“Apparently Glen withdrew his patronage of the Sphynx Company. Adair seems to charge that he turned now to prevent ‘two other gentlemen’—presumably Matthew Roche and his partner—getting recompense for losses in the venture,[i10] whereupon a controversy arose between his Excellency and Matthew Roche, one of the partners, it seems, in the course of which the latter printed a pamphlet, ‘A Modest Reply to the Governor’s Answer to an Affidavit made by McNaire.’” (Meriwether)[i11] The pamphlet incorporated a letter written by Adair on some phase of the transactions. In umbrage, the Governor asked the Common’s House of the province to have its committee on Indian affairs investigate and report on the controversy. This was done. The report branded Roche’s pamphlet “a false and malicious paper, throwing unjust and slanderous aspersions on the governor’s honor and character,” and declared Adair’s letter to be so contradictory of a previous one he had written as to be unworthy of credit. “Adair’s was not the only charge against Glen of his having investments in the Indian trade and of having his official acts influenced thereby. The fact of such investments is indicated by a suit brought by him which involved several dealers in the Indian trade, by his relations with Cherokee traders, such as Grant and Elliott, and by his failure to deny charges. The bad policy of this is, of course, beyond question, but of actual fraud there is no evidence.” (Meriwether) Adair was far from being satiated. He was not content to allow the contest for his deserts to thus end. He now, for the first time, turned author and wrote his own brochure or book in vindication. This he announced by way of an advertisement in the _South Carolina Gazette_ of April 9, 1750: “Shortly will be published—A Treatise upon the Importance and Means of Securing—The Choctaw Nation of Indians—in the British Interest—In which are interpreted many curious _remarks_—Concerning the History, Policy and Interest of the Nation—with—Several incontestable Reasons, and chronological observations, to prove, that the Year of Our Lord 1738 was several Years antecedent to the year 1747—To which is added—A Genuine Account—of the most remarkable _Occurences_ since that Period of Time—Concluding with—Some _Scenes of a Farce_, as the same was some time ago first rehearsed in private, and afterwards acted publickly; in which are contained some comical and instructive _Dialogues_ between several modest _Pretenders_ to the Merit of a certain Revolt, said by them to be lately projected and effected—The whole supported by Records, Original Letters, and Living Witnesses.”[i12]