Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1808-10-14

lytes OF gentlemen of this description
Could he suppose they we're fit objects 10
be used in illicit enterprises! Certainly
not. Dces either of them state that he
made any attempts of this kind? Certain
Iy not. Is the,e any other instance ofhis
having expressed any op Mon in favor Of
a separation of the Union during the
whole course of his life Certainly
not. This is the only solitary instance OF
such an expression, that has been adduced
or pretended Is there any criminal intent
ascribed TO col. Taylor for the expression of
similar opinion to gen. Carberry ? Cer-
tainly not. What rule OF evidence is ap.
plicable to MIR Smith, which is not applica-
BILE to COL Taylor? Is it just TO condemn
one man for the expression of an opinion,
when The expression of the same opinion
by anoiher, does not even subject him TO
suspicion From all these circumstances
| am satis6 d, first, that Mr. Smith did not
express the opinion in favor of the separa.
ton OF the Union, in the sense attributed
to him by col. Taylor; and in the next
place, 1T he did, it was not expressed with
any criminal intent.
Fhe next evidence in point of time, from
which differences are drawn, injurious to
Mr. Smith, is the testimony of Peter Tay
Tor. 1t relates to circumstances, which
took place ut Mr. Smiths house on the 23d
of October, and shortly afterwards. The
first observation made in relation to this
point, is, that Mr. Smith in his answer states
! that Peter Taylor is man unworthy of cree
/ dit, for several reasons mentioned by him,
and that he was incorrect in his evidence
IN the recital of several incidental circum.
I ct xa,ira - "A al. ID
| Tor is a man of fair character, thougl g
norant and uniformed, and that his tcs-
timony is unimpeached. / readily admit
that Mr. Smiths impressions in relation to
| Peter Faylor's character, are mere unfa.
vorab than are warranted from the state
or the evidence before the Senate; but this
| Is not wonderful, when all circumstances
! are considered When it is considered,
that deadly wound to MIR Smith s Charac.
ter was apprehended 10y him to be about
to be inflicted by p. Taylor's evidence :;
which consisted principally in the recital
of incidental circumstances, in some of
which he was evidently mistaken when
all the knowledge Mr. Smith had of him,
was, that he was one of Blennerhassett's
servants, and presumed to be both ignorant
and uniformed, it is not wonderful, that
MIR Smith should have entertained worse
opinion OF HIM than he merited: But see
nothing criminal in this miscopception. Il
was perfectly innocent and natural one
readily also admit, that in general, Pc
ter Taylor's character for truth and veraci-
ty stands unimpeached, although it mus ar
the same time be admitted, that he was
mistaken in some of the many incidents ne
relates; and in one very remarkable in
stance Ito wit) forgetting the death of his
wife, which happened about six weeks be-
fN,.a l,e.
a further provision for.her support. men.
ton this, however, not for the purpose of
having an injurious influence upon the geG-
eral course OF his evidence, but merely rs
a caution against p ying too much aspect
to the episodes or the incidental ciTcul.stan.
ces mentioned by witnesses and particular
ly by him. differences of guilt ought very
| cautiously to be drawn from such sources
but see nothing in the material and sub
stantial part of Peter Taylor's evidence
but what is perfectly consistent with Mr.
Smiths innocence, and in my judgment
tends strongly to support it.--As this evil
dence has been very much relied upon TO
terminate Mr.. Smith, lee it now be criti-
cally examined in spirit of justice and i'm
part aiity. Peter Tayior's testimony is sub
stantially as follow: During the month of
October Mrs. Rlenperhassett having become
very much alarmed for the safely of her
husband, IN consequence of the resentment
OF the people in the neighborhoOd, against
him, produced by the pieces under the sig
nature OF the Querist, which he acknow.
lodged himself to be the author of and be-
ieving that Burr had nstigated HIM to that
conduct, dispatched Peter Taylor, her gar
dener, in quest of Bennerhassett, with a
letter, requesting that he would return to
the island, and would prohibit Burr from
again returning thIther. Being uncertain
where Blennerhassett might be, but presu-
ming he would be found with Burr, she d.
rected Peter Taylor to search for HIM, first
at Chillicothe, and if he should not be found
there, at Cincinnati, and TO enquire at the
house of John Smith, store keeper. In par
suance of these instructions, Peter TAYLOR
being unsuccessful in his search at Chilli
cothe, arrived al Mr.. Smith house in Gin
cinnati, on the 23d of October-When Mr..
Smith came out 10 Inn, he enquired for
Burr and misunderstanding object he states
to be, to see if Mr.. Smith could give any
account of them. Mr.. Smith at first tod
him, that he had mistaken the place, that
they were not there, and he knew nothing
oil them. But upon telling Mr.. Smith that
he was one of Biennerhassett's servants, and
was sent in quest Of him by Mrs Blenner-
hasse;t, Mr. Smith took him up stairs to a
chamber he was accustomed 70 write in, to
| write a letter to Mr. BieuncrhaEsett and