On the 1st of September he had descended the river and was upon Blannerhasset's island; and, on the 4th of the same month, appeared in the newspaper, at Marietta, the first number of the Querist, which was followed by two or three more. Í have been unable to obtain a copy of these papers, but the substance of their contents is well known. Their object was to prepare the minds of the people, in that part of the country, for a separation from the Atlantic States; they dilated upon all the topics so familiar in the mouth of Mr. Burr; and so much were they identified with his doctrines, that Dr. Wallace, one of the witnesses at Richmond, with whom Burr had conversed on these subjects in the summer of 1805, declares that, on his first perusal of these papers, he drew from their internal evidence the conclusion that the ideas were Burr's, and the language Blannerhasset's. Blannerhasset was, indeed, the writer, and precisely at the same time and immediately after, was ranging the country with the activity and spirit of a recruiting officer-promising the plunder of banks at New Orleans and of Mexican mines -settling the hereditary succession of the fancied Crown; and teeming with embassies and empires. [SENATE. the reception it deserved. He left the house | sign. For the projects he contemplated, and before breakfast the next morning. which he was then attempting to carry into execution, Mr. Smith was a man of the very first importance. As a Senator of the United States, it is obvious how useful his services might become, in his attendance here, during the session of Congress. As a contractor for building gunboats, and for supplying the army with provisions, he could, without exciting suspicion, and without danger of detection, be of the greatest use in performing the same services, and furnishing for Mr. Burr the same kind of supplies. As a man of influence and consideration in the State to which he belonged, his aid in propagating the doctrines of disunion, and in contributing to the accomplishment of that end, were not less desirable. The motives of profit and of distinction which might be held up to his expectations, were of a nature as persuasive upon a mind, which could be as susceptible of receiving them, as those of making Truxton an Admiral, or Eaton a General. Is it, then, credible that, while Burr was proceeding upon his business, with all the activity and energy of his character; while his boats were building and his provisions collecting; while he was obtruding almost upon every stranger and transient acquaintance, that he found in his way, the opinions which were suitable to his purpose-while Blannerhasset was filling the newspapers with rebellion, and engaging men for war, under his standard-is it credible, I say, that Burr should have solicited entertainment under the roof of Mr. Smith, and obtained it, for five or six days, without so much as intimating to him any one of his purposes? Is it credible that, in the course of that visit and in the intimacy between the parties, which the whole transaction so strongly implies, amidst the violent suspicions with which Mr. Burr, even then, was notoriously surrounded, there should never have occurred to the friendly solicitude of Mr. Smith a single inquiry which would have led to a disclosure, real or pretended, of the object of Mr. Burr's visit, and of his progress through the Western States? Should this be deemed, under all these circumstances, a credible thing, I then ask, how Mr. Smith's asseveration that Burr did not then disclose to him ANY object he had in view, is to be reconciled with Mr. Smith's affidavit of 6th Jan On the very same day that the first number of the "Querist" appeared at Marietta, the 4th of September, Mr. Burr, by the pencilled note, invites himself to the house of Mr. Smith, in Cincinnati, where he is hospitably received and entertained five or six days. During this time, he spends an evening at William McFarland's, where he holds exactly the same kind of conversation about the impotence of the Government, the rights and wrongs of the Western country, and their inducements to separate from the rest of the Union. About the 10th of September he leaves Mr. Smith's; proceeds to Lexington, in Kentucky, where he arrives and concludes his contract for the Washita lands, before the close of that month. Mr. Smith, in his answers to the queries of the committee, (an answer which he offered to make upon oath,) says that, on this visit, Colonel Burr tarried with him five or six days, and then progressed on his journey: for what he next adds, I must refer to his own words: "But he did not disclose to me ANY object he had in view. Meanwhile the voice of suspicion and jealousy was raised against him, and although I knew as little of his objects in visiting the Western States as either of you, still, as I had entertained him in conformity to the customs in which I was reared, and according to my own sense of propriety, I felt uneasiness and jealousy in consequence of these reports." The character of Colonel Burr is now generally well understood; and, when combined with the circumstances I have just mentioned, and with others which I am about to mention, it is difficult to conceive that his visit to Mr. Smith at this time should have been made without deVOL. III-37 uary, 1807, in which he says, "Burr did then speak to him about his project of settling a large tract of his Washita lands." It is one of the peculiarities attending Burr's conduct, through the whole of his conspiracy, that he had always an ostensible object, to serve as a mask to the real design. One of the difficulties and inconveniences of this method of transacting business is, that in exhibiting the purpose, which is meant only for show, it is apt to be materially variant from itself at different times. It is often variant, not upon trivial incidents, with which the best human memory cannot be accountable for perfect accuracy, but upon the most essential part of the story. It is SENATE.] Case of John Smith. [APRIL, 1808. inconceivable to me, that, at that precise period | the island, into Kentucky, for the purpose of of Mr. Burr's experiment upon the Western warning Burr that he could not, with personal States, he should thus have been, at his own safety to himself, return to the island. Taylor desire, the guest of Mr. Smith, five or six days, was to go first to Chilicothe, then to Smith's, without making to him any communication of at Cincinnati; and there he was to be told his real views, while he was so liberally dissem- where Burr and Blannerhasset were to be found. inating them to others far less intimate to his At this time it was no longer safe to inculcate acquaintance, and far less important to his pur- the disunion of the States. The people there, I poses-and when we find Mr. Smith's own nar- thank God, were not to be deluded by Mr. rative, upon this very point, so variant from Burr's mode or by any other mode of effecting itself at different times, how can we suppress a dismemberment. They were true to themthe belief that the real story was not that which selves and to their country. The public odium could safely be told? had arrived at such a pitch, that it might not be advisable for Mr. Smith to appear so intimate with Burr, as to know where he was to be found, and it might also be necessary for him to have the ostensible object of Mr. Burr's purposes ascertained. For, although he says that, when Burr was with him in September, he had talked about the settlement of the Washita lands, yet, at that time, the purchase was not made. This view of the state of things at that time will explain the particulars of Peter Taylor's testimony. When he arrives at Mr. Smith's, and inquires for Burr and Blannerhasset, Mr. Smith answers, that he knows nothing of either of them. That Taylor must be mistaken; that was not the place; but finding Taylor to be Blanner hasset's servant, he tells him, "he expected they were at Lexington, at the house of à Mr. Jourdan." Now, sir, what does this de The conversation to which Colonel James Taylor attests, occurs within a very few days after the departure of Mr. Burr from Mr. Smith's house, at this period. The subject of that conversation was the separation of the States. Mr. Smith takes pains to circulate that Querist, which was to scatter the seeds of disunion throughout the Western country. Mr. Smith adopts its arguments as his own; and adds others of the same tendency to assist its effects. Mr. Smith contends that these doctrines, however obnoxious then, in less than two years would become ORTHODOX. Is there no knowledge and participation in Burr's projects on the face of these expressions? We are told they were speculative opinions; and we hear complaints that a man should be held accountable for his political speculations. But when speculative opinions are associated with military prepara-nial, in the first instance, that he knew any thing tions, and a formidable enterprise in the very of them, and this pointing so precisely afterprocess of execution, then, sir, they assume a wards to the very house where they were to be very different complexion from that of free and found, indicate? The counsel for Mr. Smith legitimate discussion. Speculative opinions, at says, that Taylor was sent there for Mr. Burr's all times, have such an influence upon practice, greatcoat; nothing of that appears in the evithat I hold it not very justifiable in a man vest-dence. But, from Taylor's declaration, it aped with public trust, to speak in terms of approbation, of a dismemberment of this Union, upon any contingency, or at any distance of time. We ought to deprecate this greatest of all possible calamities, for our posterity as well as for ourselves. Yet, I acknowledge, that even these dangerous opinions, when merely speculative, may be expressed without evil intentions, and ought not to draw the weight of public censure upon the person using them, in the form of a decision of this body. It is the time, the occasion, the circumstance, upon which this speculative opinion was divulged, which display it as evidence of Mr. Smith's participation in Burr's conspiracy against the Union. We have followed the course of events until the close of September, about which time Blannerhasset follows Mr. Burr into Kentucky. In the course of that and the following month, the preparations and conversations of both these personages, the numbers of the Querist, and certain publications of an opposite character, which appeared in another newspaper, called the Western World, had roused the suspicions, the anxieties, the resentments of the people in that part of the Union, to the highest degree. About the 20th of October, Mrs. Blannerhasset found it necessary to despatch Peter Taylor from pears that he was sent there to ascertain where Burr and Blannerhasset were to be found; that Mr. Smith, at first, denied knowing where they were, and afterwards told him the very house in Lexington where he was to go for them. As the sole object of Taylor's going to Mr. Smith, was to inquire where Burr and Blannerhasset were, and as, before he left the house, Mr. Smith gave him a letter for Burr, under cover, to Blannerhas set, it is impossible to doubt the correctness of Taylor's testimony in that respect; that Mr. Smith told him where to go. The inference is ir resistible. This accurate knowledge where they were, and this express denial of that knowledge to a man whom he supposed a stranger, is a proof that, even then, Mr. Smith knew much more than he was willing to avow. The remainder of Peter Taylor's story, so far as it respects Mr. Smith, all concurs to establish the same fact. Mr. Smith's anxious inquiries for the news; for what was passing; for what was said, about General Wilkinson; the charge to Peter Taylor not to go to a tavern, lest he should be sifted with questions; and, finally, the letter, professedly to Blannerhasset, but enclosing one to Mr. Burr, all combine to exhibit a state of mind agitated and alarmed, studious of concealment, and fearful of detection. APRIL, 1808.] DEBATES OF CONGRESS. Case of John Smith. Above all, consider the inquiry, what was said What could have about General Wilkinson. associated, in a mind utterly ignorant of all Burr's projects, inquiries about Wilkinson with the then situation of Burr and Blannerhasset? Recollect the passage of the ciphered letter: "Already has the contractor orders to furnish six months' provisions at the points Wilkinson shall name; this shall be used only at the last moment, and then under proper injunctions." Mr. Smith has, at one time, denied all the material facts attested by Peter Taylor; and he attempted to disgrace his character; so little has he been borne out by his own evidence, now produced, that he formally admits the very facts he had denied. The same course has been pursued with regard to Colonel James Taylor's testimony. Sir, this treatment of the witnesses is not calculated to inspire confidence in the solidity of Mr. Smith's defence. Unfounded attacks upon the character of a respectable witness, not only confirm, but aggravate the weight of his testimony. If, however, the testimony of Peter Taylor needed confirmation, it would be found in the substance of the letter itself, of which he was the bearer, and of the answer to that letter. To .these two documents I now ask the particular attention of the Senate. The letter is dated 23d October, 1806, and says: "I beg leave to inform you that we have, in this quarter, various reports prejudicial to your character. It is believed by many that your design is to dismember the Union; although I do not believe that you have any such design, yet I must confess, from the mystery and rapidity of your movements, that I have fears, let your object be what it may, that the tranquillity of the country will be interrupted, unless it be candidly disclosed, which I solicit, and to which, I presume, you will have no objection." [SENATE. complete justification of all his subsequent con- "If there exists any design to separate the West- At this passage there are the following notes by Mr. Smith: I "J. Smith has heard Colonel Burr and others say, that in fifty or a hundred years, the Territory of the United States would compose two distinct Govern ments." I return to the letter: "I have no political view whatever. Those which entertained some months ago, and which were comHere is another note by Mr. Smith: municated to you, have been abandoned. "J. Smith presumes that Mr. Burr refers to an invitation to settle in Tennessee, of which he heard him speak." The letter proceeds: "Having bought of Colonel Lynch four hundred Now, what is the solicitude manifested in this thousand acres of land on the Washita, I propose to letter? It is not so much that Mr. Burr's ob- send thither, this fall, a number of settlers as many as will go and labor a certain time, to be paid in ject should be declared, not to be the dismemberment of the Union. It asks for something land, and found in provisions for the time they labor which may be told, to prevent the tranquillity-perhaps one year. Mr. J. Breckinridge, Adair, and of the country from being interrupted. And it very explicitly intimates what must be denied. It is an answer of a very peculiar kind which appears to be wanted; an answer contained in the letter itself. A voucher is wanted to deny the project for dismembering the Union; and to speak with certainty of the ostensible object. This was the settlement of the Washita lands. Mr. Smith, in one of his narratives, says that Burr had talked with him on this subject in September before; but the purchase of the It was uncerlands was not then concluded. tain whether that could now be spoken of as the professed purpose, and Mr. Smith's letter was well adapted to obtain that certainty. Mr. Burr's answer appears perfectly to have understood the object of these inquiries. Much has been said by Mr. Smith about the apparent frankness and candor of this letter, and on this document he relies, with great emphasis, as a Fowler, have separately told me that it was the strong And, finally, there is the following marginal admonition : "It may be an unnecessary caution, but I never write for publication." Thus you see, sir, that the design of separating the States is denied in terms explicit, as Mr. Smith's letter had desired; but, with how much regard to truth, this volume of evidence at SENATE.] Case of John Smith. [APRIL, 1808. sentence, or did he not? If he did, where is the whole defence which he has now set up? If he did not, was this paragraph calculated to inspire his confidence? Was it calculated to remove suspicions? Projects which could only be personally disclosed! Projects which might affect the interests of the United States! Projects prompted by no public considerations! but merely by personal interest for himself and his friends! And was this to remove suspicion from the mind of a Senator of the United States? Was this an answer to calm anxieties and restore confidence? Is not the very language of it suspicious? Equivocal? Ambiguous? I ask every member of this Senate to put the question to himself. Had you been at that time in the midst of the scene of Burr's operations, and had you received such an answer to a letter of solicitous inquiry, would it not have increased instead of allaying your alarm? Would you not have seen in this paragraph a concealment suspicious in itself-darkened still further by expressions of dangerous import and of doubtful legality? Strange indeed must be the texture of that mind to which this answer could restore unqualified confidence in the writer! Richmond has sufficiently proved. The purchase of the Washita lands is announced to have been completed. Thus far, the answer is precisely such as the letter seemed to ask; but all the rest is darkness and oblivion. The caution against publication was itself not naturally suited to inspire confidence. It seems to say, You may show this letter, but you must not publish it. The other allusions are so obscureso unintelligible-that Mr. Smith has found it necessary to make them clear by explanatory notes. There is a reference to former conversations on the subject of a separation of the States, in which Mr. Smith is reminded that he concurred with the sentiment which Mr. Burr had expressed. Mr. Smith's note intimates that this refers to opinions about the separation of the Union in some fifty or a hundred years. But, if Burr's speculations in public companies postponed to so distant a date the event, which he was projecting, to Eaton, to the Morgans, to Blannerhasset, to McFarland, and Glover, he had been urging the propriety of their accomplishment at a much earlier day. And from the testimony of Colonel James Taylor, it would seein that the concurrence of sentiment for which Mr. Burr refers to the consciousness of Mr. Smith, extended no less to the practical But, sir, if Mr. Smith had seen nothing in projects than to the speculative opinions of this letter to startle confidence, instead of comBurr-to the separation of the States within posing it, was there nothing in the course of five or two years rather than to the dismember-public events at that time, which might and ment of the next century. The mode, says Mr. Burr, for promoting such a measure would be by operating on the minds of the people, and demonstrating it to be their interest. Now this was the very mode in which Mr. Burr and Blannerhasset under him had been attempting to promote the measure. Burr had been so operating at Cincinnati the year before this. And William McFarland at least had persuaded, that Cincinnati was to be the capital of the Western empire. He had been so operating all the way at least from Pittsburg, in August, and until he left Cincinnati in September, only six weeks before these letters were written. The Querist was one of these instruments of the mode for operating upon the minds of the people. And when the Querist first appeared, Mr. Smith had expressed his approbation of its contents. Is not this the sort of concurrence to which Mr. Burr alludes rather than that of speculating upon the destinies of a future age? The rest of the letter is equally obscure. Mr. Burr's abandonment of a project for settling in Tennessee requires the explanation of a note from Mr. Smith; and that note is conjectural. Mr. Burr has some other views, merely personal, which he can only communicate personally. If they could affect the interests of the United States, it would only be beneficially; but they were prompted by no public considerations, but merely for the interest and comfort of himself and his friends. Mr. President, I ask again the attention of the Senate to this remarkable sentence. Did Mr. Smith, on receiving the letter, understand this should have aroused him to more than suspi cion? Mr. Burr's letter was dated on the 26th of October; within ten days from that time, that is, on the 5th of November following, the District Attorney of the United States in Kentucky filed a complaint against Mr. Burr, for a violation of the laws of the United States, in setting on foot an expedition against Mexico, which complaint I beg leave to read "J. H. Daviess,* attorney for the said United States, in and for said district, upon his corporal oath, doth depose and say, that the deponent is informed, and doth verily believe, that a certain Aaron Burr, Esq late Vice President of the United States, for several said months past hath been and is now engaged in preparing and setting on foot, and in providing and preparing the means for a military expedition and enterprise within this district, for the purpose of descending the Ohio and Mississippi therewith, and who are now in a state peace with the people of the making war upon the subjects of the King of Spain, United States, to wit: on the province of Mexico, on the westwardly side of Louisiana, which appertain and belong to the King of Spain, a European prince, with whom the United States are at peace. "And said deponent further saith, that he is informed, and fully believes, that the above charge can, and will be fully substantiated by evidence, provided this honorable court will grant compulsory process to bring in witnesses to testify thereto. "And this deponent further saith, that he is informed, and verily believes, that the agents and emis * Joseph Hamilton Daviess, of Kentucky, the able lawyer brilliant pleader, and ardent patriot, killed at Tippecanoe st the head of a night charge upon the Indians. APRIL, 1808.] DEBATES OF CONGRESS. Case of John Smith. [SENATE. saries of the said Burr, have purchased up, and are sorry to say that in it all private confidence becontinuing to purchase large stores of provisions as tween man and man seemed to be nearly deif for an army, while the said Burr seems to conceal stroyed." And in this state of temper, Mr. in great mystery, from the people at large, his pur- Burr "ventured to tell Mr. Smith that if there and projects and while the minds of the good should be war between the United States and people of this district seem agitated with the current Spain, he, Burr, should head a corps of volunrumor, that a military expedition against some neigh-teers, and be the first to march into the Mexican boring power is preparing by said Aaron Burr. poses 66 Wherefore, said attorney, on behalf of said United States, prays that due process issue to compel the personal appearance of the said Aaron Burr in this court, and also of such witnesses as may be necessary in behalf of the said United States; and that this honorable court will duly recognize the said Aaron Burr, to answer such charges as may be preferred against him in the premises. And in the mean time, that he desist and refrain from all further preparation and proceeding in the said armament within the said United States, or the territories or dependencies thereof." It will be remembered that on this complaint a grand jury was summoned, and on the 8th of November discharged, because Davis Floyd, whom the attorney deemed a material witness, and whom we now know to have been one of Mr. Burr's principal associates, was absent. We all know what the effect of this transaction was here. Certainly not of inspiring confidence in those who were ignorant of Mr. Burr's real designs. provinces; if peace should be preserved, which And this is the communication which added The attack upon Mexico was to be in case war should take place between Spain and the United States. But is it possible, sir, that a man of Mr. Smith's understanding should at that time, and under these circumstances, have given an instant of credit to that shallow pretence? If Mr. Swartwout, one of Burr's acknowledged associates, was ashamed of pretending to rely on this tale of contingent war, and frankly told the grand jury at Richmond that they were to attack Mexico, to be sure, in case of a war with Spain; but if there had been no war he was ready to forget the law of the United No, sir! The confidence which this abortive States against such expeditions. If Commodore attempt to bring Mr. Burr to justice inspired, Truxton, a private citizen, smarting under the was in himself and associates. He wrote im- injuries which he conceived he had suffered mediately to Blannerhasset not to apprehend from the Administration, even in July, while any danger from this prosecution, (which his the project was but in prospect, and not in acfriends then and so long after called a persecu- tual execution, made his first and emphatical tion,) but delay in the settlement of the lands; question, whether the Government of the and one fortnight after-that is on the twenty- United States was acquainted with it, and on third day of November-we see him again at being informed that they were not, instantly Cincinnati, making the promised personal and refused to have any concern with it; let me ask, confidential communication to Mr. Smith, which whether in the last days of November, while he had not dared in a letter of 26th October to Burr was persevering in his preparations, after commit to paper-and no wonder; for it is a having been brought before a judicial court complete and unquestionable acknowledgment upon the very charge, and dismissed solely beof the identical crime for which Mr. Burr had cause a witness was absent, a Senator of the been summoned into court at Frankfort, not United States, receiving this communication twenty days before, and discharged merely from Burr himself, could possibly be the dupe from the failure of a witness to attend. But it of this pretence? Whether his first question is not merely a confession of that guilt, it im- ought not to have been that of Commodore ports much more; and the very terms used by Truxton: Is the Executive of the United States Mr. Smith, relating it, in his affidavit of 6th of informed of your designs? Is it possible, sir, June, 1807, show that he understood it as im- that this disclosure of the intended Mexican inMr. Burr tells Mr. Smith, that vasion could confirm the confidence of Mr. porting more. his design "is not dishonorable, or inimical to Smith, when it was the very thing for which this Government; "he "repeated that his ob- the district attorney not three weeks before ject was not hostile to the people of the United had entered the complaint against Mr. Burr, beStates or dishonorable to himself," and that he fore the court of the United States competent would be "the best neighbor this country ever to try that offence? Is it possible that Mr. had." Whether the design was honorable or Burr's confession of his guilt should have been dishonorable, Mr. Smith should have judged the confirmation of Mr. Smith's confidence? for himself. That it was not inimical to this Gov- Yes, sir; so far as relates to the misdemeanorernment, there was little reason for him to be- to Mr. Smith's participation in the project for lieve, when coupled with those boiling resent-invading Mexico-his own affidavit on the 6th ments which overflowed from the lips of Mr. Burr in the very act of making this acknowl"In this Government he had been edgment: persecuted, shamefully persecuted, and he was of January, 1807, is evidence, which, in my mind, nothing can control. His engagement of his two sons to Mr. Burr, admits neither of denial nor of jurisdiction. |