University of Virginia Library

Appendix J
Oldham's Lawsuit Documents

Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Carstairs

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.

Nelson Barksdale
Advertisement for Workmen

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.

James Oldham to Nelson Barksdale

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.

Thomas Jefferson to James Oldham

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.

Thomas Jefferson to James Oldham

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.

Jonathan Michie
Account with James Oldham

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."

James Oldham to Thomas Jefferson

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

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.

Thomas Jefferson to James Oldham

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.

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough to James Oldham

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.

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.

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough to James Oldham

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.

Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Carrington Cabell

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).

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough to James Oldham

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.

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough
to the Rector & Board of Visitors

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.

Rice W. Wood
Certificate

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.

James Oldham
Memorial to the Rector & Board of Visitors

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.

Rice W. Wood
Certificate

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.

Thomas Jefferson to Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough

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."

James Oldham
Lawsuit Against the University of Virginia

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)".

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough to Rice W. Wood

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.

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough to Rice W. Wood

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).

Thomas Jefferson to C. P. McKennie

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.

Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Carstairs

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."

Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough
Bill of Exception

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

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

Dabney Cosby to Arthur Spicer Brockenbrough

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."