claimants under the G. M. Company. That the certificates of the N. E. M. Land Company came to his hands as follows: at the time of maturity of several of the notes, such notes being dishonoured, or the parties being insolvent previous to maturity, they proposed to defendant (who agreed) to pay such notes by certificates of the N. E. M. L. Company; that accordingly, scrip, to the amount of 691,677 acres, was delivered to him, and notes to equal amount were given up by defendant, and that he never had any other certificates of the N. E M. L. Company, and these have been given up to the Commissioners, and appropriated by them to account of the G.M. Company. Admitted that Commissioners deducted from indemnity awarded to the individuals a sum as their proportion of expenses of the N. E. M. L. Company; but avers, that said N. E. M. L. Company produced statements, and litigated before the Commissioners as to such expenses, and such sum as was allowed, was allowed after deliberation but insisted, that the decree as to expenses is conclusive as to the amount, and that any portion of any extra expenses could not be recovered of him; and that no deduction or provision for payment of future expenses of the N. E. M. L. Company, ought to have been made. Commissioners awarded that, indemnity upon 957,600 acres, amounting to $130,425 12 cents, should be deducted from the whole amount claimed by said N. E. M. L. Company, on account of certificates issued by the Company to purchasers who were in default of ment to the G. M. Company; that they determined such scrip void, and parties claiming under it

pay

1822.

Brown

V.

Jackson.

1822.

Brown

V.

Jackson.

should lose indemnity but avers he did not rcceive certificates for said $130,424 12 cents, on behalf of the G. M. Company, or himself, as such member; on the contrary, he was not then a member thereof, and never received any part of indemnity or certificates therefor, save for the amount found due him for the balance of his account with the G. M. Company, as their agent; That, as to said award, there remained, at the time it passed, unpaid notes of members of the N. E. M. L. Company, given for purchase money to the amount of $95,760, and the indemnity of $130,421 25 cents, was ordered on account of such unpaid notes that he delivered up said unpaid notes, being required so to do; that the said Company contested the allowance, and are concluded by the decree. That, after said decrees, deducting the amount of the unpaid notes, and also the amount of scrip of said Company, taken in payment of other notes, and held by defendant as aforesaid, the members of the Company, separately and individually, according to their shares, did apply to the Commissioners, and received certificates entitling them to the indemnity. That the Commissioners made no allowance on said $130,425 12 cents, on account of expenses incurred by plaintiffs in managing the affairs of the Company, and insists they did right, and their decree is conclusive. That it appeared from the schedule to the articles of agreement between him, Williamson, and Blake, of 26th January, 1796, that Seth Wetmore subscribed for only 100,000 acres. That between the date of said agreement, and the complete delivery of said notes to him, many changes were made in the amounts and purchasers from those in the schedule:

that it appears by an account of said notes and scrip, kept by the defendant, (a true copy of part whereof was annexed) that defendant received from Seth and Samuel Wetmore, notes to the amount of $25,760 together with scrip of Company, to amount of $11,740 making $37,500, which is the purchase money of 375,000 acres, and therefore Seth and Samuel were interested in the purchase to that amount. Whether notes were made jointly by them, or as principal and endorser, could not answer, but believes jointly, because, in said amount in other instances he distinguished whether drawers or endorsers. That he took an oath before Commissioners, that said notes were not taken on any other account than purchase money of said land. And avers the same in answer; and therefore whether Seth or Samuel were joint drawers, or one drew and the other endorsed, or were reciprocally drawers and endorsers for each's part, or whether Seth was really interested to the amount of the notes, cannot answer; but insists, that being in his hands, and given for no other consideration, whether given for his own interest or that of another, was immaterial, and the decree was right. That, after passing the first decree, defendant was summoned as witness before the Board, and re

quired to deliver up all vouchers, papers, notes, scrip, and accounts, touching purchase by the N. E. M. L. Company; he complied, and the Commissioners stated an account between him and the G. M. Company, leaving a balance of $24,631 90 cents, in his favour. In stating the account, the G. M. Commissioners credited the N. E. M. L. Company with the total amount of sales to the Company, de

1822.

Brown

V.

Jackson.

1822.

Brown

V.

Jackson.

ducting a number of acres of W. Williamson, and de-
bited the Company thus; (1.) For 292 full scrip of said
Company, which scrip was received by defendant,
in payment for part of the purchase money, engaged
to be paid by members of the N. E. M. L. Company;
and it having depreciated in consequence of the repeal
of the act of Georgia, and purchased by the members
of the N. E. L. M. Company, at a low price, was re-
ceived in payment as aforesaid, by defendant, at their
original value. (2.) For amount of unpaid no:es, as
delivered to Commissioners. (3.) For said Compa-
ny's proportion of loss on notes of members of the N.
E. M. L. Company, consequent to compromise, to
which he was compelled by said repeal, nine-tenths
of which loss only was charged to said Company,
the other upon defendant's commissions. (4.) For
amount of scrip of N. E. M. L. Company, delivered
up to Commissioners. (5.) For commissions at 10
per cent. on sales to the N E. M. L. Company;
and that the Commissioners by decree (copy exhibit-
ed) awarded said balance to defendant, and issued
to him a certificate for so much indemnity; which
sum was the whole amount of the indemnity received
by defendant, or any other person for him on his own
account, or the account of any persons or company
whatever. Insisted, that said decree is wholly irre-
versible; and defendant having received the amount
of indemnity, as agent of the G. M. Company, could
not be called upon to account to complainants. Admits
that indemnity was reserved upon 957,600 acres, on
account of notes unpaid, but never allowed to defen-
dant, as stated in bill.
amount of unpaid notes.

Avers the same was the true

That according to the

schedule annexed to bill of certificates surrendered by individuals, it is certified that the total amount so surrendered was upon 2,795,017 acres ; but whether said schedule is a true list, or whether the amount stated is the true amount, defendant is ignorant. As to the amount of certificates by members represented by complainants, defendant is ignorant; but avers, there was no allowance to him, nor was there a reservation of indemnity for 107,600 acres too much, but the excess (if any) between the total amount of acres reserved for individuals, or for unpaid notes, together with the amount represented by plaintiffs, and the original purchase, is owing to error in amount surrendered by individuals, or the amount represented by plaintiffs.

Edward Stow, a witness examined on the part of the plaintiff, testified, that the agent of the Georgia Mississippi Company, and the members of the N. E. M. L. Company, agreed, that the deed of the land purchased of the former, should remain, for certain purposes, an escrow; and on the failure of Seth Wetmore, to pay his notes of $10,000 for his 100, 000 acres of land, the defendant, Jackson, as agent of the G. M. Company, declined delivering said deed to the N. E. M. L. Company, unless they would agree to deliver him, or some other agent of the G. M. Company certificates for 103,480 acres, in the stock of the N. E. M. L. Company; and in consequence thereof, they entered into a contract with the defendant, Jackson, on the 10th of December, 1796, to deliver to him, or some other such agent, said certificates; but, as they have never been demanded, the certificates have never been issued. In said contract

1822.

Brown

Jackson.