The enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1804-1815, 1808-09-30

Taylor is mistaken in this Particular point OF his
evidence. There = part OF Col. Tayior's owne-
violence, which furnishes strong considerations
for caution in interpreting The rest. The candor
and circumspection observed by the deponen;, in
this particular point evidence, is so honorable
20 him, that beg leave tdprcscnt it to the Senate
IN his own words. After answering many ques-
.:ons put to him by MIR. Smith. Col. Taylor con-
ciuties his evidence with tire following voluntary
observation -" beg leave father to state, that
Mr.. Sisith has generally been viewed as friend
ly, Benevolent, worthy man, AMI his family, (con
sistins of an amiah!e wife, and daughter, and Sc
vcral very promising sons have been consid red
ensiuc'! to- and held place in the frs. circles of
society in cur quarter
What could have induced Col. Taylor to make
! this observation upon closing his evidence =
There is NJ doubt, Sir, ii VS. ntcnied c;s,i-
ton to the Senate in the nerpretatio OF other
circumstances, although related by himself. II
fevidently arose from L consciousness that those
circumstances were vague and uncertain, and
that his Impressions of them might nc mistaken
1t WAS the spontaneous conviction of an anlbic
mind, iaboring Under an impression, that inno-
cence might become the victim OF itS own honcss
misconceptions. l will now state my reasons for
| The conviction that Coz. Taylor was mistaken in
| surprising that Ejr. Smith spoke OF the separation
OF the Union as AN opinion Of bis own, and moi
rs the opinion ncuicatcd by the Querst.
| The opinions expressed in the Querst, had
not only become the subject of general CO. .ersa-
ton. bat We're the subject OF that particular
conversation. Mr. Smith probably rcc;ied these
opinions in an ungu:irded manner; and from
tiiat circumstance, 1t not unnatural that Col.
raylor's impressions might have been formed.
TINS appears from the deposition of Doctor Sell
man, wao wasp present at the same conversation /;
and swears expressly that he was induced to put
this question to Mr.. Smith, most probably from
the unguarded manner ofexpressing himself Are
these your own opinions those expressed IN
the OuerIst? To which Mr.. Smith replied,
they were the opinions OF tbs Querist, and not
his n.vn ',ninnns ::A c:,ac:i H.:
a separation of the union and hoped to God ne
yer TO live to see the day when that event should
take place. Here is the positive evidence of
Doctor SelIaan TO the particular fact in question ;
whereas Col Taylor speaks OF the impression
made on his mind by the whole tenor OF the con-
versaton. Col. Taylor must therefore be mis-
tGkea, or Doctor Selinan SrilfalipforSvSora Would
it be proper to make this presumption against
| Doctor Selman Who is Doctor Selman A
gentleman otirrepreachablc character tire friend
and brother-in-law of Col. Taylor; l believe
the friend ofthe government and of the admins
tration. Doctor Selman does not stop here he
swears that he is in habits OF intimacy with Mr..
Smith, and that he never did, before since thar
Period, hear Mr.. Smith express any opinion in
heard him express opinions directly and positively
against it Does Col. Taylor contradict this state
ment No, sir but confirms it. He also sw.:ars
that h,sleycr heard Mr. Smith express that OPT
Mon at any other time before or since. Now, sir,
as Colonel Taylor himself states that the pie
ces signed the Cuerist, were the subject of
the conversation IN question, and that lie never
before or since that time, heard MIR. Smith cx-
press analogous opinions with those of the Que
riSt and when Doctor Selman swcars positive
~ that during that particular conversation, he
put the identical question to Mr.. Smith, are
you speaking your own opinions or those of thc
| Qleri3t and that he unequivocally answered,
not his own, but those ofthc Querist and also
swcars positively that he never did, before or
since that time, hear Mr. Smith express analogous
| opinions to those Of the Ouerst; but often the
! rcverse-Would it not be :. strange perversion
OF the rules q. eydence to say, that on that par
ticular occasion alone, he expressed opinions in
direct hostility with those expressed during the
whole course OF his life, both before and after
Spa,ds But this is net all. This case furnishes
evidence still more conclusive, If possible, in IA
vor of my Interpretation.
| If Mr.. Smith had been in the habit of express
sing this opinion, would not the zeal, the acti-
witty and the intelligence OF Elias Clover and his
associates have discovered and communicated
1t Men, who not content with the most inve-
terate accusations and prosecutions against Mr.
Smith in their individual capacities, have form
ed clubs, and at length associated themselves in
a corporate character under the imposing name
OF the republican society for that and other pur-
poses After their profusion Of other charges,
which they could not substantate, is it TO be
presumed that they would have omitted tI;s
| charge if it had been true, and thus could have
substantlated it? Their not having made it, is
almost conclusive proof with me, that it did not
exist But further, what does general Carbe-
ry say upon this subject That he is in habits
of intimacy with Mr.. Smith, and that he never
| heard him express sentiment in favor of the
| separation of the Union, but often the reverse.
| That he did, however, on one occasion hear CO.
! lionel James Taylor express an opinion in compa-
ny with several persons, that separation of the
Union would take place at some distant time, say
ten or twelve years. And upon his asking colo
mel Taylor, after retiring from the company, if
he did not think it imprudent to express that o.
pinion, even speculatively col Taylor admit
ted, that nc thoughtit was ; and made some pa
! triotic observations OIL the OCCASION.
! This leads me to examine the second question
in relation to this point. Even admitting that
Mr.. Smith did express the opinion attributed to
him by col. Taylor as his o7ua, was it done witt,
any criminal Interest," / am satisfied it was not
! M. CHESS Sbsech to be continued
! g AMUEL MYERS, has removed to the store
| ~ lately occupied by Richard Brooke oDno.