 
 
 o o 
 
 o o 
 o <^ 
 
 &03 
 
 J3 CQ 
 
 a 3 
 
 NO 
 
 oo I o o o !> 
 
 O <^ 1 O 00 O '^ 
 
 •o 
 
 Ov o 
 
 « o 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 03 
 
 
 o o o o 
 
 O O 00 so 
 
 O »^ On *^ o» O »^sO 
 « « "T " t) 
 
 U 
 
 
 cjqQQ 
 
 o o 
 
 O -H ^ 
 
 ^u So 
 
 1^1 ■ 
 
 S " 4> 
 S CO O 
 
 hh<0 
 
 
 ?-CO rt 
 
 rft <^ ^ 
 
 u a " 
 
 hhhPQ 
 
 o o o o o- 
 
 O O 00 O r<^ 
 
 O O - « S5 
 O SO O t~ 
 
 u ti 
 HI 3 
 
 "S "^ 
 O 
 
 t^ 
 
 3 
 O 
 t»> 
 
 J3 
 
 •T3 ^ gj fc- 
 
 £2§o 
 
 bQ 2 o E 
 c o.5.ti 2 
 hhQQO 
 
 o 
 
 o o 
 
 J 
 
 O CO 
 
 O 
 
 2- 
 
 o o 
 
 O O 
 
 o o o o o 
 " o o o o 
 
 o o 
 
 O 00 
 
 O " " 
 •O MM 
 
 
 o o 
 
 00 30 
 
 
 U 
 o 
 
 c 
 
 X 
 
 o 
 
 o o 
 
 i a. >-. </! ^ 
 
 
 3 3 
 O CO 
 
 3 
 
 m 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 (». 
 
 S 
 
 >> 
 
 ii 
 
 4~l 
 
 O 
 4^ 
 
 
 D 
 
 Q 
 
 r. 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 
 h 
 
 !- 
 
 
 3 "^ 
 O 
 
 e 
 
 nl 
 
 
 c ■ 
 
 o ■= o 
 
 O d 
 
 Mo 
 
 O N 
 
 .5 CO 
 
 Q o 
 
 -a 
 
 a 
 w 
 
 3CQ 
 -^ 
 
 cC 
 
 a 
 
 ^2 
 
 a rt I 
 
 ^2g= 
 
 CC >r iiO 
 
 " "5 2 
 
 t- .t; 
 g Q 
 
 o o o c 
 
 3 S 
 
 03 B 
 c O 
 
 CI 
 
 *_. *J Z- *-' OJ 
 
 qqqg 
 
 c ,o _o ,o 
 
 rt « 
 
 i7§ 
 
 "a 
 
 3 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 2; 
 
 
 J3 
 
 
 - -
 
 
 ~n 
 
 CO 
 
 < 
 
 CO 
 
 D 
 
 o oo 
 
 J2 
 
 
 
 PQ 
 
 05 
 
 cg^ CO 
 
 ' — Pi 
 
 'a 
 
 «> 
 
 4-* 
 
 u 
 
 «> 
 
 O 
 
 c 
 
 D 
 O 
 
 '■^ .1 £ 
 
 2 
 
 Q 
 
 < 
 . O 
 
 P 
 
 o o o 
 
 o o o 
 
 ;_ o o o 
 1 2 w " " 
 
 o 
 
 
 ■" 
 
 
 « 03 1 
 
 '-' 
 
 
 00 
 
 n 
 
 N 
 
 « 
 
 00 
 
 • vo^jOvOOcccnO^OOOOro o^C 0>00<^ro^OO-OC\0"~. -CV5000^0>00~0 
 
 i. Leo 
 
 it " 
 
 ■■ I,. O 
 
 00 f^OOVOCO ®s-*00 '+-fn"*00 "N 
 
 cr^-1-rrir^30 O "^'^ 
 
 ir\ -^ ^.^ ^^ 
 
 
 O — t/N r^ r^ m 
 
 4 CO O CO c^ o *N 
 
 
 •^n «^N r#^o^^o•- « cc 
 
 M^WOO'^r^'^O^rr, «« ^ 
 
 *^ r* CN O f^ «^^ l>*OQ 0\-^ -O •* GO ^ so ^ 
 
 C4 
 
 3 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 •§ ^r^ 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 • 
 
 , 
 
 
 e S . 
 
 
 NO ' 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 .2 
 
 E " fc u 
 £ r. ■" F 
 
 
 1 ^ ii " t- 
 
 
 
 
 
 a • 
 
 «=~— 3uJ3S°"'3'r;— . 
 
 "=• C " C C I- « 
 
 
 
 t 
 
 I 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 .5 . o - 
 
 .-O0-0-0-"0-o--00-.o5- 
 tf, c* CO rn ro CO cr^ m CO m Cfi CO f^ c< rri coUJ c<» 
 
 (r. en on <ri m W -^ « 
 
 *-» O vr^ r- tr.oo « O 
 
 
 
 
 
 m CO ~ ^ ^ 11 eo 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 
 CO - 
 
 ■-^ — p 
 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 *J 
 
 .ti 
 
 u r* 
 
 D t- ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 CQ 
 
 j= z 
 
 ^ o. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 "CO 
 
 •^•t: o 
 
 O O m o 0^<: >0 ov: '^ ff> rnso >c *0 ^ m m 
 
 rrimo mrf\mt^O O O 
 
 O O O^C^^nf^f^^ 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 o , 
 
 c -. 
 
 
 
 
 ■n 
 
 ti 
 
 i-> 
 
 •- S 
 
 
 c<-. >0 -* T^^r^i-^t^M ^v#^ov" « « r*0OOD 
 
 
 fc*%«j-)>0 O rnrfiCo*^ 
 
 n 
 
 CU 
 
 c ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 o 
 
 c o 
 
 h o t^oOOO "^O 0*00 r< (N O !>0 rriOsO «*»^i^'N>o 
 
 — r-'^'-o— 0000 '^r^OO 
 
 <i-■«:^l^c^ eorrrrtOk 
 
 c: 
 
 
 
 
 a a -c -T 
 
 \r'-«'-i -C003S— o -^ i^m:) m »* o o n r* 
 
 rr-. — I"-- «-^ m '■< — "^ ^'s r* 
 
 -<\ »^ moo *o r*-i CO ^ 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 -■ 
 
 ■■J •-• 
 
 a c-j 'n 
 
 *^-rrr. .-«-.c<nriOst^ciriMMOSN 
 
 
 
 uca 
 
 Q2 
 
 
 r* «* 
 
 
 
 c 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o o 
 
 
 
 
 
 hh 
 
 [_ 
 
 [-(_ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 r4 
 
 ^s, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■—J 
 
 
 <t3 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 oi 
 
 o
 
 
 CO 
 
 < 
 
 4-* 
 
 < 
 
 z 
 < 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 
 
 > 
 o 
 
 -Z 
 
 O O 1 O 00 
 
 - 
 
 
 - 
 
 ^ 8 
 
 CO 
 
 
 By my Draft on you favour of 
 Suloochurd Bridjeo Bafly, ■ 
 Lucfcnow tit Rs 5496 12 J 
 
 By my Draft on you favour of) 
 Colonel Martin J 
 
 • Balance 
 
 00 . 
 c» a 
 
 - fl 
 
 
 U 
 u 
 
 N 
 
 
 t- 4, 4> 
 h '-' C! 
 
 C ><! S 
 
 3--= 3 
 O .J 
 
 U-, <= ^ 
 
 " S2 
 SI o 
 
 KCJ o 
 o o '^ 
 
 o 
 
 sO >o ^O ^ I 
 ■^ -^ -^ -^ 
 
 00000 
 
 4^ 1^ «^ J_l 4_j 
 
 ■q 5 Q Q (5 
 
 Q o o> o o^ o 
 S 
 
 M 
 
 
 00 
 
 ■^ 
 
 W 
 
 1^ 
 
 CO 
 
 
 <= 9 
 o o 
 
 a^t 
 
 1,500000 fe*^ 
 . I . . OS 
 
 o rt 
 o o 
 
 1 I I i 
 
 3 
 
 e O C 
 
 »-?.-,cqm<l 
 
 
 n 
 
 u 
 
 J3 
 
 I 
 
 <5 
 
 
 s 
 
 PI 
 s 
 
 'So 
 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 <: 
 
 •3 
 
 6 
 3 
 
 CO 
 o 
 
 • ?;§
 
 ( ^ ) 
 
 E 
 
 To J AM E S F R AS E R, Efq% 
 
 S I R, 
 
 I BELi EVE I mifunderftood you the other morning, in think- 
 ing that you claimed the amount of the promiflbry Note, inde- 
 pendent of the Balance of the Account- Current. Pray am I right 
 •or not ? 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY, 
 
 To R A M S AT H A N N A T, Efq-, 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 The promiflbry Note being neither Jlated^ or charged in the ac- 
 count, muft neceflarily be independent of that account, and the 
 Balance of it. If you wifli for any elucidation of the Ac- 
 count,
 
 ( 7 ) 
 
 count, or the mode or amount of my receipts, be pleafed to in- 
 form me. 
 
 I am, Dear Sir, 
 
 Your's, moft obediently, 
 
 J. F R A S E R. 
 
 Wednefday. 
 
 N.B. The igth March 1783. 
 
 G 
 
 To JAMES F R A S E R, Efqi 
 
 Sir, 
 
 I NEVER imagined your demand on my brother's eftate to be 
 of the magnitude it appears to be, and will therefore be obliged 
 to you to inform me how it arofe ; that is, on what occafion the 
 Note was granted, and why it was not inferted in the accounts- 
 current that have been fent in fubfequent to the date of it. — I alfo 
 beg to knoiv the precife fum you have to demand of the ejlate. 
 
 I am, 8cc. 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY. 
 P To
 
 (' 8 > 
 
 H 
 
 To RA M SAT H ANNA r, Efqy 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 I HAVE no demand on your late brother but what is con- 
 Altuted by his prormjfory Note^ and the Jmall Balance of the open 
 account ; both originated from money advanced folely to accom- 
 modate his cowuenience^ as often thankfully acknowledged by 
 him. 1 did not chufe to involve the Note, which 1 held of 
 nearly equal validity with a bond, in an Account-current, from,, 
 which it was diflindt, and on which there was a Balance due to me, 
 and he did not defire it. I had, moreover, (ome difficulties about 
 intereft. After the amendment of his money-concerns, I fre- 
 quently fignified the wifh to be reimburfed both, without preffing 
 it. He fuggefted different modes of liquidating the debt, to fave 
 the exchange on his money, (^c. <^'C. ; and lad year he affured 
 me, that he had, the Augufl; preceding, tranfmitted me bills on 
 you for a confiderable amount ; but I never received them, nor 
 any others. I have been looking for fome papers and letters to 
 fend you ; but I cannot lay my hands on them to-night, though 
 I have detained your Hircarrah purpofely. 
 
 I am, Dear Sir, 
 
 Yours, mofl obediently, 
 
 J. F R A S E R. 
 
 Thurfday night. 
 
 N. B. loth March. 
 
 N. B. To this letter there was the following Poftfcript, though not printed in the firft 
 edition of the Narrative. — The Note is dated i ^th OElobcr iTjC, for Ct Rs io,i20, 
 8, 6; (ind I believe inter eji is ihargcabk on it to the time of his death at leajl. 
 
 To
 
 ( 9 ) 
 
 To RAM SAT H ANN A T, Efqi 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 On enquiry I find it an eftabliflied Rule in Court, to allow in- 
 terest on promiflbry notes ; propofe therefore to charge your bro- 
 ther's eftate to the 13th Auguft lafl, becaufe my oivn preference, de- 
 claredly, to the more complex account of Harper^ has been the caife of 
 delay. If I am right, it will (land thus : 
 
 Promiflbry Note, dated 13th Oftober 1776, - Ct Rs 10120 8 6- 
 
 Intereft thereon, from the date to 13th Auguft 1782, 10 ffrcf«?. 5903 to o- 
 
 16024 2 ^ 
 Add Balance of Account-current. 
 
 Pleafe to fend me the copy of the account I left with you, that 
 I may fign it, and fend it with the promiflbry note, and any ac- 
 quittance, or difcharge, you may think neceffary ; when it ihall 
 fuit your convenience to difcharge the amount, the fooner the 
 more convenient to, 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Your's, mofl obediently, 
 
 J. FRASER. 
 
 Mcn-ch Q.2d 1783, 
 
 To.
 
 ( lo ) 
 
 K 
 
 To JAMES F RA S E R, Efq; 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 The Executors of the will of my deceafed brother, confider 
 the information that you have given them refpeding the pro- 
 miflbry note infufficient to juftify their paying the amount, and 
 I muft therefore beg the favour of you to fend me fome other 
 vouchers, particularly the account from which the balance of 
 6842 3 2 is taken. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY. 
 
 To RAMSAY HA NNA r, Efq; 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 I HAVE this moment your note; but I confefs honeftly to you, 
 I do not underftand it : I would be very glad on this, and 
 every occafion, to give fatisfaction to the Executors of your bro- 
 ther's will ; but I confefs I think it an unufual thing to be called 
 
 on
 
 ( It ) 
 
 on formally for vouchers In fupport of the promiflory note, writ- 
 ten and fubfcribed by the deceafed ; and when I intended to have 
 fent you the other evening fome letters, it was for your private 
 fatisfa(5lion and information, and not formal proof. If the note 
 does not fufficie^illy eftahliJJj the debt in laiv, I mujl have recourfe to 
 Jiich collateral proofs as may be in my poiver ; and in the mean time^ to 
 prevent ujekj's trouble and ivajle of time ^ I nnijl beg the favour of you 
 to inform me explicitly^ ivhether the Executors^ through you, refife to 
 pay the note, and for 'what reafons, that I may inform myfelf ivhe- 
 ther it may be mofl for my interefl and convenience to profecute the 
 efiate in this country^ or in Europe. 
 
 I will fend the account you want as fbon as I can get it copied, 
 but my writer has been fick and abfent from me thefe three 
 weeks. 
 
 I am, 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Your's, moft obediently, 
 
 March 22. 1783, J. F R A S E R- 
 
 M 
 
 To RAM SAT HAN NAT, Efq; 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 On a reference to your note of ycfterday, which was delivered 
 to me juft as I got up from fleep, I perceived I did not fufficiently 
 
 (^ advert
 
 ( 12 ) 
 
 advert to the reafons afligned by . the Executors of Colonel Han- 
 nay for refufing to pay the deceafed's promiffory note, the infuf- 
 iiciency of the information I had given refpedling it. — I beg 
 leave to obferve, that I never meant by my communications with 
 you to add to the validity of that inftrument, nor did I conceive 
 it necelTary, or required of me. The Executors of Colonel Han- 
 nay acl upon oath, and I reft the OAoneVs proimjfory note upon its 
 otvn ground^ ivithoiit afdng or ivifhing any favour at all to it, from 
 the heirs or executors. If they do not think themfdves "warranted 
 to pay it on its ozun pri7iciple and f elf -evidence^ no collateral iriforma- 
 tion of mine ought to induce them ; oti the other hand, I owe it, in 
 jujiice to myfelf to adopt the mojl expedient means of fupporting and 
 fecuring ivhat I knoiv to be very clearly my right ; and, to prevent 
 mifunderflanding, I beg leave to revoke the arrangement of interefl, in 
 my note to you of yeflcrday, holding it fair, in a decifion at latv, to take, 
 my chance of ivhat it grants : 1 2 per cent. / am told, is the interefl 
 alloived by the Court ; and, if I am rightly informed, the refifal of a 
 demand authorifes the charge to the day of payment. As thefe cir- 
 cumflances make a confiderable difference, I think it neceffary to 
 mention them, that they may not afterwards appear novel. I la- 
 ment very much the trouble created to you, individually, in this 
 bufinefs, and wifh I had earlier underftood the intention of the 
 Executors. I beg you will excufe this additional, but lad trouble 
 on the fubje(5l ; and 
 
 I remain, Dear Sir, 
 
 Your's, moft obediently, 
 
 J. ERASER. 
 
 March 23. 1783. 
 
 To
 
 ( 13 ) 
 
 N 
 
 To Mr HE NET STARK. 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 As we are apprehenfive Mr Frafer may fay in anfwer to the 
 bill, that he has fent the note of hand to England, we think it 
 may be necefTary to make a demand for the return of it before 
 the failing of the packet : I fubmit to you the propriety of it, and 
 if you think it right, requefl that you will, without any delay, 
 make the demand. You may inform him, that our reafon for de- 
 manding it is, that we are of opinion it has been already paid. 
 
 RAMSAY HAN NAY. 
 
 O 
 
 To HENRY and JAMES STARK, Efqrs. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 I AM this moment favoured with your note of the 8th. I am 
 really little verfed in matters of law, and cannot make an anfwer 
 to this note till Saturday morning, when I fliall be in town, and 
 furnifh you with my reply ; mean while, 
 
 I am, Gentlemen, 
 
 Your moft obedient humble Servant, 
 
 JAMES FRASER. 
 
 To-
 
 ( H ) 
 
 To HEKRT and JAMES STARK, Efqrs. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 Just as I came home lad night, I received and acknowledged 
 your note of the Hth, promifing an anfwer on Saturday morning. 
 The Executors of Colonel Hannay never intimated to me that the 
 cleceafed's promilTory note was difcharged in his lifetime ; they* 
 demurred to the payment on a plea of infufSciency of vouchers, 
 anda hurt at it, I fignified an intention, if I found it practicable, 
 to enforce payment in Europe ; but I have (ince done nothing at 
 all in the bufinefs. I think the plea nov^r fet up in the requilition 
 through you is intended to compel an adjufliment in this coun- 
 try ; but taking the literal meaning, it conveys, you may believe, 
 a very unpleafing imputation ; and J affure you upon my ivordy 
 Gentlonen, as I am ready to confirm upon oath, that I am not 
 confcioia of any grouttd in the ivorld, on ivhich the Executors of 
 Colonel Hannay can found fuch a fufpicion. J am pofttively clear 
 I never charged this note to Colonel Hannafs account in any 
 manner ivhatever, nor ever received value for it from him, or any 
 body elfe, by myfelf or any other perfon authonfed by me. But 
 if the Executors think they have any jufl grounds to fuppofe the 
 contrary, I will be mod ready to give fatisfadlion in every rea- 
 fonable point ; and if they have any proof, J will, they may be 
 affured, not only be ready to give up the note, but render any re- 
 compence fuitable to the occafion. After this declaration, 1 think 
 i; will be candid to tell me what is meant or alluded to j and from 
 
 you,
 
 ( 15 ) 
 
 you, Gentlemen, I beg the favour to be informed. I am quite 
 ignorant of law, as I believe you are acquainted, and, added to 
 my general averfion to litigation, I fhould be particularly reluc- 
 tant to engage now in any controverfy that might probably re- 
 quire more time to decide than I propofe to remain in the coun- 
 try. I fliall not feek any information in the bufinefs until I hear 
 from you in anfwer to this. 
 
 I am^ 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 Gardens^ Your moft obedient humble Servant, 
 
 Thurfday morning, J. F R A S E R^ 
 
 Meffn STAR K 3. 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 The reafons why the Executors of the will of Colonel Hannay 
 demurred paying the promiflbry note demanded by Mr Frafer, 
 was, becaufe they then had fome doubts of its being due ; and 
 why they now demanded the return of it, is, becaufe they are fa- 
 tisfied the doubts they then entertained were not groundlefs. If 
 Mr Frafer is affured that the note of hand. has never, by any 
 
 . R means,.
 
 ( i6 ) 
 
 means, been difcharged, no informatioa we covild give ought te 
 induce him to deliver it up ; and, in that cafe, we mufl try what 
 a law-procefs can do, in eftablifhing our right to have it returned 
 and cancelled. If, on the other hand, he is of opinion the Note 
 is not juftly due, he cannot require our reafons for not paying it, 
 to prevail on him to deliver it up when demanded. 
 
 This you will pleafe to inform Mr Frafer, and, at the fame 
 time, we expe(5t his final determination without delay. 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY. 
 
 R 
 
 To RAMS AT H ANN AT, Efq; 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 I EXPECTED to have had the pleafure of hearing from you 
 yefterday. To put an end to this bufinefs of your brother s Note alto- 
 gether^ I here inclofe it to be cancelled, which, I fuppofe, is all 
 that can be required, 
 
 I am, 
 
 Gardens^ Dear Sir, 
 
 Tuefday Morning, Yours mofl obediently, 
 
 N. B. The isth April. J. F R A S E R. 
 
 To
 
 ( »7 ) 
 
 To JAMES F RAS E R, Efq, 
 
 S I R, 
 
 I HAVE received your letter, with its enclofure, the promif- 
 fory note, granted to you by my deceafed brother, for the ba- 
 lance of an Account Current. 
 
 The recovery of this Note was certainly all the Executors had 
 in view in the fteps they have ufed ; but^ as they have necejfarily 
 incurred fame expence^ in employing counfcl, c^-'c. they expert that you 
 <ire to pay it^ and I JJjall therefore direSi Mr Stark to fend you in his 
 bill of charges for you to df charge. The Executors, alfo, think it 
 proper, that the elephant bufinefs be re-confidered ; as they are 
 of opinion, the information the arbitrators determined upon was 
 improper ; and that, had it not been for this information, they 
 would have given a very different award. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 RAMSAY HANNAY. 
 Calcutta^ 
 iSth April y 1785. 
 
 Ts 
 
 ■■J
 
 ( i8 ) 
 
 To MAJOR ALEXAND ER H ANN AT, 
 (The original Letter.) 
 
 My Dear Major, 
 
 I WROTE you the 9th inftant, concerning extradl of a letter 
 from Harper, and preffing you to haften the adjuflment of his 
 account, which I now earneftly entreat. The poor fellow feems 
 in great tribulation about the untoward ftate of his affairs, and no 
 wonder. I begged of you alfo in my lad, to let me have a bill 
 on Calcutta, for 5 or 6000 Rs on my own account. Should you 
 have any cafli in Calcutta that you can command, will you oblige 
 me by an order for 20,000 Rupees, to be replaced ivithin tivo 
 months ? I will thank you if you do. But at all events, my friend, 
 fail not in writing me two or three lines in reply, and you will 
 oblige 
 
 Your affedionate Friend, 
 
 September 12. 1780. 
 
 J. F R A S E R, 
 
 N. B. This letter, in Mr Frafcr's hand-writing, is in the hands of Colonel 
 Hannay's Executors. 
 
 To
 
 ( 19 ). 
 
 U 
 
 To MAJOR ALEXANDER HANNAT. 
 f Mutilated Copy.) 
 
 My Dear Major, 
 
 I WROTE you the gth inftant, covering extra(?l of a letter from 
 Harper, and prefling you to haften the adjuflment of his account, 
 which I now earneftly entreat. The poor fellow feems in great 
 tribulation about the untoward ftate of his affairs, and no won- 
 der. I begged of you alfo in my laft to let me have a bill on Cal- 
 cutta for 5 or 6000 Rupees, on my own account — Should you 
 have any cafli in Calcutta that you can command, will you oblige 
 me by an order for 20,000 Rupees, and I will thank you if you 
 do ; but at all events, my friend, fail not in writing me two or 
 three lines in reply, and you will oblige 
 
 Your affedionate Friend 
 
 September 12. 1780. J. F R A S E R. 
 
 [The preceding letter was delivered by Mr Frafer to the Arbitrators who fet- 
 tled the Elephant Account, and was attefted to be a true copy of one he had 
 written to Colonel Hannay.3 
 
 S To
 
 i 20 ) 
 
 To JA M E S F RA S E I^, E/^; 
 
 My Dear Fraser, Atterouukey Sept. 17. 17S0. 
 
 I HAVE had the pfeafure to receive your favour of the 9th, 
 enclofing me an extra<5l from a letter of Harper's by the Duke of 
 Kingfton — 1 too fenfibly feel his loiTes, poor fellow, not to be as 
 folicitous as any man can be to bring the elephant concern to as 
 advantageous a clofe as poflible; and you muft do me the juftice 
 to admit, that it has nat'been owing to any negle<5l or blame of 
 mine, that it has been kept fo long in fufpence. The original fale 
 of the elephants amounted to 108,000 Rs j Harper's advance on 
 the purchafe was 22,000 Ct Rs — mine was far more confiderabie. 
 There is (till upwards of 16,000 Halee Sicca Rs due by Polier up- 
 on this concern. In November lafl I paid you 35,000; I had be- 
 fore paid Burton a confiderable fum, 1 believe about 5000 Rs, but 
 which I cannot afcertain, until I return to my cantonments where 
 my papers are. All thefe circumftances I mentioned to you before, 
 when we were together; but you feem to forget that they made 
 fo fenfible an impreffion upon you then, that you exprefsly enga- 
 p-ed, in the receipt for the 35,000 Rs. that, if it exceeded the fum 
 which m.ight appear due to Harper upon the final fettlement of 
 the account, you was to repay me the furplus ; and write to me 
 for remittances, as if I were in pofleffion of the funds. I believe, 
 Frafer, you tranfmit Harper copies of all your correfpondence up- 
 on his money matters : let me fubmit it to your own reflection, 
 Vfhether, upon his perufal of your letter, now before me, it muft 
 not appear to him, that without confideration either to his conve- 
 nience.
 
 ( 21 ) 
 
 nience, or the rlgfits of fiiendfliip, I am wilfully keeping pofTcf- 
 fion of his money, the contrary to which you well know to be 
 the facft. In the coiirfc of a month I (hall be able to fee and de- 
 cide upon the probability of recovering Poller's debt; and, if 
 there is even a fhadow of my being able to recover it, I mean to 
 give Harper credit, and take the debt upon myfelf ; and, until 
 this is effecfled, what purpofe can it anfwer for me to fend you 
 the account ? If there is any balance due to Harper at that time, 
 I will give you a bill on Calcutta for the amount ; and if the re- 
 verfe is the cafe, I will of courfe call upon you for the difference: 
 And with refpecfl to your private account and mine, if you will be 
 fo good, my friend, as make it up to the firft of next month, 
 and fend it me> I will inflantly grant you a bill on Calcutta 
 for the balance. I am far from well, and living in a country 
 which is as bad as the Fens of Lincolnfhire ; fo I fhall only add^ 
 that I ever am, 
 
 My Dear frafer, 
 Your fincerely affediionate and faithful friend, 
 • A L E X. H A N N A Y. 
 (Signed) True Copy. J. F R A S E R. 
 
 [The preceding letter was laid before the Arbitrators who fettled the Elephant 
 account by Mr Frafer.] 
 
 {The
 
 ( 23 ) 
 
 ijrhe fabricated Letter.) 
 
 My Dear Hannay, 
 
 On the eve of my departure from Digah, I received your 
 letter from the Fens. I hope they'll prove as fertile in preparing 
 for the London Market as thofe of Lincolnlhire ; if not, I iliall 
 for ever execrate them for the untoward influence they fuddenly 
 have acquired on the temper of my friend. I have been at this 
 place now till I am tired, and I hope to quit it by the middle of 
 the month. I am writing to Harper by thefe fhips ; but^ my 
 friend^ I never fent him any part of our correfpondence. I have al- 
 •ways conftdered it of a private nature ; ivhen it becomes necejfary to 
 fend him any correfpondence^ it mufi be formally carried on^ and figned 
 by me as his acting attorney ^ and not your fiend. This neceflity, 
 however, I hope, will never occur. The only thing we differ up- 
 on is, his right to intereft on the fums you received through Mr 
 Mlddleton, and had the ufe of, until your payment to me at Luck- 
 now, of L. Sa. Rs. 35, GOO ; and this we can, at mutual convenience, 
 refer to the opinion of fome friends. The claufe in my receipt 
 to you was very proper, becaufe at that time the Nabob's bond 
 for the balance, principal and intereft, afcertained in March 1777, 
 about 30,000 Rs. was then outftanding, together with the balance 
 of Poller's account, 20,000, inclufive of Intereft, drawn out by 
 myfclf at your defire, and admitted by him with fome little va- 
 riation in the batta. 
 
 Thefe
 
 ( ^3 ) 
 
 Thefe were the funds whence I expedled your ability to aid 
 Harper; and I flill fincerely trufl you will be able to obtain cre- 
 dit for thofe fums in the Fouzdar's accounts with the Vizier. I 
 know 1 need not urge you — I know, full well, the trouble you 
 have had in this concern — I was an eye-wltnefs to your perfeve- 
 rance, when we were fellow-labourers at Afuph's Court — I know 
 alfo the fincerity and difintereftednefs of your frlendfliip for Har- 
 per : — but, my friend, confider the predicament I {land in be- 
 tween you ; 1 have the happlnefs to be efleemed the friend of 
 both ; and I hope never to have the misfortune of forfeiting any 
 part of the" partiality of either of you. I love and efteem you 
 both, and would adl equally for either ; and I am fure, my dear 
 friend, you will, in cool refle(5lion, acquit me of any impropriety 
 to either, in the application which feems to have dlfpleafed you, 
 I mufl: pay another vifit to Lucknow, and fhall, if pofTible, ftorm 
 your encampment in my way. You have not yet replied to my laji 
 requifition o/" 20,000; but it is immaterial, as I am at prefent fuffi- 
 ciently provided. News I know none, and politics we'll talk, of 
 in your jungles. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 {J^rue Copy.) J. F R A S E R, 
 
 Calcutta^ 
 December i. 1780. 
 
 [This letter was laid before the Arbitrators who fettled the Elephant account 
 and was attefted by Mr Frafer to be a true copy of one he had written to Colonel 
 Hannay.] 
 
 T To
 
 ( 24 ) 
 
 Z 
 
 To COLONEL ALEXANDER HANNAT, E/q; 
 
 My Dear Colonel, 
 
 I HAVE often complained of your not writing from this place; 
 but I was unexperienced. I am now only furprifed, that any 
 man, not refident here, can ever write at all. I am here now ex- 
 adly two months, and what with running about recognifing old 
 friends, and forming new acquaintances, I find myfelf totally 
 unfit for writing. Let this ftate of mind, and your own expe- 
 rience, plead my apology for not replying to your letter on the 
 fubjedl of Harper's affairs. I received it when I was bufy pre- 
 paring for my trip hither, and not having brought it with me, 
 I can now only tell you, that you were wrong in all your pofi- 
 tions and fuppofitions. I never in my life fent the copy of a letter 
 to one friend in this country to another out of it, in elucidation of biifi- 
 vefs ; and I JJjould be little pleafed ivith any man that ivould ufe any 
 part of my private correfpondence in that ivay. When J flmll have 
 occafion to make ife of my correjpondence ivith yoiiy I -will fign myfelf 
 as Attorney for Harper^ and not as your friend^ claiming your confidence. 
 I will hereafter reply to your letter. This is an apology for the de- 
 lay only. 
 
 Perhaps you may expedl news : I wifli I could fatisfy your ex- 
 pectation. The now military arrangements will, I believe, be 
 complete by Tuefday, and take place immediately. Your Cap- 
 tains will all be promoted to the rank of Majors ; but 1 hope you 
 cannot be otherwife affeded. General Stibbert is here, and, I 
 believe, ably aflifted by the experience and capacity of Mr Murray, 
 
 tlie
 
 ( 25 ) 
 
 t^Jie Company's General. P. Murray is aflinp; Adjutant-General; 
 Colonel Hampton commands at the fort, and Colonel Blair at Ba- 
 ruckpore; Colonel Pearce will, 1 believe, be ready to leave this in 
 five days. The Mahratters, to the number of 18,000, with about 
 20,000 Pindarry lads, on this fide of the Maha Muddy, and the 
 Black Gentry, frightened with the perfuafion of an irruption into 
 Midnapore and Burdwan. I believe there is very little reafon for 
 fuch an apprehenfion. It does not feem to be doubted by the fea- 
 iaring people, that Goddard will be able eafily to convey his troops 
 in open boats to the Myfore Country. And it can never be doubt- 
 ed, that the veteran leaders on the Coaft will be able to fupport 
 the reputation they have been diftlnguifhed for. It feems, how- 
 ever, to be a very ferious bufinefs there. They depend on us for 
 fupplies of provifion. About 50 vefTels have failed this month, 
 and more preparing ; but a late capture of a vefTel in the Bay, by 
 a French privateer, and intelligence of five or fix being cruifing 
 about, has occafioned a great alarm, and will, I am afraid, create 
 lome difficulties to our intended fupplies. I believe the Governor 
 has it in view to make a ferious reform in the civil line, as well 
 the revenue as commercial. It is fully as requifite in the latter as 
 in the former. I return to Patna in a few days, and will write 
 you thence; mean while believe me, as I truly am, 
 
 Your afiedionate and faithful friend, 
 
 Calcutta, December 24. 1780. J. F II A S E R. 
 
 (Compliments of the feafon to you,^ 
 
 N. B. The above letter was found amongft Colonel Hannay's papers at the time 
 Mr Frafei's accounts were difcovered ; and it was by comparing it with the 
 _ foregoing one, dated .ft December, that they were led to conclude "that the laft 
 (the one of the ill of December) was fabricated, 
 
 T9
 
 .( ^6 ) 
 
 To R A M S AT H A N N A X\ E/q, 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 Understanding you are the aifllng Executor of your late- 
 "worthy brother Col. Hannay, I take the liberty to apply to you 
 on the fubje(S of an account between him and Captain Gabriel 
 Harper; it originated in a concern of Elephants furnilhed the Na- 
 bob of Oude in 1774. I received 35,000 Lucknow Siccas, from 
 Col. Hannay, on my receipt, to account, at Lucknow, in 1779; 
 about 50,000 remained at that time to be realized, which, together 
 ivith fame difficulty Col. Hannay found in afcertaining exaflly the a- 
 jjioiint of his own disburfefiients for the concern, delayed a final ad- 
 juftment at that time; and the deal of bufinefs in which he was 
 afterwards engaged prolonged the delay, though on fubfequent 
 applications he repeatedly promifed to finifli the bufinefs. I hope 
 the tranfaflion appears fufficiently clear on his books and papers ; if 
 not, be pleafed to inform me, and I will furnifli materials. Mr 
 Middleton was acquainted with the circumftance of the joint con- 
 cern, &c. as well as his moonfhies, and Lieut. Long, who lived, 
 with Capt. Harper at the commencement. 
 
 I am, 
 
 Sir, 
 
 Your's, moft obediently, 
 
 O^ober26. 1782. J. ERASER. 
 
 ExtraH
 
 ( 27 ) 
 
 Z** 
 
 Extraa of a Letter from Mr ERASER to Mr R. HAN NAY, 
 dated, Cojfapore, 2<^th O^ober 1782. 
 
 Sir, 
 
 It is with much regret I read in your note, that your late bro- 
 ther's papers do not throiv any light 07i the tranfaftion ivith Captain 
 Harper ; and I mod fincerely lament the reludlance your brother 
 had to fetting about an adjuftment of it. It proceeded, I believe, 
 and indeed I am pretty certain he told me fo, from the difficulty he 
 found in ajcertaining the a^lual disburfements made for the concern for 
 the Elephants proceeding up in three different herds, ivhen he ivas him- 
 felf in Oude. He was obliged to requeft different friends at the 
 different Jlations, which make the Account branch out, and pro- 
 bably it became blended with other concerns. It is unlucky that 
 this' account of the charges had not been afcertained, as it may prove 
 the mofl difficult part in any prefent arrangement. 
 
 A a 
 To RAMSAY H A N N A Y, Efq; 
 
 S I R, 
 
 I WAS happy to underftand by your letter of the 30th, that 
 you had found fome Accounts relative to the Elephants ; and / 
 fondly hope, that on a proper arrangcfuent of the materials ivhich that 
 
 U bundle 
 
 ^(
 
 / 
 
 V 
 
 ( ^8 ■) 
 
 bundle may prodnu^ the Executors will be able to form a decided 
 view of the bufinefs. — I have, as you defired, written to Col. Po- 
 ller, and made application for a copy of the Account adjufted with 
 the "Vizier's Minifter in the year 1777. 1 have alfo written to 
 Mr Middleton ; but I repeat my hope, that you will find mate- 
 rials fufficient among the papers of the deceafed. It is my wifti, 
 that any difficulty which may occur fhall be left to the determi- 
 nation of fome gf the mutual friends of thefe Gentlemen, who 
 were themfelves fo intimate, and confident in each other. I am 
 very fenfible that the Executors have the fame point with me in 
 view, a fair and equitable ftatement; and 1 doubt not they will 
 equally defire as early a conclufion as poffible. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your moft obedient Servant, 
 
 J. ERASER. 
 
 Coffapore, Nov. 4. 1 782. 
 
 * The hundle alluded to in the foregoing letter, was one which Mr Hannay 
 found amongft his brother's papers, indorfed Elephant accounts, the contents of 
 which, although very defeftive, were all the papers he could at firft difcover, x-e- 
 lating to this fubjeft, from whence he concluded that there were no more, or that 
 they muft have been miflaid up the country, or loft. Mr Frafcr's own accounts of 
 dijhurfment for elephants, as agent for Col. Hannay, was not found until the ri- 
 gorous fearch fome months thereafter, in confequence of the demand of the Note 
 of hand, and the refufal to produce explanatory accounts. 
 
 Extrafi
 
 ( 29 ) 
 
 B b 
 
 Extras from Mr Trafcrs Letter to Mr Hannay, dated 22d Decem- 
 ber iy82,from ivhence it appears^ thai the amount charges on the 
 Elephants -was not then a/cerlained. 
 
 These are the articles which compofe the account, and if you 
 can aj certain the amount^ cofl^ and charges upon elephants^ the principal 
 difficulty will be removed. If you cannot, the readiefl: method, I 
 apprehend, will be for the Gentlemen arbitrators to fix what they 
 may fuppofe an equitable fum. The only other article of difil- 
 culty, I conceive, is whether Colonel Hannay is chargeable with 
 interefl on his receipts of cafh from MrMiddleton. Capt. Harper's 
 claim to his proportion of the intereft actually received from the 
 Vizier and Colonel Poller will necelTarily be admitted, as things of 
 courfe ; and on thefe two points of the elephant charges, and in- 
 terefl: on Middleton's payments, refts the only difficulty, in my 
 conception, &c. 
 
 December 22. 1782. 
 
 J. F R A S E R. 
 
 C c 
 To ROBERT STEWART, Efq; 
 
 SIR, 
 
 I RECEIVED your note of yefterday, repeating your refufal to 
 anfwer my demand of the 25th, and I did not intend to reply to- 
 it. As the laws of honour fufficiently provided my remedy in ihat 
 cafe, my mind was made up ; but the Meeting, after honourably 
 
 acquitting
 
 V 
 
 ( 30 ) 
 
 acquitting me of the ill-founded charge you either expreffed or 
 infinuated to my prejudice, fo ftrenuoufly infifted on my promi- 
 fing to them to feek no further redrefs, that I yielded, perhaps 
 indeed the more readily, as my refentment was againft the mali- 
 cious, and not the mifled man ; I am therefore now at liberty to re- 
 ply to the paragraphs of your letters I formerly pafTed over. You 
 appeal to my recolledlion, that your good- will was reciprocal. / 
 do not doubt that it ivas ; but it fo happened, that in our pro- 
 grefs through life you found it feveral times convenient to give 
 me an opportunity of fliewing my inclination to be ufeful to you, 
 and 1 do not recollecfl that any fuch opportunity ever occurred 
 for me to put you to the trial. You deny having any malevolence 
 to me, and you deny having mifreprefented me to Colonel Harp- 
 er; I fhall therefore admit both denials in the full and literal 
 fenfe of the words : but it was intimated to me, that, among 
 other things, you affured Colonel Harper, that I had received near 
 forty thoufand Rupees on his account from the eflate of Colonel 
 Hannay, under your award and knowledge ; whereas you well 
 know the fum I received was CtRs 25,195 10 2, and the full 
 amount of every claim I made admitted by the arbitrators in their 
 firft award, and confirmed in their fecond, under your hand, to 
 /* be jufl and fair. As to the pomp with which you, for the firft 
 time, inform me that you had withdrawn yourfelf from my 
 fociety, I can honeflly alTure you I never miffed you : You did me 
 the honour frequently to invite me to your abode at the Powder 
 Mills in 1780, and to your refidence near Calcutta in 1782 and 
 1783 ; but it fo happened, that I never vifited you at either place, 
 fo of courfe I did not afk you to my houfe ; our intercourfe there- 
 fore was in accidental places; and from the time of the lafl arbi- 
 tration, to our late interview at the India Houfe, I do not recol- 
 le(fl feeing you, except once paffmg in my palanquin, and an- 
 other time at Mr Wheeler's levee, while I was writing in his clofet. 
 
 —You
 
 ( 31 ) 
 
 —You were not in Calcutta, I believe — the reafon I did not afk 
 cither Colonel Crabb or Major Law, was, that they had, like ho- 
 nourable men, already declared their opinions, and that I wiflied 
 to give the other three gentlemen, with each of whom I flood in 
 a particular predicament, the befl opportunity of being convin- 
 ced of the falfity of the reports to my prejudice, by fifting the 
 grounds of them. One of them has been for many years con- 
 neded in account with me; another has had large properties 
 under my management ; and a third has been fpoken to by a man 
 of great refpetftability, who had heard fomething of the reports. 
 In refpecfl to your epithets, at firft, ftrongefl grounds, facls, and 
 pofitive proofs, afterwards dwindled to impreffions : I fliall be 
 content by quoting, " Inaccuracies in accounts and correfpond- 
 ence are fufBcient to have mifled Captain Stewart." But you 
 fbould not have faid the nnatter of my demand on Colonel Han- 
 nay's Eftate, onmy own account, came judicially before you, 
 as one of the arbitrators between the eftate and Colonel Harper, 
 as neither 1, who was a party, nor any of the Gentlemen on the 
 part of Colonel Harper, ever were made acquainted ; and I con- 
 iidered them as perfedlly dinin(5l and feparate as any two tranf^ 
 a<5tions in the hands of the fame individuals could well be. 
 
 I have done with the bufinefs, and fliall only beg I may not 
 have the honour of being the next fubje<5l you fhall be pleafed to 
 make free with. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your moft humble Servant, 
 York-Jreet, St James s-fqnare, J. F R A S E R, 
 
 March 31. 1785, 
 
 N. B. Mr Frafer (hewed a copy of the foregoing letter (with what view cannot be 
 tnifunderftood) to one of his friends, without letting him fee my anfwer ; from 
 whence it is fair to conclude, he made the fame ufe of it to others. 
 
 X To
 
 ( 32 ) 
 
 D d 
 
 To JAMES F RA S E H, E/r, 
 
 S I R, 
 
 Your letter of the 31(1 ult. came to my hands the night of 
 that day after I had left my lodgings preparatory to quitting 
 London ; I have, therefore, not been able to acknowledge the re- 
 ceipt of it until now. My replies to your demand of the 25th 
 were uniform and confiflent, and my mind was, probably, as 
 much made up on the fubjedl as yours. I truft I know enough 
 both of the laws of honour and honefty, not to deviate from the 
 rules of either in any inflance. 
 
 You obferve, " Thai I found it fever al times convenient to give you 
 an opportunity of fJoeuuing your inclination to be ifefiil to me" from 
 whence, I prefume, you mean it fhould be underftood you was 
 ufeful to me. Had that really been the cafe, 1 would chearfully 
 have acknowledged it. But I had fo little reafon to be fatisfied 
 with your conduct in the tranfadion of the little matters I ever 
 recolle(fl troubling you with, whilft you relided at Dinapore, that 
 1 fhould have thought myfelf peculiarly fortunate, had I availed 
 myfelf of the fervices of any other perfonal acquaintance in that 
 quarter. I allude to the Cochineal and the Mill-ftones, the only 
 cafes where I remember putting your inclinations to be ufeful to 
 the trial, and which I had great reafon to regret having done. 
 
 Colonel'
 
 ( 33 ) 
 
 Colonel Harper had heard that I was an arbitrator in adjufling 
 his account with Colonel Hannay, and naturally aflted me about 
 it. I narrated to him every particular regarding the arbitration, 
 and the revifion of it, from firfl: to laft. Of fums I could only 
 fpeak from memory, having no notes. Part of the money reco- 
 vered of Colonel Hannay's ellate, was on account of the late Cap- 
 tain Burton. Colonel Harper may have confounded this with the 
 fum received on his own account. 1 had no motive to fay any 
 thing to him but the truth, which I did, on all points, to the 
 beft of my recolle(flion. 
 
 Whether, in intimating to you, for the firft time, the circum- 
 ftance of my withdrawing myfelf from your foclety and acquaint- 
 ance, I have ufed terms of pomp unfuitable to the occafion, is 
 immaterial. The fimple fa (51 is, that, after the fecond arbitration, 
 I refolved to have as little future connecflion with you as poflible. 
 Upon every occafion when we met thereafter, my perfonal de- 
 portment and behaviour was the very reverfe of that perfetft cor- 
 diality towards you that before influenced it. Your own breaft, 
 1 never doubted, would fuggefl to you the caufe. 
 
 What you faid and fliewed to Colonel Crabb and Major Law, 
 may have been juft and fair, and there is no doubt they would 
 give their opinion, like honourable men, on the cafe before them. 
 But to have made them mafters of the fubje6l, you fliould have 
 referretl them to the papers in the hands of Mr Hannay. As it 
 was, they decided on ex parte evidence, and every one knows- 
 what fort of deciiions thefe are. 
 
 You fay, " In refpeft to your epithets, at firft, ftrong grounds.. 
 fa<5ts, and policive proofs, afterwards dwindled to iinpreflions ; I 
 ihall be. content, by quoting inaccuracies in accounts and corre-- 
 
 r^fpondenoey
 
 ( 34 ) 
 
 fpoadence, as fufEclent to have mifled Captain Stewart." As 
 you Teem to prefs this on my attention, I fhall obferve, that, al- 
 tered opinion, conckifions to your difad vantage, or impreffions, 
 are, in my idea, nearly fynonymous ; they follow as natur illy 
 from, and are connected with, firongell grounds, ficfls, and proofs, 
 as anyeffedl with a caufe. In whatever words conveyed, my fenti- . 
 raents on this head were entirely the fame on the laft day I wrote you 
 as on the firft. They have been too deliberately formed to admit 
 of change. Thofe who know us both, who know that no perfo- 
 nal difference ever fubfilled between us; who know that you are 
 efteemed a clear-headed man of bufmefs ; and that I, from ha- 
 ving been originally bred to bufinefs myfelf, may be fuppofed a 
 tolerable judge of tranfa(5lions connedled with it, may be aflo- 
 nifhed what " inaccuracies in your accounts and correfpondence 
 could miflead me," to draw the conclufions of you I did, from 
 your condu(5l to Colonel Hannay's Executors. After hearing what 
 you had to f ly, if they examined the documents in the hands of 
 Mr Johnfton Hannay, they would have the fubject fully before 
 them, and would judge for thetnfelves. This, every perfon who 
 takes the trouble of informing himfelf on the fubjed will, no 
 doubt, do, notwithftanding all that has been faid or written about 
 it. 
 
 When you firft demanded payment of the late Col. Hannay's 
 Note of hand, and dated it to be independent of the fmall balance 
 he owed you in account, the Executors wiflied to have fome expla- 
 nation how it arofe, and to have Ceen. copies of former accounts 
 between you and the Colonel. This, you feemed at firft difpofed to 
 grant them ; but you immediately thereafter declined it, faying, 
 you meant to have fent them fome letters and papers for their pri- 
 vate fatisfaclion, but that you did not expe<5t to be called on for 
 voucher's in fupport of tlie Note of hand, which you claimed on its 
 
 own
 
 ( zs ) 
 
 own principles, holding it to be of nearly equal validity with a 
 bond. You intimated an intention of prolecuting for the amount, 
 which roufed the Executors to fearch the papers of the late Colonel n 
 with a diligence they had not before exerted. They difcovered all 
 your accounts with the Colonel for many years back ; whereby it 
 appeared, that the Note of hand had been liquidated all but the 
 fmall balance in account, which you claimed independent of it. /\ 
 The principal obje<5l to be arbitrated in the Elephant concern, be- 
 tween Colonels Hannay and Harper, was, whether the former 
 fliould allow the latter intereft on his (the hitter's) proportion of 
 fums received on their joint account, during the time the former 
 'had the ufe of them. As the Account-Current between them had 
 never been fettled and clofed, and as it was not the prad^ice of the 
 Court of Juftice in Bengal to allow intereft on open accounts, the 
 Executors confidered, that it could not of courfe have been reco- 
 vered of them in a fult at law. You mentioned to me individual- 
 ly, and to all the arbitrators, that you had demanded this intereft 
 of Colonel Hannay during his lifetime; and you produced a copy 
 of a letter from yourfelf to him, making fuch a demand, which 
 feemed to eftabliCh a legal claim to th^ inter^. In the fearch 
 juft alluded to, the Executors difcovered an original letter from 
 you to the Colonel, which made them conclude, for various rea- 
 .fons that occurred on comparing the two together, that the one \ 
 making the demand of intereft never had been written. They 
 further difcovered an account of charges for the Elephants, pai-d 
 by yourfelf on account of Colonel Hannay; but you had given 
 him no credit for Harper's proportion of this, confequently the 
 balance againft Hannay became fo much the greater. The Exe- 
 cutors therefore defired a revifion of the arbitration, becaufe they 
 had reafon to think the arbitrators had decided on improper in- 
 formation; and they found it neceffary to fend foE, and make me 
 and the otlier arbitrator particularly acquainted with all the above 
 
 Y difcoveries.
 
 ( 36 ) 
 
 difcoveries, and every circumftance relative to the delivery up of 
 the Note of hand, to put us on our guard againft admitting any 
 papers, on a revifion of the arbitration, of the authenticity of 
 which we had not the mod pofitive proof. 
 
 From this minute detail, which your remarks " but you Jhould 
 not ha've faid^'' 8cc. has forced me to enter into, you will find I 
 was pcrfedlly corredl in afTerting, that the fadls relative to you 
 came judicially before me as an arbitrator, or were communica- 
 ted with the necell'ary papers by the Colonel's Executors, as origi- 
 nating from, or having an intimate connection with, tranfa<5lions 
 that were to pafs under my view as an arbitrator; for thefe I be- 
 lieve were nearly the words I ufed. 
 
 You obferve, that the full amount of every claim you made was 
 admitted by the arbitrators in their firft award, and confirmed in 
 the fecond, under my hand, to be juft and fair. Such words were 
 never ufed that I recolledl. In the firft award we certainly did not 
 admit your claims in their full extent. In revifing this award, the 
 authenticity of fome papers and accounts produced by you from 
 Lucknow, was particularly inquired into and afcertained, which 
 had not been done before. We confirmed the grant of the in- 
 tereft, not becaufe you had eftablilhed a legal right by demanding 
 it of Colonel Hannay, (for your copy of the letter to that pur- 
 pofe was thrown afide altogether), but becaufe it was, on other 
 grounds, fair and equitable. It was further determined, that 
 Colonel Hannay 's account fhould have credit for the above charge 
 on the Elephants paid by you, and it was to have been debited 
 for fome Intereft (I think) on a fum received by Colonel Hannay, 
 for the Elephant concern, at an earlier period than it was known 
 ^t the firft award to have been received. 
 
 There
 
 ( 37 ) 
 
 There may have been other articles to be carried to the debit 
 and credit, which I do not recollc<5l. In this ftage of the bufmefs, 
 Major Davy (one of your arbitrators) remarked, that new model- 
 ling the account in the manner it ought to be made out, would 
 make no very material difference to either party. He therefore 
 propofed, that the old award fhould be confirmed. To this, un- 
 der a feeming impatience of taking further trouble, Mr Ramfay 
 Hannay, the ading Executor, afTented, not a little to the furprife 
 of the other Executor, who was prefent, as well as that of their 
 arbitrators. As he had acquiefced, however, the latter had no- 
 think further to do. 
 
 This is the hiflory of the fecond award, or confirmation of the 
 firft, w^hich I am led to give, to the befl of my recoUedlion, in 
 confequence of the flrefs you appear to lay upon it. In reply to 
 your laft paragraph, I (hall obferve, that as I do not recoUecfl ha- 
 ving gone out of my way to trouble myfelf about you, or any 
 thing concerning you, fo fliould they happen to come in my way 
 hereafter, I fliall treat them with the fame freedom, and the fame 
 adherence to truth, I would any other fubjed. 
 
 To conclude, I have only to exprefs my hope, that this will 
 terminate our correfpondence of every fort ; for though I difclaim 
 all malevolence or perfonal animofity, I am not more folicitous 
 than I was before of having the honour of being numbered a- 
 mongfl your acquaintances. 
 
 I am, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient Servant, 
 
 R. STEWART. 
 
 Falmouth^ S^k April i-j^S' 
 
 {Aivard?)
 
 ( 38 ) 
 
 E e 
 
 {^Award.) 
 
 AT a meeting this day, May 30. 1785, at Mr Bailie's, of Ca- 
 vendifli-fquare, of us the under figned, to inquire into a money- 
 matter tranfadlion between Mr James Fraler, of York-ftreet, St 
 James's, and the Executors of the deceafed CoK Harmay, which 
 has been reported to the prejudice of the faid Mr Frafer, as having 
 had finifter motives, and an abfolute intention to defraud the a- 
 forefaid Executors ; this is to certify, That we have carefully in- 
 veftigated the fame, and, after the moft particular inquiry, our 
 opinion is, that Mr Frafer is acquitted of any intention to de- 
 fraud ; at the fame time, it is our opinion, that Mr Frafer's in- 
 accuracies in his accounts and correfpondence are fufEcient to 
 have mifled Captain Stewart : And we unanimoufly agree, that this 
 difpute ihould not be carried further by either of the partiesj and 
 that Mr Frafer fliould not feek any further fatisfadion. 
 
 T. Conway. W. CAivrPBELL. 
 
 M. RiDDELL. H. Bailie. 
 
 S. Fraser. a. Balfour. 
 
 F f 
 
 To Mejfrs William Ccwiphclly Arthur Balfour ^ Miihael RidJelL 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 As Mr Frafer and his friends have, during his canvas for 
 the Eaft-India Direiflion, taken the liberty of fliewing every where 
 the award given by you and the other Gentlemen at this place in 
 
 1785,
 
 ( 39 ) 
 
 tjSs, adding comments and infinuations injurious to my clia- 
 radler, I cxped, from your juftice and candour, that you will 
 authoriie me publicly to declare the difficulty you- found your- 
 felves under at the meeting of the arbitrators, and the impolTibi- 
 lity of going thoroughly into the bufmefs of Mr Frafcr's conducl 
 to Colonel Hannay's Executors, owing to the pre- determined re- 
 folution in his favour, with which his referees appeared to have 
 come to the meeting. From this circumftance any man may 
 judge of the impartiality of the award. 
 
 This award exprefsly fays, that the matter was not to be car- 
 ried farther by either of the parties. In diredl contradi6lion to 
 this, however, Mr Frafer took occafion to write me a letter, in a 
 very triumphant ftyle ; and to reafbn from the words of the award, 
 in a manner I felt moft galling. This circumflance led me to 
 draw up a narrative of the whole bufinefs^ from firft to laft, for 
 the purpofe of fatisfying my particular friends of the motives and 
 propriety of my condud. That, however, I might do nothing 
 underhand, I informed Mr Frafer thereof, at an accidental meet- 
 ing on the I ft of May laft, offering to give him a perufal of it, 
 which he declined, faying, if 1 ufed it,, he would take my life; a 
 threat I treated with the contempt it deferved, though from the 
 annexed affidavits, it might be thought, that Mr Frafer had fome 
 fuch intention. 
 
 You have frequently expreffed to me, individually, that yotr 
 thought I was juftified in what I had done; and as I conceive 
 that Mr Frafer has, in feveral articles of his condudl, infringed the 
 award, I mean to lay all the particulars of it before the Public. 
 
 Your very humble fervant, 
 
 Londmi, Aprils. 1787. ROBERT STEWART. 
 
 2 To.
 
 ( 40 •) 
 
 Gg 
 T9 ROBERT STEM^ART, EJq; 
 Sir, London^ 4th Jpril lySy. 
 
 We have received your's, of this date; in reply to which have 
 to inform you, that finding Mr Frafer's Arbitrators would not ad- 
 mit the idea of his being capable of any improper motive, we 
 were prevented from entering into fo full an inveftigation of the 
 bulinefs as would have enabled us to give any decided opinion on 
 the point ; and we are ready to acknowledge, that in giving this 
 award we were influenced by motives of humanity, and a defire to 
 prevent any difagreeable confcquences that might follow : and we 
 declare, that nothing could have induced us to fign the award, had 
 •we conceived it pofllble that it would in any way have been iti- 
 terpreted fo as to throw the moft diflant reflection on your cha- 
 radler. And we are extremely forry to obferve, that Mr Frafer, 
 by the letter he wrote to you fubfeqvient to the award, which 
 was accepted by him as final, has given occafion again to open 
 the bufmefs, ' 
 
 We are, your moft obedient fervants, 
 
 WILLLIAM CAMPBELL. 
 
 A. BALFOUR. 
 
 M. RIDDELL. 
 
 H h 
 
 WESTMINSTER,) 
 
 To Wit, 
 
 The Information o/* William Bird, Builder, of Fritices- 
 
 Jireet, St Anne. 
 
 Who being upon oath, fays. That about a month, or five 
 ■weeks ago, being in company with Henry Lowrie, of Ogle- 
 
 ftreet.
 
 / 
 
 ( 4> ) 
 
 fVi-eet, St Mary-fe-'Bone, ahid Benj:nnln Harrdy^; of tH'e fame 
 j)lace; he heard' towry fay' W Hardy, th:it he had been v 
 
 defired by Mr Frafer to enquire after the places ufually re- 
 ibrted to by Captain Stewart ; that Mr Fi'afer faid, he would 
 fpare. no ex^ncC t<> lejirh. " M'r Hatdy defired to know, what 
 Mr Prafer's re'afons were for making thefe enquiries,- when 
 faid J.owry rephed, th^c Mr Frafer had' told hirn, lie belie- 
 ved Captain Stewart had come over from India, on purpofe 
 to be an evidence againfl Mr Haftings, Ar wt>fdl'"^o that 
 purpofe; tliereFore lofe tio iirfie, {added IVIr Frafer),- but en- 
 ' ' deavour to watch him ; if he takes a coach, do you take 
 another, and follow him ; fee and make ypurfelf acquainted 
 with his clerk; no money fliall be -> wanted, .provided you 
 can find out the places he-^'of^Vts tp, The deponent further 
 fays, That he, the faid Hardy, in reply to the above, obfer- 
 ved, that he thought he, the faid Lowry adled in a very im- 
 proper manner, and not like a tradefman at all, in under- 
 taking fuch a bufinefs ; to which faid Lowry anfwered, that" 
 that was the opinion of Mr Frafer, who, he added, wiflied 
 him not to do any thing in the bufinefs, and that he ought 
 to tell Mr Frafer, that Captain Stewart was gone out of town, 
 {lie, Mrs Frafer, being refolved to get Mr Frafer out of 
 town as foon as poffible : That, in the further Courfe of 
 the converfation between the faid Lowry and the faid Hardy, 
 he, the depori^nt, le^i^ned' that therfe had beeil fome difpute 
 between Mr Frafer arid 'Capt. Stewart, which Mr Hardy 
 feemed to think might eventually prodvice bad confequen- 
 ces; for he obferved,th^t if Capt. Stewart lofl Jiis life, it 
 was a fin. which. he.T Lowry, would have to anfwer for one 
 day, or words to that'purpofe. The deponent further fays. 
 That from the earneftnefs which Mr Frafer had ihewn in the 
 bufmefs, he concluded it , was ibmething-immediately con- 
 
 '' cerning
 
 cerning himfelf, and not Mr Haftlngs, which made him adl 
 in the manner he had done; and as he had reafon to beUeve- 
 that bad defigns were formed againft Captain Stewart, he 
 thought it his duty, as an honeft man, to inform him there- 
 of. He further fays. That he has heard faid Lowry fay to Mr 
 Hardy, that he had been delired by Mr Frafer to try to be- 
 come acquainted with the chairmen in the neighbourhood of 
 where Captain Stewart lived, in order to learn if they carried, 
 any letters for him, the faid Stewart, that he might fall on 
 fome means of intercepting them. 
 
 J. B I R D. 
 
 Sworn this loth day of 
 June 1786, before me,. 
 
 JOHN HALE, 
 
 I i 
 
 MIDDLESEX,! 
 To Wit. S 
 
 The Information of Henry Lowry, of N° 40. Ogle-flreet^ Si 
 Mary 'le- Bone y Cabinet-Maker^ taken before me this gth Day 
 of June 1786. 
 
 Who being upon oath, fays, That about a fortnight or 
 three weeks ago he was defired by Mr James Frafer, of Gold- 
 cn-fquare, to make inquiry (and privately as he believes) 
 when Captain Stewart, of N° 85. in Newman-ftreet, intended 
 to go out of town, where he ufually dined, and at what 
 
 hours
 
 ( 43 ) 
 
 hours he generally went out : That he this informant went 
 two or three times to N° 85. in Newman-ftreet, under pre- 
 tence of hiring lodgings ; but with intent to get the infor- 
 mation above mentioned : That he alfo made inquiries of 
 the chairmen, and at a public-houfe in the fiiid ftreet for 
 faid purpofe: That at one of the times when he called at 
 N° 85. in Newman-ftreet, he told the maid -fervant that he 
 fhould be glad to fee Captain Stewart in the ftreet, but did 
 not wifli to fpeak to him in his own lodgings : That on Sa- 
 turday lad he faw faid maid-fervant at the Blue Pofls, in 
 faid ftreet ; that he afked her at what coffee- houfe Captain 
 Stewart ufually dined, and believes he added, that if ihe 
 would tell him, he would make it worth her while : That 
 about a week fince, he told Mr Hardy, with whom he lod- 
 ges, what inquiries Mr Frafer had defired him to make, when 
 faid Hardy faid, that he thought it a very black bufmefs 
 and that he, laid Hardy, w^ould not be employed in it. And 
 this informant further lays, Ihat he himfelf thought that the 
 making the before-mentioned inquiries, particularly from the 
 manner in which they were required to be made, was a very 
 improper bufinefs for him to undertake, and that he Ihould 
 not have done it, if he had not been afraid of loiing Mr 
 Frafer's bufinefs as a cabinet-maker. 
 
 That Mr Frafer defired this informant to follow Captain 
 Stevirart, when he fliould fee him in the flreet, and let him 
 know where he went ; and alfo that he this informant 
 ihould get acquainted with Captain Stewart's clerk, in order 
 to learn with more certainty where the Captain ufually 
 dined. 
 
 HENRY LOWRY. 
 Sworn before me this 9th 
 
 day of June 1786. 
 
 Saivipson Wright. 
 
 A ai The
 
 ( 44 > 
 
 The faid Henry Lowry further faid, That he had been 
 jnftru<5led by Mr Frafer to find out the hours at which Cap- 
 tain Stewart ufually came home at night; and that Mrs Fra- 
 fer having found out that fome fecret bufmefs was going on 
 between him the faid Lowry and Mr Frafer, about Captain 
 Stewarr, expreifed her apprehenfions of the confequences, 
 as flie faid they (Frafer and Stewart) had had fome difpute,, 
 and (he wifhed Lowry not to continue his inquiries. 
 
 This he declared in prefence of, and to uSj 
 
 JAMES CARMIGHAEL SMYTH. 
 D. SCOTT, 
 
 K k 
 
 BuxaKy Oftoher 13. 1776, 
 
 Current Rupees, 10. 120. 8, 6. 
 
 I. prcmife to pay to James Frafer, Efq; or his order, the fum of 
 Ct Rs 10. 120. 8. 6. fay ten thoufand one hundred and twenty 
 current rupees, eight annas, and fix pice, being the balance of our 
 account to this day^ as witnefs my hand 
 
 ALEXANDER HANNAY, 
 
 N. B. This Note never was in my hands till yefierday ; but an 
 obfervation arifes upon it, which, had 1 £tt\\ it in time, might have 
 rendered unneceffary much of the reafoning ufedJn my Narrative. 
 For, it appears upon the face of it, to have been given for the ba^ 
 lance of the account delivered in on the 9th of Odober 1776; 
 and it muft neceffarily have ftrnck Mr Frafer, every time he look- 
 ed at it, that it conflituted part of the account-current delivered. 
 in in the year 1781. 
 ^/iW/8. 1787.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY LIBRAK?Y 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 Form L-o 
 aom-l.'4l(1122)
 
 P8S8 Narrative of 
 
 a Trans- 
 action wlilchr- 
 
 passed In Bengal. 
 
 DSMCO >WN 
 
 -x-CT 
 1508 
 
 pass 
 
 D OOU 714 055