The presidential electors of the state of New-Jersey were federal. Dr.
Samuel S. Smith, president of Princeton College, was an elector. The Hon. Jno. B. Prevost, son of Mrs. Burr by her first husband, was married to the daughter of Dr. Smith. This circ.u.mstance rendered plausible a story invented and propagated by the calumniators of Colonel Burr. They boldly charged that "_Dr. Smith, of New-Jersey, was secretly to have voted for Mr. Burr, and thus made him President of the United States_." To this charge Dr. Smith replied as follows :--
TO THE EDITOR OF THE EVENING POST.
Princeton, July 29, 1802.
SIR,
In your paper of Monday, July 26, under the article ent.i.tled _A View of the Political Conduct of Aaron Burr, Esq_., by the author of the _Narrative_, I observe some very gross misrepresentations, which I conceive it to be a duty that I owe to Mr. Burr, the New-Jersey electors, and myself, to declare to be absolutely false. Mr. Burr never visited me on the subject of the late election for president and vice-president--Mr. Burr never conversed with me a single second on the subject of that election, either before or since the event. No project or plan of the kind mentioned in that paper was proposed or hinted at among the electors of New-Jersey. I am a.s.sured that Mr. Burr held no intrigue with them on that occasion, either collectively or individually. They were men above intrigue; and I do not know that he was disposed to use it. At their meeting, they unanimously declared that a fair and manly vote, according to their sentiments, was the only conduct which was worthy of their own characters or of their cause.
"SAMUEL. S. SMITH."
It was next charged that Colonel Burr had sent, at his own expense, special agents to different states, previous to the choice of electors, with the view of influencing their selection, and to promote his own elevation to the exclusion of Mr. Jefferson. The agents named were Mr. Abraham Bishop, of New-Haven, and Mr. Timothy Green, of New-York. It was a.s.serted that Mr. Bishop was Mr. Burr"s agent at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, during the session of the legislature that appointed the presidential electors.
In August, 1802, Mr. Bishop published a full and explicit refutation of the charge. He denied that Mr. Burr sent him to Lancaster, or that he went there for any purposes personally or politically regarding that gentleman. The publication of Mr. Bishop is not readily to be found; but he is still living, and subsequently was appointed by Mr.
Jefferson collector of the port of New-Haven.
In relation to Mr. Green, it was alleged that he was sent to Columbia, South Carolina, for similar purposes, and that he "_corresponded with the vice-president on the subject of the then approaching election, under cover to John Swartwout_." The replies of Mr. Green and Mr.
Swartwout were as follows:--
"New-York, October 11, 1802,
"MESSRS. DENNISTON AND CHEETHAM,
"In the _American Citizen_ of this day you have made a publication, to which you have affixed your names. In this you have stated, 1st, That Timothy Green, of this city, was despatched as an agent to Columbia, the seat of government of the state of South Carolina, by the vice-president. 2dly, That he was the eulogist and intercessor for the vice-president. 3dly, That he sent the vice-president despatches regularly, addressed to Mr. John Swartwout, of this city, under cover.
"Now, as you have been most egregiously imposed upon by some disorganizing person, it is your duty and mine that the public be immediately furnished with both what were and what were not my inducements and motives in making a journey in November, 1800, to Columbia, and of my conduct while there. For this purpose you will please to insert in your paper of to-morrow the following corrections to your statement:--
"1st, I aver that I never went on any message of a political nature to Columbia, in South Carolina, or to any other place for the vice-president or any other person; neither was I ever requested or desired by the vice- president or by any other person to go to Columbia, in South Carolina, or any other place, on any political or electioneering mission, of any name or nature whatsoever. On the contrary, my journey to Columbia, in South Carolina, in the year of our Lord 1800, and my engagements until my return in 1801, was wholly unsolicited by any person (except my debtors in South Carolina), and were solely of a commercial nature, and for which I had been preparing eight months before.
"2dly, That I never wrote a letter to the vice-president of a political nature; neither did I write him any information relative to the presidential election in South Carolina, neither did I ever enclose a letter, directed to the vice-president, in a letter or cover directed to Mr. John Swartwout.
"3dly, That my letters to Mr. Swartwout while in South Carolina were unsolicited, and written solely with the motive to relieve the minds of my friends from the anxiety necessarily attendant on a state of suspense, while an important event is hourly expected to take place.
"4thly, That I never was in the habit of eulogizing public men, neither did I vary from my usual manners while in South Carolina. I had no occasion to intercede for the election of Colonel Burr: all the fear I had while there was lest a compromise should take place, as the political parties were nearly balanced in the state legislature. This I did, as far as in my power, conscientiously endeavour to prevent; knowing that, if union and good faith were not inviolably preserved among the const.i.tutional republicans, our past, present, and future exertions would be unavailing.
"TIMOTHY GREEN."
FOR THE AMERICAN CITIZEN.
"New-York, October 13, 1802.
"MESSRS. DENNISTON AND CHEETHAM,
"In your seventh letter addressed to Aaron Burr, Esq., Vice-president of the United States, published in the American Citizen of the 11th instant, I notice the following paragraph, viz.:--
"Meantime, Sir, you had your eye on South Carolina; you despatched an agent, Mr. Timothy Green, of this city, to Columbia, the seat of government of that state. It was questionable whether South Carolina would give you a single vote. At that period you were scarcely known in the state. Mr. Green was at Columbia at least two months. He, was your eulogist; your intercessor; he sent you despatches regularly; they were addressed to Mr. John Swartwout, of this city, under cover, and by him communicated to you.
"You will please to inform the public, through the medium of your paper, that the above paragraph, so far as relates to my receiving letters under cover, or communications from Timothy Green for Aaron Burr, is utterly dest.i.tute of truth.
"JOHN SWARTWOUT."
In a pamphlet ent.i.tled "A View of Aaron Burr"s Political Conduct," it was charged that "Mr. Burr, while in the city of New-York, carried on a negotiation with the heads of the federal party at Washington with a view to his election as President of the United States. A person was authorized by them to confer with him on the subject, who accordingly did so. Mr. Burr a.s.sented to the propositions of the negotiator, and referred him to his confidential friend to complete the negotiation.
Mr. Burr stated that, after the first vote taken in the House of Representatives, New-York and Tennessee would give in to the federalists."
To this Colonel Burr replied, in a letter to _Governor Bloomfield_, of New-Jersey, under date September 21, 1802:--
"You are at liberty to declare from me that all those charges and insinuations which aver or intimate that I advised or countenanced the opposition made to Mr. Jefferson pending the late election and balloting for president; that I proposed or agreed to any terms with the federal party; that I a.s.sented to be held up in opposition to him, or attempted to withdraw from him the vote or support of any man, whether in or out of Congress; THAT ALL SUCH a.s.sERTIONS AND INTIMATIONS ARE FALSE AND GROUNDLESS."
In the pamphlet already referred to, and various newspaper publications, it was alleged that General Hamilton had personal knowledge of Colonel Burr"s negotiations with the federalists. On the 13th of October, 1802, the editor of the New-York Evening Post (William Coleman) states that he is authorized to say that General Hamilton, at a dinner at Edward Livingston"s, declared that he had no personal knowledge of any negotiation in reference to the presidency between Colonel Burr and any person whatever.
It will be recollected that Colonel Burr, in his letter to Governor Bloomfield, denied the charge of "having proposed or agreed to any terms with the federal party." The person named as being the agent of the federalists, with authority to confer with Colonel Burr, was David A. Ogden, Esq., of the city of New-York, who was intimately connected with General Hamilton in professional business. Dr. Peter Irving was at that time the proprietor and editor of a highly respectable daily journal (Morning Chronicle) published in the city of New-York. The facts in relation to this charge are developed in the following letters.
P. IRVING TO DANIEL A. OGDEN.
"New-York, November 24, 1802.
"SIR,
"Though I have not the pleasure of a personal acquaintance with you, I flatter myself that the contents of this letter will preclude the necessity of an apology for addressing you.
"It has been a.s.serted in various publications that Mr. Burr, during the late election for president and vice-president, entered into negotiations and agreed to terms with the federal party, or with certain individuals of that party, with a view to advance himself to the office of president to the exclusion of Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Burr, in a letter to Governor Bloomfield, dated the 21st of September last, declared that all such allegations were false and groundless; and the charges have been renewed in more recent publications, which point to you by name as the person through whom such negotiations were carried on and terms concluded. It has now become interesting to a great portion of the community to be informed how far these a.s.sertions and charges have been authorized by you, or are warranted by your knowledge of facts.
"Having received frequent anonymous communications for the Morning Chronicle relative to these matters, and being unwilling to occupy the paper with vague and unsubstantial conjectures or remarks on a subject of such importance, I am induced to apply directly to yourself as an authentic source of information. I do this with the more confidence, from a persuasion that you can have no wish to suffer false reports to circulate under the authority of your name for mere party purposes; and that, in the actual posture of things, you cannot be averse to declare publicly and explicitly your agency, if any, in the business.
I take the liberty, therefore, of requesting your written declaration to the points above stated, together with any circ.u.mstances you may be pleased to communicate tending to establish the truth or falsehood of the charges in question.
"I have the honour to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
P. IRVING."
DAVID A. OGDEN TO P. IRVING.
New-York, November 24, 1802.
"SIR,
"Though I did not conceive it to be inc.u.mbent upon me, or in itself proper to notice a publication in a newspaper in which my name was used without my permission or knowledge, yet I have no objection to reply to an inquiry which comes in the shape of that contained in your letter, and from a person of your standing in society.