Washington sentinel., 1855-02-04
HISTORY vINDICATED-sENA
BAYARD'S DEFENSE OF HIS FA-
THEIR In THE SENATE.

THEIR IN THE SENATE.
We cannot, perhaps, present to our reader.
anything more instructive and interesting than
sketch Of the remarks of the distinguished
Senators who participated in the discussion, il
discussion it can be called, that took place in
the Senate on Wednesday last on the occasion
Of Mr.. Bayard's vindication of his Fathers
memory from representations contained in the
"Anas" of Thomas jefferson.
The Jefferson papers were ordered to be
published by Congress. They consisted of one
hundred and thirty-four large bound volumes
OF manuscript, besides an immense mass OF
loose papers. The Joint Committee of the
two Houses, on the Library, found it necessary
to employ gentleman to edit them. In the
language Of Senator Pearce, of Maryland, they
employed gentleman of talent and character
to edit them, and directed him generally to
make such selection from the papers of Mr.
Jefferson as were necessary and proper to ex-
hibit fairly and fully his opinions, character
and public course"
The editor felt that in publishing Mr.. JEFF
fersons papers, under these instructions from
the committee, he was not at liberty to omit
what he calls, in note in the ninth volume,
"The celebrated Anas." of Mr.. Jefferson. The
Anas' contained charges Of serious nature
against the character and political integrity Of
the late James A. Bayard, father of the present
senator Of that name from Delaware.
The first charge will be found in the ninth
volume of the congressional edition of Mr.. JEFF
fsrson's works, page 2O2. 1t is in these words
February IL, ls0l.-Edward Livingston
tells me that Bayard applied to-day, or las,
night, TO General Samuel Smith, and repre-
sented to him the expediency of his coming
over to the States who vote for Burr; that there
was nothing in the way of appointment which
he might not command, and particularly
mentioned the Secretaryship Of the Navy.
Smith asked him if he was authorized to make
the offer. He said he was authorized Smith
told this to Livingston and to w. G. Nicholas,
who confirms it to me-"
Senator Bsyard, in his able vindication of
his fathers memory from this charge, says:
In answer to this charge / shall irst read
the remarks in the Senate at the time my col.
league brought it to the notice of Messrs. Smith
and Livingston; then the deposition of my ia
ther, made in 1905, in suit for libel brought
by Aaron Burr, against James Cheetham, and
letter written by him to General Hamilton,
on the 7th Of January, 1901. shall also refer
to letter from Colonel Burr to General Smith,
a copy Of which is given in the deposition OF
General Smith in the case of James Gillespie
against Abraham Smith, which deposition
shall read hereafter in refutation Of the second
charge made by Mr.. jefferson
In 1880, when the first publication of Mr.
JeAerson's works was made, Mr. Clayton, who
was then in the Senate, brought this charge tc
the notice of the two gentlemen, Mr.. Edward
Livingston and General Samuel Smith, who
we're fortunately, at that time, members of the
Senate, and were the authorities alleged By
Mr.. Jefferson for this charge. Mr.. Clayton
after making some feeling remarks, and read
ing the charge above cited, called upon Mr.
Livingston and General Smith for their state
ments, which we're as follows:
"Mr. Smith, of Maryland, rose and said, tha,
he had read the paragraph before he came
here to-day, and was, therefore, aware Of its
import. He had not the most distant recollec
tion that Mr.. Bayard had ever made such 9
proposition TO him. Mr.. Bayard, said he, and
myself though politically opposed, were init
mate personal friends, and he was an honora
bic man. OF all men Mr.. Bayard would have
been the last to make such proposition tc
any man; and am confident that he had toe
much respect for me, TO have made il, under
= r.
man any such proposition.
"Mr. Livingston, of Louisiana, said that, as
to the precise question which had been put to
him by the Senator from Delaware, he must
say, that having taxed bis recollection. as far as
it could be on so remote transaction, he had
no remembrance Of it."
The other proofs relied on and cited by SEN
ator Bayard are equally pointed and satisfac.
tory. They are, however, Too long for inser.
ton in our columns.
The second charge preferred by Mr.. Jeffer.
son against the distinguished father Of Senator
Bayard is as follows
.Aprl 10, 1867 did not commit these
things to writing at the time, but do il now,
because, in O suit between him (Burr) and
Cheetham, he has had a deposition of Bayard
taken, which seems 10 have no relation to the
suit, nor to any other object than to calumni-
ate me. Bayard pretends to have addressed to
me during the pending Of the Presidential elec.
ton in 1901, through General Samuel Smith,
certain conditions on which my election might
be obtained, and that General Smith, after con.
versing with me, gave answers from me. This
is absolutely false. No proposition of any kind
was ever made TO me on that occasion by Gen.
eral Smith, nor any answer authorized by me.
And this fact General Smith afirms at this
moment Jeferson's Works, Congressional
Edition, page 209. |.
in REPUTATION Of this charge Senator Bayard
read the deposition Of his father in the case Of
Gillespie against Smith made on the Sd day Of
April, 1906, and that of of..General Smith made
in the same case on the 18th ofthe same month.
Senator Bayard related the following interest
ing circumstances connected with his search
for his proofs. He said
Sir, when my brother and first read this
charge we we're at loss for the means Of refu-
fufinu- We eonld no+ II r.. II.