Production Note Cornell University Library produced this volume to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. It was scanned using Xerox software and equipment at 600 dots per inch resolution and compressed prior to storage using CCITT Group 4 compression. The digital data were used to create Cornell's replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1984. The production of this volume was supported in part by the New York State Program for the Conservation and Preservation of Library Research Materials and the Xerox Corporation. Digital file copyright by Cornell University Library 1994. o A BIOGRAPHY OF FERNANDO WOOD. A HISTORY OP THE FORGERIES, PERJURIES, AND OTHEli CHIMES OP OUR “MODEL” MAYOR. KTo. 1. In presenting to the public the first number of the “ Mercantile, Politi- cal, and Official Jjife of our ‘Model’ Mayor,” we embrace the opportunity of assuring the people of the city that not aline will be written that is not susceptible of the strongest corroborative testimony, by living witnesses— men and women of unimpeachable integrity—the names of whom we will give. The following numbers of this Biography will be the production of various pens, of persons who are familiar with the mercantile, political, and official career oi Fernando Wood, from early life to the present day. 3A. HISTOEY OF THE PKIYATE, POLITICAL, AND OFFICIAL VILLAINIES OF FERNANDO WOOD. To Brown, Brothers & Co., Goodhue & Co., George Douglass, R. L. & A. Stuart, Jacob Little, Schuyler Liyingston, Matthew Morgan, R. H. ‘Winslow, Royal Phelps, Decoppet & Co., Fletcher Harper, Wm. H. Macy, L. C. Clark, Thomas Small & Sons, T. F. Bulkley, Wm. B. Astor, Moses Taylor, Watts Sherman Wm. H. Cary, A. B. Neilson, George Newbold, Charles A. Morgan, Dayid Ogden, Courtlandt Palmer, Daniel Drew, - Israel Corse, Horace Waldo, PL M. Young. Gentlemen: There is not an individual, nor any number of individuals in this great commer- cial metropolis, to whom we could with greater propriety dedicate this work than yourselves. You are ardent and zealous in the advancement of the commercial interests of our city, and of the whole Union, and must deeply deplore every cir- cumstance that tends to retard mercantile enterprise. You are careful to uphold the true dignity of your profession, and to encourage the legitimate exercise of its duties. Most of you are known extensively as men of fortune, whose wealth equals that of princes, and your munificence, liberality and charity have been on a scale as magnificent as the fortune you have acquired. It is, or should be, the pride of your life that you have amassed wealth by honest enterprise and upright2 . DEDICATION. dealing, and not by fraud and oppression. "We believe each of you have a reputa- tion for integrity in business, and would positively refuse to employ, even in the humblest capacity, in your mercantile establishments, or other places of business, a man who had been guilty of the grossest frauds in the transaction of mercantile affairs. You would certainly refuse to become associated with, or to admit as a partner in your business, a man who had, in a former partnership, plundered his partner in every possible way that his ingenuity could devise, and whose frauds had been proven beyond a possibility of doubt. Entertaining this opinion, we have dedicated this pamphlet to you. We wish you to peruse it candidly; and we the more expressly desire you to do so, because we observe in the public papers, of a recent date, that you have voluntarily urged the present Mayor of this city to consent to a reflection- The individual you thus have honored with your approbation is the hero of these pages. He, too, has been a merchant, and we have faithfully portrayed his admirable qualifications for mer- cantile pursuits. You have recommended him for Mayor, though not one of you would consent to employ him in. your counting-house, when his true character becomes known to you. We are ignorant of the influences that have controlled your action in this matter. If, as men of great wealth, you expect to give direction to public sentiment in the politics of the city, in the movement you have made, you will find that you have; been mistaken. We shall print for your special perusal, 20,000 copies of this pamphlet, and at least three times that number for the 60,000 mechanics, artisans, and laboring classes of this city, who have at least as deep an interest in the election of honest public officials as the 28 merchants to whom we have dedicated this work, or the “ 83 others,” who, it is alleged, have joined you in the urgent request that the present Mayor would consent to a reflection. Bv the Author.INTRODUCTION In the following pages will be found a brief history of a series of mercantile frauds and villanies, and political and official wrongs, of the present Mayor of New- York. In recording them, we have not gone beyond the most undoubted and in- contestable proof of their existence. We have not stated a fact, drawn an infer- ence, or even imagined a single circumstance that has not been proven by testimony as strong as ever was given in a court of justice, and by men of as fair characters for truth and veracity, as ever were engaged in business in our city. The alleged frauds of Fernando Wood, are proven beyond a possibility of doubt. They stand on record, never to be effaced. No rebutting testimony has shaken the belief of any of the men who have investigated them legally. They are proven as plain as the sun of heaven at noonday, in an unclouded sky, both by direct and circum* stantiai evidence. No rogue ever resided within the walls of a State prison, or ever will, who was convicted of forgery by more unmistakable evidence, than that which was given to prove that Fernando Wood exhibited to Ed. E. Marvine, a fraudulent or forged bill of sale of the barque John W. Cater, and a forged letter purporting to have been received from T. 0. Larkin of California. Yet Fernando Wood swore that such a charge against him was untrue I We will not argue what constitutes perjury in the legal sense of the term, but no one can doubt, after read- ing this pamphlet, and investigating tho case for himself, that in a moral sense, Wood is guilty of both forgery and peijury! The perpetrator of these frauds is now Mayor of this great commercial city, and a candidate for reelection. His friends will again appeal to the voters of this city for support. He has the whole of the vast patronage of the city government to aid him, and no one knows how to use this power more adroitly. What a sad com- mentary upon the mercantile enterprise, business character, intelligence, and integ- rity of our people, his reeleotion to the mayoralty would be! Those who supported him, when ignorant of his frauds, may be excused. But now, when these villanies are proven, they can have no excuse for giving him their support. If he, or those who may still believe him an honest man, feel aggrieved at the following statement of facts, there is now time before the election to show its falsity. If they can not do this, as honest men, having a desire to promote public and pri- vate morality, and preserve the reputation of our city, they will use every honora- ble effort to defeat his election. What would be the effect upon the trade of our city, were all, or even a majority of our merchants, shown to be as devoid of mercantile integrity as Fernando Wood ? Or what would be the effect upon the politics of our city, if all, or a ma- jority of our leading politicians were proven to be as corrupt in business, private or official, as Mayor Wood ? No people can long preserve a reputation for integ- rity, and no government can long be popular, where the perpetrators of such frauds4 INTRODUCTION. as those charged and proven against our Mayor, are elected to the highest offices. To suppose the reverse of this, is to admit that the majority of the voters are cor- rupt, or too ignorant to exercise the franchise with safety to the public welfare. We hope it will be long before this admission can be truthfully made in any part of this great and free republic. High political excitement oftentimes leads to a close adhesion to party nomina- tions ; and the immense patronage of our city government, including a control over the entire police force, wielded by a tyrant hand, may force a nomination of the most corrupt man in the community. But we think the public mind will be aroused against Fernando Wood, to such an extent, that he will fail in his reelec- tion. His true character will be portrayed so vividly that he can not succeed. When a candidate in 1854, he sought interviews with many whom he had a right to suppose would oppose him, as they knew much of his real character, and of the alleged frauds charged upon him. He endeavored to persuade them that he had been unjustly accused; but when finding that he could make no impression on their minds in this direction, he then appealed to them for forgiveness, and solicited them to give him an opportunity to redeem his character through his election to the mayoralty. He stated, in some instances, that he sought this high position chiefly to remove, by his good conduct in official position, the deep prejudices that existed against him. This appeal induced some to support him, who otherwise would not have done so. When arrayed against a single opponent, Wood was easily beaten, as was the case in 1850, when he was beaten by several thousand votes. But he saw in the mayoralty contest, in 1854, that there would be several candidates, and that if he could get the endorsement of the Democracy, or of the Seymour party, he could slip in by a plurality vote. He was right in his calcula- tion. But what effort did he make to redeem his character after he was elected ? His policy at first was to be bold, and seemingly honest, Napoleonic m the style of his public documents. But no sooner had he begun to get the good opinion of some who had opposed his election, than he found it convenient, and to his interest, to take a stroll in the neighborhood of the sunken ship Joseph Walker, lying at the slip, foot of Dover Street, in which entombed craft he imagined he saw a second John W. Cater. The first draft he made on the city treasury, on account of this sunken treasure, was a contract with his friend Jones to raise her, for the snug little sum of $13,000! He succeeded in getting a greater part of this amount out of the treasury, when the press got hold of the matter, and further drafts on this account were dishonored. But his friend Jones got some seven or eight thousand dollars on this fraudulent contract. This showed that the express desire to reform, when once in the Mayoralty chair, was a mere pretense for the perpetration of other frauds, if possible on a more gigantic scale, where the city treasury, much larger than Marvine’s capital, held the plunder. His whole conduct while Mayor, has shown that he is the same identi- cal Fernando Wood, who converted a bill of 15 cents, into $100.'75, and rendered it to his partner, thus fraudulently altered, and received the one half of the fraudu- lent amount from him in the final settlement of their accounts. He is still the same Fernando Wood—grown probably more bold in villainy, by having the people’s endorsement for the mayoralty—that he was when he exhibited a forged bill of sale for the barque John W. Cater, by which he plundered his partner out of $40001 Elevation to high official position, has about the same effect upon his moral nature, as the sight of a fat pullet does upon the physical propensities and appetite of a hungry fox. Such is the character of Fernando Wood, the Mayor ofFIRST NOMINATION—DEFEAT. 5 New-Tork, as will be conclusively shown in what follows. Bead, and then say whether he is persecuted, or whether he stands condemned of the perpetration of the grossest frauds in private business affairs, and in his official career. The cry of persecution will not avail now. Here are the charges, and the evidence of their truth; they must stand until shown to be false. The acts of a public man are properly subjects of close scrutiny. His general character for honesty and fair dealing may be properly referred to when up for office, or when holding one. A man who will aid in the elevation to office, of such a man as we have represented Mayor Wood to be, is a dangerous citizen. It is, therefore, the duty of every man to satisfy himself whether we have charged him wrongfully or whether we have told the truth. We have simply stated the irresistible convic- tions of our own mind, and, we feel assured, those of the mind of every man who has been engaged in the investigation of the legal proceedings which have been instituted in the cases referred to in this pamphlet. We feel satisfied that no can- did mind can come to any other conclusion than that to which we have arrived, if they will investigate the matter. HISTORY. WOOFS FIRST NOMINATION FOB MAYOR IN 1850-HIS DEFEAT. In 1850, Fernando Wood became a candidate for the Mayoralty. On the eve of the election, there was sent to the office of one of our city papers an astounding document, a copy of a complaint made by the assignees of Edward E. Marvine, in a suit then pending in the Superior Court in this city, in which Fernando Wood was defendant. In this complaint Wood was charged with gross frauds upon Marvine, perpetrated during a partnership that existed between them in 1848-9. The proprietor of the paper to which a copy of this complaint had been sent, refused to publish the document, unless he could be satisfied of its general truth. It so hap- pened that many of the alleged frauds perpetrated by Wood were easily examined. Documents were placed in possession of the proprietor of the paper, and several of the merchants, of whom Wood had purchased goods on account of the partnership, were visited, and the bills which Wood had rendered his partner were compared with the books of the merchants, when it was found that the grossest frauds had been committed. Being thus fully satisfied of the truth of the alleged frauds, the complaint against Wood was published, with strong editorial comments. Though Wood was defeated badly for the Mayoralty, many voted for him who would not had they believed the charges against him. They were made on the eve of the election, and many, therefore, doubted as to their truth. Mr. Wood managed to keep this case in court until he again became a candidate for the Mayoralty in 1854. Then, too, the charges were reiterated in one of our city papers, but, unfortunately, their publication was again deferred until within a day or two of the election. Though much proof of the alleged frauds then existed, they were published in a paper not read by the masses, and, therefore, did not have that extensive circulation they should have had. This time, although Wood ran several thousand behind his ticket, there were so many opposing candidates to di- vide his opponents, that he slipped into the Mayoralty chair by a small plurality. The Seymour ticket was popular, as we all remember, and Wood was adroit enoughSECRET POLITIQAL MASKED ORGANIZATIONS. to identify himself with the success of that ticket, and was consequently elected. His official career while Mayor will be reviewed by one competent to perform the task. It is now being prepared for publication. The following pages relate more particularly to the deep villainy of Fernando Wood in those relations of life where honor and integrity shine with peculiar lustre, and where villainy has even a blacker aspect than when practised in official positions. THE SECRET POLITICAL MASKED ORGANIZATIONS GOT 1JP BY MAYOR WOOD. It is now about twenty years ago when Fernando Wood first became an aspir- ing and ambitious politician in this city. In 1840, he succeeded in being nomi- nated and elected to Congress. For the purpose of securing the nomination, he organized a secret political association, composed of five members from each ward. Tins secret body met at No. 44 Chatham street, and all the members wore masks, and were sworn to the most profound secrecy. The form of the oath is now in pos- session of Mayor Wood, and is drawn up in language something resembling the oath which Morgan had published as that taken by Masons, a few years before ouf “ model” Mayor came to this city to reside. The initiatory oath of this masked as- sociation was comparatively harmless to the one taken just before the candidate entered the inner temple at 44 Chatham street. The candidate for admission was blindfolded when he entered the room. His mask was so constructed that all was total darkness to him. All that transpired at these meetings were kept a most profound secret. Those who spoke disguised their voice so that they should not be recognized. Several of our most respected and influential citizens were induced to join this masked secret organization, believing that the interests of the Democratic party were the object. Men of means were placed on the Finance and other important Committees. Two of the five members from each ward were chosen to organize other asso- ciations in the city. For this purpose they were associated with three persons from each ward, not members of the association, and entirely ignorant, of the exist- ence of such a secret masked body. By these means a great variety of associa- tions were formed, all of which were controlled by the central, secret, masked body, of which Fernando Wood was the originator. The machinery was all in perfect order, and the design was to control all the nominations of the party in the city. It operated with a power unseen, and unfelt by all the outsiders in the party. When Tammany Hall opened its doors to the nominating convention chosen by this secret, masked organization, so admirably was every thing arranged, that on the first ballot for members of Assembly, of which there were thirteen, chosen by general ticket, twelve were nominated nearly unanimous; and the other candidate of this masked organization was nominated on the next ballot. Wood was nominated for Congress, and nearly every man that he desired was successful. The outside Democrats could not tell how the thing was done, nor who did it. But it was done. At the head of this singular organization was the man who is now Mayor of the city, and who asks to be reelected. Several persons joined it without knowing or supposing that so many ridiculous features marked an entrance to it, or that its ob- ject was to give Fernando Wood the power to make all the nominations. Many, when they found out the object, were disgusted, and withdrew. A similar association, except the masks, was recently organized by the Mayor to compel his renomination, and also to control every nomination' made or to be made by the Democratic party this Fall. In this association none were admitted but those who were the Mends of the Mayor, and many of them were his appoint- ees to office, and quite a number members of the police, a body of men which the Mayor has publicly avowed should not mingle or take an active part in the politics of the city. In this movement the Mayor has so far been successful, although he has called forth an opposition in the ranks of the Democratic party that bids Mr to insure his defeat at the polls. THE CELEBRATED PARTNERSHIP FRAUDS. THE CELEBRATED PARTNERSHIP FRAUDS OF OUR “MODEL” MAYOR— THE MARVINE CASE-A FORGED BILL OF SALE-TWO FORGED LETTERS —A SCORE AND MORE OF FRAUDULENT ALTERATIONS OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS—UNPARALLELED VILLAINY IN MERCANTILE LIFE. In the latter part of the year 1848, Fernando Wood designed sending to Califor- nia a quantity of merchandise. The gold discoveries on the Pacific coast were then just beginning to excite the cupidity of our merchants and others, and Mr. Wood designed to be among the first to make his fortune in the California trade. Not being overstocked with cash at that period of his life, he very naturally looked about him to find pecuniary means to aid in the enterprise. He thought of his friend Edward E. Marvine, then residing in this city, who had been an old mer- chant, had retired from business many years, was worth about $100,000, and had good credit with merchants who knew him. Between Wood and Marvine there existed a relationship, and a warm personal friendship. Under these circum- stances our hero, the present Mayor of New-York, wended his way one evening, in the latter part of the year 1848, to the residence of Marvine, then living in one of our up-town streets. He briefly opened upon the object of his visit, but was told that, in consequence of some friends who had called that evening to see Mr. Marvine on a social visit, some other opportunity must be embraced by Mr. Wood to develop more fully his scheme of making a fortune in the California trade. The time and place for a second interview was agreed upon. At this interview Mr. Wood was. fully prepared with a glowing statement, proving conclusively that if Marvine would join him in the enterprise, a large fortune would surely result. To convince Marvine of the success of the enterprise, ho showed a letter purporting to be from T. 0. Larkin, then residing in California in the capacity of government agent. In this letter Mr. Wood was strongly urged to send out a quantity of mer- chandise to California. Accompanying the letter was a memorandum which named many of the articles that should be sent as most suitable to the market at that time. In this letter, which was dated in July, 1848, it was stated that the pretended miter, Mr. T.,0. Larkin, was greatly indebted to Mr. Wood, for import- ant favors shown him, and that he would like an opportunity to return those favors, and that this was the first time he had had the means to repay the obliga- tion. Mr. Wood was urged in this forged letter to ship some $10,000 worth of goods to the California market, and he was told in it that he would realize $100,000 profit on the shipment. At that time Mr. Marvine had no reason to believe that this letter was a forged document, got up by Wood to induce him to enter into partnership with him. But such was its real character! Marvine confided in the truth of the represent- ations made by Wood, and acceded to the proposal of partnership. But before the partnership agreement was drawn up, Mr. Wood desired to per- petrate another fraud on Marvine. He had purchased au old barque, the “ John W. Cater,” for $4000. He proposed that Marvine should purchase the one half of this barque, and that the goods for the California market should be shipped in her. He stated that the barque cost him $12,000, and that he had just paid that amount for her in cash. He said he would sell to Marvine the one half of said barque for $6000. Not finding Mr. Marvine so ready and desirous to purchase the one half of the barque as he supposed, and fearing that the reason of his hesitation arose from some doubts about the value of the vessel, or as to, the price Wood sa d he paid for it, he, Wood, invented a plan to romove these supposed objections. To do this it was necessary to introduce another forged document, in the shape of a bill of sale, purporting to be the original instrument by which the barque had been conveyed to Wood, by its former owners. In this forged bill of sale the cost price of the barque was stated at $12,000, and her age not over eleven years. Not lor a moment supposing that Wood had prepared a false bill of sale, Marvine pur- chased the one half of said barque, at the price of $6000. These preliminaries being settled, the partnership agreement was drawn up and signed. In this agreement, the sale and purchase of one half of the barque, the price paid for It, and the manner of payment, were described. The parties also- agreed to purchase $20,000 worth of goods to be shipped on board of her, each8 THE MARVINE CASE. party paying $10,000. It was further agreed that Wood should make all the purchases, keep a correct account of their cost, and of all the disbursements, and also the receipts of such moneys as may have been derived from passengers before the departure of the barque. When the goods were sold the returns were to be equally divided between the parties, so soon as they could be received in this city. Afterwards, it was agreed to increase the goods shipped from $20,000 to $26,000. Such was the, nature of the agreement between the parties, brought about entirely by the false representations and forged documents exhibited by Wood. The barque was laden, and she sailed on the 19th day of October, 1848. Mr. Wood, two days afterwards, rendered to Marvine an account of the disbursements which had been made under the agreement, for fitting out the cargo of said vessel, and for the purchase of the ship’s stores and supplies. This balance-sheet, or account, was prepared by Wood himself) in his own hand-writing, and to which he appended his name. At the time he rendered this account he also furnished to Marvine the original bills, invoices, and vouchers, taken from the parties of whom purchases had been made, and to whom the barque had become indebted. These original bills and vouchers corresponded with the account rendered by Wood. Be- lieving all to be correct, Marvine settled with Wood. He did not then suppose that Wood had with his own hand altered nearly every one of the bills. He saw interlineations and alterations in the bills, which changes appeared to have been made in Wood’s own handwriting, but he was not then prepared to believe that Fernando Wood could have actually perpetrated such a wholesale forgery of accounts. Wood asserted that all the vouchers and bills were original, made out by the parties to whom he paid moneys on account of the joint enterprise, and so Marvine paid one half off the account rendered. But after this settlement suspicions began to harass the mind of Marvine, that all was not right. He exhibited these bills and vouchers to a mercantile friend; true copies of them were prepared, and these copies had placed on them the initials of his friend. Marvine began to inquire of the merchants and others to whom the barque had become indebted. On the very threshold of this inquiry there was unfolded to his view a systematic series of frauds, forgeries, and villanies, without a parallel in the history of mercantile partnerships. The. bills and vouchers rendered by Wood to Marvine were in many instances more than double in amount of the actual price paid for them! Bills were rendered, as itHfterwards appeared, fbr goods never shipped, or never put on board of the barque. In a few words, the true bills were horribly mutilated by Wood, in a manner clearly show- ing that he had no other object in view than that of swindling his partner. After various ineffectual efforts to settle the rriatter with Wood, a suit was insti- tuted in the Superior Court, f6r the recovery of some six or seven thousand dollars, which was about the extent of the frauds or overcharges that Marvine had then discovered. It was subsequently agreed to refer the matter, and the Court appointed three referees to try the case. It is but recently that the referees gave a unanimous decision against Wood; judgment and costs amounting to about $15,000, about the one half of which is costs. The case was decided against Wood on every point, by evidence so clear and convincing that none could doubt.. During the investigation, other frauds of Wood, not previously known to Marvine, were developed. But as he had not included them in his original complaint, and as they formed no part of the pleadings, he could not be benefited by the new developments of fraud and forgery on the trial before the referees. Now, the reader may naturally ask, Where is your proof of these astounding facts, frauds, or forgeries? We must give enough of this proof to satisfy any fair man. To give the whole case would occupy at least some three hundred pages of the size of those in this pamphlet. But we will give enough of it to remove all doubt from the mind of the reader, as to the forgeries and perjuries of Fernando Wood, the present Mayor of New-York. What was the first allegation of fraud in this matter? From the pleadings which are sworn to by both parties, and which are composed of the. plaintiffs’ com- plaint, and the answer of the defendant, we find that it is alleged on the part of the plaintiffs, that Wood, in order to induce Marvine to become his partner, ex- hibited a forged letter, purporting to have been written by T. O. Larkin, of Califor- nia. Wood denies this, under oath, in his answer.EXTRACTS FROM TESTIMONY. 9 Now, if some four or five respectable men come upon the stand and swear that Wood exhibited such a letter to them, and that, in some instances, Marvine was present; and if T. O. Larkin also comes upon the stand and swears that he never wrote such a letter, nor did he ever write any letter to Mr. Wood, nor even know him at that time, we .suppose, under such circumstances, no sane man will doubt that Wood did show such a letter, and that the plaintiffs’ oath is true, and the* defendant’s oath is false. Extracts prom Testimony as to the Exhibition op the Forged Letter prom T. 0. Larkin. Hen/ry A. Smyth's testimony.—I am a merchant in this city; I was present at an interview between Wood and Marvine, in the fall of 1848; it was at my store, 81 Broad street; the conver- sation was in regard to a shipment of merchandise to California, by the John W. Cater; Mr. Wood produced a written list of articles recommended to be shipped to California, coming, as he said, from a friend there; there was a letter accompanying this list, which Mr. Wood showed me; I either glanced over the letter, or it was read to me; Mr. Wood said it was from a Mr. Larkin, who held some office in California—either N. 0. Larkin or T. O. Larkin; I saw the signature, and as near as I can remember, it was T. O. Larkin; he said the list and letter contained information very valuable, worth at least $5000 to any man. Mr. Wood represented this Larkin to be a con- sul, or holding some other office under government in California, and that he furnished him with this information in consideration of the procuring the office by Wood. The object seemed to be to show me the inducements held out by Wood, so that I would either sell them goods or recom- mend them to my friends. I did so recommend them. Charles Partridge's testimony.—My store is at No. 8 Courtlandt street; I know Mr. Wood; he purchased from me nine cases of matches in the fall of 1848; he showed me a letter from T. O. Larkin, in government employ; the letter was shown to me within a month or two before the sale of the matches; my attention was called to this letter more than once by Mr. Wood; the sub- stance of the letter was that there was a great chance to make money if goods were sent to Cali- fornia of a description as mentioned in a catalogue sent with the letter, which catalogue I saw in the hands of Mr. Wood; it may, or may not, have been a part of the letter; Mr. Wood said he received the letter from T. 0. Larkin, with whom he had become acquainted while he, Wood, was in Congress; that he had assisted Mr. Larkin to the office he held, or had used his influence to get him appointed. I first saw this 0. Larkin letter at Wood’s store, corner of South and Dover streets; I think I had it in my hand, and looked at some of the statements in it; the signature was T. 0. Larkin, I am positive of that; I saw the same letter in my store afterwards; Wood showed it to me. Benjamin H. Folger's testimony.—I reside in the city of Buffalo; my business is that of a hardware merchant; in the year 18481 resided in the city of New-York, and did business there; I have known Mr. Marvine for more than twenty years. On or about the 28th of September of that year, Mr. Marvine introduced me to Fernando Wood. Mr. Wood exhibited to said Marvine and myself a memorandum of an assorted cargo of goods, which paper he said he had received from T. O. Larkin, of San Francisco, who then held some government appointment, which he,vWood, had obtained for him when in Congress, and in gratitude for that act of friendship he had sent Mr. Wood, privately, this list. Mr. T. O. Larkin's testimony—1 reside at present in New-York; in 1848 I resided: at Monte- rey, California; I was U. S. Consul, U. S. Navy Agent, and U. S. Storekeeper there at that time; I had been Consul there four or five years previous to 1848; I had been doing business in that country, directly or indirectly, as a merchant, for sixteen or eighteen years; in 1848 I did not know Fernando Wood; had never received a communication from him; had no knowledge of writing him; was under no obligations to him for any favors, nor had he ever rendered me any assistance. I did not write any letter to him recommending any shipment or adventure to Cali- fornia, nor send him any list of articles useful for that market; no other person named Larkin was connected with the U. S. government in California in that year. .A. T. Mar nine's testimony.—I reside at Delhi, Delaware Co., this State; I know the defend- ant^ Wood, by sight; I first saw him in the fall of 1848; I received a letter from my brother, Ed. E. Marvine, requesting me to go to California, and came to this city for that purpose; I found, on my arrival, that Mr. Wood was one of the parties, and I followed his directions in all I did in this city; I went on board the barque as a passenger; Henry Richardson, a brother-in-law of Mr. Wood, was also a passenger. I understood when I came here, that the expedition had been got up in consequence of a letter received by Mr. Wood from T. 0. Larkin, and that they had been bought according to a list furnished by Mr. Larkin. My brother, Mr. Ed. E. Marvine, directed me, by .letter, to call on Mr. Larkin, and express to him a sense of obligation or thanks for the information he had furnished; I did so; quite a dialogue passed between us before I could make him under- stand what I meant; I finally told him he might understand that he had written a letter to Fer- nando Wood, and had sent to him a list of goods wanted in California, and that the goods had been sent, and I was one of the passengers of the expedition. He then said he was glad we were doing well with it, but he had no recollection of any such man as Fernando Wood, and had never writ- ten such a letter, nor sent such a list to him. "We do not for a moment suppose, after reading the above, that any one will have the least doubt that Fernando Wood exhibited to Marvine a forged letter, having the signature of T. 0. Larkin. Human testimony can not be given of any >*0 FALSE, FOEGED, AND SIMULATED BILLS. fact of a stronger character. Yet he denies on oath that he ever did I That the letter was a forgery is shown by th9 very person from whom Wood said he received h* who never wrote to, or even knew Wood at that time. Look at the character of the witnesses who swear that Wood showed them the letter. Who is Heniy A. Smyth ? Who are Charles Partridge, and the others who swear that Wood, OB more than one occasion, exhibited this letter ? They saw the signature, read, and heard read, the contents, looked at the list of articles which it was alleged Mr* Larkin advised to have sent to the California market. We now pass to the second forged document in this case. Extracts of Testimony relative to the forged Bill of Sale of the Barqub John W. Cater, exhibited by Wood to Marvine. Bemgmrwn H. Folger's testimony.—Mr. Wood exhibited to Mr. Marvine and myself, in my store, a paper purporting to be a bill of sale of the barque John "W. Cater, in which the price paid by Wood for the barque was stated at $12,000. Marvine said he knew nothing about vessels, but then bought the one half of the barque at $6,000. I purchased, at the request of Wood and Mar- vine, some hardware to be shipped on the barque, and applied to two offices in Wall street to have it insured. Both offices declined, on account of tbe age of the barque. One of them said the barque was so old that she was out of the books. Neither office would take the risk at anypre- mium, and laughed at me for trying to effect an insurance on so old a vessel. At the time Wood exhibited the bill of sale referred to, he said tbe barque was from nine to eleven years old. I reported the result of my visit to the Insurance offices to Mr. Wood, when he answered me that he could get any amount done on her that he wanted, and requested me not to mention the subject to Mr. Marvine, who was then in Auburn. He then showed me the hill of sale to him of the barque, filled up for the consideration of $12,000, and said that he had expended $1,000 in putting her in good order. James Boyington's testimony.—In 18481 was a merchant of the firm of Smith & Boyington. Our firm owned the barque John W. Cater. We became her owners in 1844. Her papers were issued in 1831. We bought her of Captain C. K. Davis for $4,200. We sold her in May, 1841, to Fernando Wood for $4,000, and executed a bill of sale to him. We never executed a hill of sale in which the consideration was $12,000; but I presume the consideration expressed in the bill of sale was $4,000, the sum for which she was sold. Is not this conclusive as to the existence and exhibition of a forged bill of sale? Instead of some nine or eleven years, the barque was seventeen years old in 1848, and instead of costing Wood $12,000, he only paid $4,000. Wood swears in his answer to the complaint, that he never exhibited a bill of sale of the said barque. Now, what are we to call this? Is it not perjury? It is true that in swearing to the truth of legal pleadings of this nature, you only swear positively as to those matters that come within your own knowledge, and that the pleadings contain much that you swear to on information and belief, which you merely swear that you believe to be true. But the exhibition of a forged bill of sale ^as a fact that must have come within his own knowledge, and, therefore, he swears not upon belief and information, so far as that fact is concerned. We presume we have said enough about the first two forged documents—the hill of sale and the T. O. Larkin letter—prepared and exhibited by our “ model” Mayor to defraud an old friend. The referees appointed by the court to determine this matter between the par- ties gave judgment against Wood for $5,835.40, on account of the barque fraud. Their report on the whole subject will be found in another part of this pamphlet. Ealse, forged, and simulated Bills. We will now refer to the fraudulent, forged, altered, and simulated bills and vouchers furnished Marvine by Mr. Wood, and which he, Wood, represented as true and correct. The account as made out by Wood had bis signature appended to it, was in his own handwriting, and the amounts in it corroborated with the several fraudulent bills. The overcharges or frauds in these bills or vouchers are specified in the report of the referees below. It is only necessary that we should refer more in detail to some of them, and to the testimony, in order that the people of this city may understand more fully the rascality of their Mayor, who is again placed in nomination, and be prepared with substantial arguments compelling them to oppose his election. The frauds perpetrated by Wood respecting the purchases he made on account of the partnership, embrace that of altering the bills rendered by the merchants ofTESTIMONY. 11 Whom ho purchased. In some eases he increased the quantity of goods purchased, in others he added largely to their price. In many cases he perpetrated both these frauds in the same bill. In some cases he rendered bills to his partner for goods never purchased, to be shipped on the voyage, and which, of course, were never on board. In some cases, he would prevail on the merchant to make out his bill at prices which would afford a deduction of forty per cent for cash. On these bills Wood would alter the 40 per cent into 10 per cent, thus increasing the cost of the goods to his partner 30 per cent, and reducing the cost to himself the same amount. No plan of fraud and forgery that human ingenuity could devise seems to have been omitted by our “model" Mayor, in his business affairs with his friend Marvine. When Wood discovered that Marvine had determined to call on the merchants of whom he purchased, to get evidence of the frauds he, Wood, "had perpetrated, he travelled in advance of him, and endeavored to induce the merchants to make out new bills, or to alter the charges by increasing them so as to correspond with the forged bills he had rendered Marvine. His usual story told the merchants in these cases, was, that he had much trouble in this matter, and the increased charges would no more than pay him for it. In most cases the merchants refused to com- ply with his request, but in others he succeeded in procuring the alterations, by deceiving the merchants as to his object. Some Testimony on this Subject. Sidney Wintringham * testimony.—In 1848 I was a dealer in cider, porter, ale, and wines. I know Mr. Wood. On the 9th October, 1848,1 sold him a bill of cider, porter, and ale, amounting to $485; the terms were six months. The bill as follows: 100 cases cider at $2,............................$200 100 “ porter at $1.75, .„................... 175 *25 « ale at $1.75,............................ 43 75 25 “ porter in pints at $2.50,................. 62 50 Cartage,................................... 3 75 $485 00 I was called on by Mr. Wood to make an alteration in the charges. I declined doing so, and thought it objectionable, and that I might be called in court, and it would not look well. Wood said that some one would call to get a copy of it. : David L. Wintringham's testimony.—In 1848 I was selling ale, porter, and cider. I was with my brother, Sidney Wintringham. On the 9th of October of that year, a sale was made to Mr. Wood. I have the book in which the sale was entered. The entry is in my brother’s hand- writing. The original amount was $485. At the request of Mr. Wood 1 made an alteration of that entry. He wished me to make it, and I think he was present when I made it He wished me to alter the cider from $2 to $2.25 per dozen, the porter from $1.75 to $2 per dozen, and the wine, pints from $18 to $20.50. He said that some person might call for a bill, or a copy, and that he did not wish every one to know his business. It was a year after the purchase was made When Wood called to have the alterations made. John B. Thurshy's testimony.—My father was a rope manufacturer in Bush wick, and liad an Office in this city. I have my father’s books here. There is an entry against Fernando Wood amounting to $910. Mr. Wood called at my father’s office, in reference to that bill, some time in the fall of 1849. He spoke to me in relation to it. I do not remember the precise conversation, but it was to the effect that he had been to much trouble and expense in fitting out and sending the barque John W. Cater, he should like to have us add something to the amount of the bill, about 10 per cent, I think, more than the face of the hill then was. He said some one would call for a copy of the bill, and he wished me to deliver the bill, when I had made the addition, to whoever Should call for it. He asked that the addition be made to the price per pound. I made out a bill in conformity with his request I added one cent per pound to the amount stated in the original invoice, and cartage and expenses $12.50. the precise sums named by Wood. There was some figuring, but Mr. Wood wished me to add about 10 per cent, and to do so the one cent a pound Was added, I did just as he told me. I don’t remember whether I delivered this altered bill to any one, or whether I left it to be called for. Iii these two or three cases we see the ingenuity of the hero in this swindle. More than a year afterwards, when Marvine concluded to ferret out some of the .frauds and forgeries of Wood, Wood starts in advance, calls on the merchants, and makes a desperate effort to get them to falsify their books, by altering the charges against him, and this, too, long after they were paid. He knew what the exact amount of fraud was in each case, and if he could only get the merchants to alter -their books so as to correspond with the frauds and forgeries embraced in the hiHs he had rendered Marvine, and get them to deliver copies of these altered accounts it&Harvine, or some one who called for them, at his request* he would still succeed in destroying the suspicions of Marvine as to the frauds 3a© had perpetrated. Who12 ALTERATIONS OF BILLS AND VOUCHERS. but Fernando Wood could have devised this infamous method of covering up his frauds ? The report of the referees will show the exact amount of the frauds in the several bills and vouchers rendered by Wood. We need only to refer more specifically to a few of them, in order to show the general and systematic fraud perpetrated. For a small bill of groceries purchased of John R. Woolsey, of seven dollars and seventeen cents, he, Wood, rendered a bill for $35.81, thus fraudulently obtaining $28.10, from Marvine. For another small bill of said Woolsey, for fish and oil, of $9.85, he rendered a bill of $39.85, thus defrauding Marvine of $30.00, on this hill—making $58.10, on the two bills, which in the aggregate only amounted to $11.02. The fraud in these cases was near four times the amount of the true cost of the purchases. It was effected by adding to the bills 30 gallons of oil, and four kegs of lard, never purchased, and never put on board of the barque! The referees gave judgment against Wood for the $58.10, on these two small bills. Wood rendered bills to Marvine for work done to the barque long before he sold the one half of her to Marvine. He rendered a bill of Hagadorn & Elliot, for painting the barque, work done long before Marvine became part owner. The referees gave judgment against Wood for this amount, $54.40. He rendered bills to Marvine for poultry, fresh beef, ducks, turkeys, eggs, oysters, pork, vegetables, tongues, cider, porter, lard, and other articles, which were never purchased, nor put on board of the barque, and Marvine paid him the one half of these fradulent bills. In short, there is no other person inside or outside of the State prison, who has shown more ingenuity in altering bills than our model Mayor. As a specimen of shinplaster forgeiy, we give the following: S. Nichols sold Wood the following bill: 1 16-inch upper-box, leathered, . . . . $1 50 2 “ lower pump-boxes, ) stapled and nailed, )-.... 2 00 $3 50 Now, how do you think our model Mayor could convert this bill into one of $36.50, instead of $3.50? Why, we will tell you how. He forged a figure 6 after the figure 1 in the first item in the bill. It then read $16.50, instead of $1.501 He then forged a little cipher and placed it after the figure 2 in the second item, so that it read $20.00 instead of two dollars! One more instance of his dexterity in mathematics, an example of which is not fbund in any of the ordinary works on that science, though it may be found among the combinations of figures in a lottery scheme. Waydell & Co. had sold Wood, 4 water-casks, for $12.00. Our Mayor’s ingenuity soon magnified this $12 into $112. It would not do to make 4 water-casks cost $112, so he just innocently placed before the 4 a figure 3, which in the natural order of the digits should be placed there, and it, Waydell’s bill, read 34 water-casks, which was no longer Waydell’s bill, but Wood’s bill; and then just to show that 34 water-casks could not be bought for $12, he placed another 1 beside Waydell’s 1, when it read $112! No wonder our Mayor has got to be a rich man. His success disproves the general remark that mathematicians are always poor, because too much absorbed in figures to look to worldly matters. Still one more convincing proof of our Mayor’s capacity to make large profits on a small capital. He was far too modest when he read that forged T. O. Larkin letter to Marvine, in which $100,000 profit was promised on a shipment of $10,000 worth of goods. Wood actually made a profit of $100 on a bill of 15 cents, con- tracted for three cartages at 25 cents each. 0. & R. Poillon rendered to Wood a bill for sundry items and three cartages, at 25 cents each, carried out 15 cents. Wood just added, we suppose in his usual off-hand way in money-making, the words, “ sundry spars,” on the same line with the “ 3 cartages,” and just to have the price look business-like, prefixed to the figures $0.15 a 1 and a 0, which made it $100.15! Truly it is the easiest thing in the world to make a fortune, if you understand figures. If we may rightly say that when we double the capital we have invested we have made 100 per cent, profit, Wood in this instance made between 10,000 and 20,000 per centREFEREES’ REPORT, 13 The testimony of Mr. Dix, the son of John A. Dix, who was in Mr. "Wood’s employ at the time the accounts for the barque John W. Cater were made out, swears that Mr. Wood wrote the heading of the invoice, and then handed him, the witness, the heading, and all the bills, books, and papers, which enabled him to make out the invoice. The invoice was made out by the witness from these bills and vouchers, and it amounted to $25,938.19, as stated in Wood’s letter to Mar- vine at the time. Of this amount Wood purchased the following bills, and Marvine all the rest. wood’s purchases. James Hunter & Co., bill rendered,.................................$504 35 C. W. Field, “ 569 76 Geo. S. Spall, “ 210 00 M. Q. "Wood, * “ 675 88 Wm. E. Lawrence, “ 825 11 Holt & Palmer, “ 874 15 S. Wintringbam, “ 578 75 J.Thursby, “ 1,000 67 Charles Partridge, “ 526 24 Jacob Condit, “ 697 88 O. Wan Every K' 655 71 James Moore, “ .................................... 466 00 R. Fish, “ 110 00 C. L. Ingersoll, “ 177 25 Taggart & Gray, “ 188 25 Total,..........................................$7,540 00 These bills all correspond with the invoice, as the invoice was made out from them in part, and they were all handed to young Dix by Mr. Wood for that pur- pose. After this, Wood informed Marvine by letter, which we have published, of the exact amount of the cost of the cargo. When Marvine came to this city, Wood handed him all these bills for inspection, and Marvine had copies made of them before he returned them to Wood. We will go no further into the details of these disgusting frauds. The following, report of the referees in the case, will give the amount in dollars and cents, as far as they investigated the subject. NEW-YORK SUPERIOR COURT. Henby Sheldon, Geobge E Byxbie, William H. Sheldon, and Levi Chesnutwood, vs. Febnando Wood. To the Justices of the Superior Court of the City of New- York : In pursuance of an order of this Court made in the above entitled action, bearing date the twenty-ninth day of November, in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-one, whereby it was referred to William M. Evarts, John Cochran, and Henry Hilton, of the city of New-York, counsellors-at-law, to hear and determine this action, and to report thereon, We, the undersigned referees in the said order named, having been attended upon the reference herein by the counsel of the respective parties, and having heard their respective proofs and alle- gations, do report: That the following facts were proven and established befor e us upon such reference. That on the second day of October, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, the defendant and one Edward E. Marvine made and entered into an agreement, in writing, of which a copy, in- cluding the memorandum at the foot thereof, is annexed to the complaint herein, and marked Schedule A. That at the time of making such agreement, the defendant represented to said Marvine that the barque John W. Cater therein named should be contributed to said joint adventure at the cost price thereof which the defendant had paid therefor, and the defendant then agreed to sell to said Marvine, and the said, Marvine then agreed to purchase of the defendant, one half of said barque at such cost price. That the defendant thereupon represented such cost price to have been twelve thousand dollars, ($12,000,) and said Marvine, believing such representation to be true, and upon the faith thereof agreed to give the defendant for one half interest in such barque the sum of six thousand dollars, ($6000,) specified in said agreement, marked Schedule A. = That for five thousand dollars of Baid sum of six thousand dollars the said Marvine agreed to gve the defendant, and the defendant agreed to accept of said Marvine, certain leasehold premises 10WU as No. 3 Murray street, in the city of New-York, subject only to an incumbrance thereon of five thousand dollars, ($5000,) which the defendant was to assume.14 referees’ report. That the cost price of said barque John W. Cater to the defendant was not twelve thousand dollars, ($12,000,) but on the contrary was only four thousand dollars ($4000.) That said Marvine did not convey or transfer, or cause to be conveyed or transferred, to the de- fendant said leasehold premises number 3 Murray street, subject only to an incumbrance of five thousand dollars, ($5000,) but, on the contrary, after the conveyance and transfer thereof to the defendant in pursuance of the agreement aforesaid, he, the defendant, was obliged to and did pay, lay out, and expend in perfecting and making good the title to said premises so transferred to him, the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars. ($15o.) And also paid the sum of seventy-six dollars and twenty-one cents, ($76.21,)being the taxes upon said premises for the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, (1848.) _ That the payment of said sum of one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) and said sum of seventy- six dollars and twenty-one cents ($76.21) were necessary and proper in order to vest in the defend- ant a title to said leasehold premises, subject only at the time of the transfer thereof to him to the said incumbrance of five thousand dollars. ($5000.) That on or about the twenty-first day of October, one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, and within a few days after said barque had sailed from the port of New-York upon the joint ad- venture so agreed upon, the defendant rendered to said Marvine an account of expenditures made by the defendant under said agreement, marked Schedule A, in the fitting out of said vessel, and the purchase of her stores and supplies, and said Marvine, believing such account to be correct, did, on the seventh day of November, one thousand eight hundred and. forty-eight, pay to th e defend- ant one half thereof, pursuant to said agreement. x That in the account so rendered and paid were the following errors and overcharges: HOWARD & W iNTRINGHAM i O vercharge,........................................................$300 00 John R. Woolsey : Overcharge,......................................................... 58 70 Benjamin Hall & Co.: Overcharge..................................................,....... 214 90 O. M. Holcomb : Overcharge,......................................................... 8 25 J. W. Fream : Overcharge,................................................... 54 50 Poole & Pentz : Overcharge,.................................................... 120 50 Hagadorn & Elliott : •Overcharge,..................................................... 54 40 F. Hennill : Overcharge,....................................................... 11 00 0. & R. Poillon : Overcharge,..................................................... 100 00 S. Nicholls : Overcharge,......................................................... S3 00 Waydell & Co.: Overcharge,....................................................... 100 00 C. L. Watkins : * Overcharge,......................................................... 11 75 R. Fisk : Overcharge,................................................... 65 00 Commissions : Overcharge,......................................................... 46 60 That at or about the time of rendering and settling the disbursement account last above stated, the defendant and said Marvine rendered to each other, and on the third day of January following settled between them, the account for purchases made by each pursuant to said original agreement marked Schedule A, for the cargo of said barque John W. Cater. That upon such final settlement, the account set forth in complaint, and dated January 3,1849, “Was stated and signed by the parties, and such settlement was had by tbe defendant paying to the said Marvine the balance of nine hundred and ninety-four dollars and five cents ($994.u5> in the manner in said account specified, such payment being necessary to equalize the said disburse- ments on account of such cargo, and thereby each contributed an equal half part of the cost thereof according to the accounts upon which such settlement was based. That in the account so rendered by the defendant to said Marvine for purchases made by the defendant for account of cargo of said barque John W. Cater as aforesaid, were the following; er- rors and overcharges: Holt & Palmer: Overcharge,............................................................ .$100 90 Taggart & Gray : Overcharge,.................................................... 5090 Ovetts W. Field & Co.: Overcharge,........................... ............................ $6090 James Hunter & Co.: Overcharge,.................................................... 102 70 William E. Laurence : Overcharge,.................................................... .... 236 00 8. Wintringham: Overcharge,......................................................... 2590 R. Fish: Overcharge..................................... ................. 20 00 M. Q. Wood: Overcharge,.........................................................17*8415 REFEREES’ REPORT. Oliver Yak Evert : Overcharge,......-----....-----..........____..._________..._________... $0 71; John Tuonan y: Overcharge, ............................................................ 112 59 An overcharge of interest, as follows: Interest on $2826.04 of purchases made by defendant for cargo of said barque, actually made upon a credit of six months, but in the account charged as made for cash,............................................*......... 203 91 Interest on $446 of similar purchases actually made upon a credit of six months, but in the account charged as made upon a credit of four months,. 5 '20 That each and all such errors and overcharges have been discovered by said Marvine since the settlement of said disbursements and cargo accounts, and that the payment by him to the defend- ant of an equal half part of all the items above enumerated, except the overcharge of interest last mentioned, and as to that, the payment of the whole thereof was made upon the accounts of the same rendered by the defendant to said Marvine as aforesaid, and upon the faith and credit of said Marvine that said accounts so rendered were correct. That said errors and overcharges, exclusive of said overcharge of interest, In the aggregate amount to two thousand two hundred and thirty-one dollars and forty-nine cents, ($2231.49,) one half thereof being one thousand one hundred and fifteen dollars and seventy-four cents, ($1115.74,) and the interest upon said one half from the respective times of the payment thereof by said Mar- vine to the defendant, as "hereinbefore stated, to the date of this report, amounts to five hundred and sixty-one dollars and seventy-seven cents. ($561.77.) That such overcharge of interest amounts in the whole to two hundred and nine dollars and eleven cents, ($209.11,) and the interest thereon from the time of the payment thereof by said Marvine to the defendant, as hereinbefore stated, (namely, the 3d day of January, 1849,) to the date of this report, amounts to one hundred and four dollars and seven cents. ($104.07.) That the difference between the one half of the actual cost price of the said barque, John W. Cater to the defendant, and the sum which said Marvine paid the defendant therefor upon the re- presentation that she cost twelve thousand dollars, ($12,000,) is Tour thousand dollars, ($4000.) That deducting therefrom the sums paid by the defendant as above stated for perfecting the title to, and removing liens upon, said leasehold premises number 3 Murray street, leaves the sum of three thousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and twenty-nine cents, ($3773.29.) Interest upon said sum of three thousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and tweniy- nine cents, ($3778.29,) from the twenty-sixth day of January, 1849, the day the said Marvine transferred said leasehold premises to the defendant, to the date of this report, amounts to cue thousand eight hundred and sixty-two dollars and eleven cents, ($1S62.U.) On or about the 7th day of November, 1849, and prior to the commencement of this action, the said Marvine duly assigned and transferred to the plaintiffs herein all claims and demands which the said Marvine had against the defendant arising out of said adventure, or the purchase of the said barque John W. Cater, or the disbursement or cargo account of the same, or said agreement* of which a copy is annexed to the complaint herein, and marked Schedule A1. We do further report as a conclusion of law upon the facts so found, First, That the plaintiffs are entitled to recover of and from the defendent, the difference between the one half of the actual cost price paid by the defendant for said barque John W. Cater, and the sum which said Marvine paid the defendant fir said one half, less the sums so paid by the defend- ant for perfecting the title to, and removing the liens upon, said leasehold premises, namely, the sum-of three thousand seven hundred and seventy-three dollars and twenty-nine cents, ($3773.29,) with one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two dollars and eleven cents, ($1862.11,) being the interest thereon from the twenty-sixth day of January, 1849, as above stated, in the whole amount- ing to five thousand six hundred and thirty-five dollars and forty cents, ($5635.40.) Second, That the plaintiffs are entitled to recover of and from the defendant the said one half part of said errors and overcharges above enumerated, amounting to one thousand one hundred and fifteen dollars and seventy-four cents, ($1115.74,) with five hundred and sixty-one dollars and seventy-seven cents, ($561.77,) being the interest thereon to the date hereof, from the times said Marvine paid the same to the defendant as above stated,in the whole amounting to one thou- sand six hundred and seventy-seven dollars and fifty-one cents, '($1677.51.) Third, That the plaintiffs are entitled to recover of and from the defendant for said overcharge of interest above specified, the sum of two hundred and nine dollars and eleven cents, ($209.11,) with one hundred and four dollars and seven cents, ($104.07,) being the interest thereon to the date hereoffrom the time the said Marvine paid the same to the defendant as above stated, in the whole amounting to three hundred and thirteen dollars and eighteen cents, ($318.18.) Finally, That the plaintiffs are entitled to payment herein against the defendant for the sum of seven thousand si^ hundred and twenty-six dollars and nine cents, (7629.09.) And we do further certify and report, First, That no sufficient tender by the defendant to said Marvine was proven before us to have befen at any time made respecting the subj ect-matter of this action. Second, That upon such reference the defendant introduced, subject to the plaintiffs1 objection and to our final determination in respect thereto, -evidence respecting the following items, which items he claimed should be allowed to him as an offset against any claim of the plaintiffs ia this action, namely: One-half of the sum paid by the defendant to one Kent for a gold-tester,........... . $5 50 T wo -certain notes of Marvine in favor of one Barney, paid by defendant,— ....... 25 00 One half of certain sums paid by defendant to one Capt Stephen Camaek, . . ............. 820 09 This "sum charged to the defendant for the compensation of A. G. Marvine, as supercargo, usd paid out of defendant’s share of the return of the adventure,...... $50 0$ This sum charged to defendant Tor insurance on the returns of rite adventure, and paid out of the defendant’s share of the returns of the ad venture,-.........-......—.. -501 89 Thirst That prior to making this our report, we ^determined that all -such items should be dis*I 16 WOOD’S DEFENSE. allowed, and the evidence in respect thereto should he rejected, because no sufficient set-off or counter-claim had been set forth in the defendant’s answer herein, and the pleadings presented no issue in respect thereto. All of which is respectfully submitted. Wm. M. Evabts, , John Cochran, Henry Hilton. Nkw-Yoek, January 13 ih. 1856. (Copy.) WOOD’S DEFENSE. Now, the reader would naturally inquire what was the nature and character of the defense our Mayor would resort to in this case. It was scarcely to have been supposed that his ingenuity was insufficient in getting up some kind of defense. He who could manufacture a forged letter, and a forged bill of sale, and render so many fraudulent bills and vouchers to his partner, could not certainly content him- self without an attempt to show that no such crimes had been perpetrated. He assumed the ground that these charges of fraud were untrue, and that all the overcharges in his bills were errors. To give coloring to his assumption of integ- rity, he further asserted that Marvine participated in making up the accounts of the barque, and to him, therefore, the alleged errors should at least in part be attri- buted. The ground was taken by the defense that Marvine had called at Wood’s store, a day or two after the barque sailed, and, together with a boy in Wood’s employ, made up the ship’s accounts, in which the alleged errors were discovered afterwards by Marvine, and for which the referees have given judgment against Wood. This line of defense was ingenious, and necessarily gave Marvine much trouble to show its falsity. The barque had sailed on the 19th of October; and now how was Marvine to show that he had nothing to do with making up the ship’s accounts, and thus completely destroy this species of defense on the part of Wood? The facts of the case were that Marvine was in Auburn when the barque sailed, and for several consecutive days after, and, therefore, could not have participated in making up the accounts of the barque in Wood’s store in New-York, which were made up on the 21st of October, two days after the barque had sailed. A state- ment of these accounts was rendered to Marvine at Auburn, by Wood, in Wood’s own handwriting, having his own proper signature to it, and dated on the 21st of October. Wood had purchased all the ship’s stores, supplies, and outfits of the barque, amounting, as he stated, to $3,590.66. The cargo on board the barque cost $25,939.11, making together $29,529.fI*7. Of the cargo Marvine had purchased to the amount of $18,399.11, and Wood to the amount, as he alleged, of $1,540.00, together making the cargo cost $25,939.11. Now, in the purchases by Marvine, of over $18,000 worth of the cargo, no errors, overcharges, or frauds existed. But in Wood’s purchases, of about $*7,500 worth of the cargo, and the whole of the outfits, about $3,500, making together $11,130.66, all the frauds, errors, or overcharges existed. If Marvine had really partici- pated in making up the ship’s accounts, and was thus responsible in part for the alleged errors, it is singular that they should all have been against himself) and that he should have managed so as to alter bills and vouchers, in almost every case, so as to wrong himself in the aggregate out of thousands of dollars. We say Buch a state of facts would be almost miraculous. If he had such a penchant for cheating himself, why did he not do it in some of the bills he had purchased on ac- count of the barque ? i Although no sensible business man would attach the least credit to such a de- fense on the part of Wood, even were there no other proof of its absurdity, yet it so happened, that Marvine had the most unquestionable proof that he had no agency in making up the ship’s accounts, was not in this city when they were made up, and that he received a copy of the accounts, made up in Wood’s own handwr itin, directed to him at Auburn, dated the 21st day of October, two days after the barque had sailed. The following is a copy of the outfit account, all of which was purWOOD’S defense. 1> chased by Wood, and the original is in his own handwriting, and was sent to Mar- Tine in Auburn on the 21st day of October: Basque John W. Gates, To Fernando Wood, Dr. Oct. 1848. To Gash, Steamboat U. States and pilot,.................................. $18 00 “ Howard A Wintringham—sto’s,.............................................. 480 68 44 Board of Surveyors,....................................................... 12 00 44 Thomas Ritter—medicines,.............................................. 12 98 44 Bliss A Creighton—compasses,.............................................. 5 50 “ John R. Woolsey—provisions,.............................................. 807 26 “ Howard A Wintringham—oil, Ac.,....................................... 12 81 44 A. J. Horton—wood, Ac.,.............................................. 25 50 44 G. M. Holcomb-flour, Ac.,............................................ 14 75 44 Advertising and papers,.............................................. 18 25 44 M. Trappel—wharfage,................................................. 00 88 44 Benjamin Hall A Co.—stores,.......................................... 214 90 44 M. Tallant—watching,................................................. 4 68 44 J. Macey—blacksmith,................................................. 12 02 44 Jno. W. Terans—poultry, Ac.,......................................... 54 50 44 Jno. Ferguson—coal, &c.,............................................. 5 00 44 R. Y. W. Thorne—wharfage,............................................ 6 00 44 Pool A Pentz—cash to crew,........................................... 120 50 44 J. Ellis—marine survey,.................................................10 00 44 A. W. Rogers—ship keeping,................................................. 2 25 44 J. L. Sandford & Co.—bread,.............................................. 180 92 44 Hagadorn A Elliott—painting,............................................ 54 45 44 R. C. Wetmore & Co.—crockery, ............................................ 13 97 44 John Mason & Co.—labor, &c.,............................................. 102 56 44 Ackerly—potatoes,......................................................... 28 52 44 O. Van Every—caboose,..................................................... 49 76 44 Williams & Hinmore—ship ch’d’y,.......................................... 224 84 “ Hemmingway & Beveridge—sails,........................................... 896 61 44 G. Van Deusen—filling................................................ x 25 40 “ Pilotage,............................................................... 10 50 44 O. Van Every—stove fixtures,............................................... 8 00 « F. Humill—board bill,..................................................... 11 00 44 Fulton-street Tea Store,.............................................. 18 05 44 John R. Woolsey—groceries,................................................ 35 87 44 C. & R. Poillon—repairs and spars,..................................... 188 09 44 Advanced to Cook,........................................................ 26 00 44 S. Candler—survey certificate,............................................. 7 50 44 O. L. Ingersoll—boat,................................................... 88 25 44 S. Nicholls—pump, gear, &c.,............................; ......... 86 50 44 Wagdell & Co.—casks, c’p’ge, &c.,...................................... 152 37 “ Wm. Frost—wharfage,........................................................ 7 87 44 F. Humill—advanced to crew,.............................................. 222 25 44 C. L. Walker—boxes,................................................... 1175 44 R. Hoyt—cash, &c.,...................................................... 82 50 Thompson—Brooklyn wharfage,............................................... 5 00 « S. Tallant—watching,...................................................... 16 25 “ J. R. Woolsey—fish, &c.,.................................................. 89 85 44 R. Fish—boats,............................................................ 65 00 44 W. Cain—poultry, &c.,.................................................... 32 20 44 T. P. Cowen—rigging, &c.,................................................. 75 08 44 Daniel Coger—ship-joiner,............................................. 31 24 44 Custom-House—clearances & c’t’ges,...................................... 53 85 To com. and advancing $3,486 64,...................................... 174 38 $3,660 97 Error in Bill, November 25,..................... 20 11 $3,640 86 New-York, October 21st, 1848. Fernando Wood. Deduct on filling first page,........................ 10 20 $3,680 66 Deduct,.................................. 40 00 $3,590 66 On the day preceding the date of this account, that is, on the 20th of October, the day after the barque sailed, Wood wrote Marvine at Auburn as follows: New-York, Oct. 20, 1848. Ed. E. Marvins, Esq., Auburn: My dear Sir : I regret exceedingly to learn from Mr. Smyth that Mrs. Marvine continues quite ill, so much so as to prevent your leaving her. I sincerely hope she will be much better before 218 THE T. O. LARKIN EORGED LETTER ONCE MORE. the receipt of this. I wrote you some days ago that the barque was insured. I attended to that, and have your policy, which will be handed to you on your return. She eailed yesterday, at 10 o’clock A. M., with an exceedingly fine and fair wind, with the most favorable prospects. Tour brother and Mr. Richardson went on board in exultant spirits, full of hope for a successful Tesult. We have been exceedingly fortunate in all things, except passengers. Our passage-money amounts to but $250, and freight-money to $511, total $761. What the expense of outfits will be I can’t tell yet, until all the bills are received, bjit they are very heavy. We found that as It is our intention to run the vessel on the Pacific coasts for sometime, and disbursements and pro- visions would be so high there, that it was necessary to lay in a very large supply to last along time. From present indications the outfits will amount to over $3,U00. It may be several hun- dred dollars over that sum. The exact amount of invoice of our goods is $25,939 11, which is all well insured, and 20 per cent added. The whole accounts and papers were made up by Mr. Sheldon’s nephew. I thought in your absence it might be more satisfactory to you. He arranged all the bills and papers. When we meet, the whole matter will be talked over. There is nothing now requiring your pre- sence here appertaining to our business. Very truly yours, Fernando Wood. Here we see by this letter, that “Wood informed Marvine the exact amount of the cost of the cargo, $25,939.11; and stated that the outfits would be over $3,000, and several hundred dollars over that sum. On the very next day he sends the exact amount. Now, what becomes of the defense that Marvine was at Wood’s store in New- York, at the very time when Wood was daily writing to him at Auburn ? He wrote him at Auburn almost, daily for several consecutive days. Marvine proved that he was in Auburn daily, from the time the barque sailed, on the 19th of October, until the 28th of the same month. He proved this by several persons in Auburn, with whom he transacted business on those days. Here, then, we see the strongest proof that he had no agency in making out the ship’s accounts, in which so many frauds have been proven to exist. When Wood swore that Marvine par- ticipated in making out these accounts, he swore to what was not true, and what he knew was false. When Marvine arrived in this ci1y, which he did about the 1st of November, Wood banded him the bills and vouchers of the outfit account of the barque, which bills and vouchers corresponded with the account he had sent Marvine at Auburn, on the 21st of October. Marvine, believing that all was correct, after com- paring the bills and vouchers with the account as sent Mm by Wood, settled' by paying Wood the one half of it, or $1'795.33. Before Marvine returned the bills and vouchers to Wood, suspicions began to be entertained that he had been defrauded, and he, therefore, had copies of the bills and vouchers made, and these copies compared with the originals by a mercantile friend, who put his initials on them, and they were produced on the trial. Wood never produced on the trial the original bills, on which Marvine had settled the aeeount with him. Probably, like his bank-book years before, they had been burned up in some fire that occur- red ! Why did he not produce them? Ah I he was not disposed to show the referees that he had altered those bills, and that they were thus no longer the bills as made out by the merchants of whom he had purchased goods for the barque. | It was the frequent interlineations and. alterations in those bills and vouchers, that gave Marvine suspicions that he had been defrauded; so before he returned them to Wood he had copies taken. THE T