e appropriations
made by the legislature had ever been exceeded, the atrocious charge
was still confidently repeated; and the few who could triumph in any
spot which might tarnish the lustre of Washington's fame, felicitated
themselves on the prospect of obtaining a victory over the reputation
of a patriot, to whose single influence, they ascribed the failure of
their political plans. With the real public, the confidence felt in
the integrity of the chief magistrate remained unshaken; but so
imposing was the appearance of the documents adduced, as to excite an
apprehension that the transaction might be placed in a light to show
that some indiscretion, in which he had not participated, had been
inadvertently committed.

This state of anxious suspense was of short duration. The late
secretary of the treasury, during whose administration of the finances
this peculation was said to have taken place, came forward with a full
explanation of the fact. It appeared that the President himself had
never touched any part of the compensation annexed to his office, but
that the whole was received, and disbursed, by the gentleman who
superintended the expenses of his household. That it was the practice
of the treasury, when a sum had been appropriated for the current
year, to pay it to that gentleman occasionally, as the situation of
the family might require. The expenses at some periods of the year
exceeded, and at others fell short of the allowance for the quarter;
so that at some times money was paid in advance on account of the
ensuing quarter, and at others, that which was due at the end of the
quarter was not completely drawn out. The secretary entered into an
examination of the constitution and laws to show that this practice
was justifiable, and illustrated his arguments by many examples in
which an advance on account of money appropriated to a particular
object, before the service was completed, would be absolutely
necessary. However this might be, it was a transaction in which the
President personally was unconcerned.[37]

[Footnote 37: Gazette of the United States, 16th November,
1795.]

When possessed of the entire fact, the public viewed, with just
indignation, this attempt to defame a character which was the nation's
pride. Americans felt themselves involved in this atrocious calumny on
their most illustrious citizen; and its propagators were frowned into
silence.

[Sidenote: Mr. Randolph resigns. Is succ