IVilliam Atwood. with which he was told that Nanfan had declared that he would sign the death war rant for his execution the next day. But he would not yield. The day following he was allowed to receive a communication from his counsel, Emot, to the effect that if he would admit that he was sorry for the offence he had given, Emot thought the reprieve would be granted. To this last suggestion, though with much hesitation, he yielded and sent a petition with that statement, which was satisfactory to Nanfan, but Atwood ob jected, and insisted that the reprieve should not be granted, unless Bayard inserted in his petition " the crime I have committed." This Bayard refused to do, but worn by his confinement, and exhausted both in mind and body, he at last, at the earnest solici tation of his friends and of every one about him, consented to insert the words "the offence with which I have been charged," and as nothing more could be got from him, the reprieve was granted. When Bayard was reprieved, the sheriff told him that he, the sheriff, and the Lieuten ant-Governor, were very particular friends, that Nanfan had told him not to release Bay ard upon giving bail unless a certain lady conveyed to the sheriff a tract of land near the town, of the value of £1,500, and that if he consented to obtain it, not to discharge him until the deed of conveyance was deliv ered, which Bayard positively refused to do; and at this juncture intelligence was re ceived that the vessel with Lord Cornbury on board was in the lower bay, and Daniel Honan, a member of the Bayard party, a man of unsavory reputation, when secretary of Governor Eletcher, upon receiving this information, succeeded in reaching Cornbury before he came to the city, and made such good use of his time as to apprise the new governor of everything that had oc curred, and with the assistance of some others to secure him in the interest of the Bayard party. In the first official intercourse between
1 95
Atwood and Cornbury, which became nec essary immediately after the latter's arrival, "his lordship," as Atwood expressed it, "discovered a prepossession to the Chief Justice's prejudice," and he interpreted rightly, for one of Cornbury's earliest acts was to send a written order to the sheriff to release Bayard and Hutchins, which the sheriff refused to recognize, as being with out authority; whereupon Cornbury, who had little regard for forms of law or legal objections, sent a detachment of soldiers to the prison, by whom the sheriff was arrested and brought to the fort, which the Governor followed up by suspending him, and direct ing the mayor to take upon himself the of fice of sheriff, with authority to execute it by deputy, which was done, and Bayard and Hutchins were released.1 Whilst a series of charges were being prepared against the Chief Justice, the Gov ernor maintained a ceremonial politeness towards him, inviting him twice to dinner, and in Atwood's peculiar phraseology " ac cepted of no mean entertainment " from him. When the charges were formally pre sented, Atwood says, he demanded a hear ing, which the Governor promised him he should have; a promise, he says, which he did not keep, but at the next meeting of the council, when the Chief Justice came in, pronounced a " sentence prepared in writ ing," suspending Atwood from exercising the duties of his office. This was followed by the removal of Atwood, Weaver, the two associate judges, De Peyster and Wal ters, and Dr. Staats from the council, the appointment of five others in their places, and the suspension of Weaver from the exercise of the two lucrative offices he held of receiver of the revenues of the Crown and receiver of the customs. He also removed the associate judges, De Peys ter and Walters, from the Supreme Court, and appointed ex-Chief Justice Smith and Dr. Bridges in their places. In addition to ■ N.Y. Hist. Soc. Col. 1880, pp. 287, 288, 289.
