• vCc ® * A iiruLxr/ fc mpi 3f?: fwi: slimirn few ifTT lo ua ri3v/| np r3ixiu. Il!) Jji. L QtftU& tfl lhanyii j,' LJ if | J DJhVJ. J 1U. 5YU Dun AJ pan W lerl/.- fio Iff 3* tabd terfi. nya rseiwfc ,/ isorftO 5 fQU SO'I. o rf ^ D— 1 '" in/ paH. Jfjta Irul aval . . Hty " n / v i- iliJ V/ Giiil ,1) 2... N° 37-] ON FEES, GRATUITIES, & c.-( Malt.) 5S T) o. >' QU rerc° 1Iea anY to have been named when fees were the fubjed of con- venation r— There was- a Sum mentioned, but I do not recoiled what it was. Did any thing pafs from Mr. Fitzimons relative to fees ?- I do not recoiled, but he may have laid iomething about them. How long did you remain at the houfe of Mr. Fitzimons ?— About twentv mmutes. 1 Was the hour late ?— It was dark, though it was in Auguft. Was there any thing faid of monthly payments ?— Something may have been faid of monthly fees, but 1 don't know what. Did the convention which pafled about fees relate to anfwers already given, or to anfwers to be given f— The converfation which paffed related to anfwers which Clements either had given, or would give, but I do not recoiled which. Were thofe the anfwers refpeding fees, which you have before flated as incorred ? — Partly fo. Did the converfation apply folely to the fees of Clements, or to thofe of Mr. Fitzimons alfo ?— I confidered it to apply folely to the fees of Clements, but I will not take upon me to fay that the fees of the Infpedor General were not alfo meit- tioned. Did the anfwers given by Clements relative to his fees, appear to have been eva « five or untrue ?— In part they were evafive and in part untrue. Had you ever any converfation with any other Officer refpeding the particulars of the examination of Hill Clements before this Board ?— I never had any. Rich. Start. J. S. Rochfortj. Fred. Geale, Robert Alexander, ...••: Chas. Saxton. • J No. 37. taken on Oath, The Examination of Mr. WILLIAM KNIPE; the 13th and 14th day of May 1807. When the Commilfioners of Enquiry were about to commence their examination on the Excife, were vou ordered to feled any Officer to attend and give Evidence before them, relative to the mode of doing the duty over Diftilleries ?— I am not cer- tain that I was applied to ; but I know that an order was iiTuedto Mr. Fitzimons, the Infpedor General', and, 1 believe, to me, by the Board, to fend a good and intelligent '" Officer to the Commiffioners of Enquiry ; I dont recoiled that I recommended any Officer-; but Mr. Fitzimons faid jocularly in his Office, that " he would fend that rogue, Clements, and let them make the beft hand they can of him." What was the impreffion left on your mind by that obfervation of Mr Fitzimons ? — That he thought Clements fo clever, as to be able to give the Commiffioners of Enquiry fuch anfwers as would puzzle them. , If the feledion of an 5ffic. er for the above purpofe had been left to you, would you have ftnt Hill Clements ?-* fc> uld not. Why would you not have fefifcjClements ?— Becaufe I had not a good opinion of his integrity, though I knew him to be- clever. tvj ]\ fr Fi'zimons know what opinion you had of Clements ?— Mr. Fitzimons knew that I thought Clements a corrupt Officer, though a man of abilities. Wm. Knipe. J. S. Rochfort, Examinr- Fred. Geale, Robert Alexander, Charles Saxlcn. - 17. Mr. Starr. Mr. Knipe.