Appendix J
Oldham's Lawsuit Documents

Dear Sir Monticello Nov. 1. 17.

After a separation of near 20. years I avail myself of the occasion of recalling myself to your recollection which is furnished by the necessity of asking information from you in the line of your business, and which I trust you will have the goodness to give me. we are here engaged in the erection of a college called the Central college. we have agreed to give our Carpenters & housejoiners the prices stated in the last Philadelphia Builder's Price book with whatever percent on them is habitually now allowed there as the advance of prices since the date of that book. will you be so good as to inform me what is the advance now habitually allowed there [on] those printed prices? and will you moreover be so good as to indicate to mr Matthew Carey the genuine edition of that book (for I am told there is a spurious one) who on your shewing him this letter, will I am sure be so kind as to procure and send me the book by mail: the cost of which shall be remitted to him separately or await on account for a considerable supply of books for which I shall apply to him within 2. or 3. weeks. I take this occasion with pleasure of assuring you of my continued esteem & respect.

Th: Jefferson

ALS (polygraph copy), DLC:TJ, 1p, with TJ docket "Carstairs Thos. Nov. 1. 17." TJ made this copy on a coversheet addressed to "Thomas Jefferson Esqr Monticello near Milton." TJ's copying machine failed to make the letters in square brackets. Thomas Carstairs was a "practical contractor" who worked with TJ, William Thornton, Stephen Hallet, and James Hoban on the Capitol building in Washington in the 1790s (see John Dos Passos, "Builders for a Golden Age," American Heritage, 76). TJ wrote to Carstairs again on 16 January and Carstairs replied to TJ on 26 January 1818.

[ca 1 March 1819]

1819 A part of the Proctors Advertisment to Undertakers House Carpenters and Joiners--As the items of house carpenters and Joiners and there several Prices are too nu[m]erous to be specifyed, some Standard of refference for Prices must be proposed. The Philadelphia House Carpenters book of prices printed by M. Carey in 1812, is adopted for the rule of prices and every undertaker is to say whither he will undertake, at the Prices printed in that book or at what pr Cent more or less. Lumber is excepted from this refference to be settled at its actual cost, the uncertainty of which might be hazardous for the undertaker, but unseasoned boards must be sufficiently Kiln dryed by him. Where an item of work and prices are not to be found directly in the price Book it is to be deduced from the elements furnished by other articles in the book. As the buildings are distributed in portions of a little more or less than a 100 thousand Bricks, each undertaker is to say for How much of these portions he will contract to finish the wooden work by the first day of February next--

Whenever work is not finished by the stipulated day the party failing is to pay as an indemnification as rent of 10 pr Cent on the cost of the building from the day stipulated until his part of the work is finished--Advances of money will be made from time to time to the amount of Materials brought into place and of half the workmanship actually done, the balance within six months from the completition of each portion--

Letters containing proposials are to be addressed to the Subscriber--as Proctor of the University near Charlottesville with as Little delay as possible, and an answer will be promptly returned--

Signed Nelson Barksdale

Copy (extract), in "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," ViU:PP; copy, part of document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823. Oldham's extract presumably was copied from a local newspaper. The advertisement was placed in newspapers in several other localities, including Staunton, Winchester, Richmond, Baltimore, and Philadelphia (see TJ to Thomas Cooper, 3 March, TJ to Joseph Carrington Cabell, 6 March, and JCC's reply of 12 March, TJ to Dabney Carr, 11 March, Israel Collett's Account for Advertising, 18 March, and Thomas Cooper to TJ, 11 April 1819 as well as the letters cited below). This advertisement appeared in the Richmond Enquirer on 12 March (see Richard M. Burke to Barksdale, 6 April 1819). For proposals of undertakers which make direct mention of this advertisment, see Levi Taylor to Barksdale, 16 March, James C. Fisher, et all to Barksdale, 17 March, Christopher Branch to TJ, 20 March, Jacob H. Walker to Barksdale, 20 March, John Parham to Barksdale, 23 March, Chilion Ashmead to Barksdale, 24 March, William Hawley, Jr., to Barksdale, 24 March, E. W. Hudnall to TJ, 26 March, Richard Ware to Barksdale, 26 March, James Oldham to Barksdale, 27 March, John Percival to TJ, 29 March, Abraham Woglome to Barksdale, 30 March, Richard M. Burke to Barksdale, 6 April, Daniel Flournoy to TJ, 8 April.

Sir Sharlottesville March 27.--1819.

The standard adopted in your advertisment for the rule of Prices, for the Carpenters and Joiners worke of the Buildings to be erected at the university of virginia, I tender to you my Servises to undertake one or two of the Buildings at 25 cent advance on the adopted rule, the worke to be performed agreeable to the Turms specifyed in the Advertisment, but the kilndrying of Plank and bordes will be charged for, With Grate Respect I have the Honor to be Sir Your Obt. Sevt.

J; Oldham

ALS, ViU:TJ, 1p [1659] with TJ docket "Carpenter. Oldham James." Oldham's initially wrote "20 cent advance on the adopted rule" but changed it to "25 cent advance." Before the closing Oldham struck out "and a cent on all Iron mongery equal to that of the retail merchant."

Oldham modified this offer in a letter to TJ of 3 April. For the university's response to his proposals, see TJ's two notes to Oldham of 8 April.

Apl 8. 19

The terms offered by James Oldham are accepted for the Pavilion No 1 with an allowance to him of the Philadelphia printed prices without any discount Pavilion No 1 is 44. f front & 48. f. flank, the interval between N 11 & 1 is 54. f. from wall to wall--

Ths Jefferson

Copy, document A in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; copy, document A in document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; copy (extract), in "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," ViU:PP. This letter covered a second note of this date from TJ to Oldham (see below). See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Apl 8--19--

Th Jefferson sends to Mr Oldham an acceptance of his offer to undertake a pavilion, at the printed Philadelphia prices without the discount offered by him--he Sends him a drawing of the pavilion No 1 allotted to him, and wishes him to take a copy for his own use so that Th. J. may receive back his own on his return from Bedford, Say at the next Court--the master work men may lodge in the Dormitories themselves and the under workmen in the cellars of the Dormitories--

Copy, document B in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. TJ enclosed this note with his letter to Oldham of this date. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Jas Oldham in Act. with Jonathan Michie July 17 1819

To Three Thousand nine hundred & forty eighty feet of 1¼ I boards

at $2 pr hundred 78.97

do Three Thousand six hundred & forty Six feet of 1 I bords

at $1.50 pr hundred 54.66

do One hundred & thirty five feet of 2 I bords at $2.50 pr Hundred 3.37½

do four hundred & thirty three feet of ½ I bords at $1.16¼ 5.07

do One Pine Stock--300 feet 1.50 4.50

$146.57½

Jonathan Michie

ADS, ViU:PP, 1p, with docket "James Oldham to Janan. Michie paid 29th. Sepr. 1819 $146.57." Michie's signed receipt for partial payment on the day of the lumber's delivery reads: "Recd. of Jas Oldham One hundred dollars in part of within act. this Seventeenth day of July 1819 Jonathan Michie." Two months later Oldham signed a receipt beneath the account that reads: "Sept 29th 1819 Recd a Dft on Bursar for the above Bill of $146.57. 146.57½ [-] 32 [=] $178.57½ J; Oldham."

Sir, University January 3. 1822

Since the 2 of November last I have repetedly solicited a Settlement of my worke with the Proctor, of this fact, their is evidence--on yesterday I renewed the subject again when he positively refused to do any thing with it--and declared that I should not recieve one cent of pay until it Suted him to give it--I am advised to make an appeale to Mr Jefferson and to give a Statement of the Condition of my worke which will be seen in the following memorandum--Pavilion 1--finished inside, except the hand rail which is redy and will be finished in one day when I receive the Locks and Hinges to complete the doors--

The 4 dormitories ajoining finished and have been occupied during the Summer--the Closet doors are unhung--Hotel A east finished complete one week before the meteing of the bord of visitors--locks & hinges wanting and have been repeetedly asked for--

The 9 Dormitories, the floors are all finished and the inside worke mearely all prepared--all the Sashes for these ware made in June last and those for the Hotel made in the month of may, not one of them Glaized--

Hotel A, West, all the sashes glaized and fited compleet, the cornice all prepared and the Architraves for the windows and door insid nearly done and the Shingling bords Suffitient to compleet the roofs of 2 Dormitories & Piaza of Hotel prepared: the Scantling for the rasining floore and roof of this house is not yet received, but has been pressed for with all the force I posses I am redy to pledge myself that the finished work will exceed the Sum of six thousand dollars by the Proctors own measurement--

admit the lowest Sum of-- $6000.11

ad to this Sum an account due to me Since the years 19 & 20, for

Lumber waggonage horse hire, Kiln drying, Plank and Cash 221.37

advanced the sum of $6221.37

Total sum received 2309.94

$3911.43

From 2½ to 3 days would be Suffitient time to measure and estimate all my worke that is finished & unfinished the working draughts being redy at hand--as it would require some time for the Arbitrators to meete I perposed theare appointment first to be done, then to prepare the estimate of worke and lay that which may be in dispute before them--that you Sir will direct the course to be pursued in this business and in the mean time permit me to have a little money as I am in grate neede Sincearely hoped for--

J. Oldham

Endorsed--A Copy of a letter sent to Mr Jefferson respecting a settlement--January 3rd 1822--

Copy, document H in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Dear Sir Monticello Jan. 3. 22.

I sincerely regret that any difficulties should arise between Mr Brockenbrough and yourself on the Subject of your contracts, but it is totally foreign to my office to intermeddle with them--I cannot entangle myself in the labyrinth of questions between the proctor and undertakers as the contracts are made with him, with him they must be settled as they would be with any other employer in any private case--I should think both of you would prefer arbitration to law, but in this you must chuse for yourselves--with respect to money a Sum of 15,000 D. became due at the Treasury the day before yesterday out of which I presume a payment can be made you as soon as the Bursar has made arrangements to draw for it--I hope you will find it reasonable that I should be excused from interferences which are not within my province and I assure you of my best wishes and friendly respects--

Th Jefferson

Copy, document I in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; polygraph copy, ViU:TJ [1917]. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Sir University Va Jan 3. 22

I have your communication of this date to Mr Jefferson, written no doubt to injure me in the estimation of Mr J. and wherein you State "Since the 2nd Novr last I have repeatedly solicited a Settlement of my work with the proctor["] of this fact there is evidence I admit you have frequently mentioned the Subject of a settlement by arbitration--and I as often have proposed going on with the measurement and fixing the prices of the work and such articles as we could not agree on to be Settled by Arbitration hereafter--Your course I did not think proper to take--my proposition you rejected again you say "on this day I renewed the Subject again when he posatively refused to do any thing with it and declared that I should not receive one cent of pay until it suited him to give it"--as well as my memory Serves me (but perhaps it may not be as good as Capt Oldhams) our conversation on Tuesday turned principally on the acct for Scaffolding, timber &c--when I Stated particularly there were Items in that acct which I would Settle for at any time--but I could not pitch on any particular day for an arbitration of the acct, I made no such declaration relative to your pay as you Stated in your letter--I have called on you frequently for a memorandum of such locks hinges &c. as you wanted for the buildings you were working on--I have never received a memorandum of the articles, as for Hinges I sent to Charlotesville to get them for the Hotel if Mr Vowles word is to be taken in evidence, it is your fault that the Hotel windows are not glazed--Sir, I will lay down explicitly the course I mean to pursue in this business--it is so Simply this, as fast as the buildings are finished, I shall with the undertakers measure the work and make out the bills agreeable to the Philadelphia price book, if the undertakers and myself can agree on all Settled Bills, I shall give drafts for the balances that may be due as fast as funds can be obtained to take them up all unsettled bills will be layed over untill the entire completion of the buildings, to be then left to reference, Sooner than that unless expressly ordered--I will not arbitrate any acct--I am Sir your Obt Servt

A. S. Brockenbrough P. U.Va.

Endorsed--Since writing the within I have accidentally come across your memorandum of Locks and Hinges left I suppose with Mr Thornton--A.S.B.

Capt James Oldham--Present

Copy, document J in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File (see James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823); copy, part of document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File, dated 5 January 1822; copy, document no. 1 in "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," ViU:PP.

Sir, U.Va Jan 25 1823

In reply to your note of yesterday morning Stating you have no objection to a settlement of your accts in Richmond thereby lessing the expence--I have to inform you--cannot agree that the business Should be done in Richmond for there I cannot attend to it--and again the Kind of work charged in the bill can be better understood by seeing it again the bills as made out by you must not be layed before the arbitrators, but new bills including the Items not Settled by us in quantity and price put down, so that the Arbitrators themselves may settle the quantity where we disagree and the price--as you have a desire to lessen the expence, I will meet your proposition thus far--If the two persons Selected to Settle the bills disagree--I will in all cases where that is the case Split the difference with you, at the same time--let this agreement between us be Kept a perfect Secret from the arbitrators and give them to understand where they disagree, they must each give the price were it so happens--I expect to make an appointment in Richmond when ever I can get down--I am Sir respectfully yours

A. S. Brockenbrough--P

Copy, document S in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; Copy, document no. 3 of document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; copy, document no. 3 in "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," ViU:PP. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Dear Sir Monticello Feb. 4. 23.

Mr Brockenbrough has shewn me a letter, written anonimously, charging him with the grossest frauds and malversation in the office of Proctor of the University, and addressed to Mr Griffin a member of the legislature. I know the hand writing of the letter as well as I do my own, and possess many samples from the same pen. it is from James Oldham one of our undertakers. I have known him 15. or 20. years. he worked on my house some years, is as faithful a workman as I have ever known, and I have ever believed him an honest man. but his temper is unhappy. disagreements with his brother-workmen occasioned his leaving my service, without any displeasure between him and myself; and knowing his skill and fidelity as a workman I got him employed at the University. he soon got into misunderstandings there with the Proctor, he refused to settle his accounts on the principles on which I am informed the other undertakers have settled, and has not yet closed with the propositions of arbitration which have been offered. this has prevented his receiving payments for his work in proportion with others, and has engendered the dispositions of mind manifested in that letter. I did not suppose however that his self-respect would have permitted him to have attacked an adversary from behind the mask of an anonymous information; or that instead of laying his charges before the board of Visitors whose duty it is to inquire into any malversations of their officers, he would have sent them enquiry at such a distance, to a gentleman under no particular relations with the matter and who, I am sure must have felt his justice offended by the presumption of the writer that he would become the instrument of any one who would not risk his own name on his charges. with respect to the charges themselves, I shall say nothing now; because I hold it to be the duty of the board, if the informer will undertake to maintain them, to go into that inquiry at our next meeting, and to go into it uncommitted and unbiased by former opinions. it is surely our duty to see that those whom we employ act faithfully to their trust, and that the money of the public confided to our care be honestly and economically administered. in justification of myself however so far, I may say that so much of the conduct of Mr Brockenbrough as has come under my observation has had the stamp of the most perfect integrity and diligence; that it has kept me in a state of entire satisfaction, and that I have deemed it one of the happinesses of our undertaking to have found two officers so capable and so trust-worthy as our Bursar and Proctor: and yet that had any of these anonymous charges been ever suggested to me on grounds worthy notice, no personal confidence or consideration on earth would have prevented my instituting a proper investigation of them. and I still deem that it would be injustice to suffer the confidence I have had, and still have in Mr Brockenbrough to be impaired by any thing contained in this anonymous letter. I shall devise Mr Oldham to put his charges into distinct and issuable forms, to give a copy of them to Mr Brockenbrough, and both to be prepared for their investigation at our meeting in April. on this subject I shall await your information, and the advice of our colleagues with you, and that this should be given me as early as the proceedings with you shall enable you, saluting you with affectionate friendship and respect

Copy, ViU:TJ, 2p [1974] with TJ docket "Cabell Joseph C. Feb. 4. 23." Brockenbrough apparently conveyed this letter to Cabell (see Cabell to TJ, 11 February).

Sir University Va. Feby 5--1823

In consequence of some abominable Slanderous charges, and insinuations thrown out against me in a letter directed to Thos Griffin Esqr member of the General assembly, Signed a farmer in which I recognize you to be the author, I must withdraw my proposition made some 8 or 10 days past to appoint arbitrators in Richmond to Settle your accts with the University of Va.--after such conduct you certainly cant expect me to have any thing to do with you or your accts untill after a complete investigation of my official conduct takes place which I am well assured will be at the next meeting of the visitors of the University of Va. this therefore is the last communication you will receive from me, until after that time--I am Sir

A. S. Brockenbrough

Copy, document T in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Gentlemen, Proctors Office April 7th 1823

I beg leave to lay before you my contract with Mr Wm. J. Coffee for Composition & Leaden ornaments for the buildings, I do this because Mr Coffee is dissatisfied and complains heavily of his bargain, and I am not willing to take upon myself the responsibility of advancing more than the contract calls for--he has sent on an acct. amounting to $487.46--the cost agreeable to my estimate on the back of the contract amts to $382.39 which I have authorized him to draw for--since doing so I find he has not completed his contract--⁽⁸⁵⁶⁾

It will be necessary to make some provision for the debts of the University of Va. three or four of the accts. are unsettled therefore I can't say to a certainty the amt of them but as near as I can come I suppose them to be a little over $20,000--including the completion of the garden Walls & Privies--

I must beg permission to call your attention to what materially concerns myself--my character has been furiously attacked by an anonymous writer under the name of a "Farmer"--I must ask an investigation of my official conduct as proctor of the University of Va. if my conduct has been as represented by that writer you will no doubt act as you should do in that case by dismising Me your service if on the contrary the charges alledged against be found with out foundation, I hope you will do me the justice to make some public declaration to that effect.⁽⁸⁵⁷⁾ my feelings have been much wounded by those calumnious charges--I ask a public declaration of your sentiments for the satisfaction of my distant friends and my posterity, the most fervent wish of My heart is to leave an untarnished reputation as an inheritance to my children--I am Gentlemen most respectfully your obt sert

A. S. Brockenbrough

ALS, ViU:PP, 2p. with address "To the Rector & Visitors of the University Va" and TJ docket "Brockenbrough. A. S. Apr. 7. 23. recd Apr. 7." For the enclosed contract between William J. Coffee and Brockenbrough, see their Agreement for Ornamentation, 18 March 1822.

July 14th 1823.

At the Solicitation of Capt Oldham I accompanied him to the office of the Proctor U.Va. for the purpose of ascertaining his course with respect to the settlement of Capt. Oldhams bills for work done at the university--upon enquiring of him what course he wished to pursue on this Subject, after hesitating he replyed that he wished Capt Oldham to leave the bills with him, that he might run over them, for the purpose of ascertaining what would be the difference of the estimates made by Capt Oldham and that made by himself--Capt Oldham then observed that there could be no utility in that as he, the Proctor had already examined the bills and had made his objections--that he would not be willing to take the prices according to the Proctors estimate and he Supposed that no utility could be found in the course Suggested by the Proctor as to leaving the accounts with him, But Mr Oldham observed that he was willing to let Mr Dawson Copy the accounts at the expence of the University--Mr Proctor did not Say whether he wished Mr Dawson to take a Copy of the bills or not--It was then observed by myself that Capt Oldhams object was to ascertain whether the proctor was willing to have an arbitration of the accounts in pusuance of an agreement which exhisted between himself and the proctor previous to or on the 25th Jany last as appears by letter--Mr Brockenbrough remarked that it was understood between himself and Mr Jefferson that there Should be no arbitration, the question was Several times repeated as to the arbitration, and he as often confirmed what he first said about the aribtration--Immediately previous to our leaving the office I was requested by Capt Oldham to be more explicit in my enquiry with regard to the arbitration and request Capt Brockenbrough to be more explicit in his answer to my enterrogatory--I think Capt. Brockenbrough said he was directed not to agree to an arbitration of these differences with Capt Oldham (not saying who had directed him) but at the same time remarked that Mr Jefferson had told him to do as he pleased about it--Capt Oldham in the mean time baving observed that he had not understood from Mr Jefferson that he was opposed to an arbitration as to a portion of his Bills but that he was willing to a refference of part of his account--

The substance of a Conversation in my presence between Capt Oldham myself and the Proctor as at present recollected by me

Signed Rice Wood

Copy, document no. 4 of document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File; copy, document no. 4 in "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," ViU:PP; another copy, signed by Wood, Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:PP. The second copy in ViU:PP apparently was made before Brockenbrough filed his Bill of Exception, 3 January 1831. Wood made a related certificate on 19 November 1823. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

To the Rector and Visitors of the U.Va Octr 3rd 1823

You[r] memorialist James Oldham very respectfully represents--That he was induced by the propositions made by the Proctor of U.V. to apply for some of the work that was proposed to be let out to undertakers in the spring of the year 1819--He accordingly made his proposals to the former Proctor U.V. and the Proctor laid them before the board of visitors at their spring meeting in 1819. After the dissolution of the meeting--He was informed by the Rector that his proposals were approved, and entered into a written contract with the Rector--a Copy of which contract is herewith exhibited marked (A)--

By which contract he bound himself to execute certain houses which were then to be erected at the U--and by which it was agreed that the price of the work should be regulated by a Price-book which was published in Philadelphia in the year 1812 by Matthew Carey--so far as the Items of work to be done was specified in the price book--But in the event of a difficulty in consequence of work done for which no price was specified in the price book the proposals above alluded to--as published by the Proctor provided that the price of such work as had not been fixed by the price book should be deduced from the elements of which sd. work was composed--A Copy of which proposals is herewith exhibited and referred to for the Correctness of this Statement--Your memorialist proceeded with deligence and fidelity to the performance of the work allotted to him by the Proctor and Rector, until the Autumn of the year 1822--at which time he completed this undertakings except as to some unimportant particulars which he could not execute for want of materials which the Proctor had undertaken to furnish, in the capasity of Agent for the purchase of materials--Allthough the Proctor as your memorialist humbly conceives, acting out of his duty--had interfered with him by employing other artists to execute work which had been let to him by contract, and which he had, had no oppertunity to perform, for the want of materials--Your memorialist continued labouring for the institution over which you preside upon different buildings then erected for the period of nearly four years--at great expence, having many hands in his employment during the time, and persevered until his Contracts with the Rector were fulfilled on the part of himself--During the progress of his work your memorialist had frequent interviews with the Proctor upon the Subject of the Settlement of his bills for work which had been either wholly or in part completed by him--And as it appeared to your memorialist that there might be a variance of opinion between himself and the Proctor upon the Subject of charges he became solicitous to Know before he proceeded further with his work, what method the Proctor would approve as a means of removing such difficulties--And from repeated communication both personally and by letter it was agreed between the parties that all difficulties with regard to the charges of your memorialist was to be removed by arbitrators one chosen by each of them as evidence of which understanding and agreement he begs leave to refer the board to letters written by the Proctor to your memorialist, copies of which are herewith exhibited marked 1. 2 & 3. one dated Nov. 5th 1821 a second dated Jany 3d 1822--and a third dated Jany 25th 1823. This understanding was satisfactory to your memorialist as he considered it as forming a part of the contract which he was executing deligently on his part--and he was advised its execution could be enforced on the part of the Rector and visitors of the institution--These considerations quieted his fears and Soothed the anxiety of his mind, and he proceeded with his labour--Whenever he pressed a referaence against the institution for work which was so far completed as to entitle him to receive considerable sums of money from the Institution, the Proctor would state objections and urged your memorialist to complete the buildings and then was the time that he intended to refer the accounts as to all items about which they could not agree--Your memorialist finished the buildings he undertook in the fall of the year 1822--and since that period--he has been constantly urging the Proctor to Settle his accounts in the way agreed upon--He has not only made personal application to him on this behalf but has employed Counsel to press his claims before him and he is now informed by him, that he will not consent to an arbitration at all, that if your memorialist will not take what he offers him, that he must resort to a Court of Justice for a remedy--As evidence of which determination on the part of the Proctor, the board is referred to the certificate of Rice W. Wood, who was employed by your memorialist to act as counsel for him in the Settlement of his bills against the institution with the Proctor and is herewith exhibited marked (4)--⁽⁸⁵⁸⁾

But your memorialist has waited twelve months already since the completion of his work, rather than incur the Costs of a law suit himself and embroil your institution in litigation--He has thought it better to wait and appeal to your board--being advised that you are clothed with a controuling power, persuaded as he is of your disposition to do him complete Justice--Your memorialist considers that he is not only entitled to an arbitration of his accounts by virtue of his agreement with the Proctor--But he is also persuaded that in the absence of all agreement that your honourable body will agree with him in the opinion, that the submission of disputes of this Character to arbitration is not only the most equitable but the most eligible method of deciding them--The board must be familiar with many illustrious instances in which this method has been adopted not only for the decision of differences between individuals, but also in the Case of national disputes--The experience of your memorialist furnishes him with an instance of Similar character to this to which he wishes to call the attention of the board--He alludes to the case in the which the executive of Virginia thought proper to Submit claims for work between the State and the Artists who repaired the Capitol in 1817. to the Arbitration of men, one chosen by each as will apear by referaence of the Copy of the order of Council hereto annexed marked (6)--Your board will the more readily grant this request, when you are informed that your memorialist is not only Kept here in a State of Suspence with regard to his accounts, and reduced to the necessity of resorting to his own funds for the purpose of defraying the expences he has incurred on act of the University, and which he is daily incurring for the means of support--As evidence of which as to a part he refers to a bill for lumber herewith produced (5)--Your memorialist has chosen to make an appeal to the board from the Proctors decision, because he has the most perfect confidence in their Justice and thinks it would be idle to go else where to procure that Justice which he confidently expects from them Influenced by the solicitude he feels for a Speedy and amicable Settlement of his disputes with the Proctor--He thought proper to trouble the Rector with his Complaints--But he was Sorry to find that his opinions varied some what from your memorialists ideas of Justice and equity--He appeared to be willing to Submit a portion of your memorialists bills to arbitration, But thought that he ought to consent that those Arbitrators should be farmers and not Carpenters--As to the other Items of account he Seemed to think that your memorialist ought to abide by the prices fixed in bills Settled with other undertakers--Your memorialist thinks that the Settlements of others is not obligatory upon him, even if they had been conclusive Settlements--But in two cases he is informed that the undertakers were induced to acquiesce in the proctors terms, not because, they thought them correct, but because they were desirous to get the money for their work and avoid controversies--In a third instance the undertaker States that he was compelled to make Sacrifices to get his accounts Settled--as to the proposition to Submit to farmers--it was objected to because it was believed they were not so well qualified as artist, to decide correctly--Your memorialist would be willing to Submit his disputes to any men whose experience and Knowledge qualify them to decide correctly--But he is not Singular in the Idea that the more Knowledge a man has upon a given Subject the more capable he is of forming a correct Idea upon that Subject--If Farmers could be procured much experienced in house Joining he would be willing to Submit to their award--But it does appear to him that no one can form so correct an Idea of the value of a piece of work as the man who has been in the habit of executing that worke--Your memorialist does not wish it to be understood that it is his prayer that the whole of his work Should be submitted to arbitration--he only craves an execution of the proctors agreement--Your memorialist prays for the health and prosperity of the Board individually and collectively--

James Oldham

Copy, part of document U in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. Copies of some of Oldham's supporting documents for his lawsuit against the university are in ViU:PP, marked "Memoriall to the bord of Visitors of the U.Va. Octobr 3. 1823," and includes William Robertson's Order, 2 June 1818, Nelson Barksdale's Advertisement for Workmen, ca 1 March 1819, Jefferson to Oldham, 8 April 1819, Brockenbrough to Oldham, 5 November 1821, 3 January 1822, and 25 January 1823, and Rice W. Wood's Certificate, 14 July 1823. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

[19 November 1823]

I do heareby certify that at the solicitation of Capt. Oldham I did as his friend and advisor call upon the proctor of the university for the perpose of ascertaining from him whether he had decided upon the course he intended to persue with regard to Capt. Oldham's accounts and also to endevour if possible to procoure an arbitration of the same.--This I did on the first of November. in consequence of the pressing business then on hand the proctor declined entering into conversation upon the subject.--I saw him again in the corse of the succeeding week when we had some conversation upon the subject, and I pressed upon him the subject of a decition upon the mater, he replied that he wished to take further time for deliberation, but stated that he would give me a reply in the course of two or three days.--

About a week elapsed, and Capt Oldham being urgent upon me I again called to see the proctor at his office, and enquired of him his intentions, he then stated that he had not yet decided, that he had expected that Mr. Jefferson would have been at the University before that time and that he was desireous of having a consultation with him; That he expected to have an opportunity of doing so in some short Time, and again repeated that he would rite to me as soon as he did so, I waited four or five days and haveing received no reply, I was again urged by Capt. Oldham to write him a note, which I did on last monday, but receiving no reply, I at the instance of Capt. Oldham wrote a second note on the next wednesday, to which a reply was given by the proctor that he had not received a reply to a letter written by him to Mr. Jefferson upon that Subject.

This day Rice W. Wood Made Oath before me that the forgoing statement Contains the Substance of two Conversations held in his presence, between Jam[e]s Oldam and A S Brockenbrough the first On the 14th. July 1823 the 2d. on the 19 Nov 1823 as appears by Written memorandums Made at the time of which the forgoing are true Copies

Jno. R. Jones

Question by the defendt. A S Brockenbrough--Did I not in a short time after the foregoing conversations took place address a letter to you, with such articles of agreement there in as I was willing to go into an arbitration of Capt oldhams accounts with the University

Answer. Some time after the 19th Nov 1823 I did receive a letter from the defendant Brokenbrough in which he stated that he was willing to submit to an arbitration of the matters of account between himself as Proctor of the U.Va and the plaintiff. That proposition was accompanied with several conditions some of which I do not at present recollect but the condition most objected to by Capt Oldham the plaintiff was, that the arbitrators in making the admeasurements and estimates should go over the whole work again, while it was insisted by pltff that they should only reprice and remeasure such portions as had not been certified by the Proctor as correct but such only as he objected to as unreasonable

Question by A S Brockenbrough--Does not the accompanying paper show the substance of my propositions to you as the agent of Capt Oldham for the settlement of his accounts?

Answer I have inspected the paper alluded to above, enclosed "Articles proposed to james Oldham for settlement of accounts 28th Nov 1823" and beleive it to be a true copy of the one communicated to me as Attorney for the plaintiff.

Question by A S Brockenbrough, do you recollect in our subsequent conversations, the reasons assigned by me for not going into a partial arbitration with Capt Oldham if you do what were they?

Answer One of the reasons assigned I beleive was that some of the prices certified were too high and if one portion should be submitted you wished them to have the whole subject before them that they might do the University justice

Copy, in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:PP. This copy apparently was made before Brockenbrough filed his Bill of Exception, 3 January 1831. Wood made a related certificate on 14 July 1823.

Dear Sir Monticello Nov. 20. 23.

I inclose you Oldham's letter.⁽⁸⁵⁹⁾ the settlement of his and Nielson's accts. I leave to yourself entirely, you are so much a better judge than myself. I always fear settlements left to workmen however honest; because on that subject they have a special code of morality of thier own: however I do not say this of all, and leave that to your judgment, recommending that you have a settlement in some way. I am engaged in making an estimate of the number of Professors we may venture to engage, which renders it necessary for me first to know how much we must set apart for the maintenance of the institution viz. salaries, hire, laborers, taxes, store accts. Etc. as the surplus only can be applied to Professors. this renders the estimate I asked for necessary. friendly salutations.

Th: Jefferson

ALS, ViU:PP, 1p [2033] with address "Mr. Brockenbrough University" and ASB docket "T. Jefferson Nov 20. 1823 respecting O. & N: Accts."

[20 November 1823]

To the Honourable John Brown Judge of the Superior Court of Chancery holden of Staunton--Humbly Complaining Sheweth unto your Honour your orator--James Oldham That in January 1819, the General assembly of Virginia passed an act for establishing an University by which it was enacted that on the Siete provided for the erection of the Central College in the County of Albemarle, there should be established a University to be placed under the Government of seven Visitors who should appoint a Rector of their own body, and who should be a body Corporate under the Style and title of "The Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia"--The said Rector and Visitors were charged by the said act, "with the erection preservation and repair of the buildings, the care of the ground and appurtenances and of the Interests of the university Generally"  They were authorised "to appoint a Bursar employ a proctor and all other necessary Agents"--Soon after the passage of said act the Governor and Council proceeded to the appointment of Seven visitors, a majority of whom appointed Thomas Jefferson one of the members of their body, the Rector of the University The said Rector and visitors employed a certain Nelson Barksdale as the proctor and made arrangements for the erection of the necessary buildings at the Siete before mentioned--All the visitors residing at some distance, and most of them being engaged in active employments, they confided the superindence of the concerns of the University almost entirely to the said Thomas Jefferson, who besides having devoted himself to that object possessed extensive Knowledge and experience--Your orator being a house Joiner and Carpenter and having seen an advertisement of the said Proctor in the news paper inviting persons of that description to become undertakers at the said university addressed written proposals to the Proctor who delivered them either to the board of visitors or to Mr Jefferson in answer to which your orator on the 8th of April 1819 received a note from the latter herewith exhibited marked A enclosing that marked B --The "Philadelphia printed prices" mentioned in the said Papers which were constituted the rule of compensateors were contained in a book published in 1812, by Matthew Cary, a Copy of which your orator will exhibit if necessary-In the advertisement before mentioned the said Nelson Barksdale referred to that Book as furnishing a rule of compensation and where the prices were not directly applicable in terms, the Said advertisement Stated that the price was to be deduced from the elements furnished by other articles in the book--This was the understanding of the Contract as evidenced by the paper marked B --This contract comprehended the work necessary to be done in your orators line to Pavilion No 1, and four dormitories which occupied the interval between that Pavilion and Pavilion No 2--At a Subsequent period your orator undertook to do the work at Hotel A--and nine Dormitories on the Eastern range on the same Terms, And at a period Still later your orator undertook the work at Hotel AA--and two dormitores also on the same terms--Your orator proceeded in the execution of his Contracts according to their true tenor--He performed work to a large amount which is enumerated in an account herewith exhibited as part of this bill marked ( C ) The measurement of the work as stated in the said account does not depend on your orators Knowledge, but he has taken it from the report made to your orator by the present Proctor Arthur S. Brockenbrough, except a very small part which was measured and reported by James Dinsmore who acted by the Authority of the said Proctor--The first work that was measured was that done to Hotel A--The measurement was made by the said Brockenbrough in your orators presence in October 1821--He made out a bill of the work and certified it correct, with the prices annexed, which bill marked ( D ) your orator herewith exhibits--When the said Brockenbrough commenced making out the said Bill he asked your orator to be present--In conversing on the Subject it appeared that there was a difference of opinion between him and your orator as to the application of the rule furnished by the Book containing the Philadelphia prices as to part of the work. It led to a proposal which your orator made, that in the adjustment of the accounts between him and the University for the work which he had performed and was to perform except that embraced by the said bill ( D ) all the Items relative to which Such difference of opinion Should exist Should be Submitted to capable persons, one chosen by your orator and the other by the Proctor--The said Brockenbrough objected alledging that Mr Jefferson to whose Judgment deference was paid in all such cases was opposed to having the matter adjusted in that way--In consequence of this remark your orator addressed a note to him on the Subject and received his answer herewith exhibited marked ( E ) Mr Jefferson at the same time sent a note to the said Brockenbrough in consequence of which the latter in a few days afterwards Sent a note to your orator which your orator also herewith exhibits marked F --After the receipt of the note of the 5th of November your orator repeatedly requested the said Brockenbrough to measure your orators finished work, so that he might receive payment according to his Said Brockenbroughs own advertisement of the 25 August 1821, which your orator herewith exhibits marked ( G ) your orator was also desirous that an adjustment by arbitrators as agreed on should take place as speedily as possible which could not be done until the work was measured--But he was not able to effect any thing--on the 2 January 1822 your orator renewed his application and expressed his desire to have his work measured his account adjusted and the money which might be due paid him--The said Brockenbroughs answer was, that he would not do any thing with it--that your orator should not have one sent untill it suited him--Your orator thus driven by necessity addressed a letter to Mr Jefferson a Copy of which your orator herewith exhibits marked H In answer to which your orator received the note marked I --Your orator also on the same day received a letter from the said Brockenbrough herewith exhibited marked J --In this letter the said Brockenbrough accuses your orator of remissness in not furnising a memorandum of locks &c--which he however retracts in the endorsement on the back of the letter--It seems that the said Brockenbrough considered your orators application to Mr Jefferson as insulting to his dignity Such was not your orators intention--Though moving in humble life he considered himself as a Citizen of the Republic entitled to Justice and when that was with held from him by the "Agent" he supposed it to be his right to address him self to those who "employed" him, He did not then, nor does he now, recognize in the proctor (who is wholly irresponsable to the community) a Supreme power over his rights--Under these impressions your orator wrote to Mr Jefferson the letter of the 3d of January 1822;--and his only object was to obtain redress for grievance which he sincerely believed he Suffered--Soon after the date of the letter before mentioned your orator was taken Seriously ill and remained confined for about three months; this caused a Suspension in your orators efforts to have his work measured and his accounts adjusted--*During your orators illness the said Brockenbrough measured the work done by your orator on Hotel A--and nine Dormitories, and made out two distinct bills which are contained in paper ( K ) herewith exhibited as part of this bill--as soon as your orator was able to examine the said bills he discovered that the said Brockenbrough had omitted a number of Items for which your orator was entitled to compensation and on being stated by your orator the said Brockenbrough annexed them in his own hand writing with out however affixing any price--These Items are contained on the 3 & 4th page of said paper ( K ) and are marked "Omitted" About the same time the said Brockenbrough also measured other work done on the nine dormitories before mentioned by John Harrow whom your orator employed and on that account a Separate bill was necessary--The measurement and pieces were made out by the said Brockenbrough in an account which is herewith exhibited marked ( L ) In June following the said Harrow having done other work for your orator, it was also measured and a separate bill made out by the said Brockenbrough, which your Orator also exbibits marked ( M )--In August 1822 the said Brockenbrough measured certain other work done by the said John Harrow for your orator on hotel AA--and two Dormitories on the West Street and made out a bill thereof herewith exhibited marked ( N ) The said Brockenbrough afterwards proceeded with the measurement of the remainder of the work done by your orator under his Contracts Your orator having been Sufficiently recovered attended him and took notes, and at his request made out the bills herewith exhibited as part of this bill marked [(] O. P. Q. ) In these bills your orator at the instance of the said Brockenbrough annexed the prices according to the agreement--that is, he added such prices as he believed were fixed in the Book referred to in the Contracts--These three last bills were Submitted to the Said Brockenbrough for examination who annexed a certificate to each imparting that they had been severally examined--that the measurement had been found correct except in a few items marked X and that the prices of the items marked thus--were correctly stated--By comparing the account certified to be correct by the said Brockenbrough marked ( D ) with some of the other Bills, it will be found that he affixed different prices to the same Kind of work. Thus in that account he allows 1/6 per foot for 706 feet of Tuscan entablature--In the bill marked ( N ) he allows only 1/3 per foot for exactly the same Kind of work--In the same account D he allows 45/ per square for "Secret nailed floors" and in the Bill L he allows 37/6 only for the same sort of flooring--In the said account D there is allowed 2/9. per pair for 24 pair of Architr[a]ve blocks in the bill marked O the same price is one of those objected to--There are many other discrepanc[i]es in the acts of the said Brockenbrough--For instance, in the bill made out in his own hand writing for work done at hotel A--he allows 6d per foot linear of framing for putting up cornice--In the account made out by your orator marked Q the sme charge is objected to by him, or rather it is among the Items not admitted--your orator will not Swell his Statement with other instances of the discrepancies which exist He has enumerated a few to Shew that he ought not to be bound by the determination of the said Brockenbrough in the cases where he objects to your orators prices, When his own acts proved Capricious disposition or a want of Judgment--Independant of the work before stated your orator had some claims against the university for many expended &c--About the time the bills for his other claims were under discussion he made out an account thereof and submitted it to the said Brockenbrough--He made an endorsement thereon which together with the said account your orator herewith exhibits marked R , After the controversy had been narrowed by the said Brockenbroughs admissions in his certificates to the bills D. O, P Q & R making out the other bills--and your orator believing that the remaining Subjects could be settled by competent Judges at any place, your orator proposed to the said Brockenbrough that as they both contemplated going to Richmond to Submit it to proper persons, believing that very competent and disinterested persons could be got in that place In answer to your orators note on that Subject he received one bearing date the 25 January 1823, herewith exhibited marked ( S ) in which the said Brockenbrough declined that proposition, but still adheard Substantially to the agreement entered into in November 1821 to leave the contested Items to arbitrators. I proposed making the appointment of Arbitrators while in Richmond In expectation that such would be the fact your orator made preparations to meet him in that place--But about the 5th of February he received aletter from the said Brockenbrough herewith exhibited marked T --in which he positively refused his assent repeatedly given to appoint arbitrators--Thus after your orator had used every effort in his power to have his accounts adjusted for more than a year he found himself defeated by the said Brockenbrough rendering his power as a public Agent Subservent to his private vengeance your orator is to have the means actually agreed on to have Justice done denied him "in consequence of Some charges thrown out against him" by some person which he believed to be your orator--Your orator being addressed thus rudely, did not think proper then to obtrude any explanation upon the said Brockenbrough or to press a settlement of his accounts--It is true he did not intend to Submit to "the fantastic tricks of those clothed with a little brief authority" but he thought it better to permit the effervesence of anger to pass over and then to pursue his amiable efforts to obtain his rights--In the month of March following the said Brockenbrough forced the doors of Pavilion No. 1, to which your orator had the Keys, and which he retained in order to compleat the Work, by fixing the ornaments in the possession of the said Brockenbrough and which your orator could not obtain--The said Brockenbrough employed an other work man M. F. Crawford, to do it and gave him the ornaments The said Brockenbrough also employed his own hands being both Proctor and Undertaker, to finish some work at Hotel A & hotel AA--which it was the right of your orator to finish and which he would have finished had he not been prevented--In the summer of 1823 your orator believing that the said Brockenbrough had personal hostility to him and Supposing that through the instrumetality of another person he could effect an adjustment of his accounts, procured Rice W. Wood Esqr. to assist him in his efforts--He went to the Office of the said Proctor accompanied by the said Wood for the purpose of ascertaining what course the said Brockenbrough intended to pursue in relation to your orators accounts--The said Wood stated to him that it was your orators wish to carry into effect the agreement for an arbitration as to the contested items in the account The said Brockenbrough answered, that it was understood between him and Mr Jefferson that there Should be no arbitration--This was repeated by him Several times--An[d] the said Wood renewing the Subject and wishing a more explicit answer--the said Brockenbrough said that he was directed not to arbitrate the business at the same time remarking that Mr Jefferson had told him to do as he pleased, and your orator departed without being able to effect anything-Your orator thus failed in his efforts, turned his attention for redress to the board of visitors--He was advised that they constituted the Corporation who was responsible alone as a corporate body to those who had contributed their labour or expended their money in the erection of the buildings of the University, He believed that it was not only their right but their duty to investigate the Conduct of their agents and to see that they did not employ the power which they bestowed upon them to the purposes of injustice and oppression--under these impressions your orator at the meeting of the board of visitors in October 1823 respectfully addressed to them a memorial a Copy of which marked U --your orator herewith exhibits--On the following day your orator received a letter from Mr Jefferson containing as imparts the decision of the board of visitors on your orators memorial This letter marked V --your orator herewith exhibits as part of this bill--When your orator received this letter he was overwhelmed with astonishment He saw himself without the hopes of redress--He was told that he must depend on the Justice of the exasperated man `who if he failed to do right was amenable to the Courts of Justice' That he must depend on the individual responsibility of him who when he came to the employment which he held was without property and without credit--Though your Orator did not believe his case as hopeless as the answer of the board of visitors represented it, yet wishing if possible to avoid a legal controversy he again solicited Mr Wood to make application to the Proctor for an adjustment of his accounts--He made several fruitless applications receiving nothing but equivocal answers--on the 20th & 23d of November 1823, the said Brockenbrough wrote the notes herewith exhibited marked W. X. This closed the efforts of Mr Wood, though your orator afterwards made another himself proposing again an adjustment by men mutually chosen which was again refused by the said Brockenbrough--Thus your orator is compelled to resort to this Honorable Court for redress, He believes that if a fair adjustment of the accounts takes place he will be found the creditor of the University to the amount of about four thousand dollars out of which he has been unjustly Kept for years--He contends that the Corporation composed of the Rector and visitors of the University are responsible to him and not an individual in whose responsibility he never confided and who by law has no contract of the funds of that Institution--Your orator has in Vain endeavoured to ascertain by what law the Proctor is made the "Executive Agent" and solely responsible for his acts--He is advised that by law the visitors have power to employ a Proctor as their Agent--That the principals in all other cases are liable for the acts of the Agents if within the Scope of their authority and that the agents in such cases are not liable individually at law--He is moreover advised that the Rector and Visitors being charged with the "erection" of the buildings are bound to do Justice to those who erect them--by paying them what may be Justly due out of the means confided to them for that purpose--your orator at various times received partial payments of which he presumes an account has been Kept by the burser and which he is willing Shall be credited on a settlement of the accounts--

In tender consideration of the premises and in as much as your orator can have no adequate remedy at law--but is only relievable in this Honorable Court where complex and contested accounts can be best adjusted and agreements Specifically executed To the end therefore that Thomas Jefferson, Chapman Johnson, James Breckenridge, James Madison, Joseph Cabell, John H. Cocke and Geoge Loyal, the Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia and Arthur S. Brockenbrough the Proctor be made defendants hereunto and that they may Severally answer the premises as fully and truly as if the whole was again repeated & interrogated--That the Items in your orators accounts not adjusted as herein before mentioned may be settled as agreed upon by the parties in November 1821 by the appointment of Arbitrators, and if that can not be done in the manner usual in this Honorable Court--That the amount found due to your orator may be decreed to him with Interest, and that such other and further relief may be granted to your orator as may be Just May it please your Honour to grant your Orator the Commonwealths writ of Subpoena directed &c--The following are Copies of the Exhibits referred to in the foregoing bill, to wit,

Copy, ViU:UVA Chonological File, 13p, part of Oldham vs University of Virginia, with docket "The Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia &c James Oldham acct Bill & exhibits (A Copy)".

Dear Sir, 20th November 1823

I have to acknowledge the receipt of your two notes of Monday and Wednesday relative to the Settlement of Mr Oldhams accounts--I told you I wished to hear from Mr Jefferson before I came to any determination on the Subject--not having Seen him I have written on the Subject and expect an answer to day or to morrow, as soon as its received I will let you Know, and the proposition that will be made on the part of the U. Va for the final Settlement of the accounts--I am Sir respectfully your Obt Servt

A S Brockenbrough P UVa

Copy, document W in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823.

Sir Nov. 23d. 1823

I am unwilling to run the University of Va to any great expence about Settling the matters of Controversity between James Oldham and it--I should be glad to Know how far your client is willing to go in defraying the expences if I will consent to the appointment of persons to settle the accounts--I am Sir respectfully Your Obt Servt

A. S, Brockenbrough

A Copy Teste William S. Eskridge C.C.C

Copy, document X in Oldham vs University of Virginia, ViU:UVA Chronological File. See James Oldham, Lawsuit against the University of Virginia, 20 November 1823. William S. Eskridge, the second and last clerk of the chancery court at Staunton, was married to Margaret Brown, the daughter of the courts judge, John Brown (see Waddell, Annals of Augusta County, 375, 388).

Sir Mo. Nov. 25. 23.

The case of Capt. Oldham is this, he charges the Proctor of the University with malpractices in his office. the board of Visitors, who employ the Proctor, is the tribunal having authority to enquire into this. they authorised their Exve commee (Genl. Cocke & myself) to do this. I gave notice in a lre to Capt Oldham in April last that we would proceed to the enquiry whenever he should be ready with his testimony. he has never signified his readiness, and the enquiry waits only for him to do so. instead of this he proposes to transfer the discussion into your paper. the suitors in every cause on the docket of Albemarle court might as sell spread their cases before the public in the same way, and thus turn your paper into a vehicle of personal squabbles and vituperns, set the nbhood together by the ears, and break up it's peace and happiness. whether you will make this change in the character and object of your paper is a question for your own discretion, whether the paper so changed would continue to be taken would become a question with the subscribers.

I return you the Rockfish Report. it consists of 2. sheets making 16. leaves. the parts to be left out of the new impression amount to 7. leaves, so that the remaining 9. with 1. for the act of ass. would make 10. leaves or 1¼ sheets. and as 2 sheets on like paper were for 400 copies to cost 50. D. 1¼ should of course be furnished for 31¼ D. to the 400. copies for the University I would request you to add 25. more for myself which would make the whole 425 copies cost 33¼ D. you are perfectly welcome to print the Report in your paper; but the only part interesting to the publick is that which I note for the new impression. Accept assurances of my esteem and respect

Th: J.

ADftS, DLC:TJ, 1p, with TJ docket "McKinnie C. P. Nov. 25. 23." Jefferson made this draft on a coversheet with a mutilated address.

Dear Sir Monto. Jan. 13. 24.

When we began our buildings at our University, we adopted it as a rule that we would be governed in all our prices by those established by long experience & due competn in Phila, and you were so kind as to procure & send me the printed book of Carpenter's prices. in the other branches of work we have been able in different ways to learn your prices, except those of plaisterer's work. of those we have never been able to get satisfy. informn, and the acct being a very large on[e] (12, or 14,000. D) our Proctor Mr Brockenbr. bearer of this thinks it worth while to go on to Philada with our plaisterer to ascertain them. the question between them is What was those prices, in 1820, the date of their agreemt as he is a perfect stranger there I take the liberty of putting him into your hands in perfect confidence that you will be so kind as to advise him in his proceedings so that he may be assured of obtaining fair & full informn on his enquiries, and to obtain a just settlement entirely impartial between employer & undertaker. he is the person who in the office of Proctor to the Univty. has superintended the whole of our works from the begg. is a skilful house carpenter and eminent Undertaker himself, and a person of the most perfect integrity & worth, & in whom no confidence can be misplaced. he will shew you the plan of our establmt, the last building of which is now in hand. when this shall be done, the whole will have cost about 300.M D. will be a perfect model of classical architecture, and on the whole will vie in taste & appearance with any thing in the US. I take very sincere interest in your health happiness & prosperity and shall be very happy to learn that all these have been continued to you, and report to you the assurances of my constant esteem & respect.

ADftS, DLC:TJ, 1p, with TJ docket "Carstairs Tho. Jan. 13. 24." Jefferson made this draft on a coversheet addressed "Quincy Ms, March 12th. Thomas Jefferson Late President of the US Monticello Virginia."

[3 January 1831]

The separate Bill of exceptions of Arthur S Brockenbrough to the report of the Commissioners Yeamans Smith and Otis Manson in the case depending in the Superior court of Chancery holden in Staunton in which James Oldham is plaintiff and the Rector & Visitors of the University of Virginia and A S Brockenbrough are defendents--

The said Smith & Manson commissioners appointed to View, Measure & affix the proper prices to the work done at the University of Virginia by said Oldham met at the University of Virginia agreeable to notice on Saturday the 10th of April in the after noon, and adjourned over to the 12th to meet at the same place, met agreeable to adjournment and entered on the business, Viewed a portion of the work but did not measure any--they adjourned over to the next morning (the 13th) to meet at the same place after breakfast, the said commissioners did not meet at the University agreeable to adjournment on the morning of the 13th. where this defendent was in waiting all that day--On their adjournment on the 12th they went from the University to Fitches Tavern in Charlottesvill[e] and that night entered on the business, and continued all the next day (the 13th) at the same place engaged in the business, without giving this defendent any notice of their intention to do so, this defendent considered it important to attend the commissioners and intended doing so if they had not received him by changing their place of meeting without giving him notice there of--In confirmation of the aforesaid change of the place of business by the commissioners I beg leave to call the attention of his Court to the Subjoined affidavits on that subject--This defendent considering the Commissioners, bound by the order of Court to remeasure the whole or such parts of the work as either party required rested satisfied by noting on a copy of Oldhams bill such part as he deemed necessary to remeasure, they did not remeasure the work required of them by this defendent--But proceeded to settle the accounts, by the papers then before them--

The commissioners in their report, State they "did not deem if necessary to measure all the work as will be Seen by refering to their explanations in the account in different parts, having been measured & sanctioned by the defendent Brockenbrough, but such as was not measured & sanctioned previous to the institution of this suit, they have affixed the prices of all the items not allowed by the said defendent in the bill certified by him"--This defendent enters his most solemn protest against the mode in which the Commissioners adopted in the settlement of the acounts--they "did not deem it necessary to measure all" or any part of the work altho' particularly requested so to do by this defendent--they have taken copies of the plaintifs original Bills, and consider parts thereof as measured & sanctioned by this defendent and other parts settled agreeable to their ideas of the prices given in the price Book--in consequences of their changing their place of Meeting without giving notice this defendent had no opportunity of objecting to their mode of settlement they should have measured as far as was required and priced every item agreeable to the price book. This it will be seen by their own report they did not do--This defendent agreed to many measurements & prices in the first instance, with the view & hope of getting the accounts of james Oldham settled, not withstanding this defendents belief that they were over the prices given in the price book, if one item is to be settled by the commissioners agreeable to the price book let all be examined and settled by the same guide. This defendent has been at all times willing to give to the plaintif such prices as other undertakers received as satisfactory--

This defendent not only objects to the report but to the commissioners themselves, not as deficient in integrity, but for the want of a thorough Knowledge of the complicated Philadelphia Price Book by which they were to be governed, neither of them as they informed this defendent had ever seen that price book before--and consequently from the hurried manner in which the business was transacted might have put wrong constructions on many of the prices layed down in that book--those different constructions may be so put on the prices of work in the aforesaid book,--I must call your attention to the fact, that this defendent has settled with all the other undertakers of similar work to that of the plaintifs & he alone is contending for higher prices--The commissioners state in their report they consider the plaintiff entitled to the same compensation for the work executed under the third contract that he was under the first--The first contract was made between the Rector & the Plaintif specifying the work to be executed by the said plaintif (See Thomas Jeffersons letter to the plaintif in his first Bill dated April 8 1819) The second arrangement for doing work at the University was made by this defendent & the plaintif there was no written contract but this defendent agreed to continue to give the plaintif the same prices for the work on the East Street one Hotel & nine dormitories that he had under the contract with the Rector--When the Buildings on the West street of the University was ordered to be erected, this defendent gave notice to most of the Undertakers at the University that a deduction of ten per cent would be made from the former prices for said building on the west street, The Undertakers had a meeting on the subject, the plaintif Oldham was with them consequently was made acquainted with the terms on which the work was offered (see the subjoined affidavits on that subject) This defendent moreover informed the plaintif in a very short time after the work was undertaken by him that such deduction would be made from the former prices for the work undertaken by him on the west street which was the third & last arrangement with the plaintif for work--

Your commissioners in this case, in the place of Measureing and pricing the work have taken the plaintiffs accounts and have made their report from them, setting forth that this defendent had sanctioned them, altho not present at their meeting--They have not even made out bills for the work showing the prices they allowed for the work thereby puting it entirely out of my power to detect any error that may have been made by them they have deducted the sum of one hundred & seven dollars thirteen cents from the sums pd. the plaintiff alleging it to be entered on a due Bill and at the close of their report say "Interest to be added"--

For the aforesaid assigned reasons this defendent pray the Court to set aside the report of the aforesaid Commissioners in this case

Arthur S Brockenbrough

Albemarle County to wit: This day personally appeared before me, Frank Carr, a justice of the peace for said County Arthur S. Brokenbrough and made oath to the truth of the allegations contained in the preceeding Bill of exceptions.

Frank Carr

DS, ViU:PP, 6p. See Oldham's Lawsuit against the University, 20 November 1823. The enclosed affidavits have not been identified.

Dr sir P. Edward Co. Ho. 8th Feby 1831

Yours of 5 Decr. last reached me at this my present residence some short time since,

In answer to your first Quest. I answer I recollect Capt oldham telling me that Mr. Jefferson had told him he was to have a portion of work on the western range, and I am well satisfied he considerd the work as coming from Mr Jefferson and not you. It was for my own satisfaction I made the enquiry of you to Know if you understood the thing in the same way in order that there might be no misunderstanding on the subject, Oldham being the only Carpenter with whom I had a personal acquaintance I wished him to be employed on the same Building

2 Quest. I do recollect hearing of the terms proposed to let the Carpenters work at namely 10 Cent under former prices whether before or after my Conversation with you on the subject of Oldhams employment I do not recollect but I do well recollect Oldham Considerd he had nothing to with them having been employed and his work designated by Mr Jeffrson

The Questn. and answers I have forwarded to Capt Oldham, I shall be here during the spring and am ready at any time you may think best to answer Respy Yours

Dabney Cosby

ALS, ViU:PP, 1p, with address " P. Edward C. H. Feb 12th A. S. Brockenbrough Esqr P. U. of Virginia" and ASB docket "D. Coxby--8 Feb '31." The postmark is dated 21 February and the coversheet is stamped "missent."