To John Jay from Richard Varick, 15 November 1800
From Richard Varick
New York November 15. 1800
My dear Sir
I have the Honor to inclose to Your Excellency a Report of the Convictions at the late special Sessions for this City which ended Yesterday.—1 I have said Nothing abt. the Proofs as they were full. In all the Other Cases the Jury acquitted & carried their Lenity too far on this sense & in Reducing to petit Larceny some Cases of Grand Larceny. It was certainly erring on the Humane side.
I wish to present to You my thanks for Mr Burr’s Communications of the 27th. ulto.2 which did not reach my Hands until the 13th. Inst.— I should have been silent on the subject of the pardon to those Butchers,3 if the Business had not presented itself in the present form for which I feel myself much indebted.
I have to Regret that any Gentleman not as fully acquainted with the Characters & Circumstances of the Offenders as the Court who adjudged them should interrest himself without any previous Inquiry or Explanation from the proper Source. I cannot develope the Whole Transaction in its Extent. It is not often that My Good friend James Morris4 errs & when he does it is from the Overgoodness of his Heart. That has betrayed him & his Confidence in Captn. Lovell & others who do not deserve it has on this Occasion led him away— I wish to pass it over in silence further than to say that the Representation sent to Your Excellency by the Culprits is untrue, & if it was important & could be prosecuted as a Wilful and corrupt perjury I would soon convince Your Excellency of it by a Report from the next Court of Oyer & Terminer of their Conviction of that Odious Offence. Moreover, Markler5 has permitted his Mother to be in the Alms House where she remained some Time altho three of her Sons were Butchers in the Market & I have applied to the Common Council to suspend them All, till they should agree to maintain their Mother— Her Maintenance is yet unpaid for.
The Reasons why the Court sentenced to Imprisonment was
1. That the Assault & Battery would probably have ended in the death of the person assaulted, as proved by him & 3 other totally indifferent Witnesses, if they had not been present. And in Case the Indictmt. had been so laid, they must have been convicted & gone to the State prison.—
2. That the Butchers are in the Habit of insulting passengers, & when convicted they dub the fine & it falls Light upon them & Imprisonment cannot be dubbed.
3. There were many other Butchers concerned in the 2nd. Beating who were to be deterred from such practices by Imprisonment only & We have too much Reason to believe that Captn. John Lovell,6 the Sheriffs Informt. was one of them.— Only One is yet discovered because the Man assaulted was a stranger to them.
Added to this the Watchmen have been frequently & lately beaten shamefully by Butchers in Disguise who have escaped by that Means & Lovell was one of them. ^He is a violent tempered and riotously disposed Man when in Company.^ The political Characters of these Men was not known or considered as it was a submission to the Indictments & at the Keel of a session. It now turns out that they were Burr’s Friends & partizans and that he promoted the first petition7 which I believe never reached Your Excellency.
I assure You Sir that it is not possible to keep our Disorderly persons in perfect Obedience to the Law by fining only,8 especially as our elective Officers can rarely be brought to a proper Key. I wish it had not happened: but the Sheriff feels very unpleasantly & I am sure he meant no Wrong. The Democrats were very much displeased & now they say at the Expence of the Recorder & Myself, that even Men of our party & our Friend deemed the Judgment improper. However I know their violent & very hostile Disposition towards me for more than 5 Years past & Value very little what the inferior puppies among them say.
I regret the Intimation that Your Excellency is not willing any longer to administer the Government of the State both on public & private Account.—I fear the former will receive essential Injury if not ruin to our political prosperity.— As to my own private Account it only interest Myself & my own particular Friends. My fate has been long since announced. Indeed they already Count upon my certain Destruction in the ensuing Winter.
Their Confidential Men do not hesitate to say to others of them that they will compel Governor Jay to turn Mr Varick out of Office. That if they cannot allow, which they dispair of, they will assume the Right of Nomination as well as Appointment.9 That the people imperiously demand my Removal & it must and shall be done.10
It does not depend ^on^ Myself whether I shall or shall not be continued; but as far as it does depend on Myself I will & do assure my democratic foes that I will never resign to gratify them or Yield to them in any point [torn] I deem myself in the Right, but with my Breath [torn].
I should feel extremely humbled if the Threat came from the Friends of Government.— But when it comes from Men who will not allow me the Right of speaking or acting politically as a freeman of the State or who from personal pique & Mortification would wish to degrade & even Ruin Me if they could, I disdain their Threats. They cannot Charge me with Abuse of Office, I defy the Worst of them.— They are hard set if they cannot discover any other than the Burke & Crady Theme.—11 Their Enmity commenced some Months before that Event. And as to the Clinton family, they have stabbed in the Dark until I spoke out in plain Terms respecting their kind[?] as well in politicks as towards Myself individually & now I am branded with the Epithet of Ingrate &cc.—, and they have sworn Vengeance & I have no Doubt will pursue Me. I only Regret that Your Excellency should be wounded thro Me or on my Account. I shall not yield at all & if they displace me ^I will submit as a fœderalist ought &^ it will furnish precedent and a good One. I am very respectfully Yours,
Rich. Varick
ALS, NNC. (EJ: 09301). Addressed: “His Excellency / John Jay Esquire / Governor of the State of / New York at Albany.” Stamped: “New York / NOV / 17”. Marked: “34”. Endorsed: “Richd. Varick / 15 nov. 1800 / ansd. 27 nov.” For JJ’s reply, see his letter of 27 Nov., Dft, NNC (EJ: 09289).
1. Enclosed report of the court of Special Sessions not found. For local press reports of the court of Special Sessions for 4 Nov. 1800, see Commercial Advertiser and Mercantile Advertiser (both New York), 18. Nov. 1800.
2. AB’s correspondence of 27 Oct. 1800, not found.
3. In his response, JJ observed “Your Remarks respecting the pardon in question, shew the Necessity of Circumspection on such Occasions, and I concur with you in opinion that our Friend Morris acted the best motives.” JJ to Varick, 27 Nov. 1800, Dft, NNC (EJ: 09289).
4. James Morris (c. 1764–1827), son of Lewis Morris, attorney and sheriff of the City and County of New York, 1798–1800.
5. Possibly Henry Markel, who is listed as a butcher residing at Fourth Street. The New trade directory for New-York, anno 1800. Being the twenty-fifth year of American independence; containing a complete list of all occupations and trades (alphabetically arranged practiced in the city with the names and residences of those who follow each of them respectively, also in alphabetical order (New York, 1800; Early Am. Imprints, series 1, no. 35913), 21.
6. John Lovell is listed as a butcher residing at 70 Bowery Lane. Longworth’s American almanack, New-York register, and city directory, for the twenty-fifth year of American independence (New York, 1800; Early Am. Imprints, series 1, no. 37844), 261.
7. AB’s petition presented on behalf of the accused butchers not found.
8. In response to Varick’s comments on the practice of issuing fines, JJ responded “when ^Fines are paid by Contributions their [illegible] ^purpose cannot^ ^in general^ ^be fully answered and whenever^ that mode of payment is presumable ^from Indications of combination^ Imprisonment is ^undoubtedly^ better adviseable”. JJ to Varick, 27 Nov. 1800, Dft, NNC (EJ: 09289).
9. For the struggle over the right of nomination that effectively ended the Council of Appointment during the final months of JJ’s administration, see the editorial note “Conflict with the Council of Appointment,” below.
10. JJ remarked on Varick’s continuation as mayor with the following: “^It has frequently been^ said that your Removal ^from office^ was a point settled; and undoutbledly it is a practicable—I may and shall nominate you again, but unless the Counsell consent, [illegible] it will be fruitless—who will be in such Case will be your Successor cannot be foreseen— In my opining it you ought not to resign nor to decline a nomination— Your Removal might gratify some, but it would disgust more.” JJ to Varick, 27 Nov. 1800, Dft, NNC (EJ: 09289).
Varick had been appointed mayor of New York City in 1789 and remained in office through August 1801. In that month, the Republican-led Council of Appointment replaced him with Edward Livingston.