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.