Different individuals, to gratify different feelings, have ascribed this unprecedented fall to different causes. But one who is not altogether ignorant of the springs of human actions; whose partialities and prejudices are mellowed by more than threescore years of experience; who has carefully and laboriously, in this case, examined cause and effect, hesitates not in declaring that, from the moment Aaron Burr was elected vice-president, his doom was unalterably decided, if that decision could be accomplished by a combination of wealth, of talent, of government patronage, of favouritism and proscription, inflamed by the worst passions, and nurtured by the hope of gratifying a sordid ambition. The contest in Congress fixed his fate. Subsequent events were only consequences resulting from antecedent acts.

In the progress of this work no desire has been evinced, none is felt to screen Colonel Burr from censure where it is merited. But the man who can read, unmoved, the evidence which has already been presented of the injustice done him in the charge of having intrigued and negotiated with the federal party for the presidency, must possess more of philosophic than of generous or magnanimous feelings. It would seem that the task of recording the presidential contest in Congress, in the spring of 1801, was now brought to a close. But not so. There yet remains another and imposing view to be presented. Whatever may have been the wishes of Colonel Burr, it is certain that they were so far under his own control as to prevent him from entering into any negotiation, bargain, or intrigue to obtain the presidency. There is not the slightest evidence of any such attempt on his part, while there is strong, if not conclusive proof to the contrary. Can as much be said in favor of his great competitor on that occasion? This is the view that remains to be taken. But, before presenting the testimony in the case, some explanation is necessary as to the manner in which it was first obtained and subsequently made public.

In the year 1804, a suit was instituted by Colonel Burr against James Cheetham, editor of the American Citizen, for a libel, in charging him with intriguing for the presidency. This suit was commenced by Mr. Burr with reluctance, and only to gratify personal friends. It progressed tardily, impediments having been thrown in the way of bringing it to trial by the defendant, and probably the cause not sufficiently pressed by the complainant. In 1805 or 1806, some persons who were really desirous of ascertaining not only the truth or falsity of the charge, but whether there was any foundation for it, determined on having a wager-suit placed at issue on the records of the court, and then take out a commission to examine witnesses. Accordingly, the names of James Gillespie, plaintiff, and Abraham Smith, defendant, were used. The latter at the time being a clerk in the store of Matthew L. Davis, then in the mercantile business, trading under the firm of Strong & Davis.

It was universally believed, that if there were two men in Congress that could unfold the whole negotiation if any had taken place, those two men were James A. Bayard, of Delaware, and Samuel Smith, of Baltimore. The former, a federal gentleman of high standing, the sole representative of a state in the Congress of 1800, and thus possessing, at any moment, the power of deciding the contest in favour of Mr. Jefferson. The latter, a political and personal friend of Mr. Jefferson, and the very individual whom Colonel Burr had previously selected as his proxy to declare his sentiments, in case there was a tie between Mr. Jefferson and himself. A commission was accordingly taken out, and, on the 3d of April, 1806, Mr. Bayard and Mr. Smith were examined. No use, however, was made of these depositions until December, 1830, being a period of nearly twenty-five years.

On the publication of Mr. Jefferson's writings, the sons of the late James A. Bayard felt that the memory of their father had been wrongfully and unjustly assailed in two paragraphs in the fourth volume of this work. The first of these paragraphs, on the 28th of January, 1830, was read in the United States Senate by the Hon. Mr. Clayton, of Delaware, General Samuel Smith and Edward Livingston both being members of the Senate and present. He read the following:

"February 12, 1801. Edward Livingston tells me that Bayard applied to-day or last night to General Samuel Smith, and represented to him the expediency of coming over to the states who vote for Burr; that there was nothing in the way of appointment which he might not command, and particularly mentioned the secretaryship of the navy. Smith asked him if he was authorized to make the offer. He said he was authorized. Smith told this to Livingston and W. C. Nicholas, who confirms it to me," &c.

Mr. Clayton then called upon the senator from Maryland (Mr. Smith) and the senator from Louisiana (Mr. Livingston) to disprove the statement here made by Mr. Jefferson.

Mr. Smith, of Maryland, rose and said "that he had read the paragraph before he came here to-day, and was, therefore, aware of its import. He had not the most distant recollection that Mr. Bayard had ever made such a proposition to him. Mr. Bayard, said he, and myself, though politically opposed, were intimate personal friends, and he was an honourable man. Of all men, Mr. Bayard would have been the last to make such a proposition to any man; and I am confident that he had too much respect for me to have made it under any circumstances. I never received from any man any such proposition."

Mr. Livingston, of Louisiana, said, "that as to the precise question which had been put to him by the senator from Delaware, he must say, that having taxed his recollection as far as it could go on so remote a transaction, he had no remembrance of it."

The sons of the late Mr. Bayard, not yet being satisfied as to the other paragraph, resolved on an investigation of the subject, and with this view one of them wrote the following letter. [2]



FROM RICHARD H. BAYARD.

Wilmington, March 8, 1830.

SIR,

In the fourth volume of Mr. Jefferson's Writings, lately published by his grandson, page 521, under the head of a note made April 15, 1806, occurs the following paragraph, after the detail of a conversation held with you about a month previously:—

"I did not commit these things to writing at the time, but I do now, because, in a suit between him and Cheetham, he has had a deposition of Mr. Bayard taken which seems to have no relation to the suit, nor to any other object than to calumniate me. Bayard pretends to have addressed to me, during the pending of the presidential election in February, 1801, through General Samuel Smith, certain conditions on which my election might be obtained; and that General Smith, after conversing with me, gave answers from me. This is absolutely false. No proposition of any kind was ever made to me on that occasion by General Smith, or any answer authorized by me. And this fact General Smith affirms at this moment."

Mr. Jefferson supposes this deposition to have been made in your suit against Cheetham. I have some reason to think he is mistaken as to the precise case in which it was made. However this may be, I am anxious to procure a copy of it, as returned with the commission under which it was taken.

If I may not be considered as trespassing too far on your time and attention, will you permit me to ask whether the deposition referred to by Mr. Jefferson is still in existence? In what case it was taken? And whether a copy of it can be procured?

I have the honour to be, respectfully,

Your obedient servant,

RICHARD H. BAYARD.



TO RICHARD H. BAYARD.

New-York, March 10, 1830.

SIR,

I have this day received your letter of the 8th inst., containing an extract from the fourth volume of the writings of Mr. Jefferson. I have not seen that book, and, on inquiry, do not learn that there is a copy in this city.

The suit referred to is not that of Cheetham, but one instituted, without my agency or knowledge, on a wager. The title not now recollected. A commission to take testimony was transmitted to me, then at Washington, and several depositions thereupon taken; copies of all of which may, no doubt, be found among the papers of the late Mr. Bayard.

A gentleman well informed of these matters is now at Albany, where I expect to meet him about the 20th inst., when it may be in my power to give you further satisfaction on the subject of your letter.

I pray in the mean time to be informed whether you are a son of the late Mr. Bayard. Or how, if at all related to him. And what use it is proposed to make of the communications you may receive. Permit me to add, it will at all times afford me great pleasure to gratify the family of Mr. Bayard on this or on any other occasion.

I have the honour to be, very respectfully,

A. BURR.



TO MATTHEW L. DAVIS.

New-York, March 15, 1830.

SIR,

I enclose you copies of a letter from Mr. Richard H. Bayard, with my answer, and have only to inquire whether I may refer to you to answer this letter of Mr. Bayard; your memory being better than mine, and I not having the depositions in question, or any copies thereof at this moment at my command. If you should write, please to enclose your letter to me. I think it was you who got up that suit. Pray give me the title and date.

I expect to be in Albany early next week. In your answer to this, let me know where to find you. God speed you.

A. BURR.



FROM MATTHEW L. DAVIS.

Albany, March 18, 1830.

SIR,

The irregularity of the mails has prevented my receiving your letter of the 15th inst., with its enclosures, until this day.

I have read Mr. Bayard's letter to you under date of the 8th inst. All the circumstances connected with the subject to which it refers are within my recollection; but, absent as I am from my papers, I am unwilling to speak with great confidence in relation to events which have occurred nearly thirty years since.

The deposition of Mr. Bayard, to which I presume Mr. Jefferson alludes in his memorandum of the 15th of April, 1806, was taken, as you remark, in the case of a wager. The title of the cause I do not now recollect; but Abraham Smith, a clerk in my store, was one of the parties, and I think the period was during the winter of 1805. It may have been a year later.

In that deposition Mr. Bayard states that a negotiation in regard to the pending election between Mr. Jefferson and Colonel Burr, in February, 1801, was entered into with Mr. Jefferson, through Mr. Nicholas, of Virginia, and General Samuel Smith, of Maryland; and that Mr. Jefferson did agree to certain stipulations or conditions therein specified. It is proper for me to add, that to both Robert G. Harper and General Smith the same interrogatories were propounded that were answered by Mr. Bayard, and that the testimony (if my memory is correct) of Mr. Bayard was, in every material point, sustained by both these gentlemen. These examinations were made under a commission issued out of the Supreme Court of our state.

Several copies of these depositions were made from the originals, and I have reason to believe that one copy of them was in the possession of Mr. Bayard or Mr. Harper, and another in the possession of Stephen R. Bradley, Esq., of Vermont. They were read by different gentlemen; among them, I think, was General John P. Van Ness, of Washington city, and Rundolph Bunner, Esq., late a member of Congress from this state, who, I have no doubt, can and would, if asked, detail their contents. I should suppose that General Smith would not only recollect the occurrences in February, 1801, but the contents also of the deposition to which he has sworn.

During the contest I was the advocate of Mr. Jefferson's election, and corresponded with different members of Congress; among the number were Edward Livingston and Albert Gallatin, Esquires. The letters I then received enumerated not only the doubtful states, but the doubtful men of both parties which were in Congress. These letters have been carefully preserved.

It is due to the character of the late Mr. Bayard to remark, that, so far as the circumstances have come to my knowledge, there was nothing in the transaction calculated in the slightest degree to impeach his fidelity to his party or his honour. The object of the negotiation was not to aggrandize or to elevate himself or his friends, but to secure and perpetuate certain cardinal points of federal policy.

I have not seen the works of Mr. Jefferson, but I will obtain and examine them with care and attention. The history of the times to which these memorandums and documents relate are enveloped in thick darkness. Whether the period has yet arrived when an effort should be made to dispel that darkness is problematical. The means, however, do exist of proving, to the satisfaction of the most skeptical, what are the facts in the case; and, consequently, of doing full justice to all the parties concerned; and that duty, however unpleasant, shall, at a proper crisis, be fairly, impartially, and fearlessly performed.

At my advanced age I do not wish to be drawn into newspaper controversies; nor can I be induced, prematurely, to make any publication on the subject alluded to in this letter. At the same time, you are at liberty to communicate the whole or any part of its contents to Mr. Bayard, in the expectation that it will be used discreetly.

Respectfully, your friend,

M. L. DAVIS.



GENERAL SAMUEL SMITH TO RICHARD H. BAYARD AND JAMES A. BAYARD.

Washington, April 3, 1830.

GENTLEMEN,

Ill health, and disinclination to go back to circumstances which happened thirty years past, has prevented an earlier answer to your letter. In the extract you have sent me from Mr. Jefferson's writings, it is said—"Bayard" (alluding to his deposition) "pretends to have addressed to me, during the pending of the presidential election in February, 1801, through General Smith, certain conditions on which my election might be obtained, and that General Smith, after conversing with me, gave answer for me. This is absolutely false. No proposition of any kind ever was made to me on that occasion by General Smith, or any answer authorized by me; and the fact General Smith affirms at this moment"—to wit, 15th of April, 1806. Yes, gentlemen, it was (I believe) on that day I put into the hands of Mr. Jefferson a press copy of my deposition in the case of Cheetham, [3] in which I perfectly recollect that I deny having ever received from Mr. Jefferson any proposition of any kind to be made by me to Mr. Bayard or any other person. Not, perhaps, in those words, but in detail to that effect; or having ever communicated any proposition of the kind as from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Bayard.

My experience in life has shown that few men take advice unless it comports with their own views. I will, however, recommend that you let well enough alone. Your father was a bitter, most bitter enemy of Mr. Jefferson; his enmity was known to all, and, I presume, to Mr. Jefferson; it was therefore very natural for him to conclude that the suit of Cheetham had been got up for the express purpose of obtaining the oath of your father with the view of injuring him, and that your father had advised such a course. My recollection of what passed on the occasion is as strong as if it had happened yesterday. I will give you a detail in as few words as possible.

Two or three days before the election was terminated, a member, who I suppose had been deputed by the federal party, called on me to converse on the subject. I held little conversation with him. Your father then called on me, and said that he was anxious to put an end to the controversy; that, in case of dissolution, Delaware never could expect to obtain her present advantages; that, if satisfied on certain points, he would terminate the contest. He then went on to state those points: they were three or four. I can now remember only three, to wit—the funding system, the navy, and the retaining or dismissal of federalists then in office. I answered promptly that I could satisfy him fully on two of the points (which two I do not now recollect), for that I had had frequent conversations with him on them, and I stated what I understood and believed to be his opinions, and what I thought would be his rule of conduct; with which explanation your father expressed his entire satisfaction, and on the third requested that I would inform myself.

I lodged with Mr. Jefferson, and that night had a conversation with him, without his having the remotest idea of my object. Mr. Jefferson was a gentleman of extreme frankness with his friends; he conversed freely and frankly with them on all subjects, and gave his opinions without reserve. Some of them thought that he did so too freely. Satisfied with his opinion on the third point, I communicated to your father the next day—that, from the conversation that I had had with Mr. Jefferson, I was satisfied in my own mind that his conduct on that point would be so and so. But I certainly never did tell your father that I had any authority from Mr. Jefferson to communicate any thing to him or to any other person.

During the session of Congress of 1805-6, your father told me that a little lawyer in Delaware had (he supposed at the instance of Colonel Burr) endeavoured to get from him a deposition touching a conversation with me; that he had refused it; that Burr had, however, trumped up a suit for the sole purpose of coercing his deposition and mine, and said that a commission to take testimony was now in the city, and that he apprized me that I might be prepared. I asked him what he would state in his deposition. He answered similar to the quotation you have sent. I told him instantly that I had communicated to him my own opinion, [4] derived from conversation with Mr. Jefferson, and not one word from him to your father; and that my testimony would, as to that point, be in direct hostility. He then said, the little fellow will have our testimony by some means or other, and I will give mine. I answered that I would also. A few nights afterward Colonel Burr called on me. I told him that I had written my deposition, and would have a fair copy made of it. He said, trust it to me, and I will get Mr. ——- to copy it. I did so, and, on his returning it to me, I found words not mine interpolated in the copy. I struck out those words, had it copied again, and, to prevent all plea of false copying, I had a press copy taken of it. When I appeared before the commission, I found a deposition attached to that of your father, and asked how they came by that. They answered that it had been sent to them. I requested them to take it off; that I had the deposition in my hand to which alone I would swear; they did so, and my deposition was attached. The next day (I think) I called, and told Mr. Jefferson what had passed, read to him the press copy, and asked him if he recollected having given to me the opinions I had detailed. He answered that he did not, but it might be so, for that they were opinions he held and expressed to many of his friends, and as probably to me as any other, and then said that he would wish to have a copy. I told him that I had no use for it; he might, and I gave him the press copy.

You have now a tolerable full view of the case, and will see that no possible censure can attach to Mr. Jefferson; that a diversity of opinion will arise from publication as to your father's credibility or mine, and that both may suffer in the Public estimation. I will conclude that, during my long life, I have scarcely ever known an instance of newspaper publication between A. and B. that some obloquy did not attach to both parties.

I am, gentlemen, with respect,

Your obedient servant,

S. SMITH.



FROM RICHARD H. BAYARD.

Wilmington, Delaware, April 22, 1830.

SIR,

I have just received your letter of the 10th ult., in answer to mine of the 8th, the reason of which delay is to be found in the fact of your having directed it to Wilmington, North Carolina. It was accordingly conveyed to that place, and was returned and received by me this morning.

I reply to your inquiries that I am the eldest son of the late James A. Bayard, and that the object which I have in view is the vindication of his character from the aspersion contained in the passage in Mr. Jefferson's writings, a copy of which I sent you.

It is true that among my father's papers I have found rough copies of the deposition made in your suit against Cheetham, as well as of that made in the wager case. Together with the first-named deposition there is also a copy of the interrogatories; but, in the latter case, simply a rough copy of the deposition, without title, or any memorandum of the names of the parties. You will perceive at once the necessity of accompanying the deposition in the wager case with its title and a copy of the interrogatories, in order to show, in the first place, Mr. Jefferson's error in the statement of the case, and, secondly, to refute his assertion that the deposition had "nothing to do with the suit, or with any other object than to calumniate him."

The subsequent part of his statement will be met by the deposition itself, by reference to concomitant circumstances, and such corroborating testimony as time has spared. Being anxious to avoid all room for cavil, by publishing the depositions as returned with the respective commissions, lest, perchance, there should be some slight verbal inaccuracies, I applied to you, believing it was in your power to give the information necessary to enable me to procure certified copies of the record.

You have thus, Sir, an entire exposition of my motives for addressing you my letter of the 8th ult.; and, in conformity with the sentiment you are so good as to express in the conclusion of your letter, I doubt not you will furnish me with such information as you possess on the subject.

I wrote some time since to Mr. Edward N. Rogers, of your city, to procure for me copies of my father's and General Samuel Smith's depositions in both cases. He informs me, by his letter of the 17th inst., that the depositions in your suit against Cheetham are not to be found in the office; that the case went off by default, and he supposes they were never filed. At all events, the clerk cannot now find them.

You will probably be able to state what became of them, and whether copies can be procured. I will ask of you, therefore, the favour to communicate to him information on this point, as well as the name of the wager case, that he may be enabled to comply with my request, with the execution of which he has been so kind as to charge himself.

I have the honour to be, respectfully,

Your obedient servant,

RICHARD H. BAYARD.



Footnotes:

1. See Ch. V.

2. It is considered proper to state here that the correspondence which follows is published without the privity or consent of either of the Mr. Bayards. It is found among the papers of Colonel Burr, and is intimately connected with a history of the transaction.

3. The suit was James Gillespie vs. Abraham Smith. See deposition.

4. Will the reader examine the deposition, especially what relates to Mr. McLean and Mr. Latimer?



CHAPTER VIII.

The necessary information having been given to Mr. Bayard to enable him to procure the depositions of his father and General Smith, they were accordingly obtained from Mr. Bradley, of Vermont. Before presenting them, it may not be improper to give the letters of two members of Congress, one of which enters somewhat into a history of the case, and both of which negatives, in the most positive manner, any attempt of Colonel Burr, or any person acting in his behalf, to negotiate, bargain, or intrigue with the federal party for the office of president.



WILLIAM COOPER TO THOMAS MORRIS. [1]

Washington, February 10, 1801.

DEAR SIR,

We have this day locked ourselves up by a rule to proceed to choose a president before we adjourn. * * * * * * * We shall run Burr perseveringly. You shall hear of the result instantly after the fact is ascertained. A little good management would have secured our object on the first vote, but now it is too late for any operations to be gone into, except that of adhering to Burr, and leave the consequences to those who have heretofore been his friends. If we succeed, a faithful support must, on our part, be given to his administration, which, I hope, will be wise and energetic.

Your friend,

W. COOPER.



WILLIAM COOPER TO THOMAS MORRIS.

February 13, 1801.

DEAR SIR,

We have postponed, until to-morrow 11 o'clock, the voting for president. All stand firm. Jefferson eight—Burr six—divided two. Had Burr done any thing for himself, he would long ere this have been president. If a majority would answer, he would have it on every vote.



FROM JAMES A. BAYARD TO ALEXANDER HAMILTON.

Washington, January 7, 1801.

DEAR SIR,

I have been but a few days in this city; but, since my arrival, have had the pleasure to receive the letter which you did me the honour to write on the 27th ult. I am fully sensible of the great importance of the subject to which it relates, and am, therefore, extremely obliged by the information you have been so good as to communicate.

* * * * *

It is considered that at least, in the first instance, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, New-Jersey, and New-York will vote for Mr. Jefferson. It is probable that Maryland and Vermont will be divided. It is therefore counted, that upon the first ballot it would be possible to give to Mr. Burr six votes. It is calculated, however, and strongly insisted by some gentlemen, that a persevering opposition to Mr. Jefferson would bring over New-York, New-Jersey, and Maryland. What is the probability relative to New-York?—your means enable you to form the most correct opinion. As to New-Jersey and Maryland, it would depend on Mr. Linn of the former and Mr. Dent of the latter state.

I assure you, sir, there appears to be a strong inclination in a majority of the federal party to support Mr. Burr. The current has already acquired considerable force, and is manifestly increasing. The vote which the representation of a state enables me to give would decide the question in favour of Mr. Jefferson. At present I am by no means decided as to the object of preference. If the federal party should take up Mr. Burr, I ought certainly to be impressed with the most undoubting conviction before I separated myself from them. I cannot, however, deny that there are strong considerations which give a preference to Mr. Jefferson. The subject admits of many and very doubtful views; and, before I resolve on the part I shall take, I will await the approach of the crisis, which may probably bring with it circumstances decisive of the event.

The federal party meet on Friday for the purpose of forming a resolution as to their line of conduct. I have not the least doubt of their agreeing to support Colonel Burr. Their determination will not bind me; for though it might cost me a painful struggle to disappoint the views and wishes of many gentlemen with whom I have been accustomed to act, yet the magnitude of the subject forbids the sacrifice of a strong conviction.

I cannot answer for the coherence of my letter, as I have undertaken to write to you from the chamber of representatives, with an attention divided by the debate which occupies the house. I have not considered myself at liberty to show your letter to any one, though I think it would be serviceable, if you could trust my discretion in the communication of it.

With great consideration,

Your obedient servant,

JAMES A. BAYARD.



GEORGE BAER TO RICHARD H. BAYARD.

Frederick, April 19, 1830

SIR,

In compliance with your request, I now communicate to you my recollections of the events of the presidential election by the House of Representatives in 1801. There has been no period of our political history more misunderstood and more grossly misrepresented. The course adopted by the federal party was one of principle, and not of faction; and I think the present a suitable occasion for explaining the views and motives at least of those gentlemen who, having it in their power to decide the election at any moment, were induced to protract it for a time, but ultimately to withdraw their opposition to Mr. Jefferson.

I have no hesitation in saying that the facts stated in the deposition of your father, the late James A. Bayard, so far as they came to my knowledge, are substantially correct; and although nearly thirty years have elapsed since that eventful period, my recollection is vivid as to the principal circumstances, which, from the part I was called upon to act, were deeply graven on my memory. As soon as it was generally known that the two democratic candidates, Jefferson and Burr, had the highest and an equal number of votes, and that the election would consequently devolve on the House of Representatives, Mr. Dent, who had hitherto acted with the federal party, declared his intention to vote for Mr. Jefferson, in consequence of which determination the vote of Maryland was divided.

It was soon ascertained that there were six individuals, the vote of any one of whom could at any moment decide the election. These were, your father, the late James A. Bayard, who held the vote of the state of Delaware; General Morris, of Vermont, who held the divided vote of that state; and Mr. Craik, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Dennis, and myself, who held the divided vote of Maryland. Much anxiety was shown by the friends of Mr. Jefferson, and much ingenuity used to discover the line of conduct which would be pursued by them. Deeply impressed with the responsibility which attached to their peculiar situation, and conscious that the American people looked to them for a president, they could not rashly determine either to surrender their constitutional discretion, or disappoint the expectations of their fellow-citizens.

Your father, Mr. Craik, and myself having compared ideas upon the subject, and finding that we entertained the same views and opinions, resolved to act together, and accordingly entered into a solemn and mutual pledge that we would in the first instance yield to the wishes of the great majority of the party with whom we acted, and vote for Mr. Burr, but that no consideration should induce us to protract the contest beyond a reasonable period for the purpose of ascertaining whether he could be elected. We determined that a president should be chosen, but were willing thus far to defer to the opinions of our political friends, whose preference of Mr. Burr was founded upon a belief that he was less hostile to federal men and federal measures than Mr. Jefferson. General Morris and Mr. Dennis concurred in this arrangement.

The views by which the federal party were governed were these:—They held that the Constitution had vested in the House of Representatives a high discretion in a case like the present, to be exercised for the benefit of the nation; and that, in the execution of this delegated power, an honest and unbiased judgment was the measure of their responsibility. They were less certain of the hostility of Mr. Burr to federal policy than of that of Mr. Jefferson, which was known and decided. Mr. Jefferson had identified himself with, and was at the head of the party in Congress who had opposed every measure deemed necessary by the federalists for putting the country in a posture of defence; such as fortifying the harbours and seaports, establishing manufactories of arms; erecting arsenals, and filling them with arms and ammunition; erecting a navy for the defence of commerce, &c. His speculative opinions were known to be hostile to the independence of the judiciary, to the financial system of the country, and to internal improvements. All these matters the federalists believed to be intimately blended with the prosperity of the nation, and they deprecated, therefore, the elevation of a man to the head of the government whose hostility to them was open and avowed. It was feared, too, from his prejudices against the party which supported them, that he would dismiss all public officers who differed with him in sentiment, without regard to their qualifications and honesty, but on the ground only of political character. The House of Representatives adopted certain resolutions for their government during the election, one of which was that there should be no adjournment till it was decided.

On the 11th February, 1801, being the day appointed by law for counting the votes of the electoral colleges, the House of Representatives proceeded in a body to the Senate chamber, where the vice-president, in view of both houses of Congress, opened the certificates of the electors of the different states; and, as the votes were read, the tellers on the part of each house counted and took lists of them, which, being compared and delivered to him, he announced to both houses the state of the votes; which was, for Thomas Jefferson 73 votes, for Aaron Burr 73 votes, for John Adams 65 votes, for Charles Pinckney 64 votes, for John Jay one vote; and then declared that the greatest number and majority of votes being equal, the choice had devolved on the House of Representatives. The members of the house then withdrew to their own chamber, and proceeded to ballot for a president. On the first ballot it was found that Thomas Jefferson had the votes of eight states, Aaron Burr of six states, and that two were divided. As there were sixteen states, and a majority was necessary to determine the election, Mr. Jefferson wanted the vote of one state. Thus the result which had been anticipated was realized.

The balloting continued throughout that day and the following night, at short intervals, with the same result, the 26th ballot being taken at 8 o'clock on the morning of the 12th of February. The balloting continued with the same result from day to day till the 17th of February, without any adjournment of the house. On the previous day (February 16), a consultation was held by the gentlemen I have mentioned, when, being satisfied that Mr. Burr could not be elected, as no change had taken place in his favour, and there was no evidence of any effort on the part of himself or his personal friends to procure his election, it was resolved to abandon the contest. This determination was made known to the federal members generally, and excited some discontent among the violent of the party, who thought it better to go without a president than to elect Mr. Jefferson. A general meeting, however, of the federal members was called, and the subject explained, when it was admitted that Mr. Burr could not be elected. A few individuals persisted in their resolution not to vote for Mr. Jefferson, but the great majority wished the election terminated and a president chosen. Having also received assurances from a source on which we placed reliance that our wishes with regard to certain points of federal policy in which we felt a deep interest would be observed in case Mr. Jefferson was elected, the opposition of Vermont, Delaware, and Maryland was withdrawn, and on the 36th ballot your father, the late James A. Bayard, put in a blank ballot, myself and my colleagues did the same, and General Morris absented himself. The South Carolina federalists also put in blank ballots. Thus terminated that memorable contest.

Previous to and pending the election, rumours were industriously circulated, and letters written to different parts of the country, charging the federalists with the design to prevent the election of a president, and to usurp the government by an act of legislative power. Great anxiety and apprehensions were created in the minds of all, and of none more than the federalists generally, who were not apprized of the determination of those gentlemen who held the power, and were resolved to terminate the contest when the proper period arrived. But neither these rumours, nor the excitement produced by them, nor the threats made by their opponents to resist by force such a measure, had the least influence on the conduct of those gentlemen. They knew the power which they possessed, and were conscious of the uprightness of their views, and of the safety and constitutional character of the course they had adopted. I was privy to all the arrangements made, and attended all the meetings of the federal party when consulting on the course to be pursued in relation to the election; and I pledge my most solemn asseveration that no such measure was ever for a moment contemplated by that party; that no such proposition was ever made; and that, if it had ever been, it would not only have been discouraged, but instantly put down by those gentlemen who possessed the power, and were pledged to each other to elect a president before the close of the session.

I am respectfully, Sir,

Your most obedient servant,

GEORGE BAER.

INTERROGATORIES to be administered to James A. Bayard, Esq., of the state of Delaware, late a member of Congress for the United States from the said state of Delaware, a witness to be produced, sworn, and examined in a cause now depending in the Supreme Court of Judicature of the state of New-York, between Aaron Burr, plaintiff, and James Cheetham, defendant, on the part of the defendant.

1st. Do you know the parties, plaintiff and defendant, or either and which of them, and how long have you known them respectively?

2d. Were you a member of the House of Representatives, in Congress of the United States, from the state of Delaware, in the sessions holden in the months of January and February, in the year 1801?

3d. Was there not an equal number of votes for Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, as president and vice-president of the said United States, at the election for those officers in the December preceding, and did not the choice of a president consequently devolve on the said House of Representatives?

4th. Did not the said house ballot for the president several times before a choice was made? if so, how many times? Was not the frequency of balloting occasioned by an attempt on the part of several members of Congress to elect the said plaintiff, Aaron Burr, as president? Do you know who such members were? if so, what were their names?

5th. Do you know that any measures were suggested or pursued by any person or persons to secure the election of Aaron Burr to the presidency? if so, who were such person or persons? Did he, the said Aaron Burr, know thereof? Were there any letter or letters written communicating such an intention? if so, were such letter or letters forwarded to him through the postoffice by any person, and who? Has he not informed you, or have you not understood (and if so, how?) that he was apprized that an attempt would be made to secure his election?

6th. Did he or any other person (and if so, who?) ever communicate to you, by writing or otherwise, or to any other person or persons to your knowledge, that any measure had been suggested or would be pursued to secure his election? When were these communications made?

7th. Had not some of the federal members of Congress a meeting at Washington, in the month of December, 1800, or of January or of February, 1801, at which it was determined to support Aaron Burr for the presidency? Or if there were any meeting or meetings to your knowledge, in respect to the ensuing election for a president of the United States in the said House of Representatives, what was advised or concluded upon, to the best of your remembrance or belief? Was not David A. Ogden, of the city of New-York, attorney at law, authorized or requested by you, or some other member or members of Congress, or some other person, and who in particular, to call upon the plaintiff and inquire of him—

1st. What conduct he would pursue in respect to certain cardinal points of federal policy?

2d. What co-operation or aid the plaintiff could or would afford towards securing his own election to the presidency? or if you or some other person did not authorize or request the said David A. Ogden to make such communication to the plaintiff in exact terms, what, in substance, was such authority or request? Do you know, or were you informed by the said David A. Ogden or otherwise, that he or any other person had made the said communication to the plaintiff, or the same in substance? Do you know, or have you been informed (and if so, how?) that the plaintiff declared, as to the first question, it would not be expedient to enter into explanations, or words to that effect? That, as to the second question, New-York and Tennessee would vote for him on a second ballot, and New-Jersey might be induced to do the same, or words to that effect? Did you ever communicate with the plaintiff, or he with you, on the subject? Do you know any person who did communicate with him? and if so, what did he say?

Did you not receive a letter or letters from Alexander Hamilton, of New-York, and late Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, now deceased, in the month of January or February, 1801, or at some other time, and when, respecting the election of a president of the United States? Did he not communicate to you that the said David A. Ogden had been requested to see the plaintiff for the purposes aforesaid? And what in particular were the contents of such letters or letter, or communication? Do you know that any, and if so, what measures were suggested or pursued to secure the election of said plaintiff as president; and did the said plaintiff know, or was he informed thereof, or what did he know, or of what was he informed? Had you any reason or reasons to believe that any of the states would relinquish Thomas Jefferson and vote for Aaron Burr as president in the said election in the said House of Representatives, or that the said Aaron Burr calculated on such relinquishment? If so, which state or states, and what was the reason or reasons of such belief?

8th. Do you know any matter, circumstance, or thing which can be material to the defendant in this cause? If yea, set the same forth fully and particularly.

Interrogatory on the part of the plaintiff.—Do you know of any matter or thing that may be beneficial to the plaintiff on the trial of this cause? If so, declare the same fully and at length, in the same manner as if you had been particularly interrogated thereto.

Miller & Van Wyck, Attorneys for Defendant.

Approved, March 6, 1805.

B. Livingston.

The deposition of James A. Bayard, sworn and examined on the twenty —— day of ——, in the year of our Lord 1805, at Wilmington, in the state of Delaware, by virtue of a commission issuing out of the Supreme Court of Judicature of the state of New-York, to John Vaughan, —— or any two of them, directed for the examination of the said James A. Bayard, in a cause there depending between Aaron Burr, plaintiff, and James Cheetham, defendant, on the part and behalf of the defendant.

1st. To the first interrogatory this deponent answers and says, As a member of the House of Representatives, I paid a visit of ceremony to the plaintiff on the fourth of March, in the year 1801, and was introduced to him. I had no acquaintance with him before that period. I had no knowledge of the defendant but what was derived from his general reputation before the last session of Congress, when a personal acquaintance commenced upon my becoming a member of the Senate.

2d. To the second interrogatory, this deponent saith, I was.

3d. To the third interrogatory this deponent saith, There was an equality of electoral votes for Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Burr, and the choice of one of them did, of consequence, devolve on the House of Representatives.

4th. To the fourth interrogatory this deponent saith, The house resolved into states, balloted for a president a number of times, the exact number is not at present in my recollection, before a choice was made. The frequency of balloting was occasioned by the preference given by the federal side of the house to Mr. Burr. With the exception of Mr. Huger, of South Carolina, I recollect no federal member who did not concur in the general course of balloting for Mr. Burr. I cannot name each member. The federal members at that time composed a majority of the house, though not of the states. Their names can be ascertained by the journals of the House of Representatives.

5th. To the fifth interrogatory this deponent saith, I know of no measures but those of argument and persuasion which were used to secure the election of Mr. Burr to the presidency. Several gentlemen of the federal party doubted the practicability of electing Mr. Burr, and the policy of attempting it. Before the election came on there were several meetings of the party to consider the subject. It was frequently debated, and most of the gentlemen who had adopted a decided opinion in favour of his election employed their influence and address to convince those who doubted of the propriety of the measure. I cannot tell whether Mr. Burr was acquainted with what passed at our meetings. But I neither knew nor heard of any letter being written to him on the subject. He never informed me, nor have I reason to believe, further than inference, from the open professions and public course pursued by the federal party, that he was apprized that an attempt would be made to secure his election.

6th. To the sixth interrogatory the deponent saith, Mr. Burr, or any person on his behalf, never did communicate to me in writing or otherwise, or to any other persons of which I have any knowledge, that any measures had been suggested or would be pursued to secure his election. Preceding the day of the election, in the course of the session, the federal members of Congress had a number of general meetings, the professed and sole purpose of which was to consider the propriety of giving their support to the election of Mr. Burr. The general sentiment of the party was strongly in his favour. Mr. Huger, I think, could not be brought to vote for him. Mr. Craik and Mr. Baer, of Maryland, and myself, were those who acquiesced with the greatest difficulty and hesitation. I did not believe Mr. Burr could be elected, and thought it vain to make the attempt; but I was chiefly influenced by the current of public sentiment, which I thought it neither safe nor politic to counteract. It was, however, determined by the party, without consulting Mr. Burr, to make the experiment whether he could be elected. Mr. Ogden never was authorized or requested by me, nor any member of the house to my knowledge, to call upon Mr. Burr, and to make any propositions to him of any kind or nature. I remember Mr. Ogden's being at Washington while the election was depending. I spent one or two evenings in his company at Stiller's hotel, in small parties, and we recalled an acquaintance of very early life, which had been suspended by a separation of eighteen or twenty years. I spent not a moment with Mr. Ogden in private. It was reported that he was an agent for Mr. Burr, or it was understood that he was in possession of declarations of Mr. Burr that he would serve as president if elected. I never questioned him on the subject. Although I considered Mr. Burr personally better qualified to fill the office of president than Mr. Jefferson, yet, for a reason above suggested, I felt no anxiety for his election, and I presumed if Mr. Ogden came on any errand from Mr. Burr, or was desirous of making any disclosures relative to his election, he would do it without any application from me. But Mr. Ogden or any other person never did make any communication to me from Mr. Burr, nor do I remember having any conversation with him relative to the election. I never had any communication, directly or indirectly, with Mr. Burr in relation to his election to the presidency. I was one of those who thought from the beginning that the election of Mr. Burr was not practicable. The sentiment was frequently and openly expressed. I remember it was generally said by those who wished a perseverance in the opposition to Mr. Jefferson, that several democratic states were more disposed to vote for Mr. Burr than for Mr. Jefferson; that, out of complaisance to the known intention of the party, they would vote a decent length of time for Mr. Jefferson, and, as soon as they could excuse themselves by the imperious situation of affairs, would give their votes for Mr. Burr, the man they really preferred. The states relied upon for this change were New-York, New-Jersey, Vermont, and Tennessee. I never, however, understood that any assurance to this effect came from Mr. Burr. Early in the election it was reported that Mr. Edward Livingston, the representative of the city of New-York, was the confidential agent for Mr. Burr, and that Mr. Burr had committed himself entirely to the discretion of Mr. Livingston, having agreed to adopt all his acts. I took an occasion to sound Mr. Livingston on the subject, and intimated that, having it in my power to terminate the contest, I should do so, unless he could give me some assurance that we might calculate upon a change in the votes of some of the members of his party. Mr. Livingston stated that he felt no great concern as to the event of the election, but he disclaimed any agency from Mr. Burr, or any connexion with him on the subject, and any knowledge of Mr. Burr's designing to co-operate in support of his election.

7th. The deponent, answering that part of the seventh interrogatory which relates to letters received from the late Alexander Hamilton, says, I did receive, in the course of the winter of 1801, several letters from General Hamilton on the subject of the election, but the name of David A. Ogden is not mentioned in any of them. The general design and effect of these letters was to persuade me to vote for Mr. Jefferson, and not for Mr. Burr. The letters contain very strong reasons; and a very earnest opinion against the election of Mr. Burr. In answer to the residue of the same interrogatory, the deponent saith, I repeat that I know of no means used to promote the election of Mr. Burr but persuasion. I am wholly ignorant of what the plaintiff was apprized of in relation to the election, as I had no communication with him directly or indirectly; and as to the expectation of a change of votes from Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Burr, I never knew a better ground for it than the opinions and calculations of a number of members.

8th. In answer to the eighth interrogatory the deponent saith, I know of nothing which, in my opinion, can be of service to the defendant in the cause.

To the interrogatory on the part of the plaintiff the deponent answers, Having yielded, with Messrs. Craik and Baer, of Maryland, to the strong desire of the great body of the party with whom we usually acted, and agreed to vote for Mr. Burr, and those gentlemen and myself being governed by the same views and motives, we pledged ourselves to each other to pursue the same line of conduct and act together. We felt that some concession was due to the judgment of the great majority of our political friends who differed with us in opinion, but we determined that no consideration should make us lose sight for a moment of the necessity of a president being chosen. We therefore resolved, that as soon as it was fairly ascertained that Mr. Burr could not be elected, to give our votes to Mr. Jefferson. General Morris, of Vermont, shortly after acceded to this arrangement. The result of the ballot of the states had uniformly been eight states for Mr. Jefferson, six for Mr. Burr, and two divided. Mr. Jefferson wanted the vote of one state only; those three gentlemen belonged to the divided states; I held the vote of the state of Delaware; it was therefore in the power of either of us to terminate the election. These gentlemen, knowing the strong interest of my state to have a president, and knowing the sincerity of my determination to make one, left it to me to fix the time when the opposition should cease, and to make terms, if any could be accomplished, with the friends of Mr. Jefferson. I took pains to disclose this state of things in such a manner that it might be known to the friends of Mr. Burr, and to those gentlemen who were believed to be most disposed to change their votes in his favour. I repeatedly stated to many gentlemen with whom I was acting that it was a vain thing to protract the election, as it had become manifest that Mr. Burr would not assist us, and as we could do nothing without his aid. I expected, under these circumstances, if there were any latent engines at work in Mr. Burr's favour, the plan of operations would be disclosed to me; but, although I had the power, and threatened to terminate the election, I had not even an intimation from any friend of Mr. Burr's that it would be desirable to them to protract it. I never did discover that Mr. Burr used the least influence to promote the object we had in view. And being completely persuaded that Mr. Burr would not co-operate with us, I determined to end the contest by voting for Mr. Jefferson. I publicly announced the intention, which I designed to carry into effect the next day. In the morning of the day there was a general meeting of the party, where it was generally admitted Mr. Burr could not be elected; but some thought it was better to persist in our vote, and to go without a president rather than to elect Mr. Jefferson. The greater number, however, wished the election terminated, and a president made; and in the course of the day the manner was settled, which was afterward adopted, to end the business.

Mr. Burr probably might have put an end sooner to the election by coming forward and declaring that he would not serve if chosen; but I have no reason to believe, and never did think that he interfered, even to the point of personal influence, to obstruct the election of Mr. Jefferson or to promote his own.

Interrogatories to be administered to witnesses to be produced, sworn, and examined in a certain cause now depending and at issue in the Supreme Court of Judicature of the people of the state of New-York, wherein James Gillespie is plaintiff, and Abraham Smith defendant, on the behalf of the defendant.

1st. Do you or do you not know Thomas Jefferson, president of the United States? If yea, declare the same, together with the time when you first became acquainted with him.

2d. Was you a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, at Washington, in the session of 1800 and 1801? If yea, state the time particularly.

3d. Do you or do you not know that in the years 1800 and 1801, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr had each an equal number of votes given by the electors for president and vice-president of the United States, and that consequently the right of electing a president devolved upon the House of Representatives of the United States? State your knowledge herein particularly.

4th. Do you or do you not know, or have you heard so that you believe, of any negotiations, bargains, or agreements, in the year 1800 or 1801, after the said equality became known and before the choice of the president, by or on behalf of any person, and whom, with the parties called federal or republican, or either of them, or with any individual or individuals, and whom, of either of the said parties, relative to the office of president of the United States? If yea, declare the particulars thereof, and the reasons of such your belief.

5th. Do you or do you not know Aaron Burr, late vice-president of the United States? If yea, declare the same, with the time when your acquaintance commenced.

6th. Do you know, or have you heard so that you believe, of any negotiations, bargains, or agreements in the year 1800 or 1801, by or on behalf of the said Aaron Burr, or by or on behalf of any other person, and whom, with the parties called federal or republican, or either of them, or with any individual, and whom, of the said parties, relative to the office of president of the United States? If yea, declare the same, with all the particulars thereof, and the reasons of such your belief.

7th. Did you receive any letters from the said Aaron Burr after the said equality of votes was known and before the final choice of a president? If yea, what was the tenour of such letter? Did the conduct of the said Aaron Burr correspond with the declarations contained in the said letter? Declare your knowledge and belief, together with the grounds and reasons thereof.

Deposition of the Honourable James A. Bayard, a witness produced, sworn, and examined in a cause depending in the Supreme Court of the state of New-York, between James Gillespie, plaintiff, and Abraham Smith, defendant, on the part of the plaintiff, follows.

To the first interrogatory deponent answers and says, I do not know either the plaintiff or defendant.

To the second interrogatory he answers and says, I was personally acquainted with Thomas Jefferson before he became president of the United States, the precise length of time I do not recollect. The acquaintance did not extend beyond the common salutation upon meeting, and accidental conversation upon such meetings.

To the third interrogatory he answers and says, I was a member of the House of Representatives of the United States, during the fifth, sixth, and seventh Congresses, from the 3d of March, 1797, to the 3d of May, 1803.

To the fourth interrogatory he answers and says, The electoral votes for Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr for president of the United States were equal, and that the choice of one of them as president did devolve on the House of Representatives.

To the fifth interrogatory he answers and says, I presume this interrogatory points to an occurrence which took place before the choice of president was made, and after the balloting had continued for several days, of which I have often publicly spoken. My memory enables me to state the transaction in substance correctly, but not to be answerable for the precise words which were used upon the occasion. Messrs. Baer and Craik, members of the House of Representatives from Maryland, and General Morris, a member of the house from Vermont, and myself, having the power to determine the votes of the states from similarity of views and opinions during the pendency of the election, made an agreement to vote together. We foresaw that a crisis was approaching which might probably force us to separate in our votes from the party with whom we usually acted. We were determined to make a president, and the period of Mr. Adams's administration was rapidly approaching.

In determining to recede from the opposition to Mr. Jefferson, it occurred to us that probably, instead of being obliged to surrender at discretion, we might obtain terms of capitulation. The gentlemen whose names I have mentioned authorized me to declare their concurrence with me upon the best terms that could be procured. The vote of either of us was sufficient to decide the choice. With a view to the end mentioned, I applied to Mr. John Nicholas, a member of the house from Virginia, who was a particular friend of Mr. Jefferson. I stated to Mr. Nicholas that if certain points of the future administration could be understood and arranged with Mr. Jefferson, I was authorized to say that three states would withdraw from an opposition to his election. He asked me what those points were: I answered, First, sir, the support of the public credit; secondly, the maintenance of the naval system; and, lastly, that subordinate public officers employed only in the execution of details established by law shall not be removed from office on the ground of their political character, nor without complaint against their conduct. I explained myself that I considered it not only reasonable, but necessary, that offices of high discretion and confidence should be filled by men of Mr. Jefferson's choice. I exemplified by mentioning, on the one hand, the offices of the secretaries of state, treasury, foreign ministers, &c., and, on the other, the collectors of ports, &c. Mr. Nicholas answered me that he considered the points as very reasonable; that he was satisfied that they corresponded with the views and intentions of Mr. Jefferson, and knew him well. That he was acquainted with most of the gentlemen who would probably be about him and enjoying his confidence in case he became president, and that, if I would be satisfied with his assurance, he could solemnly declare it as his opinion that Mr. Jefferson, in his administration, would not depart from the points I had proposed. I replied to Mr. Nicholas that I had not the least doubt of the sincerity of his declaration, and that his opinion was perfectly correct; but that I wanted an engagement, and that, if the points could in any form be understood as conceded by Mr. Jefferson, the election should be ended; and proposed to him to consult Mr. Jefferson. This he declined, and said he could do no more than give me the assurance of his own opinion as to the sentiments and designs of Mr. Jefferson and his friends. I told him that was not sufficient—that we should not surrender without better terms. Upon this we separated; and I shortly after met with General Smith, to whom I unfolded myself in the same manner that I had done to Mr. Nicholas. In explaining myself to him in relation to the nature of the offices alluded to, I mentioned the offices of George Latimer, [2] collector of the port of Philadelphia, and Allen M'Lane, collector of Wilmington. General Smith gave me the same assurances as to the observance by Mr. Jefferson of the points which I had stated which Mr. Nicholas had done. I told him I should not be satisfied or agree to yield till I had the assurance of Mr. Jefferson himself; but that, if he would consult Mr. Jefferson, and bring the assurance from him, the election should be ended. The general made no difficulty in consulting Mr. Jefferson, and proposed giving me his answer the next morning. The next day, upon our meeting, General Smith informed me that he had seen Mr. Jefferson, and stated to him the points mentioned, and was authorized by him to say that they corresponded with his views and intentions, and that we might confide in him accordingly. The opposition of Vermont, Maryland, and Delaware was immediately withdrawn, and Mr. Jefferson was made president by the votes of ten states.

To the sixth interrogatory the deponent answers and says, I was introduced to Mr. Burr the day of Mr. Jefferson's inauguration as president. I had no acquaintance with him before, and very little afterward, till the last winter of his vice-presidency, when I became a member of the Senate of the United States.

To the seventh interrogatory the deponent answers and says, I do not know, nor did I ever believe, from any information I received, that Mr. Burr entered into any negotiation or agreement with any member of either party in relation to the presidential election which depended before the House of Representatives.

To the eighth interrogotary the deponent answers and says, Upon the subject of this interrogatory I can express only a loose opinion, founded upon the conjectures at the time of what could be effected by Mr. Burr by mortgaging the patronage of the executive. I can only say, generally, that I did believe at the time that he had the means of making himself president. But this opinion has no other ground than conjecture, derived from a knowledge of means which existed, and, if applied, their probable operation on individual characters. In answer to the last part of the interrogatory, deponent says, I know of nothing of which Mr. Burr was apprized which related to the election.

(Signed) J. A. Bayard.

District of Columbia, Washington.

The deposition of the Honourable James A. Bayard, consisting of six pages, was taken and sworn to before us, this 3d day of April, A. D. 1806.

STEPHEN R. BRADLEY.

GEORGE LOGAN.

Deposition of the Honourable Samuel Smith, Senator of the United States for the state of Maryland, a witness produced, sworn, and examined in a cause depending in the Supreme Court of the state of New-York, between James Gillespie, plaintiff, and Abraham Smith, defendant, on the part and behalf of the defendant, as follows:

1st. I knew Thomas Jefferson some years previous to 1800; the precise time when our acquaintance commenced I do not recollect.

2d and 3d. I was a member of the House of Representatives of the United States in 1800 and 1801, and know that Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr had an equal number of the votes given by the electors of president and vice-president of the United States.

4th. Presuming that this question may have reference to conversations (for I know of no bargains or agreements) which took place at the time of the balloting, I will relate those which I well recollect to have had with three gentlemen, separately, of the federal party. On the Wednesday preceding the termination of the election, Colonel Josiah Parker asked a conversation with me in private. He said that many gentlemen were desirous of putting an end to the election; that they only wanted to know what would be the conduct of Mr. Jefferson in case he should be elected president, particularly as it related to the public debt, to commerce, and the navy. I had heard Mr. Jefferson converse on all those subjects lately, and informed him what, I understood were the opinions of that gentleman. I lived in the house with Mr. Jefferson, and, that I might be certain that what I bad said was correct, I sought and had a conversation that evening with him on those points, and, I presume, though I do not precisely recollect, that I communicated to him the conversation which I had with Colonel Parker.

The next day General Dayton (a senator), after some jesting conversation, asked me to converse with him in private. We retired. He said that he, with some other gentlemen, wished to have a termination put to the pending election; but be wished to know what were the opinions or conversations of Mr. Jefferson respecting the navy, commerce, and the public debt. In answer, I said that I had last night had conversation with Mr. Jefferson on all those subjects; that be had told me that any opinion be should give at this time might be attributed to improper motives; that to me he had no hesitation in saying that, as to the public debt, he had been averse to the manner of funding it, but that he did not believe there was any man who respected his own character who would or could think of injuring its credit at this time; that, on commerce, he thought that a correct idea of his opinions on that subject might be derived from his writings, and particularly from his conduct while he was minister at Paris, when be thought he had evinced his attention to the commercial interest of his country; that he had not changed opinion, and still did consider the prosperity of our commerce as essential to the true interest of the nation; that on the navy he had fully expressed his opinions in his Notes on Virginia; that he adhered still to his ideas then given; that he believed our growing commerce would call for protection; that he had been averse to a too rapid increase of our navy; that he believed a navy must naturally grow out of our commerce, but thought prudence would advise its increase to progress with the increase of the nation, and that in this way he was friendly to the establishment. General Dayton appeared pleased with the conversation, and (I think) said, that if this conversation had taken place earlier, much trouble might have been saved, or words to that effect.

At the funeral of Mr. Jones (of Georgia) I walked with Mr. Bayard (of Delaware). The approaching election became the subject of conversation. I recollect no part of that conversation except his saying that he thought that a half hour's conversation between us might settle the business. That idea was not again repeated. On the day after I had held the conversation with General Dayton, I was asked by Mr. Bayard to go into the committee-room. He then stated that he had it in his power (and was so disposed) to terminate the election, but he wished information as to Mr. Jefferson's opinions on certain subjects, and mentioned, I think, the same three points already alluded to as asked by Colonel Parker and General Dayton, and received from me the same answer in substance (if not in words) that I have given to General Dayton. He added a fourth, to wit: What would be Mr. Jefferson's conduct as to the public officers? He said he did not mean confidential officers, but, by elucidating his question, he added, such as Mr. Latimer, of Philadelphia, and Mr. M'Lane, of Delaware. I answered, that I never had heard Mr. Jefferson say any thing on that subject. He requested that I would inquire, and inform him the next day. I did so. And the next day (Saturday) told him that Mr. Jefferson had said that he did not think that such officers ought to be dismissed on political grounds only, except in cases where they had made improper use of their offices to force the officers under them to vote contrary to their judgment. That, as to Mr. M'Lane, he had already been spoken to in his behalf by Major Eccleston, and, from the character given him by that gentleman, he considered him a meritorious officer; of course, that he would not be displaced, or ought not to be displaced. I further added, that Mr. Bayard might rest assured (or words to that effect) that Mr. Jefferson would conduct, as to those points, agreeably to the opinions I had stated as his. Mr. Bayard then said, We will give the vote on Monday; and then separated. Early in the election my colleague, Mr. Baer, told me that we should have a president; that they would not get up without electing one or the other of the gentlemen. Mr. Baer had voted against Mr. Jefferson until the final vote, when I believe he withdrew, or voted blank, but do not perfectly recollect.

5th. I became acquainted with Colonel Burr some time in the revolutionary war.

6th. I know of no agreement or bargain in the years 1800 and 1801 with any person or persons whatsoever respecting the office of president in behalf of Aaron Burr, nor have I any reason to believe that any such existed.

7th. I received a letter from Colonel Burr, dated, I believe, 16th December, 1800, in reply to one which I had just before written him. The letter of Colonel Burr is as follows:—

"It is highly improbable that I shall have an equal number of votes with Mr. Jefferson; but, if such should be the result, every man who knows me ought to know that I would utterly disclaim all competition. Be assured that the federal party can entertain no wish for such an exchange. As to my friends, they would dishonour my views and insult my feelings by a suspicion that I would submit to be instrumental in counteracting the wishes and expectations of the people of the United States. And I now constitute you my proxy to declare these sentiments if the occasion shall require."

I have not now that letter by me, nor any other letter from him to refer to; the preceding is taken from a printed copy, which corresponds with my recollection, and which I believe to be correct. My correspondence with him continued till the close of the election. In none of his letters to me, or to any other person that I saw, was there any thing that contradicted the sentiments contained in that letter.

(Signed) S. SMITH.

City of Washington, in the District of Columbia.

The deposition of the Honourable Samuel Smith, written upon five pages, was duly taken and sworn to before us, two of the commissioners named in the annexed commission, at the capitol in the said city of Washington, on the fifteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and six, and of the independence of the United States the thirtieth.

(Signed) GEORGE LOGAN.

DAVID STONE.



Footnotes:

1. Judge Cooper, of Cooperstown, state of New-York.

2. During the year 1802 unsuccessful efforts were made by the democracy of Philadelphia to have Mr. Latimer removed from the office of collector. The federal party complained of the number of removals which had already been made. The Aurora of June 29, 1802, referring to this subject, says—"We can tell them (the federalists) that the most lucrative office under the government of the United States in this commonwealth, the emoluments of which amount to triple the salary of the governor of this commonwealth, is now held by _George Latimer, collector of the customs;" and on the 29th September, he adds, "Let any man of candour say if Latimer ought not long since to have been discharged from his office." Mr. Duane had not then read the depositions of Messrs. Bayard and Smith, and perhaps was ignorant of the _arrangements_ by virtue of which this gentleman and Mr. M'Lane, of Delaware, were retained in office.



CHAPTER IX.

A history of the presidential contest in Congress in the spring of 1801, with an account of some of the circumstances which preceded and followed it, has now been presented. It afforded the enemies of Colonel Burr an opportunity to lay a foundation deep and broad, from which to assail him with the battering-rams of detraction, falsehood, and calumny. From that day until the period when he was driven into exile from the land of his fathers, he was pursued with an intolerance relentless as the grave. The assailants of his reputation and their more wicked employers felt and knew the wrongs they had done. Self-abased with reflecting on the motives which had impelled them to action, their zeal for his ruin became more fiery, and they faltered at no means, however dishonourable, to effect their object. The power of the press is great. But, painful as the remark is, it is nevertheless true—the power of the press to do evil is much greater than to do good. The power of the press is too often irresistible when conducted by unprincipled and corrupt men, pampered by the smiles and the patronage of those filling high places. A stronger illustration of this remark cannot be found in history than the case of Aaron Burr from 1801 to 1804. At the height of his popularity, influence, and glory in the commencement of 1801, before the close of 1804 he was suspected—contemned—derided, and prostrated; and this mighty revolution in public opinion was effected without any wrong act or deed on the part of the vice-president.

The charge against him was that he had been faithless to the political party which had sustained him through life; that he had negotiated, bargained, or intrigued with the federalists to promote his own election to the exclusion of Mr. Jefferson. The public mind became poisoned; suspicions were engendered; his revilers were cherished; the few stout hearts that confided in his political integrity, and nobly clustered around him, were anathematized and proscribed. The mercenary, the selfish, and the timid united in the cry—down with him.

It has been seen, that whenever and wherever the charge was rendered tangible by specification, it was met and repelled. For a refutation of the general charge, Mr. Bayard's and Mr. Smith's testimony is sufficiently explicit. Concurring testimony could be piled upon pile; but, if there remains an individual in the community who will not be convinced by the evidence which has been produced, then that individual would not be convinced "though one were to rise from the dead" and bear testimony to the falsity of the charge.

The details in relation to the presidential contest of 1801 have occupied much time and space. This could not be avoided. It fixed the destiny of Colonel Burr. Besides, it forms a great epoch in the history of our country and its government, and has been but imperfectly understood.

Mr. Jefferson's malignity towards Colonel Burr never ceased but with his last breath. His writings abound with proof of that malignity, smothered, but rankling in his heart. Let the highminded man read the following extracts Mr. Jefferson, in a long and laboured letter to Colonel Burr, written uninvited, not in reply to one received, dated Philadelphia, 17th June, 1797, says—"The newspapers give so minutely what is passing in Congress, that nothing of detail can be wanting for your information. Perhaps, however, some general view of our situation and prospects since you left us may not be unacceptable. At any rate, it will give me an opportunity of recalling myself to your memory, and of EVIDENCING MY ESTEEM FOR YOU."

In his Ana, under date of the 26th of January, 1804, he says—, "I had never seen Colonel Burr till he came as a member of Senate. [1]

His conduct very soon inspired me with distrust. I habitually cautioned Mr. Madison against trusting him too much."

Thus, according to his own showing, while he was endeavouring "to recall himself to the memory" of Colonel Burr "and evidencing his esteem for him," he was "habitually cautioning Mr. Madison against trusting him too much."

Again. January 26, 1804, be says—"Colonel Burr, the vice-president, called on me in the evening, having previously asked an opportunity of conversing with me. He began by recapitulating summarily that he had come to New-York a stranger some years ago; that he found the country in possession of two rich families (the Livingstons and Clintons); that his pursuits were not political, and he meddled not," &c.

Now who that knows the history of Colonel Burr's life will believe one sentence or one word of this statement? In the year 1778, Colonel Burr was in command on the lines in Westchester. In July of that year he was appointed by General Washington to receive from the commissioners for conspiracies the suspected persons. He remained at this post during the winter of 1778-79. Ill health compelled him, in March, 1779, to resign. In the autumn of 1780 he commenced the study of law with Judge Paterson, of New-Jersey, where he remained until the spring of 1781, when be removed to Orange county, in the state of New-York, and continued the study of law. In 1782 he was licensed by the Supreme Court of the state of New-York as counsellor and attorney, and immediately commenced practice in Albany. In July of that year he was married, then twenty-six years old. In April, 1783, through an agent, he hired a house in the city of New-York, and removed his family into it as soon as the British evacuated the city. In the spring of 1784, six months after his removal into the city, he was elected to represent it in the state legislature. [2]

In the face of these facts, to talk of his "having come to New York a stranger some years ago, and finding the state in possession of two rich families," &c. What absurdity! But, shrinking from these disgusting and revolting exposures, the reader, it is believed, will cheerfully turn to the perusal of those letters which again presents to his view Colonel Burr in the domestic and social scenes of life.

TO THEODOSIA.

Trenton, January 2, 1800.

The question—When shall we meet? is already answered; but I must now answer it anew, and for a more distant day; perhaps Wednesday, perhaps Thursday; but you will hear again. Your letters amuse me; your recovery rejoices me; your determination not to torment yourself is neither from philosophy nor spleen—it is mere words, and an attempt to deceive yourself, which may succeed for the moment; ergo, no determination; ergo, not founded on philosophy; ergo, not on resentment; ergo, neither. I have no doubt but chose is on the way; the journey cannot at this season be performed in thirty days.

My compliments to A. C. M., and am very much obliged to them. It is the most fatiguing thing imaginable for such crude tastes as those of Theodosia and A. B. You had better apologize. You are sick and I am absent. But you have not mentioned the day—neither that of the beauty's ball, for which I owe you much ill will, and therefore my next shall be to Natalie, to whom all good wishes.

A. BURR.



THEODOSIA.

Albany, January 29, 1800.

You must be weary of hearing that "I have not yet a line from you, and that John and Alexis are not arrived," but you must submit to hear often of what so often employs my thoughts.

Most of all, I amuse and torment myself by fancying your occupations, your thoughts, your attitudes at different hours in the day and night—generally I find you reading or studying; sometimes musing; now and then counting the time of my probable absence. In comes C. C.—a pleasant interruption, or a note from C. C., and then follows trouble and embarrassments, and sometimes scolding. They are always answered, however.

We have agreed that the cause of Le Guen shall come on next Tuesday. It will last the whole week. The week following I shall hope to leave this place; but I may be deceived, for the court may take a week to consider of the business, and I cannot leave the ground till the thing be determined.

Adieu, chere amie,

AARON BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

Albany, February 13, 1800.

Your letter by this day's mail, dated the 13th, and postmarked the 12th, is one of those hasty and unsatisfactory scraps which neither improve you nor amuse me. I pray you never to write to me with the mere motive of getting rid of the task. These performances always lead me to fear that all other tasks are performed in the same manner; but adieu to tasks and reproaches. I will endure your haste or your silence without a murmur. One is not always in the bumour to write, and one always writes as much as the humour prompts.

I am here sentinel over the interest of Le Guen, and cannot leave the post until the final decision be had, of which, at present, I form no conjecture as to the period; but I entertain no doubt of Le Guen's eventual success.

Among the letters forwarded by you is one recommending to me in very high terms a Mr. Irving, or Irwin, [3] from London; pray inquire who he is, and where to be found, and be able to inform me, on my return, if I should happen to return.

Mr. Eacker has offered his services to take a letter. You see that I cannot refrain from improving every occasion of assuring, you how very truly I am your faithful friend and affectionate father,

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA,

Albany, February 15, 1800.

This will be handed you by Mr. Brown, [4] secretary to General Hamilton. By the two preceding mails I had nothing from you; by that of this day I am again disappointed. I do indeed receive a very pleasant little letter, but I expected a volume. Would it be an intolerable labour, if, precisely at half past nine o'clock every evening, you should say, "I will now devote an hour to papa?" Or even half an hour. Your last letter, though not illy written, has evident marks of haste.

I agree entirely with your eulogium on our amiable friend; but one point you overlook. Her heart is as cold as marble, And you mistake the effusions of politeness, mingled with respect, for symptoms of tender emotions.

The argument of the cause of Le Guen is concluded. I fear that I must wait for the final decision of the court before I can leave Albany. To-morrow I go with John to Schenectady. I am more impatient to return than I can express.

A. BURR.



THEODOSIA.

Albany, March 5, 1800.

I had taken my passage for this day, and anticipated the pleasure of dining with you on Saturday. But—but—these buts—how they mar all the fine theories of life! But our friend Thomas Morris [5] has entreated in such terms that I would devote this day and night to certain subjects of the utmost moment to him, that I could not, without the appearance of unkindness, refuse. He would, I know, at any time, devote a week or month, on like occasion, to serve me. How, then, could I refuse him one day? I could not.

But, again, more buts. But after I had consented to give him a day, I sent to take passage for to-morrow, and lo! the stage is taken by the sheriff to transport criminals to the state prison. I should not be much gratified with this kind of association on the road, and thus I apprehend that my journey will be (must be) postponed until Friday, and my engagement to dine with you until Monday.

A. BURR.



TO JOSEPH ALSTON.

New-York, January 15, 1801.

MY DEAR SIR,

Your two letters have been received, and gave me great pleasure. We are about to begin our journey to Albany. I propose to remain there till the 10th of February; possibly till the 20th. If you should come northward, you will find a letter for you in the postoffice of this city.

The equality of Jefferson and Burr excites great speculation and much anxiety. I believe that all will be well, and that Jefferson will be our president. Your friend,

A. BURR.



THEODOSIA TO JOSEPH ALSTON.

Poughkeepsie, January 24, 1801.

Thus far have we advanced on this terrible journey, from which you predicted so many evils, Without meeting even with inconvenience. How strange that Mr. Alston should be wrong. Do not, however, pray for misfortunes to befall us that your character may be retrieved; it were useless, I assure you; although I am very sensible how anxious you must now be to inspire me with all due respect and reverence, I should prefer to feel it in any other way.

We shall go from hence to Albany in a sleigh, and hope to arrive on Sunday evening, that we may be settled on Thursday. Adieu. Health and happiness.

THEODOSIA.



TO MRS. THEODOSIA B. ALSTON.

Albany, February 17, 1801.

I have heard that you reached Fishkill on Sunday, and thence conclude that you got home on Monday night. When in Philadelphia, send a note to Charles Biddle, inquiring, &c., and to inform him that you are going South. He will call and see you, being one of your great admirers. Desire Doctor Edwards to give Mr. Alston a line to Cesar Rodney, of Wilmington, a very respectable young man. He will introduce you to the venerable Dickenson, who, knowing my great respect for him (which you will also take care to let him know), will be pleased to see Mr. Alston and you on that footing. At Baltimore, either call immediately on Mrs. Smith, or let her know of your arrival. You are to wait in Baltimore until I overtake you, which will be on the 28th at the latest. Adieu.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

Washington, March 8, 1801.

Your little letter from Alexandria assured me of your safety, and for a moment consoled me for your absence. The only solid consolation is the belief that you will be happy, and the certainty that we shall often meet.

I am to be detained here yet a week. Immediately on my return to New-York I shall prepare for a tour to Georgetown or to Charleston; probably a water passage.

I.B. Prevost has been hurrying off Senat and Natalie; but for his interposition they would have relied wholly on me, and I had already proposed that they should go with the chancellor some time in the summer or autumn, which would have been then or never, as I had pleased; but he (I.B.P.) has advised otherwise, and strongly urged their immediate departure. I think I shall be able to prevent it.

Would Mr. Alston be willing to go as secretary to Chancellor Livingston? I beg his immediate answer.

Adieu, ma chere amie.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

Washington, March 11, 1830.

By the time the enclosed shall reach Mr. Alston, it will have travelled about three thousand miles. It will certainly deserve a kind reception. I leave mine open for your perusal; the other appears to be from Miss Burr.

Your Dumfries letter was received yesterday. To pass a day in Dumfries is what you could not at any time very much desire; but to pass one there against your will, and a rainy day too, was indeed enough to try your tempers.

On Sunday, the 15th, I commence my journey to New York; there I shall not arrive till the 25th. Nothing but matrimony will prevent my voyage to Charleston and Georgetown; and even so great an event shall only postpone, but not defeat the project I am sorry, however, to add that I have no expectations or decided views on this subject. I mean Hymen.

It gives me very great pleasure to hear that Colonel W. Hampton is become, in some sort, your neighbour, by having purchased a plantation within fifteen or twenty miles (as is said) of Georgetown. Write me if this be so.

I have written to Frederick [6] as you commanded; that I might not err in expressing your ideas, I enclosed to him your letter. You have no warmer friend on earth; no one who would so readily hazard his life to serve you. It always seemed to me that you did not know his value.

Certain parts of your letter I cannot answer. Let us think of the expected meeting, and not of the present separation. God bless thee ever.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

New-York, Match 29, 1801.

On Wednesday, the 18th, I left the great city. At the Susquehannah the wind was rude; the river, swollen by recent rains, was rapid. The ferrymen pronounced it to be impossible to pass with horses, and unsafe to attempt it. By the logic of money and brandy I persuaded them to attempt it. We embarked; the wind was, indeed, too mighty for us, and we drove on the rocks; but the boat did not bilge or fill, as in all reason it ought to have done. I left Alexis and Harry to work out their way; got my precious carcass transported in a skiff, and went on in a stage to pass a day with "thee and thou." I was received by the father with parental affection—but of "thee." How charming, how enviable is this equanimity, if real. There is one invaluable attainment in the education of this sect; one which you and I never thought of: it is "tacere." How particularly desirable this in a wife.

At Philadelphia I saw many—many, who inquired after you with great interest—sans doubte. Among others I saw B., lovely and interesting; but adieu to that. It cannot, must not, will not be; and the next time I meet B., which will be in a few days, I will frankly say so.

I approached home as I would approach the sepulchre of all my friends. Dreary, solitary, comfortless. It was no longer home. Natalie and ma bonne amie have been with me most of the time since my return (about twenty-four hours past). My letters from Washington broke up that cursed plan of J. B. P.; they do not go in the parliamentaire; they do not know when they go; and, in short, they rely wholly on me, so that thing is all right.

The elegant and accomplished Mrs. Edward Livingston died about ten days ago. Mrs. Allen is in town; she is in better health than for years past. As to my dear self, I am preparing with all imaginable zeal for a voyage to Charleston. One obstacle interposes; that you can conjecture. That removed, and I shall be off in forty-eight hours. I hope to be at sea by the 20th of April; but, alas! perhaps not. In eight days you shall know more of this.

Your letters have been received as far as Halifax. We conclude that you got home on the 16th. It has been snowing here this whole day most vehemently. You are blessed with "gentler skies." May all other blessings unite.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

New-York, April 15, 1801.

Your letters of the 24th and 25th March, received yesterday, give me the first advice of your safe arrival at Clifton. The cordial and affectionate reception which you have met consoles me, as far as any thing can console me, for your absence.

My last will have advised you of the alteration in the plans of Natalie. Of all this she will write you; but I must say a word of my own plans. The ship South Carolina is now in port, and will sail on Monday next. I wish to take passage in her; but a thousand concerns of business and obstacles of various kinds appear to oppose. I shall combat them all with the zeal which my ardent wishes for the voyage inspire; yet I dare hardly hope to succeed. You shall hear again by the mail of Saturday.

Your female friends here complain of your silence; particularly Miss C., and, I am sure, elle a raison.

The reasons which you and your husband give against the voyage to France concur with my judgment. You can go a few years hence more respectably, more agreeably. Adieu, chere enfalit.

A. BURR.



TO JOSEPH ALSTON.

New-York, April 27, 1801.

Our election commences to-morrow, and will be open for three days. The republican members of assembly for this city will be carried by a greater majority than last year, unless some fraud be practised at the polls. The corporation have bad the indecent hardiness to appoint known and warm federalists (and no others) to be inspectors of the election in every ward. Hamilton works day and night with the most intemperate and outrageous zeal, but I think wholly without effect.

If any reliance may be placed on our information from the country, Clinton will be elected by a large majority. The best evidence of dispassionate opinion on this subject is, that bets are two to one in his favour, and that the friends of Van Rensellaer wager with reluctance with such odds.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

New-York, April 29, 1901.

This morning will sail the brig Echo, the only vessel in harbour destined for South Carolina. I do not go in her. With unspeakable regret, therefore, the projected visit is abandoned—wholly and absolutely abandoned. The pain of my own disappointment leaves me no room for any sympathy with yours. There is one insurmountable obstacle, which I leave you to conjecture. If that were removed, it would yet, for other reasons, be barely possible for me to go at this time. But enough of disappointment; let us talk of indemnifications.

On the 5th of June I must be at the city of Washington, After the 12th I shall be at leisure, and will meet you anywhere. Write me of your projects, and address me at that place. How can Mr. Alston, consistently with his views of business, leave the state for five or six months, as you have proposed, for your Northern tour?

Of the voyage to France I have written to you both about a fortnight ago. I heartily applaud your judgment, and the motives which have influenced it. You may by-and-by go in a manner much more satisfactory.

How very oddly your letters travel. That of the 30th March arrived on the 15th, instant; and yesterday, those of the 6th and 13th by the same mail. To solve this phenomenon, I am led to believe that they have moved with a velocity proportioned to the spirit which was infused in them by the writer. Thus, the first crawled with a torpor corresponding with its character. It reminded me of the letter of a French lady, which I have shown you as a model of elegance. "Mon cher mari, je vous ecris parceque je n'ai rien a faire: je finis parceque je n'az rien a dire." This was, indeed, the substance of yours; but, being spread over a whole page, the laconic beauty was lost, and the inanity only remained. The second, a grave, decent performance, marched with becoming gravity, and performed the Journey in two-and-twenty days; but the third, replete with sprightliness and beauty, burst from the thraldom of dulness, and made a transit unparalleled in the history of the country.

You will find in this theory some incentive to the exertion of genius; and I entertain no doubt but that, ere long, your letters will be sped with the rapidity of a ray of light.

We have laughed at your horse negro, and have been very much amused by the other charming little details. Thus letters should be written.

By this vessel I send two dozen pairs of long coloured kid gloves, and half a dozen pretty little short ones, pour monter a cheval. They are directed to your husband. I wish you would often give me orders, that I may have the pleasure of doing something for you or your amiable family.

I had like to have forgotten to say a word in reply to your inquiries of matrimony, which would seem to indicate that I have no plan on the subject. Such is the fact. You are or were my projector in this line. If perchance I should have one, it will be executed before you will hear of the design. Yet I ought not to conceal that I have had a most amiable overture from a lady "who is always employed in something useful." She was, you know, a few months past, engaged to another; that other is suspended, if not quite dismissed. If I should meet her, and she should challenge me, I should probably strike at once. She is not of that cast, yet a preference to rank only is not very flattering to vanity; a remark which may remind you of "Le moi."

Adieu, chere enfante.

AARON BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

New-York, May 26, 1801.

Another parlementaire is preparing in this port, and ma bonne amie and Natalie are again preparing to sail; but you may rest assured that they will not go. Their preparations are evidently mere form, and they are ready to yield to gentle persuasion. Yet you must not delay your voyage hither, to aid, if necessary.

But, for a reason much more weighty, you must hasten—il faut. I want your counsel and your exertions in an important negotiation, actually commenced, but not advancing, and which will probably be stationary until your arrival; more probably it may, however, in the mean time, retrograde. Quite a new subject.

Who should present himself a few days ago but A. Burr Reeve. He has come, with the consent of his father, to pass some weeks with me—more astonishment. I have put him in the hands of Natalie. She will find it a hard job, but she has entered on the duty with great zeal and confident hopes of complete success.

By the time this can reach you, you will be ready to embark for New-York. You will find me in Broadway. Richmond Hill will remain vacant till your arrival. Adieu.

A. BURR.



TO THEODOSIA.

New-York, August 20, 1801.

Mr. Astor, if he should not meet you to deliver this letter, will send it after you. Yet I dare not trust to such hazards the letters which I have received for Mr. Alston and you, I persevere, therefore, in the determination to retain them.

I was so very solicitous that you should see Niagara, that I was constantly filled with apprehension lest something might prevent it. Your letter of the 29th of July relieves me. You had actually seen it. Your determination to visit Brandt gives me great pleasure, particularly as I have lately received a very friendly letter from him, in which he recapitulates your hospitality to him in ancient days, and makes very kind inquiries respecting you; all this before he could have entertained the remotest idea of seeing you in his own kingdom.