From John Jay to John Tabor Kempe, 27 December 1771
To John Tabor Kempe
[New York, 27th December 1771]
Sir
Your Doubts respecting Faulkners Declaration appear well founded, and the Remarks contained in your Letter judicious.1 I concieve the Charge of his having robbed the Company imports no more than a Breach of Trust—if so, it would be hazardous to insert those Counts: if we recover Damages it will be on the other, I am therefore for resting the Cause upon them, and think the Partnership should ^not^ appear from the Declaration.
I must now Sir! call your Attention to another Subject.
Mr. Bloomer, you know, engaged me as Counsel with Mr. Duane and yourself in the Action you commenced for Recovery of his Salary. The Cause is now almost ripe for a Determination, and I have not been consulted in any one Stage of the Suit.2 Had it been a mere Matter of usual Compliment, I should have expected from the Attorney General’s Politeness: The Neglect however would then have produced no Complaint; for tho Civility often gives Pleasure, a contrary Deportment is seldom of sufficient Importance to create Concern.
But Sir! in the present Case, as you was the Complainants Sollicitor I expected some little Attention, not from the Attorney Generals Acquaintance with the Rules of Politeness, but the Rules of Business; and allow me to remark that a Deviation from the latter is sometimes a Violation of both. The Cause I confess would have recieved little Advantage from my Aid. it would nevertheless have been but decent to have gratified your Client, & treated the Person he retained as his Counsel, with common Respect.
Your Conduct at least represents me in an insignificant Point ^of View^ and the more so, as your general Behaveour is deemed candid & polite; it therefore calls for an Explanation—to remain silent would argue little Spirit or little Regard for Reputation—Imputations which no Gentleman will either merit, or with Impunity permit—I am Sir your humble Servt.
John Jay—
To John T. Kempe Esqr
ALS, MHi: Sedgwick Papers (EJ: 4644). Endorsed: “To/John T. Kempe Esqr/Prest. 27th: Decr/1771/Letter from Mr. John Jay.”
1. Kempe’s letter concerning the case of Faulkner v. Rapalje has not been located. On 20 June 1771, JJ was retained to defend Garret Rapalje against the suit of William D. Faulkner. Opposing counsel was John McKesson. N: JJ’s Supreme Court Register, 1770–73 (EJ: 3620).
2. The first action recorded in the Chancery suit of Bloomer v. Hinchman was that of 17 Oct. 1771, when Kempe moved that the defendants argue the demurrer they had entered “on this Day eight Days.” However, John Morin Scott, the defense attorney, did not argue in support of the demurrer until 7 November, when the Chancery Court accepted Kempe’s request that he be given a “further day” on which to answer Scott. On 5 and 6 Dec. 1771 Bloomer’s counsel completed “their Arguments” against the defendants’ demurrer, and the court ordered that the defense counsel reply at “the next Court.” JJ was mistaken in his belief that the case was “almost ripe for a Determination,” for it was not until April 1772 that the Chancery Court ruled on the defense demurrer, and a decree in Bloomer’s favor was not granted until 1774. This decree was appealed to the Privy Council, but the beginning of the Revolution precluded a royal decision on the matter. New York County Clerk’s Office, Division of Old Records, Chancery Court Minutes, 4: 38, 43, 46, 64, 69, 151–53; , 22–24.