102 Assembly Proceedings, November 1-December 20, 1765.

U. H. J.
Liber No. 36
Dec. 19

Candour & Impartiality you profess, and not very consistent with
that Respect you allow them to have been entitled to.
You have been so far from supporting your Deductions, that
they have been clearly evinced to be against Facts, except in the
Instance wherein a Mistake is admitted by us, and if you were
probably Right in some of them, the Question between us is not
influenced thereby, since on the Account stated for the View already
explained the Sum exceeds M^r Ross's Claim for his Salary to the
Amount of 12,343 1/4^lb of Tobacco, and therefore if any Charge equal
to, or even beyond the Excess should be admitted to be improper,
his Claim, which is only of his accustomed Salary, for all Services
as well those that are as those that are not included in the Account
would not be affected.

By restraining the general Expressions of the Message in 1756
sent hither with the Journal you would endeavour to shew your
Conduct to be consistent with the ultimate Sense of that House
but a short Examination will discover with how little Success.
When the Upper House observed that M^r Ross's Salary was omitted

in the Journal they expressed themselves "That they were the more

surprized at this Omission, as the Lower House could not but know
there were several Laws in Force which require many services to
be done by him as Clerk of the Council" And the Lower House
catching at a particular Expression (a Practice too Common in this

p. 282

Kind of Controversy,) & evading the Reasoning in which the Ex-
pression stood, answered that "as the Upper House said there were
several Laws in Force which required many Services to be done
by the Clerk, when his Account for such Services should be laid
before them, it should be examined & every reasonable Allowance
made, but to make Allowances for Services Annually performed
in Compliance with the Laws, without any Account, was a Method
of dealing out the Peoples Money they could never come into." To
this the Answer of the Upper House was very short and determinate,
and the Question being put in the Lower House, whether M^r Ross

should be allowed as usual, it was decided affirmatively and a Message

sent with the Journal to notify their Assent to M.^r Ross's Claim,
and the general Resolve above recited. When the Upper House
expressed their Surprize on Account of the Circumstance that "the
Clerk was obliged by several Laws in Force to perform many
Services" their obvious Meaning was, that the Framers of those
Laws must have considered the Clerk of the Council as a Consti-
tutional Officer, with the Appointment of a Salary, Otherwise they
would not have been so unjust as to enjoin him to perform any
particular Duties without giving him particular Rewards, and after
the Lower House had catched at the Expression made use of by
the Upper, and endeavoured to give it a Turn very different from
the Real Meaning of it, but found the Upper House determined to