Memoirs of Aaron Burr Part 46

"By the 25th section of the act pa.s.sed the 5th of May, 1786, ent.i.tled _An act for the payment of certain sums of money, and for other purposes therein mentioned_, all persons holding or possessing certificates of Udny Hay or any of his a.s.sistants, or of Jacob Cuyler, Morgan Lewis, or Andrew Bostwick, were required to present them, in the manner therein prescribed, to the treasurer, before the 1st of September, 1786; and those who failed therein are thereby declared _to be barred and for ever precluded_ from any compensation, of which the treasurer was directed to give public notice by advertis.e.m.e.nt, which was accordingly done.

"By another act, pa.s.sed the 31st of March, 1787, the time for presenting the certificates of Udny Hay and his a.s.sistants was extended until the first of May then next, which time has not been further extended by any law of this state: so that all certificates of those denominations which were not presented within the times and in the manner specified in those laws, are expressly barred and for ever precluded from compensation.

"The commissioners have therefore, for the reasons contained in the observations prefixed to this report, conceived that a reference to the aforesaid acts was the most proper discharge of their duty with respect to all claims of compensation for such certificates.

"_Claims for grain impressed for the use of the army by virtue of warrants issued by his excellency the governor, pursuant to an act pa.s.sed 23d June, 1780_.

"The law authorizing these impresses declares the articles impressed to be for the _use and service of the army_, and that the owner shall be ent.i.tled to receive from the public officer authorized to pay the same the current price for the articles impressed, but does not say by whom that public officer is to be appointed. The commissioners have, however, no doubt but these were proper claims against the United States, and would have been allowed by the Continental Commissioner if exhibited in proper season; therefore, and for the reasons contained in the second preliminary observation, the commissioners are of the opinion that these claimants cannot of right demand payment of this state.

"The claims of Van Rensselaer and Dumond, the commissioners are of opinion are reasonable; that, having been employed under the governor, the claimants could have no demand against the United States, and that the charges are proper against this state.

"_Claims for services in a.s.sisting H.I. Van Rensselaer and Egbert Dumond in making the said impresses_.

"The commissioners consider the reasons just before stated in favour of the claims of Van Rensselaer and Dumond to apply to the eleven preceding, and that they are therefore proper charges against this state.

"_Claims for payment of debts due from persons whose property hath been forfeited or sequestered_.

"The several foregoing demands against forfeited estates arose after the 9th day of July, 1776, and are expressly precluded by the 42d section of an act pa.s.sed the 12th of May, 1784, ent.i.tled _An act for the speedy sale of the confiscated and forfeited estates within this state, and for other purposes therein mentioned_.

"The next twenty-five claims are for satisfaction of debts out of the proceeds of property sequestered. The estates of the several debtors have become forfeited, but in some instances no property hath come to the hands of the commissioners of forfeitures; and in others, the property which has come to their hands hath been insufficient for the discharge of debts which have been certified.

"The succeeding twenty-six claims are to have debts satisfied out of the proceeds of property sequestered, though there had been no conviction of adherence or other forfeiture of the estate of the debtors.

"The commissioners are of opinion that a law should be pa.s.sed authorizing the treasurer to pay demands against forfeited estates, in all cases where there still remains in his hands a surplus from the proceeds of such estates, notwithstanding the limitation contained in the act of 12th May, 1784. But the commissioners would recommend that some mode different from that prescribed in the said act be directed for the ascertaining the amount of those demands. The several claimants and such others as have neglected to avail themselves of the benefit of the said act, may, in the opinion of the commissioners, be with propriety holden to strict legal proof of their respective demands, in due course of law, in some court of record, where the interest of the state may be defended by some officer to be for that purpose appointed.

"The commissioners are further of opinion, that where there has been a sequestration of any part of the property of a person _whose estate hath become forfeited_, the avails of the property so sequestered, as far as the same _can be distinguished_, should be subject to the payment of his debts, in like manner as may be provided with respect to other demands against forfeited estates; but it would not, in the opinion of the commissioners, be at this time advisable to a.s.sume the payment of the debts of persons whose property hath been sequestered, and where there hath been no other forfeiture or confiscation.

"_Claims relative to sequestration, and property taken by orders of the Convention_.

"These persons were voluntarily within the British lines, and their property was therefore liable to sequestration under the acts of the Convention. They produce a certificate of their attachment to the American cause, signed by some respectable characters. But being within the resolutions of the Convention, the commissioners cannot advise a recompense.

"GERARD BANCKER, _Treasurer_.

"PETER T. CURTENIUS, _State Auditor_.

"AARON BURR, _Attorney-general_."

On the 19th of January, 1791, Colonel Burr was appointed a senator of the United States, in the place of General Schuyler, whose term of service would expire on the 4th of March following. Until about this period he was but little known as a partisan politician. After the organization of the federal government under the new const.i.tution, he appears to have felt a great interest in its operations. In the French revolution also, his feelings were embarked; and he was among the number of those who condemned the cold and repulsive neutrality which characterized the administration of that day. That he was now about to launch into the troubled ocean of politics was evident to Mrs. Burr, and therefore, in a letter to him under date of the 23d of July, 1791, she says, "It is of serious consequence to you to establish your health _before you commence politician_," &c.

In the autumn of 1791 Congress convened at Philadelphia, and Colonel Burr took his seat in the Senate of the United States. It has often been remarked of him, and truly, that no man was ever more cautious or more guarded in his correspondence. A disposition, from the earliest period of his life, to write in cipher, has already been noticed. To this may be added an unwillingness, on all important questions, to commit himself in writing. As soon as he entered the political arena, this characteristic was visible even in his letters to Mrs. Burr. On the 14th of November, 1791, he writes her--"To the subject of politics I can at present make no reply. The _mode of communication would not permit_, did no other reason oppose." And again, December 21st, he says--"You will perhaps admire that I cannot leave Congress as well as others. This, if a problem, _can only be solved at a personal interview_."

At the commencement of the revolutionary war, the State of New-York held an extensive tract of wild and unimproved lands. Sundry laws were pa.s.sed in the years 1779, 1780, 1784, 1785, and 1786, providing for their sale and settlement. A board was created, ent.i.tled "the Commissioners of the Land Office." It was composed of the governor, the secretary of state, the attorney-general, the treasurer, and the auditor. The powers conferred by the several acts above referred to having been found inadequate to the proposed object, the legislature, on the 22d of March, 1791, gave unlimited powers to the commissioners, authorizing them to "dispose of any of the waste and unappropriated lands in the state, in such parcels, and on such terms, and in such manner as they shall judge most conducive to the interests of the state." In pursuance of this authority, the commissioners sold during the year 1791, by estimate, five millions five hundred and forty-two thousand one hundred and seventy acres of waste land, for the sum of one million and thirty thousand four hundred and thirty-three dollars; leaving in the possession of the state, yet to be disposed of, about two millions of acres. Among the sales was one to Alexander Macomb, for three millions six hundred and thirty-five thousand two hundred acres. The magnitude of this sale, and the price at which it was sold, created a great excitement throughout the state, and at the session of the legislature which commenced on the 4th of January, 1792, the subject was brought before the a.s.sembly.

The price at which Mr. Macomb made his purchase was eight pence per acre, payable in five annual instalments, without interest, with permission to discount for prompt payment at six per cent. per annum, which made the price about equal to seven cents per acre cash. Colonel Burr, as attorney-general, was a member of the board. On the 9th of April, 1792, the report of the commissioners being the order of the day, the subject was taken up in the house. Mr. Talbot, from Montgomery county, moved sundry resolutions. They were intended as the foundation for an impeachment of a part of the commissioners of the land office. They a.s.sumed to contain a statement of facts, evidencing on the part of the commissioners great indiscretion and want of judgment, if not corruption, in the sale of the public lands, and they charged the commissioners with a willful violation of the law. These resolutions, however, excepted Colonel Burr from any partic.i.p.ation in the maleconduct complained of, inasmuch as the minutes of the board proved that he was not present at the meetings (being absent on official duty as attorney-general) when these contracts, so ruinous, as they alleged, to the interests of the state, were made: nor did it appear that he (Colonel Burr) was ever consulted in relation to them.

These resolutions elicited a heated debate; in the progress of which all the commissioners, except the attorney-general, were a.s.sailed with great bitterness; and charges of corruption by innuendo were unceremoniously made. At a late hour the house adjourned without decision until the next day.

On the 10th of April, 1792, Mr. Melancton Smith moved the following resolution, with a preamble as a subst.i.tute:--

"Resolved, That this house do highly approve of the conduct of the commissioners of the land office in the judicious sales by them, as aforesaid, which have been productive of the before mentioned beneficial effects."

This resolution was adopted by a vote of ays 35--noes 20.

Of Melancton Smith it is proper to remark here that he was a plain, unsophisticated man. A purer patriot never lived. Of the powers of his mind some opinion may be formed by the following anecdote. Dr.

Ledyard, who was afterwards health officer of the port of New-York, was a warm federalist. He was at Poughkeepsie while the federal const.i.tution was under discussion in the state convention. Smith was an anti-federal member of that body. Some time after the adoption of the const.i.tution, Ledyard stated to a friend of his, that to Colonel Alexander Hamilton had been a.s.signed, in a special manner, the duty of defending that portion of the const.i.tution which related to the judiciary of the United States. That an outdoor conversation between Colonel Hamilton and Mr. Smith took place in relation to the judiciary, in the course of which Smith urged some of his objections to the proposed system. In the evening a federal caucus was held; at that caucus Mr. Hamilton referred to the conversation, and requested that some gentleman might be designated to aid in the discussion of this question. Robert R. Livingston, chancellor of the state, was accordingly named. Mr. Livingston was at that time a distinguished leader in the ranks of the federal party. Whoever will take the trouble to read the debates in the Convention, in which will be found the reply of Smith to Livingston, will perceive in that reply the efforts of a mighty mind. It was a high but merited compliment to the talents of Melancton Smith, that such a man as Colonel Hamilton should have wished aid in opposing him.

During the winter of 1791-92, being Colonel Burr's first session in the Senate of the United States, he spent much of his leisure time in the state department. For several sessions after the organization of the federal government, all the business of the Senate was transacted with closed doors. At that period the correspondence of existing ministers was kept secret, even from the senators. With every thing connected with the foreign affairs of the country, Colonel Burr was exceedingly anxious to make himself intimately acquainted. He considered it necessary to the faithful and useful performance of his duty as a senator. He obtained permission from Mr. Jefferson, then secretary of state, to have access to the records of the department before the hour for opening the office arrived. He employed one of the messengers to make a fire at five o'clock in the morning, and occasionally an intelligent and confidential clerk to a.s.sist him in searching for papers. Here he was engaged until near ten o'clock every day. It was his constant practice to have his breakfast sent to him.

He continued this employment the greater part of the session, making notes on, or extracts from, the records of the department, until he was interrupted by a peremptory order from the president (Was.h.i.+ngton) prohibiting his farther examination.

Wis.h.i.+ng some information that he had not obtained in relation to a surrender of the western posts by the British, he addressed a note to the secretary of state, asking permission to make that particular examination; to which he received the following answer:----

"Thomas Jefferson presents his respectful compliments to Colonel Burr, and is sorry to inform him it has been concluded to be improper to communicate the correspondence of existing ministers. He hopes this will, with Colonel Burr, be his sufficient apology."

In April, 1792, there was an election for governor of the State of New-York. By some it was supposed that Governor Clinton would decline being again considered a candidate. It was known that John Jay would be the candidate of the federal party. At that period Colonel Burr had warm personal friends in both parties, who were urging his pretensions. Among the most ardent was Judge Yates. In the latter part of February, 1792, he authorized his friends to state that he declined a nomination. He was placed, however, in an unpleasant dilemma. The connexions, and many of the personal friends of Governor Clinton, were jealous of Colonel Burr's talents and growing influence. Between the governor and himself there was very little intercourse. On the other hand, the kindest feelings towards him were evinced by Chief-justice Jay, who was a most amiable man. It was his wish, therefore, as far as practicable, consistent with his principles, to remain neuter. He had never been an electioneering character, and with the people he wished to leave the pending question, without the exercise of any influence he might be supposed to possess.

By the then existing laws of New-York, the ballots that were taken in the several counties were, immediately after the election, transmitted to the office of the secretary of state, and there kept until the second Tuesday in May, when the board of canva.s.sers were, by law, to convene and canva.s.s them. The election for governor was warmly contested; the federal party supporting Judge Jay, the anti-federal party George Clinton. When the canva.s.sers met, difficulties arose as to the legality of the returns from certain counties, particularly of Otsego, Tioga, and Clinton. The canva.s.sers differing in opinion on the question whether the ballots should be counted or destroyed, they agreed to ask the advice of Rufus King and Colonel Burr. These gentlemen conferred, and, like the canva.s.sers, differed: whereupon Mr.

Burr proposed that they should decline giving advice. To this Mr. King objected, and expressed a determination to give his own opinion separate. This rendered it necessary for Colonel Burr to adopt a like procedure. He thus became a partisan, and a most efficient partisan, in that controversy.

_Seven_ of the canva.s.sers determined to reject and destroy the ballots alleged to have been illegally returned. To this decision _four_ objected. The ballots were accordingly destroyed, and George Clinton declared to be duly elected governor. The excitement produced was without a parallel in the state. The friends of Judge Jay contended that he had been chosen by the people, but was cheated out of his election by the corruption of the canva.s.sers. Great asperity and virulence were exhibited by both political parties on the occasion.

From the moment that Colonel Burr was driven to interfere in the controversy, he took upon himself, almost exclusively, the management of the whole case on the side of the anti-federal party. His accustomed ac.u.men, vigilance, and zeal, were promptly put in requisition. Full scope was allowed for the display of those great legal talents for which he was so pre-eminently distinguished. It has been known to only a very few individuals that on Colonel Burr rested nearly the whole labour; and that nothing was done, even by the canva.s.sers, but under his advice and direction. It has therefore been deemed proper to insert here some of the official details of the case.

They are worthy record, as an interesting part of the political history of the State of New-York.

"_Statement of the case by the Canva.s.sers, for the advice of Rufus King and Aaron Burr_.

"OTSEGO.--By the 26th section of the const.i.tution of the State of New-York, it is ordained that sheriffs and coroners be annually appointed, and that no person shall be capable of holding either of the said offices for more than four years successively, nor the sheriff of holding any other office at the same time. By the ninth section of the act for regulating elections, it is enacted that one of the inspectors shall deliver the ballots and poll-lists, scaled up, to the sheriff of the county; and, by the tenth section of the said act, it is further enacted, that each and every sheriff of the respective counties in this state shall, upon receiving the said enclosures, directed to be delivered to him as aforesaid, without opening or inspecting the same, or any or either of them, put the said enclosures, and every one of them, into one box, which shall be well closed and sealed up by him, under his hand and seal, with the name of his county written on the box, and be delivered by him into the office of the secretary of this state, where the same shall be safely kept by the secretary, or his deputy. By the eleventh section of the said act, all questions arising on the canva.s.s and estimate of the votes, or on any of the proceedings therein, shall be determined by a majority of the members of the joint committee attending; and their judgment shall be final, and the oath of the canva.s.sers requires them faithfully, honestly, and impartially to canva.s.s and estimate the votes contained in the boxes delivered into the office of the secretary of this state by the sheriffs of the several counties.

"On the 17th of February, 1791, Richard R. Smith was appointed sheriff of the county of Otsego, and his commission gives him the custody of that county until the 18th of February, 1792. On the 13th of January, 1792, he writes a letter to the Council of Appointment, informing them that, as the year for which he was appointed had nearly elapsed, he should decline a reappointment.

"On the 30th of March, 1792, the Council of Appointment appointed Benjamin Gilbert to the office of sheriff of the said county, with a commission, in the usual form, to keep the county until the 17th of February next. His commission was delivered to Stephen Van Rensselaer, Esq., on the 13th of April last, to be forwarded by him to the said Benjamin Gilbert. By the affidavit of the said Benjamin Gilbert, herewith delivered, it appears that he qualified into the office of sheriff on the 11th day of May, 1792. On the first Tuesday in April, 1792, Richard R. Smith was elected supervisor of the town of Otsego, in said county, and on the first Tuesday in May took his seat at the board of supervisors, and a.s.sisted in the appointment of loan officers for the county of Otsego. By the affidavit of Richard R. Smith, herewith delivered, it appears that the ballots taken in the county of Otsego were delivered to him as sheriff, and by him enclosed in a sufficient box, on or about the 3d of May, which box he then delivered into the hands of Leonard Goes, a person specially deputed by him for the purpose of delivering the said box into the hands of the secretary of this state, which was accordingly done, as appears by information from the secretary.

"A small bundle of papers, enclosed and sealed, was delivered to the secretary with the box, on which is written, 'The votes of the town of Cherry Valley, in the county of Otsego. Richard R. Smith, Sheriff.'

Several affidavits, herewith delivered, state certain facts respecting this separate bundle, said to be the votes of Cherry Valley.

"On this case arise the following questions:--

"1. Was Richard R. Smith the sheriff of the county of Otsego when he received and forwarded the ballots by his special deputy?

"2. If he was not sheriff, can the votes sent by him be legally canva.s.sed?

"3. Can the joint committee canva.s.s the votes when sent to them in two parcels, the one contained in a box, and the other contained in a paper, or separate bundle? Or,

"4. Ought they to canva.s.s those sealed in the box, and reject the others?

"TIOGA.--It appears that the sheriff of Tioga delivered the box containing the ballots to B. Hovey, his special deputy, who set out, was taken sick on his journey, and delivered the box to H. Thompson, his clerk, who delivered it into the secretary's office.

"_Question_. Ought the votes of Tioga to be canva.s.sed?

"CLINTON.--It appears that the sheriff of Clinton delivered the box containing the ballots to Theodorus Platt, Esq., who had no deputation, but who delivered them into the secretary's office, as appears by his affidavit.

"_Question._ Ought the votes of Clinton to be canva.s.sed?"