CAPE SABLE COMPANY'S CASE.—3 BLAND. 625

say * the 31st of December, 1823. The only objection to

this part of the claim is, that no vouchers are exhibited to 647

sustain it.

He next claims for amount of a draft supposed to have been
drawn by the claimant on Alexander Mitchell, in favor of Richard
Caton, at six months, for *2.500; which is charged to him m day-
book, folio 93. The books appear to have been made up some
time after the transactions recorded had taken place: and by an
accountant who does not seem to have had any personal know-
ledge of the affairs of the company. And immediately after the
entry, the accountant adds this memorandum. " There is some
doubt as to the correctness of the dft. of $2,500 being ch'd as
above: but neither Mr. C. nor Mr. M. seem to be prepared to ex-
plain the transaction; therefore, it is deemed advisable to make
this entry for the present, with the advice of Mr. C. to be investi-
gated in future." As the proposed investigation has never taken
place, and as no explanation has been made to the auditor, it is
submitted, that the claimant is entitled to be relieved from this
charge.

The third error charged is for the amount of Snelling and
Mason's acceptances of the claimant's drafts for $940 and $650,
entered in day-book, folio 69; which is supposed to be a double
entry for the proceeds of the first acceptance, entered in folio 23,
for $931; and of the second entered in folio 25, $518.10. The
auditor thinks those entries relate to the same transactions. But
in folio 22, there is a cross entry for the proceeds of the first ac-
ceptance; and in folio 25, there is a cross entry ibr the proceeds of
the second acceptance; which neutralize the former entries in
folios 23 and 25, and leave the claimant chargeable only with the
nominal amount of the acceptances as charged in folio 69. The
transaction appears to be as follows. The company had consigned
a parcel of alum to Snelling and Mason of New York; and, in
anticipation of sales, the claimant drew the bills in question on
Snelling and Mason in favor of Alexander Mitchell; who dis-
counted the same, and remitted certain sums, as the proceeds
thereof, to the claimant at Philadelphia, with the sum so remitted
he is chargeable, but with nothing more. The auditor, therefore,
thinks the error consists m charging the claimant with the nomi-
nal amount of his drafts, $1,590, instead of the sums remitted to
him as the proceeds thereof, 81,449.10.

The fourth error is for amount of account of I. and A. and W.
B. Post, $195.51; as of the 9th of December, 1820, charged in
*day-book, folio 99. As the articles included in this ac-
count, from their nature, and from the entries on the books, 648
appear to have come to the use of the company, the claimant
seems to have been improperly charged as between Messrs. Post

40 3 B.