“ in almost every other frontier, two parties--By the one Capt. Cresap was considered as a wanton violator of Treaties as a man of a cruel & inhuman disposition; By the other he was esteem[ed] as an intrepid warrior & as a just avenger of savage barbarities. You probably became first acquainted with his character at Williamsburg the seat of Government; General Clarke joined him in the War path. This circumstance will, perhaps, in some measure, account for the very different sentiments, which two Gentlemen so perfectly capable of appreciating Cresaps character, may have entertained respecting it.

"Should you judge it adviseable, at the present time, I could easily obtain from General Clarke the substance of his narrative & have it published here as an answer to spontaneous enquiries of my own. It can be done without your appearing at all in the business. This however I shall not attempt to do without your permission; yet I wish that Gen ^l Clarkes statement could be made public in some shape or other, as it would doubly mortify Mr Martin to have his assertions refuted without receiving a reply from you whom he has so assiduously laboured to draw forth into the field of controversy. I can assure that your friends in this quarter are highly gratified at the silent contempt with which you have treated that redoutable Hero of Federalism--And it is with heartfelt pleasure that I further assure you, that nothing which old Tories, aristocrats & governmental Sycophants can say against you, will in any degree, diminish the confidence, which the good Citizens of this state repose in your abilities & patriotism. Never was a State more unanimous in execrating the measures supported by your Enemies who, I trust, will soon prove themselves to be, what I have long thot them, the enemies of Liberty & their Country . . .”

Dr. Brown sent General Clarke’s [i.e. General George Rogers Clark] deposition, 8 pages folio, dated June 17, 1798.

This deposition reads in part: Your Letter was handed to me by M ^r. Thruston, the Matter therein contained was new to me; I find myself hurt that Mr. Jefferson should have been attacked with so much Virulence on a Subject which I know he was not the Author of; but except a few Mistakes of Name of Person & Places, the Story is substantially true; I was of the first and last of the active Officers who bore the Weight of that War, and on perusing some old Papers of that Date I find some M emoirs; but independent of them I have a perfect Recollection of every Transaction relative to Logans Story. The Conduct of Cresap I am perfectly acquainted with, he was not the Author of that Murder, But a Family of the Name of Greathouse--But some Transactions that happened under the Conduct of Capt ⁿ. Cresap a few Days previous to the Murder of Logans Family gave him sufficient Ground to suppose that it was Cresap who had done him the Injury; But to enable you fully to understand the subject of your Enquiry, I shall relate the Incidents that gave Rise to Logan’s Suspicion; and will enable M ^r. Jefferson to do Justice to himself and the Cresap Family, by being made fully acquainted with Facts . . .

On May 4, 1798, James Lewis, Jr., wrote to Jefferson from Fredericksburg, Virginia: “At this momentous crisis, when one party style themselves the enemies to abuse, and the friends of Reform; and the other party are contending for the continuance of their degraded institutions and unrelenting usurpations, the powers of man are everywhere in action. The struggle is, who shall prevail: the passions of men are no less active, than their understandings. No example can more effectually exhibit this activity, than a furious invective of Luther Martin, publicly applauded by Francis Corbin, a man of some conspicuity in our state, against you. At such a period, the friends of reform should let be known, that they act from from [ sic -- Ed. ] the enlightened convictions of truth & justice and from the respectable motives, that such principles necessarily inspire; our motives should be pure and our integrity unimpeached. That publication has attempted to attach to you, the degraded motive of endeavouring in your notes to raise your Literary fame at the expence of another’s reputation and to effect it, have not stopped at misreprentation [ sic -- Ed. ] & calumny. I will not, enlightened friend of man and your Country, decide as to the mode of repelling this ”