New York February 3, 1787 Sir I am to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23^d instant. Several important observations have been made on the paymental abstracts of 1778 sent in the place of the Letters for old Money received in conformity to the Resolve of November 1775 from M^r Griffin as I am told He would refer to the [undecipherable] years and was paid for the same by them, and I find that he has given credit in his accounts for nothing for the 1778, for a quantity received by him from the Committee of [undecipherable] to the amount of £093.0.3 and he charges this Committee with crediting to the amount of £201.0.2 leaving a variance of £0/32.3.0 — [undecipherable] money received from this Committee who I suppose acted for the State but it appears improbable that this clothing is the same with that you mention, because that it was delivered in 1775, that it constitutes principally in Shirts Shoes & Hose and that General [undecipherable] has produced the Officers receipts for his deliveries which he could not do if they were lodged with the State — This information may however be of some use to this Committee and for the State — Colonel [undecipherable] Pierce as I am informed on warrant afforded him with the [undecipherable] — [undecipherable] in September 1778 credited to the State of Massachusetts within a thousand Dollars received from that State — in settlement of the pay of the Line from the State of Massachusetts. I took up the accounts from January 1^st [undecipherable] and considered that as the State Pay and [undecipherable] that the whole wages for the year 1778 [undecipherable] what has been received on account from the continent, was paid by the State and to come into the general settlements. I therefore did not carry on the accounts of the Officers for this period and cannot without a reference to the Muster and an arrangement of the accounts from the first principles determine for you the balance which the State was authorised to pay on this occasion as well as in the case of the deprecation. I do not well know how any of the State Commissioners can determine the propriety of the payments without the Muster or an Abstract from them — I am &c [signature] Royal Flint, Esq^r New York February 3, 1787 Gentlemen In Secretary at War has drawn two Warrants on me in favor of Colonel — and Humphreys, one of which is for four hundred [and] twenty [two] Dollars being an account of one months pay to the Officers and the ballance of half a months pay to the [undecipherable] Commissioners Officers and Privates of his corps, in other is for the sum of five hundred and twenty one Dollars being Three Months subsistance for the said [undecipherable] in the whole to seven hundred & Four Dollars — I have therefore to request of your Honorable Board that such warrants may be granted in my favor as will enable me to make his payment to Colonel Humphrey — and am with great respect & Honorable Board of Treasury [signature] New York February 6, 1787 Dear Sir Your two Letters of the 10^th and 20^th of January are received — I have examined your account of the monies remaining as I judge to be accounted for [undecipherable] Col [undecipherable] by Colonel Jonathan Trumbull — accounted for the 63.167 [undecipherable] there [undecipherable] already accounted for does, I find [undecipherable] has not after the 500 Dollars with the [undecipherable] Dollars of M^r [undecipherable] nor has Thomas H. Polk the 210 nor was it issued for the $200 Dollars — And that Colonel Mennes's charges agreeable to the enclosed account — In sum 50,000 Dollars of which he has accounts for but the other must stand against him or some other person of that name. The same having not been acknowledged or deducted from any account — The charge against Colonel Mennes in 900 Dols has been accounted for. The 50,000 charges to Churchill Jones might unaccountably to be accounted for by him, and as of the others. The 530,000 Dollars charged to Taliaferro, M^r Harrison has made no return of or accounted for to him. It therefore remains a charge against M^r Taliaferro. The enclosed papers will shew its situation — If the returns and papers received by you in your Letter of the 20^th are most of them of no importance; The principal Papers which I want from you are the Musters & the abstracts files taken by you on your leaving me or were sent afterwards for the purposes of closing the accounts settled in your Office, then I want them for the same reason and to return them to the Office from whence they were taken — The attention to the old certificate is not as free as I should — your reasoning may perhaps now have — that your views — than I do think from me excepting that they were numbered to 10 & agreed. That in filling them up you were able to have each of the members blank which was by me to take upon which men were Attorneys. It is dated the N^o 1741 3 for a form even of this nature defaced by you in such manner as to falsify its validity — It has by some mechanism been omitted not to be found by you in which reason you are unable to produce the same on the settlement of your account of certificate papers received from me. I hope that my Letter enclosing Colonel White's papers dated December 18 has reached you — The account you require I shall make out and transmit to you as early as possible — I am &c [signature] Andrew Dunscomb Esq^r New York January 30, 1787 Sir Enclosed are the returns of the charges on mis doses received for Enlisted Veterans and Marines & [undecipherable] Department as per [undecipherable] M^r Newton in the year 1782 [signature] Office of Army Accounts New York February 22. 87 Sir In certificate N^o 34.778 which I issued [for] you and which a person is now confined in [undecipherable] appearing to be counterfeit, has been examined by me, by the private checks of the Office and I find that the same was originally issued for N^o 17.02 and has had the interlinement in every part excepting my signature and that it has been filled up so as to exactly answer the original certificate issued as N^o 34.778 this having is therefore only a continuation of the plan of the altered certificate and not a part of the paper Stolen from my Office as I at first supposed — There has been a certificate sent to me from the Loan Office of Connecticut altered throughout in the same manner as the above mentioned which was presented by Jesse Gibson to 25 [undecipherable] command and the [undecipherable] to be the same unless that has been taken before in that N^o 17[undecipherable] — plans to communicate this information to the chief justice as to Nicholas [undecipherable] Burnell and inform me to be to Thomas Smith Esq^r [signature] New York February 23, 1787 Sir I send two certificates to you on the 9 [undecipherable] of June last one for 60 [undecipherable] Dollars and the other to four hundred [and] [undecipherable] [undecipherable] dollars which certificates I have occasion to fear, in case you have sold them that the several hands they have passed — I am therefore to request you immediately on the receipt of this Letter, to make out a deposition, wherein you declare the name, occupation and place of abode of the person to whom you sold these certificates and as also the time and place when & where you disposed of them, which will oblige the public & your Humble Serv^t [signature] Cap^t Samuel Heiler New York February 25, 1797 Sir I have received your Letter of the [undecipherable] enclosing a final settlement Certificate appearing to be number 94.035 in favor of [undecipherable] [undecipherable] and for four hundred and eighty one dollars and eighty three which you desired me to determine whether it is a counterfeit. I find that this certificate was issued originally to eleven dollars forty [undecipherable] payments, & 43:54 and in favor of Samuel Brown. That the whole of the writing on the same receipt my hand writing has been taken off from the Paper by some measure and the present filling up has been inserted with an intention to defraud, it being an exact duplicate of an original appears while I referred to Captain [undecipherable] Samuel Heiler who was an Officer of Colonel [Brulley's?] Regiment — I have therefore detained this certificate for the present for further examination and have to request that if the person who applied for the Interest is to be found, that he be taken up and be made to answer for his conduct. I have reason to believe that the same person has passed certificates altered in a similar manner in different parts of the Continent; it will be very necessary for this reason if you can do it that you furnish me with a description of the person — I act of the register I shall send to you by the first safe conveyance — Wm. Imlay Esq^r P. Gentlemen I have examined the claim of [undecipherable] [undecipherable] agreeably to the directions of your Honorable Board of the 15 President and I find — That he was appointed Commissar to the Northern Army on the 14^th [undecipherable] November 1779, as registered by himself on the 14^th of October following, to take place on the 14^th of August and that he was discharged from his service on the 4^th of December the same year — That he has been paid by the United States the pay of his respective appointments from his entrance into the service to the first day of January 1794 — That the Resolutions of Congress of the 10 day of April 1780 under which the Officers of the late Army have received a deprecation on their pay, has confined their grant to those then in actual service of the United States, which exception I find that Congress have adhered to in their several actions of Aug^st 8. 1780, May 15 Aug. 12. 1783 and February 3. 1786 — I am therefore of opinion that as M^r [undecipherable] was not at the time of passing this act in the service, his petition & demands cannot be admitted without a violation of the principles & settled maxims of the nature — Office of Army Accounts, Feb^y 24. 87 [signature: PR]