to be partial, because his argument concludes against the Scriptural narrative, even upon that supposition. He will not admit his partial deluges to rise above fiftytwo and a half feet above the level of the ocean."

Mr. Jefferson had said nothing of the kind here imputed to him; and it will hardly do to infer that because he argued that the contents of the atmosphere would raise the whole ocean but fifty-two and a half feet, that they would not pro duce a "partial" deluge a hundred, a thousand, or ten thousand times that depth. The geological argument grows amusing. Dr. Mason quotes and italicizes Mr. Jefferson's words as follows:

"A second opinion has been entertained, which is, that, in times anterior to the records either of history or tradition, the bed of the ocean, the principal residence of the shelled tribe, has, by some great convulsion of nature, been heaved to the heights at which we now find shells and other remains of marine animals. The favorers of this opinion do well to suppose the great events on which it rests to have taken place beyond all the eras of history; for within these, certainly none such are to be found; and we may venture to say further, that no fact has taken place, either in our own days, or in the thousands of years recorded in history, which proves the existence of any natural agents, within or without the bowels of the earth, of force sufficient to heave to the height of 15,000 feet, such masses as the Andes."

99.66

Dr. Mason pronounces this a sucer at the Scripture itself," a "malignant sarcasm," an "oblique stroke at the Bible." He calls Mr. Jefferson "a profane philosopher," an infidel," and other hard names. "It is thus," he exclaims, "Christians, that a man, whom you are expected to elevate to the chief magistracy, insults yourselves and your Bible."

Mr. Jefferson was arguing against the now adopted theory of upheaval; that is, that mountains had been raised from the beds of the ocean by volcanic or other dynamic agencies, operating from the interior of the earth; and he said the geologists who favored this theory did well to suppose such events took place beyond all the eras of history. Doctor Mason appears to have mistaken this for an attack on the Mosaic declaration that "the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up!"

Passing over some other cosmic criticisms, about as profound, we find the reverend gentleman quoting the following sentence from the Notes on Virginia, a part of it placed in capitals, thus: "Those who labor in the fields are the chosen people of God, IF EVER HE HAD A CHOSEN PEOPLE."

Dr. Mason asks how Christian ears relish this "profane babbling," and be ranks it among other "affronts to the oracles of God." A writer, in our recollection, said: "Washington was great, if there ever was a great man." Was this writer to be understood as denying that there ever was a great man, or simply as using a familiar and purely idiomatic form of expression, to give strength to his affirmation?

Dr. Mason quotes Mr. Jefferson as saying: "The legitimate powers of govern ment extend only to such acts as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." The meaning and peculiar phraseology of this sentence are sufficiently explained in vol. i. pp. 370, 371 of this work. Dr. Mason pronounced it a preaching of "atheism."

He declared that Mazzei told a Reverend Dr. Smith that on once expressing his surprise at the ruinous condition of a church to Jefferson, the latter replied: "It is good enough for him who was born in a manger!" Dr. Mason said some of

Mr. Jefferson's friends "have been desperate enough to challenge this anecdote as a calumny fabricated for electioneering purposes." But he declared he had himself heard it from the Rev. Mr. Smith, and he thought Mazzei would not have been guilty of "trumping up a deliberate lie," etc. etc.

Dr. Mason thought all these things proved Jefferson to be a confirmed infidel, but if anything was wanting to establish this, it would be shown by "his solicitude for wresting the Bible from the hands of their children-his notoriously unchristian character-his disregard of all the evidences of divine worship-his utter and open contempt of the Lord's day, inasmuch as to receive on it a public entertainment." Lastly, he pronounced Jefferson "a man who wrote against the truths of God's Word who made not even a profession of Christianity-who was without Sabbaths without the sanctuary-without so much as a decent external respect for the faith and worship of Christians."

Since the above was written, we find in the newspapers the following extract from the Rev. Dr. Sprague's "Annals of the American Pulpit." Some friendly describer of Dr. Mason, who appears to imagine that the Republican party proposed "an alliance with Napoleon Bonaparte," gives the following characteristic picture of the times:

"There is another sermon of which I retain a distinct remembrance, and to which I advert, partly because I regard it as one of Dr. Mason's greatest efforts, and partly because it serves to illustrate a feature of character for which he was distinguished above most men: I refer to his fearless disregard of consequences in the discharge of what he deemed a public duty. The sermon was preached upon a fast day, and at a time of extreme political excitement. Personal violence had been threatened in case he denounced, as he had before done, the proposed alliance with France. I myself remember to have heard a young lawyer and a violent partisan declare that if the Doctor dared to repeat the thing, even the horns of the altar should not protect him, for he would himself be one of the first to pull him out of the pulpit.' When the fast-day arrived, a large audience assembled, expecting to hear a sermon to the times.' The Doctor chose for his text, Ezekiel ii., 3, and the whole chapter was read in his most impressive manner. Near the close of his discourse, he broke forth into a solemn and impassioned apostrophe to Deity in nearly these words: Send us, if Thou wilt, murrain upon our cattle, a famine upon our land, cleanness of teeth in our borders; send us pestilence to waste our cities; send us, if it please Thee, the sword to bathe itself in the blood of our sons; but spare us, Lord God Most Merciful, spare us that curse-most dreadful of all cursesan alliance with Napoleon Bonaparte!' As he uttered these startling sentences, the blood gushed from his nostrils; he unconsciously put his handkerchief to his face, and the next instant made a gesture which looked as if he were designedly waving it before the audience like a bloody and symbolic flag. You can fancy better than I can describe the impression which this incident, coupled with the awful apostrophe, made upon the crowded assembly. Next day I asked the young lawyer why he did not proceed, as he had promised, to pull the Doctor from the pulpit. Why,' said he, 'I was perfectly horror-struck when he wound up that terrible apostrophe by waving his bloody handkerchief.""

No doubt is intended here to be expressed that Dr. Mason was a well-meaning, devout, and within the limits of his profession, signally able man. Indeed, it is on account of his character, his talents, his erudition and high distinction, that we have chosen his as a more striking illustration of that clerical warfare on Jefferson, of which the "bloody flag" was truly "symbolic."

APPENDIX NO. XIX.-VOL. II. p. 612.

Deposition of J. A. Bayard.

day

The deposition of James A. Bayard, sworn and examined on the twentyof in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and five, at Wilmington, in the State of Delaware, by virtue of a commission issuing out of the supreme court of judicature in the State of New York, to John Vaughn, 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 4th of March, in the year one thousand eight hundred and one, 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 favor 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 apprised that an attempt would be made to secure his election.

6. To the sixth interrogatory the deponent saith: Mr. Burr, or any person on his behalf, never did communicate to me in writing, or otherwise, nor 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 favor. 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 nor 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 disclosure 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 freely 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 of 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 connection with him on the subject, and any knowledge of Mr. Burr's designing to cooperate 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 upon 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 apprised 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 of 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 a great majority of our political friends, who differed from 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. Those gentlemen knowing the strong interest of my State to have 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 favor. 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 favor, 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 cooperate 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 that 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 VOL. III.-40