John Jay Papers

To John Jay from Robert Troup, 13 June 1792

From Robert Troup

New York 13 June 1792

My Dear Sir

The Clintonian canvassers by fraud & violence have excluded you from the Government— The votes of Otsego— Tioga—& Clinton Counties have been rejected— Those of Tioga were returned by a deputy’s deputy which made their return questionable & those of Clinton by a deputy appointed by the Sheriff by parol. Both Burr & King were of opinion that a parol deputation was good & there is no doubt that the votes of Clinton were rejected to give a better appearance to those of Otsego— This violent & corrupt procedure has occasioned a great ferment in the City & the people are determined not to let the matter pass over in silence— Our friends amongst the canvassers have protested ag[ains]t. the proceedings of the others & their protest will be published tomorrow1— If we tamely submit to this flagrant attack upon our rights we deserve to be hewers of wood and drawers of water to the abandoned despots who claim to be our masters. With the sincerest regard I am, My dear Sir, Yours

Rob Troup

ALS, NNC (EJ: 07194). Addressed: “Hon’ble / John Jay Esquire / Favored by / Mr. John Kelly”. Endorsed: “Col. Troup 13 June / Recd. 24 Do / And. 25 Do} 1792”.

1Both the opinion of the Clintonian canvassers (David Gelston, Thomas Tillotson, Melancton Smith, Daniel Graham, Pierre Van Cortlandt Jr., David McCarty, and Jonathan N. Havens) and the dissenting opinion of the pro-Jay canvassers (Samuel Jones, Isaac Roosevelt, and Leonard Gansevoort), dated 12 June, appeared in the Daily Advertiser (New York) on 14 June. Clintonian canvasser Joshua Sands issued a separate dissenting opinion on 16 June that appeared in the Daily Advertiser on 18 June. See also the Diary (New York), 14 and 15 June; New-York Journal, 16 and 23 June 1792; and Albany Gazette, 25 June.

Index Entries