olemnly certify, that some time in the month of
February, 1815, (and I believe in the early part of it,) in a
conversation Col. John Prior had with me just after his
return from Albany, on the subject of candidates for the then
approaching election; he the said Prior remarked, that 'Mr.
Young was not so popular as he had been.' On my asking him
why, he replied, 'for his ill treatment to his colleagues,
having grown haughty, &c.' This I understood him to have
received directly from the said members, Messrs. Gardner,
Cowles and Ketcham. In the spring of the same year, after
Messrs. Palmer and Bunce had made known similar complaints,
that the said three members had made to them of Young's
treatment, I had another conversation with the said Prior on
the subject, in which he the said Prior intimated, 'he did
not believe the said members had told the said Palmer and
Bunce what they had pretended.' I then asked him, if the
members were not as likely to tell them of it, as himself,
and repeated to the said Prior what he had told me in the
winter, of the members having made the same complaint to him,
which the said Prior did not pretend to deny as having heard
from the members, nor having told me the same.--JOSEPH
MITCHEL. _Dated, Greenfield, March 15, 1815_."

"I hereby certify, that in the early part of the winter past,
I had a conversation with Isaac Myers of Stillwater, relative
to the conduct of Richard Ketcham, late a member of the
Legislature; when he the said Myers told me that _he knew_
the said Ketcham had _contradicted himself_, relative to what
he had said of Mr. Young; that _previous_ to the McBain
meeting, Ketcham had _denied_ to him, ever saying any thing
_against_ Young, or complaining of his treatment; but that
_afterwards_ he had _owned to several in his presence, that
he had spoken against_ Young, &c.--ASA B. JEWEL. _Saratoga,
March 25th 1816_."

Other affidavits and statements might be produced to the same effect
but twelve or fourteen different conversations, at different times,
and, in presence of different men are already proved upon them, all
importing explicitly that Mr. Young had ill-treated or neglected
them--and shewing a desire on their part that Mr. Young should not be
sent to the Legislature the ensuing year. If then Mr. Young had an
und