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.