The Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1822-1829, 1828-10-20
JAGASoN AND BURR-No. 4.

No one p~retends TO question the tran SC endant
ted that but few men OF his time could cope with
him in intellectual combat. Nor cid his mind
%conine its operations to the grand and magni-
fcent- for he knew that the most ~insignii
cant circumstances are often the surest indices to
correct conclusions. lie had. therefore, in stu
dying the human character Of whic IA he was n
thorough adept, marked well the master passion
of the man whom he wished 10 lure into his M:
nigh, have in view. And, it will not be Geni-
ed, even il his great talents were the only egi
denCe We had ofthe fact, that his schemes were
always projected with surprising art and skill,
Notwithstanding the three greatest events Of bis
lie proved alike degrading to his character, and
blasting 10 his AMBITIOUS hopes. This beng
conceded, the question then arises, whet her.
when he knew that suspicion of his intentions
we've abroad through the land, he would have
gwen such contradictory statements of those
intentions as must Inevitably have led to the de-
feat of whatever object he had in view
Every man is prepared, at the first blush of
the question, to answer in the negative. All
who are acquainted with the proceedings of
courts o. justice. know, that, if Burn bad been ar.
rested al Nashville, when ne was ou a visit TO his
Ggcat, (Gen. Jackson and if tho same evidence
which has been adduced b, the Nashville com
mittee 10 clear Gen. Jackson, in their late de.
fence, had then been brought forward. he would
have been checked there, and the account
current between " A. B and A. J.p would ne.
YER have run into the month of December. 1906
If IA man be arraigned for an offence. and ,hra<
witnesses whom he introduces, for ME. ~
prove an abb. each differ as 10 the pla ce ia
which the alleged criminal was when .h.
fence was committed, it would not opIv no
strong p~resumptive proofofbis guilt. bu, would
ensure his condemnation, We hold that the
same rule will apply i" the present case. An
drew Jackson was arraisned at the bar of
public opinion, charged with having haen ,
colleague OF Aaron Burr in 1906. He denied
che 'ru'h OF tie allegation, and pledged him.
sell to : drnou'Ice it as n calumnv.' More than
tour mo;lths "rre permitted to elapse in studied
silence. AT length, this silence was broken
br.l 10y whom Did the General comply with
his promise to denounee il, in his own proper
person I Oh mol But his I" gentlemeo usb.
ers Of the black rod came forth in all The dig
nifty of twelve columns defsace-to nut down
by length, what they could net by peight of ar.
gument, They tried, by a show OF cert ifcntes
aud extracts from letters, 10 throw an impene
,rablc cloud over the facts OF the case, which but
few men would be willing. ana still fewer A.
BILE TO pierce through. They should have re.
collected thai the spear of Truth con meme.
trate a wall OF adamant, aud that the thin
drapery of error aud falsehood with which
they have attempted 10 shroud their idol can
inicrpose no obstacle 10 il s advance. Actipe
we presume, in the capacity of counsel for
Gen. jackson. they have introduced The cou
fession Of their client, and the evidence OF hi,
witnesses, to prove his Innocence. II, there,
fore, We shall show that there is a material
variation between then, we appeal 10 the
common sense oil the public whether Gen. !
will not staud be fore them in the attitude OF
n culprit, condemned by his own showing :
Il, indeed; the variation related to an uninl-