as the man (sans peur et sans reproche) without fear and without reproach. In a letter written by Mr. Bayard in 1801, and which will be found in the Appendix, he says, "I shall never lose sight of the motto of the great original "of our name." This gentleman was an eminent lawyer in the state of Delaware. He was in both branches of Congress, and was second to no one in either branch. He was one of the envoys who made the treaty of peace at Ghent in 1814. He was a tall, well proportioned, erect man, of light complexion, light hair, of handsome face, intelligent and manly expression, and of courteous and dignified manners. He was one, of whom it might be truly said, that nature, education, mind, heart, and habit, had combined to make a gentleman. His eloquence was lofty and commanding. He had, eminently, the first of its requisites, sincerity, and certainty that he was right. It was such a man, that Thomas Jefferson would declare, even from his own tomb, to be a political knave.

The two passages complained of by Mr. Bayard's sons are the following. The first of them will be found in vol. iv. p. 515.

،،

،،

February 12, 1801. Edward Livingston tells me, that "Bayard applied to-day, or last night, to General Smith, and represented to him the expediency of his 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 Living"ston, and to W. C. Nicholas, who confirms it to me. "Bayard, in like manner, tempted Livingston, not by offer“ing any particular office, but by representing to him his, Livingston's, intimacy and connexion with Burr; that "from him he had every thing to expect, if he would come over to him. To Dr. Linn, of New Jersey, they have "offered the government of New Jersey. See a paragraph "in Martin's Baltimore paper, of February 10, signed A Looker-on,' stating an intimacy between Harper and Burr." Mr. Jefferson begins in page 520 of the 4th volume, under date of April 15, 1806, the record of an interview with Burr, which occurred, he says, about a month before, in which Burr (then Ex-Vice President) appears to have

66

66

،،

66

intimated that an office would be agreeable to him. Mr. Jefferson says that he said to Burr, "that if we believed a "few newspapers, it might be supposed he had lost public "confidence, but that I knew how easy it was to engage newspapers in any thing." "That as to any harm he "could do me, I knew no cause why he should desire it; "but at the same time I feared no injury which any man "could do me; that I had never done a single act, or been "concerned in any transaction, which I feared to have fully "laid open, or which could do me any hurt, if truly stated."

He then adds, (same page) “ I did not commit these things "to writing at the time, but I do it now, because in a suit "between him, [Burr] and Cheetham, he has had a deposi"tion of Mr. Bayard taken, which has no relation to the "suit, nor to any other object than to calumniate me. Bay"ard 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 for me. "absolutely false. No proposition of any kind was ever "made to me on that occasion, by General Smith, nor any "answer authorized by me; and this fact General Smith affirms at this moment."

66

This is

Now, so it is, that Mr. Bayard was one of the six persons in the House of Representatives, on whom the election of Mr. Jefferson depended; either of whom could have decided the election; and that Bayard had less repugnance to the election of Mr. Jefferson than to that of Mr. Burr; and that he could, at any balloting, have settled the question by his vote; and was resolved that there should be an election. It also happens, that on the same day when Mr. Jefferson made his record, General Smith, a personal and political friend of Mr. Jefferson, was engaged in giving his deposition in a case, in which he declares, that he undertook, being a resident in the same house with Mr. Jefferson, to inquire into his policy concerning commerce, the navy, and the funding system; that he did inquire of Mr. Jefferson, and did report his answers; and that the election was thereupon made. He and Mr. Bayard both testify, that no proposition was made to either of them, nor by either of them, to promote Burr's election. Mr. Bayard says, that

at this time he had no personal acquaintance with Burr; and that he knew not of any effort made by Burr, to promote his own election; that no means to that end were taken, among the members, but argument and persuasion, founded on the belief, that it would be less disastrous to the country to elect Burr, than to elect Jefferson. It is furthermore a fact, that General Smith, on the floor of the Senate denied that Mr. Jefferson had recorded TRUTHS; and another fact that Mr. Livingston stated, also, on the floor of the Senate, that he remembered no such TRUTHS, as Mr. Jefferson had recorded concerning himself.

If Mr. Jefferson could so write, on facts which must have been within his own knowledge, and adapted to be strongly impressed on his memory, it casts a deep shade over his "tells me" assertions, and over his hearsay records, received from persons, who had, probably, learned how to gratify his sense of hearing.

*

LETTER XXXVIII.

JUNE 23, 1833.

THE election of Mr. Jefferson was regarded with strongly contrasted feelings, by the two great parties of the United States. He had not been a prominent object of attention, while in retirement, between his resignation of the office of Secretary, and his Vice Presidency. While in the latter office, he was only a presiding officer, and had no call to express his opinions, publicly. As soon as it was ascertained that he, or Burr, must be the President, it became highly in

* The evidence collected by the sons of Mr. Bayard to vindicate the honorable fame of their father, against the calumnies of Mr. Jefferson, consists of two depositions given by Mr. Bayard, in cases of libel which arose out of the election of February, 1801; and of a deposition of Samuel Smith, in one of those cases;- also of letters from members of Congress, who were present at that election. This evidence is accompanied by some very becoming commentaries from Mr. Bayard's sons, and was made public January 1, 1830, through the National Gazette, (Philadelphia) in consequence of Colonel Hayne's (South Carolina) having introduced Mr. Jefferson's record of facts, in a debate in the Senate. This evidence is historically important.

teresting, to both parties, to investigate his character, and his political propensities. He was portrayed according to the perceptions of the two parties, and presented in striking colors.

By the one party, he was represented, as the early advocate of religious freedom, and of the rights of man; the great apostle of liberty; the friend of our excellent ally, France; the determined foe of British influence; the reformer of constitutional errors; a sage, a philosopher, a true patriot, and genuine republican.

By the other, as a man destitute of the commonly received moral principles; and one who entertained no respect for the acknowledged foundation of all moral principle; the devoted admirer, and blind apologist of one foreign nation, and the uncompromising enemy of another; nor less an enemy to the men who had conducted the government for the first twelve years, and to all their measures; nor only so, he was declared to be hostile to the constitution itself, and would exercise the powers which it vested in him, to gratify one portion of his fellow citizens, and humble the other; that he would not be the dignified head of a great republic, but an intolerant party chieftain; that his learning had been used to break down and remove, rather than to uphold and preserve, the landmarks by which the virtuous and intelligent had, for ages, bounded social welfare.

How far from the truth these parties respectively were, it is certainly of some importance to know. How near that posterity, to which Mr. Jefferson appeals, will come to the truth, cannot be foreseen. It is probable that the obscurity which time throws over motives and acts, and the generalization which is all that the limits of common history permits, will prevent a true estimate of Mr. Jefferson's merits and faults, among those of future days. Time will also diminish the interest which will be felt in this gentleman's real character, and he will, probably, be known only as one who held the first station in his country; and that certain prominent events occurred in his time; but why did they occur, will interest very few.

This is not so, with those who are now living. Mr. Jefferson has made it highly interesting to them to know his true character, and the meaning and consequences of his policy. If it be true, as many suppose it to be, that he was

the original cause of the dangerous theories and practice, which now threaten to destroy the security and happiness of the American people: if he was the author of that perversion of our institutions, intended for common welfare of the whole, to the exclusive use and benefit of a few; if he was the creator of that destroyer of all republics, PARTY, the well known precursor of despotism; if his political acts, and his private writings, now given to the world with the sanction of his own name, prove, that all or any of these suppositions may be true, surely, all of the present day are interested to inquire, and to decide.

Taking his public messages, and other official documents, as the true index of his purposes as a public officer; and then taking the contents of his own volumes as the true interpreter of his true meaning in all things, which he did as an officer, as a citizen, and as a man, we may arrive at demonstration.

It will, on such authority, appear, that from the 22d of March, 1790, to the 4th of March, 1801, Mr. Jefferson had three great purposes always in view, and that he spared no exertion to accomplish them: 1. The aggrandizement of France. 2. The destruction of England. 3. The demolition of federalists, as a party; and the expatriation of the citizens who were of that party.

It will also appear, that the means taken to accomplish his objects, would be considered, in any other man, to be subversive of the honor and independence of his own country; a perversion of its institutions; unjust in motive; oppressive and demoralizing, in effect. But Mr. Jefferson is singularly privileged from all imputations of base or unworthy motives, in any case. He has undertaken to be responsible for his own honesty. If it must be admitted that he was honest, that is, that he really saw himself, his fellow-citizens, his country, and its institutions, as he represents himself to have seen them, he has proved his honesty at the expense of respect for his intelligence, and of esteem for his heart. If it were any other man, one might venture to say that he thought anything right, which he thought expedient; and that anything was expedient, as to object and means, which would accomplish his own ends.

When Mr. Jefferson became President, the people had deliberately established a national form of government, as