Ct> 
 
 fij 
 
 tS r^ ^ m, 
 
HoUinger 
 
 pH 8.5 
 
 Mill Run F3i.l719 
 
F 128 A lUOGKArJlV OF FERNANDO WOOD. 
 
 .44 
 
 .W863 
 
 Copy 2 • --.-^ 
 
 A HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 FORGERIES, PERJURIES, 
 
 OTHER CRIMES 
 
 44 
 
 MODEL" MAYOR. 
 
 I 
 
 7^< 
 
 nsTo- 1. 
 
 
 In presenting to the public the first number of the " Mercantile, Politi- 
 cal, and Official Lite ot o^ir 'Model' Mayor," we embrace the opportunity 
 ot assuring the people of the city that not a line will be written that is not 
 susceptible ot the strongest corroborative testimony, by living witnesses- 
 men and women of unimpeachable integrity— the names of whom we will 
 give. The followmg numbers of this Biography will be the production of 
 varipus pens, ot persons who are familiar with the mercantile, political, and 
 oincial career ol Fernando Wood, from early life to the preseitt day. 
 

A^ HISTORY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 PRIVATE, POLITICAL, AND OFFICIAL 
 VILLANIES 
 
 i9:^j 
 
 OP 
 
 FERNANDO WOOD. 
 
 To Brown, Brothers & Co., 
 Goodhue & Co., 
 George Douglass, 
 E. L. & A. Stuart, 
 Jacob Little, 
 Schuyler Livingston, 
 Matthew Morgan, 
 
 E. H. WlNSLOW, 
 
 EoTAL Phelps, 
 Decoppet & Co., 
 Fletcher Harper, 
 Wm. H. Macy, 
 L. C. Clark, 
 Thomas Small & Sons, 
 
 T. F. Bulkley, 
 Wm. BJ Astor, 
 
 MOSEattAYLOR, 
 
 WatIs^herman 
 Wm. H. Cary, 
 A. B. Neilson, 
 George Newbold, 
 Charles A. Morgan, 
 Datid Ogden, 
 Courtlandt Palmes, 
 Daniel Drew, 
 Israel Corse, 
 Horace "Waldo, 
 E. 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. Tou are ardent and zealous ia 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 tho legitimate exercise of its 
 duties. Most of you are known extensively as men of fortune, whose wealth 
 equals that of princes, and your munificence, liberaUty 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 upright 
 
2 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 
 liumblest 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 
 afliiirs. 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 reelection. The individual you thus 
 have honored with your approbation is the hero of these pages. He, too, has been 
 a mercliant, 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 reelection. 
 
 By the Author. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Ix the followiug pages will be found a brief history of a series of mercantile 
 frauds and villanics, and political and official ^vrongs, of the present Mayor of Now- 
 Tork. In recording them, we have not gone beyond the most undoubted and in- 
 contestable proof of their existence. "We have not stated a flict, 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 busmess 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- 
 stantial evidence. Xo rogue ever resided within the walls of a State prison, or ever 
 will, who was convicted of forgery by more unmistakable evidence, thaji that 
 which was given to prove that Fernando "Wood exhibited to Ed. E. Marviue, a 
 fraudulent or forged biU of sale of the barque John TV. 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 ! "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 the case for himself, that in a moral sense, 
 Wood is guilty of both forgery and perjury I 
 
 Tlie 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 reelection to tlic mayoralty would be ! Tliose 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 tlie 
 following statement of facts, there is now time before the election to show its flilsitj'. 
 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 bo as corrupt in business, private 
 or official, as ilayor "Wood ? No people can long preserve a reputation for integ- 
 rity, and no government can long be popular, where the perpetrators of such frauds 
 
4 INTBODUCTION. 
 
 as those charged and proven against our Mayor, are elected to the highest oflQces. 
 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 pubhc 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 
 then" mmds 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 ho 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 sUp in by a plurahty vote. He was right in liis 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 liis 
 pubhc documents. But no sooner had he begun to get the good opinion of some 
 Avho had opposed his election, than he found it convenient, and to his interest, to 
 take a stroU 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 1 He succeeded in getting a greater part of this amount out of the 
 treasury, when the press got hold of the matter, and fiirther drafts on this account 
 were dishonored. But his fi'iend 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 iBcale, 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 75 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 ho was when he exhibited a forged bill of 
 sale for the barque John W. Cater, by which he plundered his partner out of 
 $4000 I Elevation to high official position, has about the same effect upon his 
 moral nature, as the sight of a fat pullet does japon the physical propensities and 
 appetite of a hungry fox. Such is the character of Fernando Wood, the Mayor of 
 
FIRST NOSnNATION — DEFEAT. 5 
 
 New-York, as will be conclusively shown in what follows. Read, and th«n say 
 whether he is persecuted, or whether ho stands condemned of the perpetration of 
 the grossest frauds in private busuiess 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 lud 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 baen 
 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. 
 
 WOOD'S FIRST NOMINA.TION FOR M&YOR 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 wliich Fernando Wood was 
 defendant. In tliis complaint Wood was charged with gross frauds upon Marvine, 
 perpetrated duruig a partnership that existed between them m 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 bo 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 untU he again became a candidate 
 for the Mayoralty in 1854. Then, too, the charges were reiterated m 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 pubhshed in a paper not read by the masses, and, therefore, did not have 
 that extensive circulation they should have had. Tliis time, although Wood ran 
 several thousand behind his ticket, there were so many opposing candidates to di- 
 vide his opponents, that he shpped into the Mayoralty chair by a small plurality. 
 The Seymour ticket was popidar, as we all remember, and Wood was adi'oit enough 
 
6 SECRET POLITICAL MASKED ORGANIZATIOXS. 
 
 to identify himself with the success of that ticlcet, 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 iionor and integrity shine with peculiar lustre, and where villainy has even 
 a blacker aspect than when practised in official positions. 
 
 THE SEaEET POLITICAL MASKED ORGANIZATIONS GOT UP BY MAYOR 
 
 WOOD. 
 
 It is now about twenty years ago when Fernando "Wood first became an aspir- 
 mg 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 membei's from each ward. 
 This secret body met at No. 44 Chatham street, and aU the members wore masls, 
 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 our 
 " 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. AU that transpired at these meetings were kept a most 
 profound secret. Those who spoke disg-uised theh voice so that they should not be 
 recognized. 
 
 Sevei'al 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 en*;irely ignorant of the exist- 
 ence of sucli a secret masked body. By these means a great variety of associa- 
 tions were formed, all of whiclr wore controlled by the central, secret, masked 
 body, of which Fernando Wood was the originator. 
 
 The machinery wms all in perfect order, and the design was to control aU the 
 nominations of the part}^ 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 thu'teen, 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 toll 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 tliat its ob- 
 ject was to give Fernando "Wood the power to mak-e all the nominations. Manj-, 
 when thej^ found out the object, were disgusted, and wdthdrew. 
 
 A similar association, excej^t 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 friend.s of the Mayor, and many of them wore his appoint- 
 ees to f ffice, 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 tlie politics 
 of the city. In this movement tlie Mayor has so far been successful, although he 
 has called forth an opposition in the ranks of the Democratic party that bids fair 
 I o insure his defeat at the polls. 
 
THE CELEBRATED PARTNEKSUIP FRAUDS. 7 
 
 THE CELEBRATED PARTNERSHIP FRAUDS OF OFR "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 hfe, 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 lum. Between Wood and Marvine there 
 existed a relationship, and a warm personal ftieudship. 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 hving 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 emlDraced by Mr. Wood 
 to develop more fuUy 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 
 Mandne would joiu 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 Air. 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 wTitcr, 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 $lu,uOO worth of 
 goods to the California market, and he was told in it that he would realize 
 $luO,OOi» 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 I 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 an 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 ho 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 sujjposed, and fearing that the reason of his liesitation 
 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 remove these supposed objections. 
 To do this it was necessary to introduce another forged document, in the shape of 
 a bill of sale, purporting to bo 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, each 
 
8 THE MAEVINE 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 tliis city. 
 Afterwards, it was agreed to increase the goods shipped from $20,000 to $26,000. 
 
 8ucli was the nature of the agreement between the parties, brought about 
 entirely by the flilse representations and forged documents exhibited by Wood. 
 
 The barque was laden, and she sailed on the 19th day of October, 1848. 'Mi. 
 Wood, two days afterwards, rendered to Marvine an account of the disbursements 
 wliich liad been made under the agreement, for fitting out the cargo of said vessel, 
 and for tlio purcliase of tlie ship's stores and supphes. This balance-sheet, or 
 account, was prepared by Wood himself, in liis own hand-writing, and to which 
 he appended his name. At tlie time he rendered this account he also furnished to 
 Marvine the original bills, invoices, and vouchers, taken from the parties of wliom 
 purchases had been made, and to wliom 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 jomt enterprise, and so 
 Marvine paid one half of 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 parcUel in the history of mercantile partnerships. The bills and 
 vouchers rendered bj'^ Wood to Marvine were in many instances more than double 
 in amount of the actual price paid for them 1 Bills were rendered, as it afterwards 
 appeared, for 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 matter with Wood, a suit was insti- 
 tuted in the Superior Court, fOr 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 recentlj' that the referees ga\e 
 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 agamst 
 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 wliole 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 plcadingR 
 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. 0. Larkin, of Califor- 
 nia. Wood denies this, under oath, in his answer. 
 
EXTRACTS FROM TESTIMONY. 9 
 
 Now, if some four or five respectable meu come upon the stand and swear that 
 "Wood exhibited sucli a letter to them, and that, in some instances, Marvine was 
 present ; and if T. 0. 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 fsoii Testimony as to the Exhibition op the Forged Letter 
 FROM T. 0. Larkin. 
 
 Henry A. Smyth's testimony.— I am a merchant in this city ; I was present at an interview 
 between Wood ami Marvine, in the fall of 1S4S ; it was at my store, 31 Broad street ; the con%-er- 
 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 mo ; Mr, Wood s.-iid it was from a Mr. Larkin, 
 who held some office in California — either N. O. 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 ifoOOO to any man, Mr. Wood represented this Larkin to be a con- 
 sul, or holding some other office under government in Calif irniu. 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. 3 Courtlandt street ; I know Mr, Wood ; 
 he purchased from me nine cases of matches in the fall of 1S48 ; 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 descrii)tion 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 jiart of the letter; Mr. Wood said he 
 received the letter from T. O. 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 O. Larkin letter at Wood's store, corner of South and Dover 
 streets ; I think 1 had it in my hand, and looked at some of the statements in it ; the signature 
 w.as T. O. Larkin, I am positive of that ; I eaw the same letter in my store afterwai'ds ; Wood 
 showed it to me. 
 
 Benjamin IT. Folger's testimony. — I reside in the city of Buffalo ; my business is that of a 
 hardware merchant; in the year 1S48 1 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 2Sth of September of 
 that year, .Mr. Marvine introduced me to Fernando Wood. Mr. Wood exhibited to said Marvino 
 and myself a memorandum of an assorted cargo of good.s, which paper he said he had received from 
 T. O. Larkin, of San Francisco, who then helds<ime government appointment, which he, Wood, 
 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 tecti/mony.—l reside at present in New-York ; in 1S4S I resided at Monte- 
 rey, California; I was U. S. Consul, U. 8. Navy Agent, and U. S. Storekeeper there at that time; 
 I had been Consul there four or five years previous to 1S48 ; 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 
 coimected with the U, S, government in California in that year, 
 
 A. T. 3fiirvine's testimony. — I reside at Delhi, Delaware Co., this State; I know the defend- 
 nnt. Wood, by Mght; I first saw him in the fill 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 psirties, and I followed his directions in all I did in this 
 city; I went on board the barque as a passenger; Henry Richanison, a brother-in-law of Mr. 
 Wood, was ulso 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. O. Larkin, ami 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 p;-ssed 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 
 
10 FALSE, FORGED, AND SIMULATED BILLS. 
 
 fact of a stronger character. Yet he denies on oath that he ever did ! That the 
 letter was a forgery is shown by the very person from whom "Wood said he received 
 it, 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 Henry A. 
 Smyth ? Who are Charles Partridge, and the others who swear that Wood, on 
 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 Barquq 
 John W. Cater, exhibited by Wood to Marvine. 
 
 JSenjamin H. Folgefa testtmony. — Mr. Wood exhibited to Mr. Marvine and myself, in my 
 store, a paiicr 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 $12,00(1. Marvine said ho l<nevv nothing about vessels, but 
 then bought the one half of the barque at $6,1)00. 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 .=treet to have 
 it insured. Both offices declined, on account of the age of the barque. One of them said the 
 barque w.os so old that she was out of the books. Neither office would take the risk at any pre- 
 mium, and laughed at me for trying to elfect an insurance on so old a vessel. At the time Wood 
 exhibited the bill of sale referred to, he said the barque was from nine to eleven years old. 1 
 reported the result of my visit to the Insurance offices to Mr. Wood, when he answered me that 
 he couhl 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 bill 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 1S48 I 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. 1847, to 
 Fernando AVood for $4,ono, and executed a bill of sale to him. AVe never executed a bill of sale 
 in which the consideration was $12,000; but I presume the consideration expressed in the bill of 
 Bale 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 mstead 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 
 Bwear j^ositively as to those matters that come within your own knowledge, and 
 that the pleadings contain much that you swear to on information and beliet| which 
 you merely swear that you believe to be true. But the exhibition of a forged bill 
 of sale was a fact that mu.st 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 
 bill of sale and the T. (). Larkin letter — ^prepared and exliibited by our " model" 
 Ma3'or to defraud an old friend. 
 
 The referees appointed by the court to determine this matter between the par- 
 ties gave judgment against Wood for $5,635.40, on account of the barque fraud. 
 Their report on the whole subject will be lound in another part of this pamphlet. 
 
 False, forged, and simulated Bills. 
 
 We will now refer to the fraudulent, forged, altered, and simulated bills and 
 vouchers furnislicd Marvine by Mr. Wood, and which he. Wood, represented as 
 true and correct. The account as made out by Wood had his signature appended 
 to it, was in his own handwriting, and the amounts in it corroborated with the 
 several fraudulent bills. The overcharges or fratids in these bills or vouchers are 
 BpecLfied 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 tlie 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 ol 
 
TESTIMONY. 11 
 
 whom he purchased. In some cases he increased the quantity of goods purchased, 
 in others he added largely to their price. In many cases he perpetrated both these 
 frauds ill 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 aflbrd a deduction of forty per cent for cash. On these bills 
 "Wood would alter the 40 per cent into 10 per cent, tlms increasing the cost of the 
 goods to his partner 30 percent, 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 ^'modtV Mayor, in his business affairs witli 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, 
 be 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 mo^^t 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. 
 
 SoiiE Testiiioxy on this Subject. 
 
 Sidney Wintringliam s testimony. — In 1S4S I was a dealer in cider, porter, ale, and -ivines. I 
 know Mr. Wood. On the 9th October, 1S4S, I sold him a bill of cider, porter, and ale, amounting 
 to $ib5 ; the terms were sis months. The bill as follows : 
 
 100 cases cider at $2, $200 
 
 100 " porter at 11.75, 175 
 
 25 " ale at .$1.75, 43 75 
 
 25 " porter in pints at $2.50, C2 50 
 
 Cartage, 3 75 
 
 $4S5 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 ii. 
 
 David L. Wintringliam^ s testimony. — In 184S I was selling ale, porter, and cider. I was with 
 iny brother, Sidney Wintringham. On the 9ih 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 $4S5. At the request of Mr. Wood 1 made an alteration of 
 that entry. lie wished me to make it, and I think he was present when I made it. He wi-ihed 
 me to alter the cider from $2 to $2.25 per dozen, the porter from $1.75 to $2 per <lozen, and the 
 wine, pints from $1S to $20.50. lie 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. 
 
 Jbfui B. T7turgby^s testimony. — My father was a rope manufacturer in Bushwick, and had an 
 office in this city. 1 have my father's books here. There is an entry against Fernando Wood 
 amounting to $910. Mr. Wood called at my father's ofKce, in reference to that bill, some time in 
 the fall of 1S49. lie spoke to me in relation to ii. 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 bill then was. lie said some one would call for a 
 copy of the bill, ami he wished mo to deliver the bill, when I had made the addition, to whoever 
 Bhould call fur it. He asked th:U the addition be made to the price per p<uind. I made out a bill 
 in conformity with his request I added one cent pei- pound to the amount stated in ttic original 
 invoice, and cartage and e.'^penses .'$12.60, the precise sums named by Wood. There was some 
 figuring, but .\lr. \V(Jod 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 thia altered bill to 
 any one, or whether I left it to be called for. 
 
 In these two or three cases we see the ingenuity of the hero in this swindle. 
 More than a year afterwards, when ilarvine concluded to ferret out some of the 
 frauds and forgeries of Wood, Wood starts in advance, adls on the merchants, and 
 makes a desperate effort to get them to falsify their books, by altering the charges 
 agamst him, and this, too, long after they were paid. Ho 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 bills 
 he had rendered Marvine, and get them to deliver copies of these altered accounts 
 to Marvine, or some one who caUed for them, at his request, he would still succeed 
 in destroying the suspicions of Marvine as to the frauds he had perpetrated. Who 
 
12 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 $35.87, thus fraudulently obtaining $28.70, from Marvine. For another 
 small biU of said Woolsey, for fish and oil, of $9.85, ho rendered a bill of $39.85, 
 thus defrauding Marvine of $30.0(>, on this bill— makmg $58.70, on the two bills, 
 which in the aggregate only amounted to $17.02. The fraud in these cases was 
 near four times the amount of the true cost of the purchases. It was etiectcd by 
 adduig 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 $58.70, on these two small bills. 
 
 Wood rendered bUls to Marvine for work done to the barque long before he 
 sold the one half of her to Marvine. He rendered a biU of Hagadoru & ElUot, 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 Marxdne for poultry, fresh beef, ducks, turkeys, eggs, oysters, pork, vegetables, 
 tongues, cider, porter, lard, and other articles, wliich were never purchased, nor put 
 on board of the barque, and Marvine paid him the one half of these fradulent l^iUs. 
 
 In short, there is no other person inside or outside of the State prison, who hag 
 shown more ingenuity in altering bills than our model Mayor. As a specimen of 
 shinplaster forgery, we give the foUowing : S. Nichols sold Wood the following 
 bill: 
 
 1 16-inch upper-box, leathered, . . . . $1 50 
 
 2 " lower pump-boxes, ) 
 
 stapled and naOed, ) . . . . 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 wUl tell you how. He forged a figure 6 
 after the figure 1 in the first item in the bill. It then read 816.50, instead of $1.50 ! 
 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 doDars ! 
 
 One more instance of his dexterity in mathematics, an example of vrhich is not 
 found 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 mnocently placed before 
 the 4 a figure 3, which in the natural order of the digits should be placed there, 
 and it, WaydeU's bUl, read 34 water-casks, which was no longer Waydoll'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 WaydeU's 1, when it read $1121 
 
 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 
 iu 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. 0. 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 75 cents, con- 
 tracted for three cartages at 25 cents each. C. & K. FoUlon rendered to Wood a 
 bill for sundry items and three cartages, at 25 cents each, carried out 75 cents. 
 Wood just added, we suppose in his usual off-hand way in money-making, the 
 words, " sundry spars," on the same fine with the " 3 cartages," and just to have 
 the price look business-hke, prefixed to the figures $0.75 a 1 and a 0, which made it 
 $lo0.75I Ti-uly it is the easiest thing iu the world to make a fortune, if you 
 understand figures. If we may riglitly suy that when we double the capital we 
 have invested we have made 100 per cent, profit, Wood in this instance made 
 between lO.OoO and 20,000 per cent. 
 
« REFEREES' REPORT. 13 
 
 The testimony of Mr. Dix, the son of John A. Dix, who was in Mr. "Wood's 
 emploj' at tlie time the accounts for the barque John W. Cater were made out, 
 swears that Mr. Wood wrote tlie heading of tlie 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 $25,938.79, 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 Ilunter & Co., bill rendered, $504 85 
 
 C. W. Fiuki, " 5(39 76 
 
 Geo. S. Spall, " 210 00 
 
 M. Q. Wood, " 675 88 
 
 Wui. K. Lawrence, " 825 11 
 
 Holt it Paluier, " 374 15 
 
 S. Wintriiigliam, " 578 75 
 
 J. Thursby, « 1,000 67 
 
 Charles I'artridge, " 526 24 
 
 Jacob CoiKlit, " 697 88 
 
 O. Van Every « 655 71 
 
 James Moore, " 466 00 
 
 E. Fish. " 110 00 
 
 C. L. Ingerfoll, " 177 25 
 
 Taggart'& Gray, " ISS 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. Alter this. Wood informed Marvine by letter, which we have pubhshed, 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 ho returned them to Wood. 
 
 We will go no fuither into the details of these disgusting fi-auds. 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-TORK SUPERIOR COURT. 
 
 Henry Sheldon, George E. Btxbie, William ) 
 
 H. Sheldon, and Levi CnESNirrwooD, I 
 
 vs. I 
 
 Fernando Wood. I 
 
 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 ei^ht hundred and fifty-one, whereby it 
 was referred to William \1. Evarts, John Cochran, and Henry Hilton, of the city of New-York, 
 coiinsollors-at-law, to he;ir and determine this action, and to report thereon, 
 
 W' e. the undert-igned 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 before tis upon such reference. 
 
 That on the second day of October, one thousand eight hundred and forty-c-ight. 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 bo true, and upon the faith thereof; 
 agreed to sive the defendant for one half interest in such barque the sum of sis thousand dollars, 
 ($6000,) specified in said agreement, marked Schedule A. 
 
 That for five thousand dollars tjf ?aid sum of six thousand dollars the said Marvine agreed to 
 give the defendant, and the defendant .agreed to accept of .said Marvine, certain leasehold premises 
 known 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 wfts not tn-elve thonsand 
 dollars, ($12,0li0,) 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 nuiuber 3 Murray street, subject only to an incumbrance of five 
 thousand dollars, ($5ij00,) but, on the contrary, afler the convcynnco and transfer thereof to the 
 defendant in pursuance of the agreement aforesaid, he, the defendant, was obliged to and did pay, 
 lay out, ami expend in perfecting and making good the title to said iiremises bo" transferred to him, 
 the sum of one hundred and fifty dollars. ($15;).) , 
 
 And also paid the sum of seventy-six dollars and twenty-one cents, ($TG.21,)belng the taxes upon 
 said premises for the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, (IS-IS.) 
 
 That the payment of said sum of one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) and said sum of seventy- 
 six dollare and twenty-one cents ($T0.21) 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 
 Baid incumbrance of five thousand dollars. (-i^SoOu.) 
 
 That on or about the twenty-first day of Octotier. one thousand eight hundred and forty-eight, 
 and wiihin a few days after said barque had sailed from tht; 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 saiil vessel, and 
 the purchase of her stores and supplies, and said Marvine, believing such accoimt 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. 
 
 That in the account so rendered and paid were the following errors and overcharges : 
 
 HOWAUD & WiNTRINGIIAM: 
 
 O vercharge, $800 00 
 
 John E. Wooi-sey : 
 
 Overcharge, 58 70 
 
 Benjamin Hall & Co. : 
 
 Overcharge, 214 90 
 
 C. M. HoLCOMB : 
 
 Overcharge, 8 25 
 
 J. "W. Fkeam : 
 
 Overcharge, 54 50 
 
 Poole & Pentz : 
 
 Overcharge, 120 60 
 
 Hagadorn & Elliott : 
 
 Overcharge, 54 40 
 
 F. Hennill : 
 
 Overcharge, 11 00 
 
 C. & E. PoiLLON : 
 
 Overcharge, 100 00 
 
 B. NiciiOLLs : 
 
 Overcharge, 33 00 
 
 Watdell & Co. : 
 
 Overcharge, 100 00 
 
 C. L. Watkins : 
 
 Overcharge, 11 75 
 
 E. FiSK : 
 
 Overcharge, C5 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 h id by the defendant paying to the 
 said Marvine the balance of nine hundred and ninety-four dollars and five cents ($994.(i5i In the 
 manner In said account specified, such payment being necessary to equalize the said disbiiree- 
 ments on account of such cargo, and thert-by 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 00 
 
 Taqqart <fc Gray: 
 
 Overcharge, 50 00 
 
 Cyrus "W. Field &, Co. : 
 
 Overcharge, 160 00 
 
 James Hunter & Co. : 
 
 Overcharge, 103 79 
 
 'William E. La urence : 
 
 Overcharge, 236 00 
 
 B. "WiSTRINGHAM : 
 
 Overcharge, 25 00 
 
 K. Fisn : 
 
 Overcharge, 20 00 
 
 M. Q. Wood : 
 
 Overcharge, 176 84( 
 
referees' report. 15 
 
 Oliver Vak Etkrt : 
 
 Overcharge, 70 71 
 
 John Thcksuv : 
 
 Overcharge, 112 60 
 
 An overcharire of interest, n-s follows : 
 
 Interest on $2S2G.04 of purchaseB made by defendant for cargo of said barque, 
 aetuslly made upon a credit of six months, but in the account charged as 
 made for oivsh 203 91 
 
 InteP'st on I-14G of similar pureliases actually made upon a credit of sLx 
 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 Marvino since the 
 settlement of said disbursements and cargo aecounls, and that the payment by him to the defend- 
 ant of an equal half jiart of all the items above ennmenited, except the overcharge of interest last 
 mentioned, and as to that, the payment of tlie whole thereof, was made upon the accounts of the 
 S)mie rendered by the defendant to said Marvine as aforesaid, and upon the faith and credit of said 
 Marvino 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 tifteen dollars and seventy-four cents, ($1115.74,) 
 and the interest upoa 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 si.Kty-one dollars and seventy-seven cents. (|.'>61.77.) 
 
 That such overcharge of interest amounts in the whole to two hundred and nine dollars and 
 eleven cents, ($209.11,) and the interest thereon fiom the time of the payment thereof by said 
 Marvine to the defendant, as hereinbefore stated, (namely, the 3d day of January, 1S49,) to the 
 date of this report, amounts to one hundred and four dollars and seven cents. ($l()4.(i7.) 
 
 Thattlie difference between the one half of the actual cost price of the said barque, John W. 
 Cater to the defendant, and the sum which sai<l Marvine paid the defendant thiretor upon the re- 
 presentation that she cost twelve thousand dollars, ($12,ltUi),) is four thousand doUurs, ($4()0(l.) 
 
 That deducting therefrom the sums paid by the defendant as above stated for perfectins 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 twenty- 
 nine cents, ($3773.29,) from the twenty-sixth day of January. 1S49, the day the said Marvine 
 transferred said leasehold premises to the defendant, to the date of this report, amounts to one 
 thousand eight hundred and sixty-two dollars and eleven cents, ($1SC2.11.) 
 
 On or about the 7th day of November, 1849, and prior to the commencement of this action, the 
 said Marvino duly assigned and transferred to the plaintitTs 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 tlie .same, or said agreement, 
 of which a copy is annexed to the complaint herein, and marked Schedule A 1. 
 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 defenilant for said barque John W. Cater, and the 
 sum which said Marvine paid the defendant for 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, ($37t3.29,) 
 with one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two dollars and eleven cents, ($1862.11,) being the 
 Interest thereon from the twenty-sixth day of January, 1S49, as above stated, in the whole amount- 
 ing to five thousand six hundred and thirty-five dollars and forty cents, ($.5035.40.) 
 
 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 ,'*i.x hundred and seventy-seven dollars and fifiy-one cents, ($1677.51.) 
 
 Third, That the plidntitfs are entitled to recover of and trom the defendant for said overcharge 
 of interest above specified, the sum of two hundred and nine dollars and eleven cents, ($2i)9.li,) 
 with one hundred and four dollars and seven cents, (flu4.07,) being the interest thereon to the date 
 hereof from 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, ($313.18.) 
 
 Finally, That the plaintiffs are entitled to payment herein against the defendant for the sum of 
 seven thousand six 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 
 been at any tiaie made respecting the subject-matter of this action. 
 
 Second, That upon such reference the defendant introduced, subject to the plaintiffs' objection 
 and to our final determination in respect thereto, evidence respecting the following items, which 
 Items he claimed should be allowed to hitn as an offset against any claim of the plaintiffs In thi.'« 
 action, numely: 
 
 One half of the sum psid by the defendant to one Kent for a gold-tester, $5 50 
 
 Two 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. Stei)hen Camack, 320 00 
 
 This sum chaigi-d to the defendant for the compensation of A. G. Marvine, as supercargo, 
 
 and paid out of defendant's share of the return of the adventure, 250 Oo 
 
 This sum cliartred to defendant for insurance on the returns of the adventure, and paid out 
 
 of the defendant's share of the returns of the adventure, 501 99 
 
 Third, That prior to making this our report, we determined that aU such items should be dta" 
 
10 wood's defense. 
 
 allowed, and the evidence In respect thereto should be 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 respectftilly submitted. 
 
 Wm. M. Evabts, 
 John Coohran, 
 Hbnrt Hilton. 
 
 New-Tokk, Jcmiuary IStA, 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 biU 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 tliat these charges of fraud were imtrue, 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 m 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 Mar\'ine 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 Marvme, and for which the referees have given judgment against 
 Wood. 
 
 This line of defense waa 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 handwritmg, having his own proper signature to it, and dated on the 21st of 
 October. 
 
 Wood had purchased all the ship's stores, suppHes, 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 $29,529.77. Of the cargo Marvine had purchased to 
 the amount of $18,399.11, and Wood to the amount, as he alleged, of $7,54=0.00, 
 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 $7,5(iO 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 ibr the 
 alleged errors, it is singular that they should all liave been against himselfj and 
 that he should have managed so as to alter bills and vouchers, in almost every 
 case, so as to wrong hunself in the aggregate out of thousands of dollars. We say 
 such a state of facts would be almost miraculous. If he had such a i^enchant for 
 cheating lumself, why cUd ho not do it iu some of the bills he had purchased on ac- 
 count of the barque ? 
 
 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 accomits, made up in Wood's own handw r 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 pur 
 
wood's defense. 
 
 11 
 
 chased by "Wood, and the origLnal is in his own handwriting, and was sent to Mar- 
 vine in Auburn on the 21st day of October : 
 
 Barque John W. Cater, _, ™ „ -nr^^ -n. 
 
 ^ To Fernando Wood, Dr. 
 
 Oct. 1848. A-.Q /\rj 
 
 To Cash, Steamboat U. States and pilot, AsnRR 
 
 " Howard & Wintringham— sto's,. . *?" °^ 
 
 " Board of Surveyors, :J5 J," 
 
 " Thomas Ritter— medicines, ^^ "^ 
 
 " Bliss & Creighton— compasses, on? 9fi 
 
 " John R. Woolsey— provisions, »"' ^° 
 
 «' Howard & Wintringham— oil, &c., ^^ »-^ 
 
 " A. J. Horton— wood, Ac, ilji 
 
 " C. M. Uolcomb flour, Ac, :}* '^ 
 
 " Advertising and papers, j^ ^^ 
 
 " M. Trappel— wharfage, oTa qr, 
 
 « Benjamin Hall & Co.— stores, •^l* ^" 
 
 " M. Tallant— watching, * ^'^ 
 
 " J. Macey— blacksmith i^''f 
 
 « Jno. W. Terans— poultry, &c., o? ^" 
 
 " Jno. Ferguson— coal, &c., ^ \"f 
 
 " R. V. W. Thorne— wharfage, ion w 
 
 " Pool & Pentz-cash to crew, ^^'^ ^^ 
 
 " J. Ellis— marine survey, o oi 
 
 •« A. AV. Rogers— ship keeping, iqn qo 
 
 " J. L. Sandford & Co.— bread, S I^ 
 
 " Hagadorn & Elliott— painting °* ^^ 
 
 " R. C. Wetmore fc Co.— crockery, A^ ^' 
 
 John Mason & Co.-labor, &c., ot 4. 
 
 " Ackerly- potatoes,.... 11 7 p, 
 
 " O. Van Every— caboose ool <u 
 
 «' Williams & Hinmore— ship ch'd'y, oofl fit 
 
 «' Hemmingway & Beveridge— saUs, J*^" "/: 
 
 " G. Van Deusen— filling , 10 50 
 
 " Pilotage, o f.f. 
 
 " 0. Van Every— stove fixtures, .," "" 
 
 " F. Humill— board bill, :f^ "" 
 
 " Fulton-street Tea Store, i? ^^ 
 
 «' John R. Woolsey— groceries, i «q nQ 
 
 «' C. & R. Poillon— repairs and spars, ^^^ "^ 
 
 «» Advanced to Cook, ^^ ''" 
 
 " S. Candler— survey certificate, ' ^^ 
 
 " C. L. Ingersoll— boat, "'^ tr, 
 
 « S. Nicholls-pump, gear, &c., "' ^" 
 
 « Wagdell & Co.— casks, c'p'ge, &c., 7 87 
 
 " Wm. Frost— wharfage, 22'2 25 
 
 " F. Humill— advanced to crew, "^ „l 
 
 «' C. L. Walker— boxes, ii kt 
 
 «' R. Hoyt— cash, &c., °f ^^ 
 
 " Thompson— Brooklyn wharfage, ..^ „_ 
 
 «' S. Tallant— watching, on o", 
 
 " J. R. Woolsey-fish, &c., ^i °^ 
 
 «' R. Fish — boats, 32 of) 
 
 " W. Cain— poultry, &c., ^. "a 
 
 " T. P. Cowen— rigging, &c., „, 04 
 
 »' Daniel Coger— ship-joiner, .., „_ 
 
 » Custom-House- clearances &, c't'ges, ' 
 
 To com. and advancing $3,4S6 64, ^j 
 
 $3,660 9T 
 
 Error in Bill, November 25, ^" ^^ 
 
 $3,640 86 
 
 New-Tork, October 2l8t, 1S4S. 
 
 Fernando Wood. ,» „j. 
 
 Deduct on filling first page, _____ 
 
 $3,630 66 
 
 Deduct, 40 00 
 
 $3,590 60 
 
 On the day preceding the date of this account, that is, on the 20th of October, the 
 day after the barque saUed, Wood wrote Marvine at Auburn as follows: 
 
 New-Yoek, Oct. 20, 1848. 
 
 %.''DE'Irs^K?iSrk^tTdingly to learn fromMr. Smyth that Mrs Ma^^^^^^^^ 
 
 ill, BO much 80 as to prevent your leaving her. I sincerely hope she will be much better before 
 
 2 
 
18 THE T. O. LAEKIN FOKGED LETTER ONCE MOKE. 
 
 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 sailed yesterday, at 10 
 o'clock A. M., with an exceedingly fine and fair wind, with the most favorable prospects. Your 
 brother and Mr. Richardson went on board in exultant spirits, full of hope for a successful result. 
 We have been exceedingly fortunate in all things, except passengers. Our passage-money 
 ariiounts to but $2o0, and freight-money to .$)11, total $701. What the expense of outfits will 
 be I can't tell yet, until all the bills are received, but they are very heavy. We found that as it 
 is our intention to run the vessel on the Pacific coasts for some time, and disbursements and pro- 
 visions would be so high there, that it was necessary to lay in a very large supply to last a long 
 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 $2.5,93H 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, Feenando 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 bo over $3,000, 
 and several hundred dollars over that sum. On the very next day he sends the 
 exact amount. 
 
 Now, wliat 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 ? Ho 
 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 1 9th 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 ijroven 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 city, which he did about the 1st of November, 
 Wood handed 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 bUls and vouchers with the account as sent him by Wood, settled by 
 paying Wood the one half of it, or $1795.33. 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 tliey were produced on the trial. Wood never produced on the trial 
 the original bills, on which Marvine had settled the account 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? Ahl 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. 0. LARKIN FORGED LETTER ONCE MORE. 
 
 The defense as to this forged document, was of a character to show the villainy 
 of Wood in as bold and prominent a view as the forged document itself, and the evi- 
 dence in relation to it. What do you imagine was the character of Wood's defense 
 on this point of the case ? After some four or five witnesses, all of the highest 
 character as respects veracity and integrity, had Liworn, on the part of the plantiffs, 
 that Wood did exhibit to Marvine and to them, such a letter as has been described, 
 purporting to have been received from Thos. 0. Larkin, a government agent in 
 California, and that they read it, or portions of it, and lieard it read by Wood, he, 
 Wood, saw the necessity of counteracting the effect of this testimony. As this T. 
 0. Larkin appeared on the stand himself, and swore that he had never written to 
 "Wood, and (J id not even know him at the time the forged letter was written, an 
 effort must be made by Wood to confound and to confute the witnesses who sworo 
 
OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES. 19 
 
 that he showed them such a letter. This effort was made. "Wood succeeded ib 
 finding a man who had been in Cahfornia, named Thos. S. Larkins; not a govern- 
 ment agent, it is true, but an Enghshman, who came to Cahfornia from China, in 
 1849. Wood very naturally supposed that if he could forge a letter purporting to 
 come from this Larkins, resembling much the other forged letter, purporting to have 
 been received from Thos 0. Larkin, and then show this to the witnesses ou the 
 stand, who swore that ho had exhibited the first forged document, lie wo\dd force 
 them to hesitate whether this last forgery was not the document they had seen 
 him exhibit to Marvine. If a letter is shown to a person, signed, as he believes, by 
 Tho^. 0. Larkin, he would naturally hesitate, a year or more afterwards, when a 
 similar letter in appearance is laid before him signed Thos. S. Larkins, to say that 
 it might not be the same, unless ho judges from the contents, or some other cir- 
 cumstance except the signature. 
 
 But happily for the cause of truth and justice, this last forgery of our "model " 
 Mayor was full as bunglingly committed as the first. The plantiffs brought on the 
 stand a witness, a Capt. Eraser, who know this Thos. S. Larkins, and had corre- 
 sponded with him ; and he swore that he was not in Cahfornia at the date of this 
 letter which Wood pretended to have received from him ; and that his name was 
 Larkins, and not Larkin ; that the middle letter was S., and not 0. He knew the 
 writing of this Thos. S. Larkins, who was an Englishman, and showed some letters 
 from him. When the handwriting of this Thos. S. Larkins, in possession of 
 the witness, was compared with that in the forged letter Wood pretended to have 
 received from him, they were about as dissimilar as the ancient Egyptian hierogly- 
 phics, and that style of hand we see in the coiDy-books used in the schools of the 
 present day. Thus it was shown that our " model " Mayor had been trying his 
 hand at forgery again. He got most beautifully caught. When the case was 
 summed up, the plantiffs' counsel called the attention of the referees to the hand- 
 writing in this forged letter, and to that in the papers before them, known to be in 
 Wood's hand. The similarity was perceptible, though an attempt to disguise was 
 evident in the forged document. All was solemn and silent when the counsel 
 showed the identity of the handwriting in the two cases, the one a forged paper, 
 and the other admitted to be the handwriting of Fernando Wood 1 
 
 Thus we see the defense in this case did nothing but multiply the frauds and 
 crimes of the defendant. Wood. His forgeries became more numerous and appa- 
 rent as the defense proceeded. Reader, shall we re-elect this man Mayor of our 
 city? 
 
 WOOD INDICTED FOR OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENSES! 
 HE PLEADS THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS! 
 
 The People against Fernando Wood. 
 
 On the 7th of November, 1851, the Grand Jury of this city found a bill of indict- 
 ment against Fernando Wood for the alleged offense of obtaining money under 
 false pretenses. But it so happened that the offense for which he was indicted 
 Had been committed three years previously, on the 7th day of November. 1848. 
 The Revised Statutes, in reference to the offense of obtaining money under false 
 pretenses, etc., enacts that the indictment shall be found and filed in court within 
 three years after the commission of the offense. In this indictment against Wood, 
 if the day on which the offense had been committed was included, three years had 
 elapsed. Wood plead this statute, so as to avoid an investigation of tlie matter. 
 The case came before the then Recorder, and as there was some doubt as to what 
 his decision would be, means were to be used to have it favorable to Wood. It 
 was all-important to Mr. Wood that no investigation of the case should take place. 
 Of course no innocent man, charged with such a crime, would desire to avoid an 
 investigation; but would rather court a full inquiry into the matter, so that he 
 could be honorably discharged, and all suspicions removed. But this was not the 
 view taken by our "model" Mayor. The Recorder's decision appeared, and it was 
 favorable to Wood. Tiie decision was that the three years had elapsed, that the 
 day on which the alleged offense had been committed must be included in com- 
 
20 OBTAINING MONET UNDER FALSE PEETENSES. 
 
 puting the time that had elapsed ; and he, therefore, granted the motion to quash 
 the indictment. 
 
 This decision of the Recorder is reported in full in the New-York Legal Observer, 
 published in tliis city ; and its correctness or incorrectness is a matter about which 
 we have nothing to say. We simply assert the facts of the case as they occurred. 
 The accused evidently had some doubt as to what the decision would be, and he, 
 therefore, very probably reflected upon the plan, which in his judgment, was the 
 best to secure a favorable one. We say this much in anticipation of giving our 
 reasons for saying it. Now for the facts of the case, and then we will leave the 
 reader to judge whether we have insinuated unjustly. There is one important 
 circumstance connected with this case, or one which we will connect with it, that 
 deserves to be mentioned, and then the reader may draw his own inference from it. 
 
 A FIVE HUNDRED DOLLAR CHECK. 
 
 Within a day or two of the very time the Recorder gave his decision to quash 
 the indictment, Wood's check for $500 was drawn, payable to the Recorder. It 
 was cashed by a broker in this city, to whom it was presented for that purpose by 
 the Recorder in person. Now, what is there wrong in this ? We see nothing 
 worthy of comment, in the simple foct that the Recorder should have had Wood's 
 check for $500, and should get the cash for it. But as the newspapers of that 
 day had much to say about this indictment, and the decision of the Recorder, the 
 broker who caslied the check could not help his attention being directed to the 
 two facts — the decision to quash the indictment and the iive hundred dollar check, 
 both of which facts occurred about the same time. The unfortunate circumstance 
 is, the simultaneous occurrence of these two facts. Tliis is what compelled the 
 broker to give the subject more thought than he gave to paying a check ordi- 
 narily. 
 
 How, then, shall we ascertain whether the fact that Wood's check for five 
 hundred dollars, given to the Recorder at this unfortunate time, was or was not a 
 business transaction, entirely disconnected with the indictment case, and not in- 
 tended by Wood to influence the decision of the Recorder ? There is no doubt of 
 the fact, that the check was paid the Recorder. It was drawn on the Citizens' 
 Bank, cashed by a well-known and responsible broker, a man who is respected by 
 all who know him. Now, it so happens that a denial by Wood and the Recorder 
 that such a check ever existed, would be very strong proof that it was given for 
 corrupt purposes. Assuming that the check was given and paid precisely as we 
 have stated, and that the transaction was a perfectly legitimate and honorable one, 
 uone of the parties would wish to deny it. But if they do deny it, then, upon 
 proof that the transaction did occur, as we have stated, it is a very strong pre- 
 sumption that the transaction was a corrupt one. 
 
 Both Wood and the Recorder have denied that such a check was ever given. 
 The Recorder went so far in his denial as to commence a suit for libel against one 
 or more of the daily papers of this city for having stated the fact of such a check 
 having been given and cashed. But he never intends to have the suit tried. We 
 have in our possession his denial of the existence of such a check over his own 
 signature, which is to our mind the strongest kind of proof it was drawn by Wood 
 to influence the Recorder in the indictment case referred to; and that the intention 
 on the part of Wood was corrupt. 
 
 There is still other evidence to show coiTuption, and an attempt to bribe the 
 court. It is usual to employ a third party to negotiate bargains of this character. 
 So it was in this case. From that party the facts we have stated were first learned. 
 Then these facts were corroborated by the broker himself wlio cashed the ciieck. 
 
 Such are the circumstances connected with the indictment case of Fernando 
 Wood for obtaining money under false pretenses. He was indicted. He avoided 
 an investigation of the case by pleading the statute of limitations. He paid the 
 Recorder $5o0 about the time that magistrate decided that the plea was a gopd 
 cue, and that the indictment must be quashed. Reader, draw your own in- 
 ferences I 
 
KNOW-NOTIIINGISM. 21 
 
 WAS OK WAS NOT OUR "MODEL" MAYOR A KNOW-NOTHING ^ - HIS 
 OATH -COUNTER AFFIDAVITS AND STATEMENTS. 
 
 It is alleged that for mauy mouths preceding the elcctioa of 1854, Mayor "Wood 
 was a member of the Americau Order, or the association known as Know- 
 Nothings. He joined the order in the twenty-second ward, though lie attended its 
 meetings in all parts of the city. He very frequently travelled with James W. 
 Barker, a candidate for the Mayoralty at tlio same election, and the nominee of the 
 order for that office. Wood and Barker were both candidates for nomination by 
 the order, though Barker beat Wood in the contest. Wood was a member of the 
 executive council of the order that nominated Barker for Mayor. He was one of 
 those selected to inform his brother Barker that he was nominated. 
 
 After Barker was nominated, Fernando Wood saw that he had no longer any 
 hope of being the nominee of the Know-Notliings as a party. He, therefore, went 
 to work secretly to produce dissension in tlie order, with a view to draw otf a part 
 of the voters to his own support. It will be remembered that soon after Barker 
 was nominated, Wood got the nomination of botli sections of the Democracy. 
 Tammany Hall nominated him without much of a struggle, and the Hards, who as- 
 sembled at the Stuyvesant Institute, had a close contest in their convention. But 
 Wood had used his money freely, had purchased the support of many members of 
 the convention, and had ac^oitly managed to get others elected to the convention 
 whom he could control. He, therefore, was by a majority of some one or two de- 
 clared the nominee of the Hard Democracy for the mayoralty. 
 
 But as the contest neared, mauy members of the Democratic party became 
 alarmed on account of the apparently well-founded assertions in the public papers, 
 and in political circles, that Wood was a member of the Know-Nothing order. He 
 was called upon by committees and by individuals to ascertain the truth of these 
 assertions. He, of course, positively denied that he was a member of the order. 
 But so strong was the behef that his denial was false that many insisted that he 
 should make the denial over his own signature, and cause it to be published in the 
 papers. Not the least alarmed about putting his name to a falsehood, in order to 
 win support, he consented at once, and the following card made its appearance in 
 the puljlie papers. It was addressed to M. Doheny, Esq., one of our Irish citizens, 
 who somewliat doubted on the question of Wood's Know-Nothmgism : 
 
 [Copy.] New-York, October 31, 1854 
 
 Dear Sie : In reply to your inquiries respecting the truth of the statement made in one of the 
 liewspai)ers of this city to the effect that I am a member of the order i. Know-Nothii^.gs, I state 
 that there is no truth in it whatever. I am not a member of any se'cret society whatever. 
 
 Very truly yours, Fernando Wood. 
 
 M. DOHENT, Esq. 
 
 Still thousands would not believe this card. They would be satisfied with no- 
 thing short of the affidavit of Wood that he was not a member of the order. He 
 was told that he must make an affidavit to that effect, or ho would be opposed. 
 Finding himself pressed on all sides upon the subject, and being nothing daunted 
 at the crime of perjury, he made an affidavit, which we publish. He made several 
 of the same kind, and swore to them before different commissioners, so as to remove 
 the suspicions of several committees and individuals who called upon him. The 
 result of all this was, that he succeeded hi inducing many to believe that he was 
 not, nor never had been, a Know-Nothmg. Hundreds, however, knew better. 
 Though he had the nomination of both sections of the Democratic party, he did not 
 get their united support by mauy thousands. 
 
 That his affidavit denying membership of the order was false, may bo proven by 
 another affidavit of four respectable members of the order, who swore positively 
 that he was a member. Their oaths were taken about four days after that of Mayor 
 Wood. We give both affidavits. 
 
 AFFIDAVIT OP FERNANDO WOOD. 
 City and County of New -York. >• «s. 
 
 Fernando Wood, of the city of New- York, being duly sworn, doth depose and Bay that the 
 statement made this day in The Sunday Dispatch, that he is a member of the order of Know- 
 
22 DISGUSTING STOEY ABOUT A CATHOLIC PRIEST. 
 
 Nothings is absolutely and unqualifledly false, and further that he is not a member of any secret 
 order or society whatever except the Tammany Society or Columbian Order ; and further, that he 
 holds no political principles antagonistic to those of the great Democratic party of this Union ; and 
 further this deimnent saith not. (.Signed) Fernando Wood. 
 
 Sworn before nie this 29th day of | 
 October, A.D. 1654. j 
 
 M. DiEFENDOBF, ConunisHoner of Deeds. 
 
 THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT OF FOUR RESPECTABLE MEN DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING 
 
 THE ABOVE. 
 The undersigned, being duly sworn, do severally swear and declare that they are personally ac- 
 quainted with the Hon. Fernando Wood, and have been so acquainted for some time pa< arid of 
 our own knowledge, do say that be has been for some months past a member of an order known and 
 designated as " Know-Nothings ;" and, furthermore, that he was a member of the Executive Coim- 
 cil oVlhi' same order, who made the nomination for Mayor at its recent session, and was himself 
 a candidate for that position, and his fViends personally solicited our voles and 8U|iport for that 
 office for him, but faUed to secure a sufficient number of votes to efl'ect tlie purpose. 
 
 (Signed) Tiieo. G. Chambers, G. C, 2d Ward, Cily New- York, 
 E. W. Spaitlding, Member Com. 4th Ward Council. 
 H. Farrington, 9th Ward. 
 KoBEiiT S. Dixo.\, 9th Ward. 
 Sworn to before me this ) 
 SddayofNov.. 1S54. ( 
 
 W. F. T. CuAPMAN, Com. of Deeds. 
 
 [Copy.] 
 
 That he had been a member of tlie order Ls a f;ict beyond dispute, and is not now 
 denied even by his friends. Those wlio wisli to show that the Mayor did not swear 
 false, say that he had withdrawn from the order. It is stated upon pretty good 
 authority, that lie induced a man by tbe name 6f Fergusson, a member of the order 
 to which Wood belonged, and its secretary, to give him a certificate of withdrawal, 
 and not to note the fact on the books of the order, or report it to its members. 
 Wood could thus hold this certificate and continue his membership or not as he 
 chose. This same Fergusson was afterwards appointed to a public ofSce through 
 Wood's influence. Prominent members of the order are perfectly familiar with 
 these facts. 
 
 It is also asserted by good authority, that he became a member of the order in 
 another ward, while he held this certificate of withdrawal from his friend Fergusson, 
 a member of the order in the 2 2d ward. lie then joined the Allen branch of the 
 order, in which he had some friends. It is probably a fact that he never did -with- 
 draw from the order, but merely held a certificate of withdra\^'al, obtained in the 
 way we have descriljcd. Under any circumstances of the case, view it in whatever 
 light we may, his oath was intended to deceive. The certificate of withdrawal that 
 he induced Fergusson to give him was obtained, it is said, after he had sworn 
 lie was not a member. 
 
 Such is a sample of the trickery of a candidate for the Mayoralty of this city. 
 What high-minded or honorable man would descend to such mean practices? If 
 he Anthdrow for the purpose of deceiving those who insisted that they could not 
 support him, unless he would remove the prejudices against him on account of his 
 supposed membership of a secret order, to the principles of which they were op- 
 posed, and again he became a member, the fraud is still worse. 
 
 But what cares Fernando Wood about the commission of perjury ? It is a crime 
 that ho is familiar with, as we have shown in the preceding pages of this pamph- 
 let. From his very boyhood he has been premeditating fraud. 
 
 A DISGUSTING STORY ABOUT A C \THOLIC PRIEST, AS TOLD BY OUR " MODEL " 
 MAYOR AT THE MEETINGS OF THE ORDER. 
 
 We have in our possession two affidavits from highly respectable citizens, members 
 of the Know-Nothing order, from which it appears that our Mayor was quite a 
 " spouter," at the meetings of the ordi-r, and from his first attendance seemed to 
 be particularly desirous to show his utter contempt for the Irish, and more specially 
 for the Catholic priesthood. He invented, no doubt, a vulgar story, describmg a 
 dirty trick he once played upon a Catholic priest in the interior of Pensylvania, and 
 upon a poor Irish lady Avho gave him shelter for the night. 
 
THE BANK TKANSACTION. 23 
 
 It appears frum this story, that our "model" Mayor was travelling on foot in 
 the interior of Pennsylvania, and had become much fatigued, as night approached. 
 In this condition he visited the humble cottage of an Irish woman, at whose 
 house there lodged for that night a Catholic priest. Young Wood asked for 
 a night's entertainment, when the woman replied that she had but one spare bed 
 in the house, and that was occupied by a Cathohc priest. She eyed him closely, 
 rather regretted that she could not accommodate him, as ho appeared much exhaust- 
 ed, and there was no public house within some mOes. Her humanity finally 
 induced her to say to Mr. Wood, that if lie would occupy the same bed as the priest, 
 he might be accommodated. Ho very cheerfully consented, and entered the humble 
 dwelling of the Catholic Irish woman. Like most rude and primitive houses in the 
 backwoods, a small ladder conducted you through a hole in the ceiling to the 
 chamber, where slept the priest. Wood retired to bed. 
 
 He relates what then happened, which is entirely too disgusting for publication. 
 Our Alayor says he had an urgent call to get up and go out in the night, and did 
 not like to crawl down the ladder, or to alarm the woman of the house. So he 
 quietly relieved himself by drawing towards him the under garment of the priest. 
 In the morning he says ho complained bitterly to the priest, of the disagreeable 
 condition of the bed. Appearances indicated that the priest had been unfortunate, 
 and he begged of his companion Wood, to make no remarks to the landlady, but 
 leave that to him, and he would make it all right. 
 
 Tliis disgusting story, purely and wholly manufactured, an impudent falsehood 
 no doubt. Wood related with such embellishments as he was capable of, at nearly 
 all the meetings of the Know-Nothings he attended. He told the story from the 
 Battery to Harlem, and ui presence of hundreds of persons. Wo have the affida- 
 vits of two respectable persons, that they heard him tell the story repeatedly. 
 There are hundreds who could make a similar affidavit. The fact is indisputable. 
 His object was to show his detestation of the rehgion of the Catholics, and show, 
 if he was elected Mayor, the earnestness of his convictions of the truth of the 
 Know-Nothing principles. 
 
 But a few days after he last related this vulgar story before an assembly of 
 Know-Nothings, he swore that he was not a member of the order 1 Was there 
 ever a greater scamp than this same Fernando Wood ? If it had been true as he 
 related the story, he was a disgusting brute, who after having been kindly provided 
 for by a stranger, put to bed in decent company, perpetrated a dirty trick, too 
 filthy for description. We scarcely know wliich is the worst, the perjury, or the 
 relation of the disgusting story. Both of them are illustrative of the true charac- 
 ter of our Mayor. Keader, this is the man who swore that he was not a member 
 of the order of Know-Nothings 1 
 
 THE BANK TRANSACTION-A $1750 FRAUD! 
 
 The history of this case is one well calculated to show the true character of Fer- 
 nando Wood in business life. The atrocity of the fraud upon the Merchants' Ex- 
 change Bank can be appreciated by bu-iiiess men. Simply overdrawing on a bank 
 is not criminal. It is a thmg very frequently done. But where a man finds that 
 a bank has placed to his credit a large amount of money which he knows he never 
 deposited, and he draws this money out by several small checks, in a short time, 
 and then closes his business with the bank, and his bank-books and check-books 
 get burned up, the thing looks mysterious, and the common sense of the world 
 will say that a fraud was perpetrated. 
 
 The facts in this case are simply these: In April, 1836, Fernando Wood opened 
 an account witli the Merchants' Exchange Bank of this city. His several deposits 
 in the bank were small, varying from $96.88 to $3.49.42. He never iiad $100 in 
 the bank at any one time. In November, some seven or eiglit montlis after he 
 opened his bank account, a clerk of the bank, through a mistake, placed to Mr. 
 Wood's credit a check on a bank in Albany for $n5i».62, which check had been 
 deposited by Mr. Cliarles Yates for collection. It was some two years afterwards 
 when the error was discovered by the bank. When discovered, the cashier called 
 on Mr. Wood, who denied owing the bank any thing, but admitted that the check 
 
24 THE BANK TRANSACTION. 
 
 for $1750.62 was not his. The matter was by agreement referred to arbitration. 
 D. A. Cusliman, Wm. McMurray, and a Mr. Gilbert, were the referees. They 
 agreed, after hearing the case, that Mr. Wood owed the bank $2,143.90, which was 
 the amount of the above-mentioned check, with interest added. 
 
 The testimony of the Cashier of the Bank. — The following testimony of the cashier 
 of the bank ia taken from the notes of Wm. Inglis, who was Wood's attorney in the 
 case: 
 
 " I had a conversation with Mr. Wood, in which I told him an error had been discovered in hia 
 bank account, which brought him iu debt to the bank about |1750. lie (Wood) said such an error 
 could not exist, and that he could not be indebted to the bank in that sum. 1 said it occurred by 
 passing to his credit a check on an Albany bank, which check belonged not to him, but to another 
 person doing business with the bank, lie admitted that he had had no such check for collection, 
 but repeated that he owed tlie bank nothing. I then asked him for his bank-books and check- 
 books. He said they had all been burned up. He appeared surprised at the statement of his 
 overdrawing, and referred to his once having overdrawn his account with the bank, but when 
 notified of the fact, promptly made it good.'' 
 
 Such is the testimony, as taken down by Judge Inglis, who was Wood's counsel 
 in the case. When Wood was a candidate for Congress, in ] 840, he was charged 
 with this bank transaction, and he applied to his counsel. Judge Inglis, for a state- 
 ment of the case, so as to remove the unfavorable impression that pervaded the 
 public mind in relation to it. Judge Inglis, no doubt, did the best he could for his 
 cheut under the circumstances of the case. 
 
 ^Ir. Cushman, one of the referees, pubhshed the following card in relation to the 
 subject : 
 
 "It appeared in evidence before the referees, that Mr. Wood kept a small account with the Mer- 
 chants' Exchange Bank, from the month of September, (April it should be,) 1S36, to March, 18.39, 
 and that his several deposits during that time varied from ifOG.SS to .$,349.42 ; that in the month 
 of November, 183(i, the clerk or book-keeper of the bank, by mistake, posted to his credit a check 
 on Albany, for $1,750.02, which had been deposited by Mr. Charles Yates, for collection, and that 
 before the error was discovered by the bank, Mr. Wood drew out the whole of that am<nint in 
 small cheeks or drafts, varying from $3(i to .$287.50 — whicli checks or drafts were produced in 
 evidence before the referees, to the amount op the credits on the books of the Bank, in- 
 cluding THE CHECK OF $1,750.62, BELONGING TO Mr. 0. YaTES. 
 
 "It w.as proved before the referees, that when the Bank discovered the error in posting said 
 check to Mr. Wood's account, which was more than two years after it occurred, the Cashiek op 
 THE Bank called on Mr. Wood, stated to him the fact of the overhraft to the 
 AMOUNT OP THE CHECK IN QUESTION, and requested permission to look at his (Wood's) hank-book. 
 Mr. Wood replied that his bank-book had been burned up at a fire in Washington street. He ad- 
 mitted to the cashier, that the check which had been passed to his credit, through the error of 
 the book-keeper, did not belong to him, but asserted that the mistake must have occurred in some 
 other way, and that he owed the bank nothing. 
 
 "The report of two of the referees (the third not being present at the last meeting) was in favor 
 of the b.ank to the amount of the erroneous credit of Mr. Yates' check, which, incliiding interest, 
 was .$2,14.3.90. D. A. CUSHMAN." 
 
 Judge Inglis says that Mr. Cushman is in error in stating that Wood's connection 
 with the bank commenced in September, 1836. It was in April of that year when 
 he made his first deposit. We have stated, previou.sly, that it was in April when 
 he opened an account with the bank. The error, however, is not material. The 
 referees agreed that Wood owed the bank the amount of the check alluded to, 
 together with the interest. There was no doubt about this fact. The bank pro- 
 duced Wood's checks, by which he had drawn the $17. 50 out of the bank in small 
 sums, soon af\er which he closed his account with the bank. Wood admitted that 
 the check was not his, but insisted that he owed nothing to the bank. Though 
 his check-books were burned, the bank had his checks on which he had drawn the 
 mono}'. His bank-book was also burned, or not produced, so that he had nothing 
 to say, except that he owed the bank no money. He had nothing to show that 
 he ever had any dealings with the bank. Of course, whether his bank-book was 
 burned or not, he knew enough not to exhibit it to the referees. He knew, and 
 every one of the referees knew, that he had drawn the money, and of course his 
 bank-book would have shown the fact, the same as his checks did, which the bank 
 produced. But as the check for $l,75(t.62 deposited by Mr. Yates, did not belong 
 to Wood, the moment he produced his bank-book, in which he was credited with 
 that check, it would be evident to all tliat he was cognizant of the error, and that 
 he was perpetrating a fraud on the bank whenever he drew his check for any part 
 of that money. 
 
DETAILED SPECIFICATION OF FRAUDS. 25 
 
 The above are tlie fiicts in this somewhat celebrated case. No one can reason- 
 ably doubt that Fernando Wood knew he was perpetrating a fraud in drawing this 
 $1,750.62 from the bank. He was then doing a small business, had little money, 
 and never the one fourth part of $1,700 in the bank at any one time. So he never 
 pretended to claim that he deposited that amount, or such a check, at any time. 
 Of course he knew enough not to claim to have owned such a check, as the falsity 
 of such a claim would have been exposed at once. To lose his bank-book was the 
 best tiling that could happen to him. That fire in Washington street was a very 
 fortunate thing for him. His bank-book was not necessary to show that he had 
 drawn this $1,750.62 from the bank, as his checks in possession of the bank showed 
 this fact. But its production before the referees would have shown conclusively 
 that he knew he was defrauding the bank in drawing this money. No doubt his 
 bank-book credited him with this amount, and he knew of the fraud he was perpe- 
 trating, but the fraud would have appeared more glarmg had his bank-book been 
 shown. 
 
 Truly, the entire business life of Fernando Wood furnishes evidence of his vil- 
 lainies. Could an impartial history of Mr. Wood be written, every page would 
 contain evidence enough to consign him to a felon's cell Who supposes for a mo- 
 ment that his bank-book was burned? or that he, who never had had $400 in the 
 bank at any one time, was ignorant of the fraud he was perpetrating? The man 
 who could deliberately forge a bill of sale of the bark John W. Cater, or the T. 0. 
 Larkin letter, or who could convert a bill of 75 cents into $100.75, by a few strokes 
 of the pen, and thus defraud his partner in business, and then swear that he had 
 done none of these things, could easily destroy his bank-book. 
 
 A DETAILED SPECIFICATION OF SOME OF THE MEECANTILE FEAITDS 
 OF MAYOR WOOD. 
 
 The following will show the various modes by which Fernando Wood managed 
 to rob his partner. It will be seen that in purchasmg the outfits of the barque 
 John W. Cater, which actually cost but about $1800, he, by various devices, frauds, 
 alterations of bills, forging bills for goods never purchased, and other tricks of the 
 trade entb-ely unknown to Goodhue & Co., Wm. B. Astor, and the rest of the 
 "twenty-eight," who urge him to consent to a reelection to the Mayoralty, he 
 managed to make his partner pay the entire actual cost of the outfits. 
 
 THE PORK FRAUD. 
 
 "Wood rendered his partner a bill of Howard & Wintringham for stores amount- 
 ing to $430.66. The bill included thirty baiTols of pork at $10 a barrel, which 
 were not shipped or used on the said barque John W. Cater, and the actual amount 
 of money paid by Wood to Howard & Wintringham for supplies furnished to, and 
 put on board, said vessel, did not exceed the sum of $130.66. 
 
 THE LARD FRAUD. 
 
 "Wood rendered a bUl of John R. Woolsey for groceries amounting to $35.87. 
 This bUl included four kegs of lard not shipped or used on said barque, amounting 
 to $23.70, makmg the cash actually paid by Wood for said groceries actually fur- 
 nished and put on board $7.17. 
 
 THE FISH AND OIL FRAUD. 
 
 Wood rendered another bill of J. R. Woolsey, for fish and oil, amounting lo 
 $39.85. Tins bill included thirty gallons of oil not shipped or used on said barque, 
 amounting to $30, making the amount actually paid by Wood for said supplies 
 $9.85. 
 
26 SPECIFIED FRAUDS IN THE CARGO PURCHASE. 
 
 THE BEEF, TONGUES, PORTER, CIDER AND ALE FRAUD. 
 
 Wood rendered his partner a bill of Benjamin Hall & Co., for stores, consisting 
 of family-beef, tongues, porter, cider, lard, etc., amounting to $214.90, no part of 
 ^yllich was shipped or used on said barque. 
 
 THE FLOUR AND MEAT FRAUD. 
 
 "Wood rendered his partner a bQl of C. M. Holcomb, for flour, meat, etc., amount- 
 ing to S14.75, which included items amounting to $8.25, wliich were not shipped on 
 said barque. 
 
 FRAUDS IN THE PURCHASE OF EGGS, DUCKS, TURKEYS, OYSTERS, 
 BEEF, PORK, AND VEGETABLES. 
 
 "Wood rendered a bill of J. W. Fream, for poultry, etc., consisting of ducks, tur- 
 keys, eggs, oysters, fresh beef and pork, and vegetables, amounting to $54.50, no 
 part of which was shipped or used on said barque. 
 
 There are several other frauds in this outfit account, all of which were proven 
 conclusively. It is astounding to see how he contrived to crowd into the account 
 so many frauds on an aggregate purchase of less tlian $2000, but which ho magni- 
 fied to ueai" $3G00. He absolutely perpetrated a fraud in about every bill ho pur- 
 chased. 
 
 SOME OF THE FR&UDS IN THE PURCHASE OF THE CARGO SPECIFIED. 
 
 Wood's purchases of the cargo amounted, according to the bills he rendered his 
 partner, to over $7000, as we have before stated. But the actual cost of his pur- 
 chases on tiiis account was only about half this sum. 
 
 Some specimens of how this was done wiU be given. 
 
 THE CIGAR FRAUD. 
 
 Wood said he bought of Holt & Palmer a quantity of cigars, and represented that 
 he had agreed to pay therefor the sum of $374.15, and produced and exhibited to 
 Marvino a paper which he, Wood, represented to be the bill rendered by said Holt 
 & Palmer to liim therefor, which h\l\, as presented by Wood to Marvine, correspond- 
 ed with the representation. After the bill had been delivered, Wood fraudulently 
 and deceitfully altered it, or caused it to be altered, by inserting in a line thereof 
 in which the original charge was "10 M Palo Alto 8 80," the figure 1 before the 8, 
 so as to make said charge $18 instead of $8 per thousand; and by placing the 
 figure 1 before the extension of 80, so as to make the extension thereof $180 ; and 
 by altering the figure 2 at the footing of said bUl into the figure 3, so as to make 
 the footing thereof $374.15 instead of $274.15, as originally rendered. 
 
 THE BROOM FRAUD. 
 
 Wood said he bought of Taggart & Gray 100 dozen brooms, at $1|- per dozen, 
 and exhibited to Marvine a paper purporting to be, and which he represented to 
 be, the original bUl, as rendered by said Taggart & (Jray to him for said purchase, 
 which bill, as so presented, corresponded ■«dth and sustained the representation so 
 made by Wood. Marvine discovered that said brooms, so purchased, were bought 
 by Wood at $lf per dozen, and that the original bill was rendered by said Taggart 
 & Gray for that price, but that after the deliv-ery thereof by them, Wood fraudulently 
 and deceitfully altered, or caused and procured the said hUl to be altered, by chang- 
 ing the price from $1| to l|per dozen, and the extension from $137 to $187. 
 
 THE PAPER FRAUD. 
 
 Wood purchased from Cjtus W. Field & Co., a quantity of paper, amounting to 
 tlie sum of $509.76, and exhibited to Marvine a jjaper purporting to be, and which 
 
THE RIGHT TO PUBLISH THE TESTIMONY. 27 
 
 he represented to be, the origiaal bill thereof, as rendered by said Cyrus \Y. Field 
 & Co. for said purchase, which bill, as so presented by Wood, corresponded with the 
 representation. That since the settlement of the said account Marvino, discovered 
 that Wood did not purchase from Cyrus W. Meld & Co. paper to the amount so re- 
 presented by him. In the ori_gin;d bill, delivered by the said C^tus W. Meld to 
 hun, were the four items following : 
 
 60 reams white plain letter, $lf, $82 50 
 
 60 do. do. do. do. 82 50 
 
 40 do. cap do. do. 50 00 
 
 40 do. do. do. do. 50 00 
 
 Wood fraudulently and deceitfully altered, or procured to be altered, the said 
 bill, so as to make the price of each of the sixty reams of paper mentioned in the 
 first two items above stated, the sum of S2f per ream, instead of $lf, and the ex- 
 tensions thereof to be $142.50, instead of $82.50 respectively, thus adding to each 
 of said items the sum of $G0 ; and in like manner further fraudulently and deceit- 
 fully altered, or procured to be altered, tlie said bill, so as to make the price of 
 each of the forty reams of paper mentioned in the last two items above stated, the 
 sum of $lf per ream, instead of $1J, and the extensions thereof respectively to be 
 $70 instead of $30, thus adding to each of the said last two items the sum of 
 $20; and by fraudnlently and deceitfully altering, or procuring to be altered, the 
 footing of said bill from the sum of $409.76 to the sum of $569.76. 
 
 THE TOBACCO FRAUD. 
 
 Wood bought from James Hunter & Co., a quantity of tobacco to the amount of 
 $504.35, and exhibited to Jlarvine a paper purporting to be the original bill of said 
 purchase, as rendered to him by said James Hunter & Co., which bill, as so repre- 
 iented, corresponded with the representation. Wood fraudulently and deceitfully 
 dtered the bill so as to make the price ll^c. per pound, instead of 9c., and the 
 ixtensioa thereof, $471.38 instead of $363.91, as in the original invoice, and by 
 tltering in like manner the footing thereof from $401.56 to $504 03. 
 
 THE OIL AND GLASS FRAUD. 
 
 Wood bought from Wm. E. Lawrence, a quantity of glass and linseed oil, amount- 
 ing to the sum of $S25.11, and exhibited to ilarvine a paper purporting to be the 
 original bill of the said William E. Lawrence delivered to him therefor. Wood 
 fraudulently and deceitfully altered the said bill by making the discount upon the 
 said glass 10 per cent instead of 30 per cent, and by fraudulently altering the ex- 
 tension thereof and the footing of said bill, so as to make the aggregate thereof the 
 sum of $825.11 instead of $589.11. 
 
 THE FRAUD IN MATCHES. 
 
 Wood said he had paid to Charles Partridge $520.24 for a quantity of matches; 
 that said Partridge made at the same time, by the said barque John W. Cater, a ship- 
 ment on his OWE private account, valued at $2,000, and Wood charged said Partridge 
 $100 for insurance on his said goods, and deducted said sum from the amount of 
 said bill for $520.24. Wood did not insure the said cargo, nor pay any sum there- 
 for, and did not pay to said Partridge any greater sum than $426.24 ibr said 
 matches. 
 
 THK EIGHT TO PUBLISH THE TESTI?(TONY IN THE MAKVINE AND 
 WOOD CASE-AN INJUNCTION SUED OUT BY WOOD, AND DISSOLVED 
 BY THE COURT. 
 
 Our "model" Mayor, two years ago, fearing that the testimony in this case 
 would find its way in the public prints, and thus injure him at the polls, sued out 
 an injunction to restrain the publication of the testimony before the referees. 
 
 The followuig is the decision of Judges Duer and Oakley, dissolving the injunc- 
 tion : 
 
28 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Jndge Duer: "Sitting as a. judge, I am satisfied that I have no power to continue this injunc- 
 tion. I tlo not believe that a Court of Equity has ever attempted to restrain the publication of 
 the proceedings in a pendins; aetion at law, either upon tlic yniiinds set forth in this complaint, or 
 upon any other. Nor do I believe that, had the jurisdielioii evt-r been claimed, the courts of law 
 would have submitted to its e.xercise. It would have been regarded and resisted as manifest usur- 
 pation of power. It is the exclusive privilege of the Court in which the action is pending to de- 
 ti rmine wliether for any reason the publication of the proceedings ought to be forbidden ; and 
 where the publication is deemed to be necessary or projier, it can only be regularly made by an 
 ordiT in the cause. The case is not altered by the fact that the action is pending in this Court, 
 ■which is now a Court of Eijuity, as well as of law, for the Code has certainly not enlarged 
 tlie equitable jurisdiction which it has given. It has given ns no power to grant any other 
 relief upon a complaint than that the Court of Chancery could have formerly granted upon a bill. 
 If tlio plaintiff is entitled to the relief which he asks, he must seek it by a petition or motion in 
 the action in which he is defendant lie has mistaken his remedy in filing thi.s complaint. 
 
 " The motion to continue the injunction is denied, and the injunction heretofore granted is dis- 
 solved." 
 
 Oakley, Chief- Justice, concurred. L. B. Shepard, for plaintiff. James T. Brady, for defendant. 
 
 Thus it will be seen that our courts will not favor the idea that a knowledge of 
 a man's crimes shaU be hidden from the public. The right to publish the testi- 
 mony includes the right to make such comments on it as truth and the public in- 
 terest require. The community must be protected against the villainy of its mem- 
 bers, even though they never aspire to public honors, or high official positions. 
 But when those who have shown themselves bold and audacious in crime seek high 
 places of power, patronage, and emolument, it becomes an important duty of the 
 public press to hold them up to the public gaze in all the blackness of their true 
 characters. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 And now, fellow citizens of the city and county of New- York, we ask you in 
 sober seriousness whether there was ever before presented to your notice a mass of 
 evidence so complete, so consecutive, so unanswerable, and so conclusive, as has 
 been laid naked for your perusal and verdict in the precedmg pages. If ever there 
 existed a criminal whose coolness surpassed his crimes, it is the hero of these 
 pages. If ever there lived a culprit whose callousness exceeded his criminality, it 
 is our " model Mayor." His villanies have been as clearly proven, and as un- 
 mistakably demonstrated, as the clearest theorem in geometry. Fernando Wood 
 has been a depredator in the bank, in the counting-house, at the merchant's desk, 
 and in the Mayoralty chair. 
 
 On land and on water he has proved himself a merciless Shylock and shark. He 
 has filled his purse by the vilest means, and from the blackest resources. The barque 
 J. W. Cater was freighted with the crimes of this practised tactician in the vocations 
 of villainy and fraud ; and it is a miracle how that barque escaped being engulfed 
 by the weight of crime which hung around and about her foully-obtained freight J 
 What a man to be selected for the chief magistracy of a great commercial cityl 
 What recklessness could prompt a community to listen for a moment to tlie sug- 
 gestion of any man, or body of men, to reelect a stamped plunderer and an acknow- 
 ledged ];>erjurer to the Mayoralty chair ? What blindness could have seized any 
 party, however reckless and desperate may be its fortunes, to think that the peo- 
 ple could endorse such a nominee for Mayor? What venality could induce any 
 newspaper press, no matter to what depths of political degradation it may have be- 
 fore then sounded, to attempt to pawn such an excrescence upon an outraged peo- 
 ple as this hero of a hundred perjuries and forgeries? If we were to seek in our 
 State prison, or even to ransack the dreary regions below, it may be questioned 
 whether we could find a candidate for public favor better adapted to plunder thft 
 tax-payers than this model swindler, this accomplished forger and classic perjurer— 
 our " model" Mayor I 
 
 It would be a sad commentary upon the intelligence and integrity of our people 
 should the returns of the next election announce the victory of Fernando Wood. 
 
 It will generally be admitted that a man who will defraud a partner in business— 
 who will muke false representations to another to induce him to enter into a part 
 norship — who will prepare /aZse, simulated, or forged papers and letters relating to 
 the business of the partnership, and thereby induce another to invest large sum** 
 of money for their joint advantage — who will, after this fraud and deception haw 
 been practised, continue to perpetrate other frauds in the purchase of goods to a 
 large amount, and render fraudulent bills to his partner, in which the quantity of 
 
CONCLUSIOX. 29 
 
 the articles purchased, and the prices paid for them, are greater than the true bills 
 of purchase show, and then obtain from his partner the one half of the aggregate 
 of the fraudulent prices — who will, when fearing detection, call upon the merchants 
 from whom he purchased, and endeavor to prevail upon them to alter their bills, 
 and make them more in amount than he actually paid them, and request them to 
 hand these new and fraudulent bills to any one who might call to inquire into the 
 matter — and who will, in every transaction relating to the partnership business, 
 defraud and deceive his partner ; we say it will be generally admitted that such a 
 man is a dangerous member of society, a desperate and unmitigated villain, totally 
 devoid of honorable principle, and preeminently unfit for high and honorable pub- 
 lic station. No honorable man of any party would give such a person his vote for 
 the Mayoralty. 
 
 It requires the strongest kind of testimony to satisfy the minds of our people 
 that such bold and systematic frauds could be perpetrated by one partner upon an- 
 other. Many will not believe that human nature can be so degraded as to have 
 perpetrated so many frauds, and of so gross a character, throughout the entire 
 business of a partnership. 
 
 But when the allegations of fraud are clearly shown by testimony as strong and 
 conclusive as any that ever was given in a court of justice, then it becomes a mat- 
 ter of serious consideration for every good member of society. If circumstances 
 should place such an individual before the community for their suffrages, for the 
 highest ofhce in their gift, then his character becomes a proper subject for dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 This candidate is Fernando "Wood. There is the strongest possible proof that 
 Mr. "Wood has been guilty of all the fraudulent practices we have alluded to, and is 
 a person totally unfit for public station, and unworthy of the public confidence. 
 
 In the whole history of mercantile life and business, we do not know where to 
 look for a parallel to this in the atrocity of its frauds. No litigated case of part- 
 nership that we have ever heard of shows such consummate and systematic decep- 
 tion. The recital should put shamelessness itself to the blush. 
 
 The whole case is one of extreme interest to the public, and it is every man's 
 duty to examine into it It may be painful to our moral feehngs to be convinced 
 that a nominee for the Mayoralty stands thus disgraced ; but we must remember 
 that the elevation to office of such a man would extend the odium to all who par- 
 ticipate in our elections. Better that Mr. "Wood alone should su2"er the loss of his 
 reputation, and our city government be freed from such an executive head, than 
 our whole people should be disgraced along with him. 
 
 There seems to have been on the part of Wood a preconcerted and villainous 
 duplicity throughout the entire business of the Marvine partnership. This arch- 
 scoundrel and unscrupulous scamp, committed tlie most outrageous frauds that are 
 known to the history of mercantile crimes. The meanest and most matured plans 
 were laid by him for a wholesale plunder of his partner. His whole talents seemed 
 to be employed to see how much he could plunder on the purchases he made. He 
 never purchased a bOl of goods but what he perpetrated a fraud. He would en- 
 deavor to induce the merchant who sold him to charge a high price, so that he 
 could deduct some 30 or 40 per cent for cash, and then alter the bill by changing 
 the 30 or 4() per cent into 10 per cent. If he could not succeed in this, he would 
 alter the prices in the bill, increase the quantity bought, or insert in the bill articles 
 never purchased. By these means about every bill he handed to his partner for 
 goods, etc., purchased by him, contained three or four fraudulent alterations, or 
 forgeries. 
 
 This man Wood has contrived to get the endorsement of a few wealthy mer- 
 chants. If these men imagine that they will control to any great extent the voters 
 of this city, they are deluded. They may have power over the money-bags, but 
 not over the minds and consciences of the people. Reelect Fernando Wood, and 
 you will prove that the way to reach eminence and power is by perfidy, robbery, 
 perjury, and fraud. Reelect him, and you throw the city in the hands of an un- 
 scrupulous ruffian, whose tools and friends will be those who will divide with him 
 the profits of the gambling, lottery, and policy shops of our city. 
 
 In his recent nomination for the mayoralty he brought to his aid the police de- 
 partment, and used the whole power of his position to effect it. Immediately after 
 
so CONCLUSION. 
 
 his defeat in his aspirations for the office of Governor, he orgjanized an association, 
 of which tlie members were bound to secrecy, having for its object his renomination, 
 to the office of maj'or. To this association various members of the police depart- 
 ment were attached, in violation of the rule of that department, which forbids them 
 to be members of any political or<;anization. The immediate purpose of this secret 
 organization was to control the general committee, and to place the primary elec- 
 tions in the hands of Mr. Wood, by the selection of those persons for inspectors 
 who were committed to return a ticket favorable to his re-nomination, whether it 
 should be elected or not. 
 
 " Having made these arrangements, he procured the majority of the general 
 committee to adopt a rule by which himself and Daniel B. Sickles could come into 
 that committee by substitution, and took his seat side by side with members of the 
 police department who were there, as we have said, in violation of the rules and 
 regulations of that department, and who obeyed his dictation in the votes they 
 gave while there, and under his political command. Having thus become a mem- 
 ber of the general committee, he proceeded to get through that body a plan of elec- 
 tions which should place every nomination iu the city, whether for mayor, city 
 judge, alderman, or councilman, member of Congress or other officer, entirely at 
 his disposal. We do not deem it necessary to set forth here the monstrous evils 
 which must spring from the conversion of the police department into a mere politi- 
 cal machine for the accomplishment of the personal aims of an individual so reckless 
 and unscrupulous as the present Mayor. 
 
 This business having been done, he himself moved his plan of primary elections. 
 Zt was to the effect that the inspectors of elections should be appointed in each 
 ward by a' majority of the delegates from that ward, and that iu those wards 
 where there was no agreement, they should be appointed by a committee, to con- 
 sist of Fernando Wood and a majority of his friends. The majority of this com- 
 mittee belonged to the secret organization to which reference has been made : and 
 the plan was adopted by the votes of that organization, together with the votes of 
 a few others who sought to save themselves in their own wards by yielding to 
 the current. Every tnember of the police department present in committee voted ivith 
 Mr. Wood in its favor. 
 
 The Committee of Organization met ; Mr. Wood moved Mr. Sickles into the chair ; 
 he moved inspectors in all the wards in which no agreement had been had, and 
 but one single inspector w,as appointed v.'ho was not known to be in his interest. 
 
 And to crown all, and deprive this stupendous fraud of even the pretext of regu- 
 larity, the delegates thus chosen assembled at the Maj^or's house the following 
 Sunday, and resolved to take possession of the room of the Convention at Tammany 
 Hall. 
 
 The subject of this biography is, perhaps, one of the most singular men in the 
 community. The philosopher asserts that each individual has certain marked pe- 
 culiarities of mind and morals, which distinguish him as positively from every 
 other man as does the peculiar features of the face. Each man exhibits a group 
 of distinctive traits belonging to the mind or heart, and which are the offspring of 
 some natural tendency, or are the result of bis education. Fernando Wood is in- 
 nately prone to dishonesty. His whole business life shows him in the capacity of 
 an artful knave, who loves money for the power it confers, but who prefers to get 
 it by fraud, rather than by honorable, upright dealing. Whether as a merchant or 
 a politician, he alwaj'S operates secretly. His great desire to be Ma,yor of tliis city 
 grew out of a supposition that the office would make him acquainted with all the 
 schemes resorted to by the bold and lawless to plunder the community. No gam- 
 bling-house, from the lowest crib to the most splendid establishment in the city, 
 will ever be interfered with by him, so long as they divide the profits with the 
 Mayor or his friends, who are believed by many to derive a pecuniary interest frona 
 the vocation. It is quite certain that no establishment of the kind can flourish iu 
 tins city unless his friends share the plunder. And it is generally admitted in the 
 fraternity of gamblers, that some of the Wood family must share the profits, or they 
 will be broken up. 
 
 Wood possesses considerable power in prevailing on others, men of integrity, to 
 render him their political support. At the time he was a candidate for the Mayor- 
 alty, two years ago, he was frequently known to shed tears in company with those 
 
CONTJLUSION. 31 
 
 whose support he knew to be important. He solemnly asserted to thorn that he 
 wanted to be Mayor so as to redeem his reputation. But no sooner in office than 
 we find him prostituting the position to protect all tlie polluted and hellish practices 
 which exist in the city. He has been charged with the practice of knavcrv in all 
 the relations of life — of having defrauded friend and partner in business — of being 
 a sharer in the plunder of the most lucrative illegal gambling transactions 
 practised in the city. He is bold in all this crime. He moralizes against it in 
 his public messages, and then retires to count over the profits he has realized from 
 the illegal and swindhng business. He who can fraudulently convert a bill of 75 
 cents into one of $100.75, can not give character to a great commercial city, by be- 
 ing elevated to the Mayoralty. We have State-prisons for the reformation of cri- 
 minals, and the office of Mayor was never intended as a position in which crime 
 could be atoned for, or a villainous reputation whitewashed into purity. If the 
 theory is sound that we should seek to convert our most adroit swindlers and forg- 
 ers to honest, upright citizens, by giving them high civil positions, then we should 
 expect the several parties to nominate candidates who resided •s\-ithin the walls of 
 our prisons. Sincere repentance for past crimes does not require to emanate from 
 the Mayor's office in the City Hall. It can be better had in the quiet closet, and 
 by an altered life in business. Once estabhsh the practice of elevating our worst 
 men to office, and you offer a bounty on criminality. If we elect a Mayor whose 
 reputation for integrity and rascality is notoriously bad, by the same reasoning we 
 should expect him to fill all the offices in his gift with the same class of persons. 
 This rule would bring the vile and infamous into public place, and morality, law, 
 and common decency would be violated in every department of the city govern- 
 ment. We doubt whether the oldest resident of this city can call to mind a period 
 of time when there was greater demoralization in our city government. Wood has 
 boldly assumed doubtful powers, and controls nearly every department of the city. 
 To him, therefore, roust be attributed the evils complained of. 
 
 It can scarcely be possible that any man who attentively peruses a history of his 
 frauds will aid in his reelection. We think it may be assumed that he must be de- 
 feated. But his defeat must be the work of those who feel a deep interest in the 
 reputation of our city, and who prefer an honest administration of the government. 
 His saintly hypocrisy has been unveiled ; the gauze that covered it has been re- 
 moved. The honest portion of the public now see Fernando Wood in the light of a 
 plunderer. His commendable acts when first elected Mayor, have all become ob- 
 solete. His absolute indifference to public morals, if he does not absolute^ encour- 
 age crime and vice, is so perceptible that it can not be mistaken for honest inten- 
 tion. The Joseph Walker swindle developed his true aim, as soon as he had 
 got fairly seated in tlie Mayor's chair. Ho opened his complaint-I:)ook merely to 
 see where the plunder was, and when he found it, he seized upon it with avidity. He 
 looks up his old friend Jones, to whom he once wanted to have the Marvine mat- 
 ters referred, and in haste proposes a contract to rob the city treasury of $13,000. 
 When the fraud is detected. Wood swears before the committee that he will in- 
 demnify the city for the loss growing out of the contract. He swore he would pay 
 the damages out of his own pocket. He has not yet made his oath good, nor does 
 any one suppose ho ever intended to. He who could swear that he never present- 
 ed a forged bill of sale, a forged letter, or fraudulently altered, or caused to be al- 
 tered, a score of biUs and vouchers, would not hesitate to swear that he would pay 
 all the damages that the city incurred by his rascahty. That he did, without any 
 authority, reach out his polluted hand and dip it into the treasury-box of the city, 
 and plunder it of the $7500 which Jones got, and which lie probably divided, 
 there is no more doubt tlian there is that we have so stated it. To look at this 
 man. Wood, in all the attitudes of life, as a merchant, a politician, or Mayor of the 
 city, the heart sickens at the corruption evinced in his nature, and warns us that 
 we must as a people, be more cautious in the exercise of the franchise, if wo would 
 preserve the reputation of our city. 
 
 A FIVE HUNDRED DOLLAR SALE. 
 
 The foUowmg, though not strictly in the lino of the biography of our Mayor, may 
 be appropriately appended to this number, as serving to show the reader the deep 
 
32 CONCLUSION. 
 
 interest manifested in this biographical sketch. I understood from a prominent 
 citizen that certain parties were desirous to purchase the manuscript of this num- 
 ber. I was told that if I would step into Delmonico's at a particular hour of the 
 day, I would meet a person who would pay $500 for the manuscript. 1 called at 
 the hour stated, and saw Col. Alexander Ming, Chief Clerk to the Mayor, Wm. M. 
 Cooke, Private Secretary to his Honor, and Chas. M. Fletcher, the special friend of 
 the Mayor, and a perfect gentleman. Observing this trio in close conversation in 
 a corner of the bar-room, I very naturally came to the conclusion that they were 
 the intended purchasers of the important documents in my possession. This sup- 
 position was soon proved correct. Mr. Cooke, one of the party, politely addressed 
 me with a countenance as smiling as one of the Rothschilds or Stephen Girard, 
 ■when they aiiticipated they saw before them a customer with whom a good bar- 
 gain could be struck. He invited me to a little Close conversation in a private 
 room up stairs, in which was a large centre-table, apparently used for purposes of a 
 little social gambling, for mere amusement — a recreation which the Mayor, nor his 
 clerks or secretaries, have no right to interfere with. Friend Fletcher accompanied 
 us to this pinnacle apartment, and Col. Ming did not, but, we suppose, remained in 
 front of the building as a guard, that no intruder should be permitted to enter and 
 interfere with certain contemplated arrangements, which he, of course, knew, or, 
 at least, expected, would be soon consummated, when he could report progress to 
 his Honor, who, no doubt, was waiting in a state of perturbation of mind to hear 
 the result of the speculation. 
 
 After we were seated, Mr. Cooke said : 
 
 " I suppose you are aware of the nature of my business with you ?" 
 
 " I suppose I am," said I. 
 
 "I have," said he, " $500 for you, if you deliver to me a certain manuscript, and 
 sign this paper." (Unfolding the following agreement.) 
 
 I read the document, suggested some alterations, and appended to it ihe conclud- 
 ing paragraph. The changes made were assented to, the paper was executed, and 
 the money paid, in good notes of our city banks ; not one of which was issued by 
 the Shoe & Leather concern, in which the funds of the city are kept. This being 
 done, the party dispersed quietly, and all in good humor. 
 
 Upon mature reflection, and by the advice of counsel, I have come to the con- 
 clusion that a biography of our Mayor ought to be published, and if in so doing the 
 followuig agreement is violated, I am ready to pay to "Wm. M. Cooke, or to any per- 
 son he may name, $500, so soon as he establishes before any tribunal of justice in 
 the United States that the agreement has been violated, or that he is entitled to 
 recover. 
 
 Copy of Aorebment entbp.ed into between Wm. M. Cooke, the Mayor's PRrvAXE Secek- 
 
 TARY, AND THE AUTHOK OF TUIS BIOGRAPHY, IN PRESENCE OF ChA8. M. FlETCHEE. 
 
 For and In consideration of the sum of Ave hundred dollars to me in hand paid by William M. 
 Cooke oCthe City of New- York, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, I, Abijah Ingraham, 
 of said City, do hereby bind myself, and solemnly pledge my honor as a man, not to violate or 
 break, either directly or indirectly, the following agreements hereby entered into by me : 
 
 I hereby agree that a certain manuscript written by myself relative to the Hon. Fernando Wood, 
 and vhich said manuscript, on the payment of the above-mentioned sum, I have delivered to the 
 said William M. Cooke in full, shall not be published in any newspaper, periodical, magazine, 
 pamphlet, or book, issued in this city or elsewhere. I also do declare that I have no copy of said 
 manuscript in my possession, and to the best of my knowledge and belief, state that no other per- 
 son or persons have any copy or copies of the same. 
 
 I also agree for and in consideration of the said sum of five hundred dollars, not to write or 
 cause to be written or published, or be concerned in the publication of any article or articles, or 
 matter of any description, reflecting in any way, directly or indirectly, upon the Hon. Fernando 
 Wood, previous to the general election in Now-Tork in November, 1S56. 
 
 I also agree that should the above conditions be violated by me, to pay back to the said William 
 M. Cooke the sum of five hundred dollars paid to me by him, and in the event of my refusing tc 
 do so, the said William M. Cooke shall have ample remedy by recourse to legal proceedings in any 
 court in the United States, to compel the payment of the same on satisfactory proof being adduced 
 that an J of the above conditions have been violated by me, or that I have broken faith with the 
 said William M. Cooke, contrary to the foregoing stipulations. 
 
 If the manuscript now delivered to the said William M. Cooke should hereafter be published, I, 
 Abijah Ingraham, shall be entitled to the profits arising from said publication. 
 
 ABIJAH INGRAHAM. 
 
 I certify that this is a true copy of the original delivered to Wm. M. Cooke, in the presence of 
 
 0. FLETCHER, 
 Dated Sept. 28, 1856, at the City of New- York. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 014 221 564 
 
 A H I S T O R \ 
 
 OF THE 
 
 I 
 
 MERCANm POllTiCAL UNO OFFICIAL CAREER 
 
 'MODEL" MAYOR 
 
 THE BARK JOHN W. CATER; THE SHIP 
 .lOSEPH WALKER. 
 
 FERNANDO WOOD MASKED! A FORGED BILL OF SALE! 
 FORGED^ LETTERS ! 
 
 " Tirr: People \vii,i. ei.kct me j\Iayok tikuch I snon.n commit a 
 
 MURDER IX MY FAMILY liETWEES THIS AND TKE Kl.KCTIOX." Fomimdo Wootl, 
 
 on the cYo of his eloctioii to tlie MuYoralty in IS.H. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 OOU 221 564 #