Newspaper Page Text
FROM THi: AURORA.
LETTER THE THIRD.
TO JOHN MARSHALL,
CHIEF JU i TIC E OF THE UNITED STATES.
SiH—i'ou have supposed, (1 say unwarie.
W.VJ that it was within the power of die ° CL !
col ‘he United States, not only to**' 0 C °,’
letted, hy means of its officers, prix an ovett
a t of treason , but that it was / X
Lave produced tit a proof at * ch ' Mnd ’ 0,1 the
■ 30 hos March, 1807. , , ,
1 M il! admit, that th, lCt hc P'’° vcd h,aP
pened (“ if ever j r -' ove, nber or Uecemlier
last, or twdvr mon'* P’. <iVlol,s lo l “
tion in Rich nor- I will admit sufficient time
to have f° r ~ie all the
evidence ‘ ‘‘ c * l uS t,een Educed on the
trial ir chief. Rut what will this admission
a vj' l '’
Will it shew that the production of that evi
dence could be reasonably expected on the ex
amination in liichmund? Surely not—and for
this plain reason, that the executive could not
possibly know that Aaron Burr would he ex
amined at Richmond, or that he ever would be
in Virginia, until ten or twelve days previous to
the examination.
Il trr was arres'ed on the 19th of February,
on the Tombigbee river, in the Mississippi
territory, and arrived in Richmond on the 26'h
of March. The president could not have been
a -prised of kin arrest more than ten or twelve
and iys pi evious to the examination. The neccs
fei'y of producing the testimony at Richmond,
could not exist until it was known that Burr
Could be examined them. This was ten or
twelve days previous to the examination.
No v, sir, admit! ig the evidence of the overt
act, which you demanded on the examination,
to have be cwcollrcted, where shoul 1 we reasona
bly expect that til s evidence was at that time ?
I am as willing to utiibuic to the executive
ary “rt niinn<\.:,” < neglect of duty as you
professed to be on the examination, and there-,
fore suppose that it ,y evidence of the overt
a t had icached the executive, it had been
t ilsmnte Ito the court where Aaron Burr was
recognized to appear. Was not this the duty
of the executive f The evidence then ought
t have b ‘em and you were bound to presume
it, ten or twelve days previous to the examina
tion, at a place six or seven hundred miles di -
tint from Richmond. It it was impossible, in
the time intervening between the examination
a id that point of tunc at which it was known,
that Aaron Burr could be examined at Richmond
to produce at that place, testimony of the overt
art, wli it opinion ought we to entertain of u
j‘ !gt who demands the production of that tes
timony ?
\Vhon Aaron Burr was in the western coun
tTV, the theatre of his ticasou, recognized t<
appear before a court, will you tell the men of
America that it was reasonable to suppose tin t
the president nf the United States could foresee
bis./?yj,'if, his arrttl , his rapid tiunsmi.iuioi. t
Virgin'a, and the propriety of examining him at
Richmond ?
Without all these monstrous and unwarrant
able suppositions, how could you demand the
production ol testimony on the examination in
Richmond, which, without “ remissues* on
Abe purt of those who prosecute,” ought to have
been ten days before at the distance of six or
seven hundred miles from tint place? In ten
days a messenger must piss through the wilds
of the western country, six or seven hundred
miles, collect the testimony of an overt act of
treason, return the same di ,tance, and bear it to
the capitol of Virginia.
Were the government gifted with prophecy,
or possessed of thfr power to create a Mercury,
you would venture to pronounce the probability
of Burr’s guilt!
It does not require an intimate acquaintance
with the law. to know that it never demands the
performance ol impossibilities in any case, nor
even unreasonable exertion to accomplish im
possibilities.
But your reasoning upon the non-production
of proof of the overt act is intended to lead di
rectly to the conclusion th it no assemblage
ever happened. For you sav, that ris “capa
ble or proof, and when time to collect* this
proot /; .•, !>■ i given, it ought to lie adduced, or
suspicion becomes ground too weak to stand
upon.’ Aou then say, “several months have
elapsed since the fact dir! occur, if it ever occur
red ; more than five weeks have elapsed since
the opinion of the supreme court has declared
the ndeessity of proving the fact, il it exists.—
Why is it not proved ?”
Will it be believed that your penetration could
hot detect such wretched sophistry as this ?
One Single question will tear in pieces the
whole web.
probable necessity of proving the
,act at HicfiT.oHd exist “ several months” be
fore the examination ; did it exist “Jive weeks”
before, when the supreme court declared the
necessity of proving the fact ? I answer for
you. wit hout fear of contradiction, it did not. It
never did occur until 10 or 12 days previous to
the examination. It was impossible that it
could exist before that lime with any person not
a prophet.
( l f who can believe that you had faith in
‘nc correctness of your own re soiling, and that
the true point of tunc, at which the necessity of
proving the. fact at Richmond (and from the
late period of which you could not reasonably
an e expected or legally requested the produc
tion of proof ol the assemblage) occurred, no
* M irk the sophistry of the sentence. Here
it is lakeu for granted, that time not onlv t■’
c'Ht cr, bm toruufivci the evidence, had
been i-tfcu. ’
• -‘f *0 your tnind, must feel
e. presided iOV your understanding than I
more They must do you the
do lot yoy that .. our u ua eak
,n J usu 9i'm it wicked.
a * sfft thcic Was no necessity that your mind
~ould be tortu cd, to make this discovery. The
point of time wr.s advcited to by Mr. Hay, and
Mr. Rodney, in their arguments. This must
convince the most credulous, ol the illegality
and partial tendency of the demand for proof
of the assemblage. There could be therefore
no unintentional forgetfulness of this material
circumstance. You must have “ remembered
to forge ” it.
But the most sceptic; 1 shall be convinced—
that there was an assemblage, is n.ost; true it
lias been proved—that it happened a consider
able time previous to the examination, and was
ilicrefoic cafuiblc oj firoof at the /.lace where thr
evidence wan, at the time oj the examination, is
also true.
Why then was it not proved on the exami
nation ut Richmond ? Mot because there was
any “ reriiissness” on the part of those wiio
prosecuted, for you have said, *• 1 ought not to
believe that there has been any t enussiicss on
the part of those who prosecute.” Not because
it did not exist—for its existence has been
proven. Not because it was not ticasonable j
for the character of the as emblage, whether
treasonable or not, was mailer of subsequent en
quiry and determination.
I will again answer for you w ithout fear of
contradiction. It was r.ot proved, localise, to
prove the assemblage at the time the examiim
'ion took place at Richmond was impossible.
Vou will not dare to assert that the attorney tor
the United States would not have exhibited the
pioot of the assemblage, which has since been
introduced, had lie been possessed of that evi
dence.
In a part of vour opinion, you say, “ I will,
however, briefly review the argumentn which
hare been urged, and the Jact't now before me, in
order to shew more clearly, the paiticlilar ope
ration they have, on my own judgment.”
Aow, sir, will you pointoutth-.it part ofihe
opinion, which “ reviews” the testimony of ma
jor I’ei kins, relative to the tune of arrest?
W here do you mention the argument of Mr.
Hay, grounded on live fact, that “ the govern
ment could not have been apprized of the fact
[ qfarrt morel ban ten days” previous to the
examination, in what unseen, hidden corner
of the opinion, do you state the “ particular
operation” ol this argument ol Mr. ltodney on
“ your judgment.” In the short time which
has elapsed since the apprehension of colonel
l!uir vv as known, there iuis been no possibility
ol gelling tile p 001, which bis counsel content!
is necexsai y.” ‘I here is a careful, cautious
omission i I any •* review” of these observations,
and arguments of the counsel for the United
States, w hich justifies not only a suspicion, but
a beiiet that you knew wiiui thiir weight ought
to have been ; and thin, it they were stated in
the opinion, theiefoie must.have been acknow
ledged by a difieient decision. They would,
too plainly, have answered your demaul for po
siti.e proof ol the assemblage. It would then
ii ve been manifest to every man, that you had
requited a peifo matterc.fimpossibilities ; and
tli a vi u refused to insert, in ine warrant oi
i omniii men , ihe charge of true non, because
the executive could not produce positive proof
oi that, which you had admitted to have beoi\
already proven su.heiently, to induce you to
commit the accused on ha charge.
Common sense, and violated justice, cry a*
loud a ;.nust such conduct, anu demand against
you the ciifo:<c cm of those laws, which you
refuse to administer. LUCIUS.
iiilu oil New-York,
At a sa i v i.,iu, *.n- saie er
.li.iiics \v ii;iam
December 1. i-Al
Exchange on Boston,
At Jiuoi't b.-j L, ivvji* s-iie by
lie ary \V. Hills.
Decemocr 1
Ff >K SALF,
pieces COT TON BAv.UIMi
■> eas<\s i-ond ii drown otout i
;i h lu H hbert s C PORTER
10 ditto -M l.e is j
AIADEIiiA \ViNE, in pipes, halfpipes and
quarter casks
SCIv ILY ditto in ditto
hi sv. s M _a UUN-roWDRR; and
v\ OuLEN.->, GROv EKIKh & PROVISIONS.
Peter Mitchcl.
December 1. 1.3+.
Notice.
All persons h wing anv demands against the
Estate ot William W ilson, deceased, are
desired to render them in; and those indebted,
to make payment to Mr. Joel UHinci;.
Jhbciiczcr Sttuk, Lx'r.
December 10—138
REMOVAL.
GEORGE BUCHANAN & CO.
HAVE REMOVED TO THE STORE
Adjoining \ ctuluc-Uoom,
MLAU THE MARKET SQUARE,
Where ihcv continue selling
Their STOCK of GOODS,
At Cost and Clutrgcs.
November 19 ‘ .59
Plunk Warrants of Annrmscmcnt.
Vor 3sic at ‘#!} office, 1
Tenth Centre*?'; of the United States.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES*
Wednesday, November 25.
Mr. Talmadge ottered the following resolu
tions :
Resolved, That the secretary for the depart
ment of war be directed to lay b* n.re th -, house
a statement ot the respective numbers ,-t ( tli
eers, non-con 1 missioned < fth trs and soldiers
composing the army c.f tj.r United States, no
ting the numbers wanting 10 complete tiie pre
sent establishment.
Resolved, I hat the secretary fur the depart
ment oi wav be dirtc ;;i to lay before this house,
a statement of the respective numbers of volun
teers, either oi artillery, cavalrc, or imantrv,
whose services have beta offered and accented,
in pursuance of the act entitled, “An nc*. au
thorising the president of the United .States to
accept the serv ice a number 01 volunteer
companies, nctcxceedir.g 3u,000 men.”
v* ldch being i t ad,
Mr. 1 ainmdgc said, that it would be remem
bered, when the president hud transmitted his
message to congress at the opening of the ses
sion, one part of it rc luted to what might be tivc
probable situation of the countr , a.... to the
necessity tiia* nv.ghr ~-xist for raising a regular
arm;.. Mr.T. presumed that every gentleman
on the floor felt the same sentiment with res
pect to the 1 importance of tne preservation cf
the honor of the nation, and in order that they
might be prepared to meet any possible e ’ ent,
it became essentially necessary to knew v. hat
was our actual force. This was the object of
the first resolution which he had proposed. I.e
wish.ed to know not only what that force was,
but how far it was deiicient. Another reason
which operated strongly on his mind, was that
the house never failed at each st ssion, to vote
money for the support of the army and navy of
the United States ; they certainly could’not
make the exact appropriations required, w ith
out knowing what the actual force of the army
vvas.
With respect to the second resolution, it
would ae remembered, that an net was passed
in February, 1807, authorising the president to
accept ot tne . emices of any number of volun
teers, not 1 acceding i.0.00u, which act was to
remain in force two years. It became import-
S ant to know how far volunteer companies had
jj offered, and how far this force might be brought
| into the held in case cf emergency. An act had
* alxo passed in April, IHO'i, authorising the pre
-5 sident tncall out 100,000 militia, to continue in
force t vo years from its date*, and would of
course expire next April. Tnexc were the dif
ferent species of force on which the president
could calculate on an emergency. Th; t the
house might know the exact force of the union,
and hovv far it might be relied on, were the rea
sons which induced him to move these resolu
tions at this time.
A desultory conversation took place as to the
ability ot the executive to give the information
called for in the second resolution, i;i which
Messrs. Talmadge, Thomas, ILnu, Quincy,
| Chandler, Durell, Alston, Uplv.m and Sinilie
I took part, when the resolutions were igrct-i to
! v. ithcat a divisi’ n.
| On motion of Mr. Poindexter, the house w ent
i into a committee of the whole on the bill to ex
j lord the right ol suffrage in the Mississippi
| territory, and for other purposes, Mr. Masters
lin the chair.
M” Troup withdrew his motion for striking
out the first section of the bill, with a view to
give tiie gentleman from the Mississippi terri
tory an opportunity of making the bill less ob
jectionable, and for that reason so’tdy.
Mr. ih'indexter, to accord with the wishes of
the representation from Georgia, moved an
amendment which limited the right of suffrage
to freeholders and holders of land by equitable
tith-s ; which wits agreed to without a division.
Mr. Bibb moved that the following provision
; be inserted in tin-bill :
“ Provided, That this act shall not take ef
fect t ill the assent of the state of Ge orgia shad
have been signified thereto.” ‘
Which motion was negatived, 63 to IS.
The bill being gone through, the committee
rnv and reported it.
-Vlr. Bibb wished the proviso he had moved
in committee of the whole to be now added to
the bill.
The speaker said the house must first decide
upon the amendment made in committee.
Mr. I'oindrXter said, that as the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Bib!.) had declared an in
tention to oppose the bill in toto, if his proviso
w vs not agreed to, he should ncw.be opposed to
the amendment which he himaeiffhad proposed,
and which had been adopted in committee, as it
had been offered with a sole view to the accom
modation of the gentlemen from Georgia ; antt
as even after this compromise, they were ktiil
determined to oppose the’ bill. tic therefore
wished it now to be decided on in its original
shape, which was most agreeable to the wishes
of his constituents.
The question being taken by yens and nays
on concurrence with the amendment of the
rrmarittec cf the whole, there were Ayes 79,
Nays 41.
Gn each of the foregoing questions some de
bate arose, in which Mevsi'c Poindexter, Quin
cv, Bacon, Sloan, Smile, khea, (Ten.) Lvon,
and Holland, generally supported the right ot
congress to legislate on the subject without the
consent of Georgia, and advocated the political
expediency cf extending the right of suffrage
ns originally contemplated by the bill, so that
every free white rattle inhabitant, who had
paid taxes for six months, and been a resident
in the territory twelve months previous to the
ejection, should be entitled to vote for represen
tatives in the legislature.
Messrs. Bibb, Troup, Gardenier, Gardner,
and Rowan, generally denied the right of con
gress to legislate on the subject in violation of
the compact entered into with Georgia, at the
time ot her cession of the territory • intimated
that the territory would soon become a state,
whvn she could fix the qualifications of iter
own voters ; and added, that in the mean time,
there was abundant evidence of her elections
being properly conducted, from the talents and
respectability of her representativ es.
I’lie house adjourned without taking a ques
tion on Mr. Bibb’s proviso.
Thursday, November 26.
\ Mr. Lewis, worn the committee to whom was
re-rammlUt 1 the bill far erecting a bridge
over the river Potomac, reperu and the bill with
amendments ; the most rna* rial cf which
makes the shares of the stock p*: on;.i instead
of l e t! property, ut.d gives to the L ; ’ted States
the right r t becoming pm it. . rs oi • in* bridge
after a cert-in time. The was teierrv and to
a c . mmittee of the whole tocrow.
Mr. 1.1 vu ; resented a rr.rruriail pr:y. Ingthtt
the mm mnent in boner of tiie offb-, ;s who fell
in the attack of Tripcii, imported ls om ivin j.*:
by tlteir brotltcr efiic.rs, be avlmitU'i lice of
duty. Referred to the committee of'conituu as
uiid manufactures.
Mr. J. Clay presented ti c- memcrial r.f W.
Davy, K. Ralston, A. M‘Cu!!, and A. M.Bue’ -
iy, a conr.uittec appointed ;.t a meeting of thes
merchants of Philadelphia, to tal into consid
eration tiie causes of sundry merchants who
could net obtain drawbacks from a misappre
lit: -b 11 of the laws on the subject.
The horse adjourned before the memorial
was dispose:’ of.
J'ridaif, November 27.
Mr- J- Hay presented a memorial from sun
dry merchants in the city ofl’hiladelphi t, pray
ing f r the repeal of the r.on-imporUitica law.
Mr. Clay moved to refer it to the committee of
commerce and rr.anafuctin es ; o.: this unit’ ncf
reference a long debate earned* The me
lon for reference was finally rejected by yeu
and nays, 80 to 50, and 110 order taken on the
memorial.
Mr. Randolph, from the committee appoint
ed for the purpose, reported a bill to explain
art act passed iast session, entitled “ An act to
prohibit the importation of Slaves into any port
or place within the jurisdiction of the United
States, from and after the IB si day of January,
in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hun
dred andeight;”
Which was read twice and referred to a *om
mitte of the whole on .Monday next.
Mr. Blount moved for the order oi’ the davon
the second report of the committee of aggres
sions ; he ’.visited the house to go into committee
cf the whole on the subject ap.d remain in com
mittee (as it was then late) no longer than to
give the business priority over any ether on the
the next day cf meeting.
Mr. Randolph enquired why the second’ re
port shoul: ‘ uve preference over :ft.- first, and
why both had net been referred to the same
committee of the whole, ax one depended or* the
other!* Why were they shuffled about in this
manner? Why was the cart to be put before
the horse ? Why was the second brought upon
the tapis and the first reserved i
M i .'Bloiu t stated that the first was merely de
claratory of the nature of the art, and detailed
that information which had been sc loudly mli
ed for from some parts of the house ; the se
cond contained resolutions for preparing for de
tente, which he conceived should be. first acted
upon.
Mr. Randolph moved that the committee of
the whole,-to whom the second report or i-econd
part of the report was referred, should be dis
charged from the Consideration of it, that it
itrig it be referred to the same committee to
whom the first part had been referred.
Mr. Blount’s motion being that under.Cnnsi
doearion, a considerable debate ensued, which,
branched widely into the subject ; in the coarse
of which,
Mr. Blount stated that the gcfttlcman from
Virginia (Mr. Randolph) had desired Mr. B. to
let him know when the report was to ne called
up. He had told the gentleman this meriting
fiat he intended to call it up to-day. ’lf the
gentleman had then expressed a desire that
both reports should be referred to the same
committee of the whole, he would have accom
modated him ; by making a motion to that ef
fect.
Mr. Randolph said he would take the gentle
man.from n. c. at his word, and widwlraw the
motion he had offered, trusting to the gentle
man to renew it.
Mr. Blount withdrew his motion for immedi
ately t .ikii.a up tiie second report, and renewed
Mr. Randolph’s motion, on which the debate
was continued. The gentlemen who took part
in the debate on this subject were Messrs. i< in
dolph, Blount, Chandler, Dana, Epi cs, Tho
mas, Rowan, Nicholas, YV. Alston, Lyon, Quin
cy, G. W. Campbell, Burwcll, Taylor, and
fimilic.
The question being on the motion as renew
ed by Mr. Blount, was negativedtf'7, toAQ.
Mr. Kppes moved that the order cf the day
on the first report of the committee of aggres
sions pe postponed till this day week- Carried ;
ayes 58, nays 47.
A motion was made that whasr-thc house
adjourned, it should adjourn till Monday. Car
ried, 01 tc 43.
Mr. Blount then rereved his original motion,
that the house should,now go into a committee
cf the whole on the second report of the com
mittee of aggressions. „ .
Mr. D. R. Williams said that it wanted but
five minutes of five o’clock, and he hoped the
house would adjourn. Carried 54 to 4*•
Monday, November 30.
Mr. Got)a said, that tiie house had been long
in session, and had yet done nothing towards
the purpose for which they were called toge
ther. • For the purpose of coining to the consi
deration ol the subject, and for obtaining the
prom-.r information, he offered tlic following re
sole Rons
Ist. Resolved, That th* seer? tnrv of the
navy he directed to lay before this’ home a
statement of the frigates and other armed
vessels composing the navy of the Univd States,
distinguishing those in actual service from those
in ordinary, and noting such as want repairs,
with an estimate of the suras necessary to pre
pare them for immediate service, andVac pre
un.. U* time necessary to make such repairs.
2d. Resolved, That the secretary of the
navy he directed to lay before this house, a
statement ot the number of officers and me.-,
ve peetivelv, belonging to th navy of the Uni
ted St ires and the corps- of marines.
3d. Resolv ed, That the secretary of the r.xw
pc directed to lay before this !.cv :v, ar. estimate,
efthe number of officers and men, which would
!, c necessary to complete th ■ manning the
while ned entire navy cf the United States,
including the gun-boats, with an estimate of thff
expenditures, respective!- . ncce.isar;, for main
taining them irt actual service duiinr or>e year.
4th. Resolved, Thar th - secretary of the navy
pc directed to lay before tins house, asts‘emer. t
of th - qu •-.ffiiy, quality present state of tiie