PCcr^r,-, 
 
 
 :^3C--ar:irii!*^^;£r^*?;": 

 
 B]i®iE©ig (gji]U:5t>r'5j'©sf
 
 THE 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 OP 
 
 POLITICAL PARTIES 
 
 IN THE 
 
 STATE OF NEW-YORK, 
 
 FROM THE RATIFCATION OF THE FEDERAL 
 CONSTITUTION TO DECEMBER, 1840. 
 
 IIV TWO TOIiUinJBS. 
 
 By JABEZ D. HAMMOND, L. L. D. 
 
 d^ouAm, (coition., ^ooWectco, otto GUtEoAaeo. 
 TO WHICH IS ADDED, 
 
 NOTES BY GEN. ROOT. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 COOPERSTOWN : 
 PUBLISHED BY H. & E. PHINNEY. 
 
 1847.
 
 JiSntered according to an Act of Congress in the year 1842, by Jabbz D. 
 HiUHMOND, in the Office of the Clerk of the Northern District of New- York.
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 XJNIVERSITY OF CALIPORNLfi 
 SANTA BARBARA
 
 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW-YORK. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE STATE OF POLITICAL PARTIES IX THE STATE OF NEW-YORK, 
 
 AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE 
 
 FEDERAL CONSTITUTIOx\. 
 
 During the contest for American Independence, the 
 existence of political parties, according to the present no- 
 tions we entertain of those associations, may be said to 
 have been unknown in the United States. There were 
 indeed in each of the states, a few families who, either 
 from motives of interest, or considerations of duty, retain- 
 ed their attachment to the British Government; and per- 
 haps the state of New-York, in proportion to its popula- 
 tion, contained a greater number of adherents to the King 
 of England, than any other of the American Colonies. 
 This was probably partly if not entirely owing to the great 
 number of offices held in the then colony of New-York, 
 under the Crown. But an immense majority of the peo- 
 ple, as well in this as in the other colonies, at an early 
 stage of the controversy with the mother country, resolved 
 at any and every hazard, to resist what they deemed to be 
 the unconstitutional laws enacted by the Imperial Parlia- 
 ment. After the commencement of hostilities, those who 
 supported the claims of Great Britain, and who were 
 
 1
 
 2 POLITICAL HISTORY [1783. 
 
 called tories, were regarded by the great mass of the 
 people, and even treated by the temporary governments 
 which were organized, rather as alien enemies than citi- 
 zens of this country. A decided conviction that the acts 
 of the British Government were an encroachment on their 
 rights as freemen, a fixed and settled determination to 
 maintain those rights, an ardent desire to establish a free 
 government independent of all foreign control, and a sense 
 of common danger, constituted a strong bond of union of 
 the friends of American liberty and independence ; — and 
 though personal jealousies, avarice, rivalship and ambition 
 no doubt existed, and occasionally produced combinations 
 of individuals and consequently cabals; in general all self- 
 ish views, pursuits and interests were absorbed in the con- 
 templation of the most effectual means of resistance to 
 unconstitutional and oppressive laws, a resolution to de- 
 fend the principle of equal rights, and a determination to 
 establish an independent goA'ernment. 
 
 But no sooner had Great Britain acknowledged the in- 
 dependence of the United States, and the treaty of peace 
 of 1783 been ratified, than men began to speculate on and 
 form different and adverse theories respecting the form of 
 government best adapted to preserve personal liberty, 
 promote the general welfare, and secure the union of the 
 States. Leading and influential individuals also began to 
 deliberate upon the most effectual means of advancing the 
 separate interests of the states of which they respectively 
 were inhabitants, and it is probable that combinations 
 having in view the gratification of individual interests and 
 ambition, were early formed and organized. 
 
 It required little reasoning to convince all intelligent 
 men, that the plan of government, or rather union, con- 
 tained in the Articles of Confederation, adopted in 1777, 
 was not competent to preserve the Union, and at the same 
 time regulate the commerce of the American nation, and
 
 1783.] OF NEW- YORK. 3 
 
 enable it to discharge its debts, defray its expenses and per- 
 form its engagements with other nations. The old Con- 
 gress was, by these articles, little other than a meeting of 
 ambassadors from the several states : ambassadors too, who 
 generally speaking, had not the power to bind their princi- 
 pals. They, except in a very few cases, could only recom- 
 mend the adoption of such measures to the states as, in their 
 judgment, the public welfare demanded ; but the carrying 
 into effect of those measures depended on the voluntary 
 action of the respective state legislatures : hence it was 
 most evident that some scheme of general government 
 must be adopted, which would enable that government, 
 without the consent of all the states, to act upon the per- 
 sons of the citizens of each state; or the union if it could 
 be preserved, would, for all important national purposes, 
 be quite useless. A few years' experience after the peace, 
 proved the truth of this position. What should that plan 
 of government be, which should remedy the evils already 
 experienced, and guard effectually against those which 
 were anticipated 1 Thinking and reflecting men in every 
 part of the nation turned their attention with anxious soli- 
 citude to this interesting and important question. All 
 admitted the imperfections and inadequacy of the Articles 
 of Confederation : all admitted that a new plan of govern- 
 ment or constitution ought to be devised and adopted, 
 but they differed widely in relation to the principles which 
 that constitution ought to contain, and the magnitude and 
 nature of powers which should be granted to the gene- 
 ral government. 
 
 It was this difference of opinion which produced the 
 first organized political parties in this state and nation. 
 Here, therefore, the task I have undertaken commences. 
 But I do not propose to enter minutely into a detail of 
 the movements of the leaders of the two parties to this 
 contToversy. It is to a later period which the atten-
 
 4 POLITICAL HISTORY [1783. 
 
 tion of the reader is more particularly invited, and in 
 which I shall endeavor to delineate more in detail the 
 character, and develop more fully the motives of the 
 actors in the political drama, and the causes which im- 
 pelled them to action. [See Note J.] 
 
 In no state in the union was the constitution which 
 was recommended by the National Convention, more se- 
 verely criticised and more zealously opposed, and in none 
 was it more ardently and ably defended than in the state 
 of New-York. Indeed, this state may be said to have 
 furnished the principal author, and afterwards the cham- 
 pion for the defence of that instrument. It is almost un- 
 necessary to say that I allude to General Alexander 
 Hamilton. With him were associated John Jay, whose 
 revolutionary services in the civil department, great legal 
 learning, sound discriminating mind, high moral qualities, 
 and unblemished purity of character, gave him a power- 
 ful influence with the public ; Robert R. Livingston, a 
 man of fine address, possessing a great landed interest in 
 the central counties on the Hudson's river, standing at the 
 head of a powerful and influential family, and holding the 
 highest judicial office in the state, and Gen. Schuyler of 
 Albany, together with the Van Rensselaer family, possess- 
 ing, deservedly, great influence with the people inhabiting 
 the section of the state, where they resided, with many 
 others eminent for their talents and standing in the com- 
 munity. 
 
 In the front ranks of the other party stood George 
 Clinton, who probably had a stronger hold on the aff*ec- 
 tions of the people, than any other citizen of the state. 
 He may be said to have been the manufacturer of his own 
 fortune. His father was an emigrant from Ireland, and at 
 an early period settled in Little Britain, in the county of 
 Orange. Although not highly distinguished either for 
 wealth or talents, he was much respected for his patriotism
 
 1783.] OF NEW-YORK. 5 
 
 and private virtues. He officiated as a county judge, and 
 during the French war was a colonel in the British army 
 which invaded Canada. The property which he brought 
 with him from Ireland, and that which, by his industry 
 and economy, he accumulated in this country, enabled him 
 to bring up his family well, but not to leave them rich. 
 George was his youngest son, and was bred a lawyer. 
 Shortly after he completed his studies, he was appointed 
 by Sir George Clinton, the Colonial Governor, to whom 
 the Clinton family are said to have been distantly related, 
 clerk of the county of Ulster. 
 
 Mr. George Clinton was one of the earliest friends of 
 the American cause, and was in grain and in principle a 
 republican. He possessed a clear and logical mind, and 
 great decision of character. His talents and private 
 merit soon rendered him conspicuous among the patriots 
 of that day, and be was almost unanimously elected the 
 first Governor of the state of New-York. This election 
 is the more honorable to him, when it is considered that 
 there were at that time in the state, several distinguished 
 friends to American Independence, who were men of 
 great wealth and powerful family connections ; and that 
 Mr. Clinton was elected without any of these adventitious 
 aids. At the time when the controversy in relation to the 
 adoption of the new constitution commenced, Gov. Clin- 
 ton had been repeatedly elected by the people to the first 
 office in the state j he had stood at the helm and dis- 
 charged his duty ably and faithfully during the long and, 
 perilous revolutionary struggle, with the fortitude of a 
 hero, and the zeal and devotedness of a patriot ; and 
 clothed as he was, by the constitution of the state, with 
 the power of distributing the patronage of the govern- 
 ment, it cannot fail to be perceived that such a man must 
 have been capable of producing a very great impression 
 upon the public mind. Among the most distinguished
 
 6 POLITICAL HISTORY [1783. 
 
 individuals who united with him in his opposition to the 
 adoption of the Federal Constitution, were Robert Yates, 
 afterwards for a long time Chief Justice of the Supreme 
 Court, John Lansing a delegate from this state in the 
 convention that formed the constitution, and subsequently 
 Chief Justice and CTiancellor ; and, though last named, 
 by no means the least, Mr. Melancton Smith. 
 
 To exhibit the manner in which some of the points in 
 controversy arose between the two parties, it is proper to 
 state, that in pursuance of a recommendation of commis- 
 sioners from several states who had met at Annapolis in 
 Maryland, of whom Gen. Hamilton was one, in Septem- 
 ber, 1786, " to take into consideration the trade and com- 
 merce of the United States, and to consider how far an 
 uniform system in their commercial intercourse and regu- 
 lations might be necessary to the common interest and 
 permanent happiness" of all the States, Congress, in Feb- 
 ruary, 1787, resolved that it was expedient that on the 
 second IMonday in May, then next, a convention of dele- 
 gates who should have been appointed by the several 
 states, should be held at Philadelphia for the sole and ex- 
 press purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation, and 
 reporting to Congress and the several legislatures, such 
 alterations and provisions therein as should, when agreed 
 to in Congress, and confirmed by the states, under the 
 Federal Constitution, be adequate to the exigencies of go- 
 vernment, and the preservation of the Union. 
 
 The views of the politicians of the state of New-York, 
 on the questions involved in this recommendation, were 
 fully developed in the debates and proceedings which 
 took place in the legislature which convened in the city 
 of New-York, in the winter of 1787. But in order pro- 
 perly to understand them, it is necessary to state that in 
 1781, in pursuance of the recommendation of Congress, 
 an act was passed which granted to the United States the
 
 1783.] OF NEW-YORK. 7 
 
 import duties to be collected in the port of New-York, 
 and provided that those duties should be levied and collect- 
 ed in such manner and form, and under such penalties and 
 regulations^ and by such officers as Congress should, from 
 time to time make, order and appoint. But in March, 
 1783, {after the peace,) this act was repealed and an act 
 was passed again, granting the duties to the United States, 
 but directing their collection by officers who should be ap- 
 pointed by the state. This law was afterwards modified 
 at the request of Congress, so as to render the collectors 
 amenable to and removable by the authorities of the Uni- 
 ted States. In reference to this proceeding, Gen. Schuy- 
 ler, on the 4th May, 1783, wrote to Gen. Hamilton, "Al- 
 though our legislature seems still inclined to confer pow- 
 ers on Congress adequate to the proper discharge of the 
 great duties of the sovereign council of these states, yet 
 I perceive with pain that some, chagrined at disappoint- 
 ment, are already attempting to inculcate a contrary prin- 
 ciple, and I fear it will gain too deep a root to be eradi- 
 cated, until such confusion prevails as will make men 
 deeply feel the necessity of not retaining so much sover- 
 eignty inthe states individually." 
 
 Mr. J. C. Hamilton, in the life of Gen. Hamilton, vol. 
 2, p. 387, remarks, that " early in the year seventeen hun- 
 dred and eighty-four, a motion was made in the legisla- 
 ture of New-York, urging the abolition of the offices of 
 superintendent of finance and of continental receiver, which 
 was followed by the acts establishing a custom house and 
 a revenue system. 
 
 *^ The immense and improvident speculations made on 
 the return of peace, poured into the coffers of that state 
 a large revenue. This was subsequently increased by the 
 navigation acts of other states, which rendered New-York 
 the entrepot of the whole region east of the Delaware, 
 and presented to her tempting prospects of future wealth.
 
 8 POLITICAL HISTORY [1783. 
 
 " To whatever cause it may be attributed, it became the 
 settled policy of New-York to defeat the proposition for 
 a national revenue. A measure conforming with the re- 
 commendation of Congress was proposed in the legisla- 
 ture in seventeen hundred and eighty-four, and failed. It 
 was again brought forward in seventeen hundred and 
 eighty-five, and again failed by two votes in the senate. 
 
 " At the close of the session of seventeen hundred and 
 eighty-six, in which the exertions of Schuyler to induce 
 the grant were most conspicuous, a law was enacted giv- 
 ing the revenue to Congress, but reserving to the state 
 * the sole power of levying and collecting' the duties ; 
 the conferring of which power on Congress, was an indis- 
 pensable and express condition of the acts of some of 
 the other states. Instead of making the collectors ame- 
 nable and removable by Congress, it subjected them to 
 the exclusive jurisdiction of the state courts. 
 
 "It also rendered the duties payable in the bills of 
 credit of the state, and thus so entirely contravened the 
 plan of seventeen hundred and eighty-three, as to be 
 equivalent to its rejection. This enactment was defended 
 by the argument that Congress, being a single body, and 
 consequently without checks, would be apt to misapply 
 the money arising from it." 
 
 Mr. Hamilton then proceeds to remark, that Congress 
 " perceiving that no benefit could be derived from the law 
 recently passed by this state j that if acceded to, the acts 
 of twelve adopting states (for Rhode Island had mean- 
 while concurred) would, by their conditions, which requi- 
 red the concurrence of all the states, become void ; that 
 the provision which rendered the duties payable in bills 
 of credit was most pernicious, as it would, on the same 
 principle, admit of all the paper money of the other States 
 at various rates of depreciation, thus reducing the revenue, 
 producing an inequality in the public burdens, and deter- 
 
 ♦
 
 1786.] OF NEW- YORK. 9 
 
 ring the states averse from paper money from engaging 
 in the measure — Congress treated it as a nullity." 
 
 Mr. H. adds that they thereupon " passed a resolution 
 requesting Governor Clinton to convene the legislature 
 for the purpose of submitting this subject again to its 
 consideration. To this application, involving such mo- 
 mentous consequences, Clinton replied by letter, stating 
 that ^ he entertained the highest deference and respect 
 for the authority of Congress, and that it would afford 
 him the greatest pleasure to have it in his power to com- 
 ply with their recommendations, but that he had not the 
 power to convene the legislature before the time fixed by 
 law for their stated meeting, except upon ^ extraordinary 
 occasions j^ and as the present business had already been 
 particularly laid before them, and so recently as at their last 
 session received their determination, it cannot come within 
 that description.' " 
 
 The Governor, in his speech to the legislature at the 
 opening of the session of which I am speaking, gave a 
 statement of this application which Congress had made to 
 him to call an extra meeting of that bodyj and his reasons 
 for refusing to comply with the request, being the same as 
 that which he had assigned in his reply to Congress, name- 
 ly, that inasmuch as the legislature had but a few months 
 before deliberated upon and solemnly decided that very 
 question, he could not consider the recommendation of 
 Congress a circumstance which created that extraordinary 
 occasion contemplated by the constitution which alone au- 
 thorized him to require a meeting of the legislature. 
 
 On the legislature which was now in session, was de- 
 volved the duly of deciding whether this state would send 
 delegates to the National Convention which was to as- 
 semble in May following j and if they should decide that 
 question in the affirmative, then it would become their 
 duty to select and appoint the delegates. For this reason
 
 10 POLITICAL HISTORY [1786. 
 
 the friends of a national government early saw the neces- 
 sity that General Hamilton should be one of the members 
 of the State legislature, and take a part in the discussion 
 of these important and interesting questions. To effect 
 this very desirable object, the most strenuous efforts were 
 made at the April election to elect him a member from 
 the city of New-York, and by the vigorous exertions of 
 the merchants of that city, aided by his political friends, 
 he was chosen. 
 
 Gen. Schuyler, the father-in-law of Gen. H., also a 
 zealous friend of the establishment of an energetic nation- 
 al government, was at that time a member of the Senate. 
 The national politics of these gentlemen, both eminent 
 for their talents and public services, placed them in a po- 
 sition adverse to Gov. Clinton, and around them the op- 
 position in each house rallied. Mr. Hamilton had been 
 placed at the head of the committee to draw an answer 
 to the Governor's speech, and he drew one which was 
 silent in respect to that part of it which stated his refusal to 
 call an extra session of the legislature at the request of 
 Congress. The friends of the governor, the leading and 
 strong man among whom was Samuel Jones, a very learned 
 and able lawyer, afterwards Comptroller, and the father of 
 the late Chancellor Jones, offered an amendment to the an- 
 swer, as reported by Mr. Hamilton, approving of the con- 
 duct of the governor in refusing to convene the legislature 
 upon the occasion to which I have referred. On the ques- 
 tion of adopting this amendment, an interesting debate 
 ensued, conducted principally by Mr. Hamilton and Mr. 
 Jones. The point in controversy, was whether the occa- 
 sion of the proposed call was such an extraordinary one 
 as, by the constitution, authorized and required the go- 
 vernor to make such call ; but in the progress of the dis- 
 cussion, the claims of the confederated States on this 
 state, and the relations which it had and ought to have
 
 1787.] OF NEW- YORK. 11 
 
 with the confederacy, were considered. This opened a 
 wide field of debate, which was conducted with great 
 ability and some asperity, on both sides. On the ques 
 tion being taken, the amendment was adopted by a vote 
 of 36 to 9. If this vote is to be considered as a test vote 
 of the strength of parties on the question, whether any 
 material alterations ought to be made in the Articles of 
 Confederation — and it probably is — it is obvious that the 
 anti-federalists at that time held a powerful preponderance 
 in the popular branch of the legislature. In the senate, 
 too, there was a large majority who concurred with the 
 governor. The legislature decided in favor of sending 
 delegates to the National Convention, and appointed three 
 delegates. The political principles of the two houses 
 accounts for the reason why a majority of the delegates, 
 (Mr. Yates and Mr. Lansing) were opposed to any mate- 
 rial alteration in the Articles of Confederation, or rather 
 to the formation of a new goverjiment^ while the election 
 of Gen. Hamilton by the same bodies of men, so large a 
 proportion of whom accorded with the views of Gov. 
 Clinton, affords a demonstration of the liberality with 
 which the partizans of that day conducted towards each 
 other. So far from making a war of extermination on 
 their opponents, or treating them as enemies to the coun- 
 try, the majority of the legislature of 1787 were willing 
 and desirous that the views and wishes of the minority 
 should be represented in the grand National Conven- 
 tion about to be held ; and therefore elected General 
 Hamilton, their most able, zealous and ultra opponent, as 
 one of the delegates. 
 
 By a reference to the resolution authorizing the appoint- 
 ment of delegates to the National Convention, it will be 
 seen with what extreme caution and jealousy of their 
 rights as an independent sovereignty, the New-York le- 
 gislature consented to become a party to that convention.
 
 12 POLITICAL HISTORY [1787. 
 
 The resolution declared that the delegates were appointed, 
 " for the sole and express purpose of revising the Articles 
 of Confederation, and reporting to Congress and the seve- 
 ral legislatures such alterations and amendments therein, 
 as shall, when agreed to in Congress, and confirmed by 
 the several states under the Federal Constitution be ade- 
 quate to the exigencies of the government, and preserva- 
 tion the union." 
 
 The National Convention assembled at Philadelphia, at 
 the time appointed by Congress. 
 
 In reviewing the proceedings of that distinguished as- 
 semblage of men, it will be found that they were divided 
 into three classes. 
 
 One portion of them desired to confine the convention 
 to an enlargement of the powers of the then existing Con- 
 federacy, or rather to an amendment of the Articles of Con- 
 federation. To this object the delegates from New-York 
 were, by the above resolution, in the opinion of Messrs. 
 Yates and Lansing, restricted j accordingly these gentle- 
 men, after a majority of the convention had determined 
 to propose a constitution which, instead of amending 
 would abolish the articles of the confederacy, withdrew 
 from it, though in the midst of its most active operations; 
 but Mr. Hamilton elected to remain on his own responsi- 
 bility, and take a part in the deliberations of that body. 
 The delegates from New-Jersey and Delaware, and the 
 celebrated Luther Martin of Maryland, entertained views 
 similar to those of Mr. Yates and Mr. Lansing in respect 
 to the proper business and duty of the convention. The 
 opinion of these gentlemen may be inferred from the re- 
 solutions proposed by Mr. Patterson from New Jersey. 
 (See Pitkin's U. S. History, 229.) 
 
 The only material alteration in the Articles of Confede- 
 ration proposed by these resolutions, seems to be the crea- 
 tion of an executive department to consist of one or more
 
 1787.] OF NEW-YORK. 13 
 
 individuals who were to possess very little power, except 
 that of appointing certain officers and directing military 
 operations, the creation of a judiciary, or rather a court 
 of admiralty, and a declaration that the constitutional 
 acts of Congress and all treaties should be the supreme 
 law of the states. The resolution further proposed " that 
 if any state, or body of men in any state, should oppose or 
 prevent the carrying into effect such acts, or treatres, the 
 federal executive should be authorized to call forth the 
 powers of the confederated states sufficient to compel 
 obedience to such acts, or enforce an observance of such 
 treaties." 
 
 The antipodes to this project were headed in the con- 
 vention by Gen. Hamilton, whose desire was to create a 
 strong government, purely national. Mr. Hamilton's plan 
 was that the members of the house of representatives 
 should be chosen for three years ; that the states should 
 be divided into districts for the purpose of an election by 
 the peophy of electors who should elect the senators; that 
 the people of the same districts should choose electors 
 who were to elect electors of president — the senators and 
 president to hold their offices during good behaviour ; the 
 president to have a negative on all bills which might pass 
 both branches of the legislature; to have the power, with 
 the advice of the senate, to make treaties, to have the 
 sole appointment of the heads of departments, and the 
 appointment of all other offices by consent of the senate. 
 His plan of a judiciary establishment, was in substance, 
 the same as that which was finally adopted; he proposed 
 that all impeachments should be tried by a court to con- 
 sist of the chief or senior judge of the superior courts of 
 law in each state, provided such judge held his office du- 
 ring good behaviour, and had a permanent salary, and 
 that the laws of the states, contrary to the constitution 
 and laws of the United States should be utterly void.
 
 14 POLITICAL HISTORY [1787. 
 
 But thfe most important innovation upon the sovereignty of 
 the states proposed by Gen. Hamilton was, that the go- 
 vernors of the states should be appointed by the pre- 
 sident and senate, and that they should have an unquali- 
 fied veto on all the laws which might be attempted to be 
 passed by the state legislatures of which they respectively 
 were governors.* 
 
 * Gea Hamilton, it would seem, afterwards changed his opinion as to the pro 
 priely of a constitutional provision that the President should hold his office du- 
 ring goord behaviour; or rather subsequent reflection convinced him that the de- 
 mocratic propensities of the people of the United States were so strong that poli- 
 cy required that an experiment should be made of electing a President periodical- 
 ly. In the subjoined letter, which he wrote to Col. Timothy Pickering more than 
 eleven years afterwards, he states the views he adopted before the adjournment 
 of the convention. From the whole tenor of this letter as. well as from other 
 acts and declarations of his, which I may hereafter have occasion to notice, it is 
 evident that so late as the year 1603, which it will be remembered was shortly be- 
 fore his death, he had very little faith in the position that the people of the United 
 States were capable of sustaining a democra,tic or even a republican representa- 
 tive government. He thought, however, "it was in itself right and proper that 
 the republican theory should have a fair and full trial;" and with this view he re- 
 luctantly consented that the national executive should be periodically elected, 
 and ultimately to other innovations that the majority of the convention, made up- 
 on his scheme. But I will give his letter to Mr. Pickering, which, it appears, was 
 written for the purpose of allaying the prejudices which were rife against him ia 
 consequence of his aristocratic principles. In my judgment it is calculated to 
 produce a different and contrary effect. 
 
 " Nrw-YoRR, Sept. 16, 1803. 
 
 " My Dear Sir — I will make no apology for my delay in answering your inquiry 
 some time since made, because I could offer none that would satisfy myself. I 
 pray you only to believe that it proceeded from any thing rather than want of re- 
 spect or regard. I shall now comply with your request. 
 
 "The highest toned propositions, which I made in the convention, were for a 
 president, senate, and judges during good behaviour — a house of representatives 
 for three years. Though I would have enlarged the legislative power of the gene- 
 eral government, yet 1 never contemplated the abolition of the state governments; 
 but, on the contrary, they were, in some particulars, constituent parts of my 
 plan. 
 
 "This plan was in my conception conformable with the strict theory of a go- 
 vernment purely republican ; the essential criteria of which are, that the princi- 
 pal organs of the executive and legislative departments be elected by the people, 
 and hold their offices by a responsible and temporary or defeasible tenure. 
 
 ''A vote was taken on the proposition respecting the executive. Five states 
 were in favor of it; among these Virginia; and though from the manner of voting, 
 by delegations, individuals were not distinguished, it was morally certain, from 
 the known situation of the Virginia members, (six in number, two of them, Ma- 
 son and Randolph, professing popular doctrines,) that IMadison must have concur- 
 red in the vote of Virginia. Thus, if I sinned against republicanism, Mr. Madison 
 was not less guilty.
 
 1787.] OF NEW- YORK. 15 
 
 Between these two ultra classes, the one advocating a 
 strong aristocratic national government ; and the other 
 democratic governments, by the respective states, united 
 by articles of confederation, varying in substance very 
 little from a treaty of alliance,ofFensive and defensive, be- 
 tween independent nations, a third party was formed in 
 the convention, which proposed the formation of a go- 
 vernment partly national and partly federal j a govern- 
 ment elective and representative in its character, but which 
 should represent the people in their numerical strength, and 
 the states in their sovereign capacity. The people of the 
 union were to be represented in ore branch of the le- 
 gislature and the states in the other; while the national 
 executive was to be created partly by the people and 
 partly by the states. This scheme was substantially 
 sketched in a series of resolutions offered by Mr. Ran- 
 ' dolph of Virginia, and probably mainly drawn by Mr. Ma- 
 dison, and from thence called " the Virginia plan.^^ (2 
 Pit. 226. 2 Ham.) A sufficient number of the ultras on 
 each side yielded to this middle course to constitute a ma- 
 jority of the convention ; and hence our present constitu- 
 tion, exclusive of the amendments subsequently proposed 
 and made a part of it, was reported by the convention, 
 and recommended by that body to be adopted by the states. 
 
 But the recommendation of the convention produced 
 little effect on the opponents of their plan of government 
 in the state of New- York. 
 
 One ground upon which the anti-federalists, (for so 
 
 " I may truly then say, that I never proposed either a president or senate for 
 life ; and that I neither recommended nor meditated the annihilation of the state 
 governments. 
 
 "And I may add, that in the course of the discussions in the convention, neither 
 the propositions thrown out for debate, nor even those voted in the earlier sta- 
 ges of deliberation, were considered as evidences of a definitive opinion in the 
 proposer or voter. It appeared to me to be in some sort understood, that with a 
 view to free investigation, experimental propositions might be made; vrh-cb wcro 
 to be received merely as suggestions for consideratioa
 
 16 POLITICAL HISTORY *"■ [1787. 
 
 the opponents of the constitution were denominated) -who 
 were citizens of the large states, founded their opposition, 
 was that the new constitution sacrificed too much to the 
 small states. A moment's reflection will shew that there 
 was much that was plausible, and indeed substantial in 
 this objection. The new constitution proposed a volun- 
 tary surrender of political power by one class of men to 
 another. To form a correct notion of the sacrifice on the 
 part of the great states, it is only necessary to consider 
 the matter in the light in which the question would be 
 viewed, if it were an original one, and now for the first time 
 presented to us. I will suppose the state of Delaware to 
 contain sixty thousand inhabitants, and that the state of 
 New-York contains two millions. The United States se- 
 nate is a co-ordinate branch of the law making power. 
 Besides posessing equal, or all but equal power in the en- 
 actment of laws with the house of representatives, it 
 is a controlling branch of the treaty making power, (and 
 treaties are, by the fiat of the constitution, made the su- 
 preme law of the land) and it is an important branch of 
 the appointing power, holding an unconditional veto on 
 the distribution of all the patronage of the national go- 
 vernment. Now suppose Delaware were to request New- 
 York to give her as much power in this department of the 
 national legislature, or which would be the same in sub- 
 stance, should ask that one citizen of Delaware should 
 possess as much power in the U. S. senate as thirty-three 
 citizens of the state of New-York % It strikes me that 
 such a proposition, if it were now for the first time made, 
 would not be very favorably entertained here. If such a 
 proposal should not be regarded as a project to create a 
 rotten borough system, I am quite sure it would be con- 
 sidered as very much like it. The manner in which this 
 objection was answered, is too obvious and too well 
 known to render it necessary tc lepeat it. But the great 
 
 #
 
 1787.] or NEW-YORK. 17 
 
 and absorbing ground of opposition, was that the propo- 
 sed constitution entirely departed from the principles of a 
 confederacy, and constituted, as was contended, a conso- 
 lidated national government vested with extensive powers, 
 operating not upon the states but upon individuals; that it 
 divested the states of their sovereignty; that it clothed the 
 President with so much power and patronage, as in the 
 hands of an unprincipled ambitious man would enable 
 him to subvert the liberties of the people and usurp 
 to himself despotic power ; and that the people them- 
 selves were not secured against the gradual encroachment 
 upon their rights, by the legislative, judicial and execu- 
 tive departments of the national government, by a bill 
 of rights. " Should the system," said the ardent and elo- 
 quent Patrick Henry, " go into operation, what will the 
 states have to do 1 To take care of the poor, repair and 
 make highways, erect bridges, and so on^ and so on. Abo- 
 lish the state legislatures at once. For what purpose 
 should they be retained f 2 Pit. 273. 
 
 Gov. Clinton and his friends tenaciously adhered to 
 the principles contained in the resolution of the New- 
 York legislature for the appointment of delegates to the 
 national convention. That resolution, they contended, 
 confined the action of the delegates to the business of 
 amending the Articles of Confederation, and by no means 
 authorized them to create a new constitution. 
 
 Although the population of this state was then compa- 
 ratively small, amounting probably to about two hundred 
 and fifty thousand souls, the sagacity and the clear vision 
 of Gov. Clinton and other distinguished opponents of the 
 national scheme, must have enabled them to foresee the 
 high destiny of the state of New-York. . They no doubt 
 took into consideration the facts that its territory stretch- 
 ed from the Atlantic ocean to the great inland seas of the 
 west; that its southern frontier included the best harbor in 
 
 2
 
 18 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 North America, and perhaps in the world ; that its soil 
 was incomparably rich and luxuriant j that water power 
 for driving all kinds of machinery for manufacturing pur- 
 poses was abundant in every part of the state; that its fa- 
 cilities for artificial internal navigation were greater than 
 any other equal portion of the known world ; that its cli- 
 mate was adapted to the production of a hardy and enter- 
 prizing race of men, and was remarkably salubrious, and 
 that nature had so formed our coast that the foreign trade 
 for North America would naturally centre at the port of 
 New-York. This prospective view must have convinced 
 them that New-York would become, what in fact she 
 now is, THE EMPIRE STATE. It is uot, therefore, at all 
 surprising that her citizens should have scrutinized with 
 an anxious and jealous eye, a scheme which, if carried out, 
 might lessen the importance of the state, and would throw 
 into a general fund, or common national stock, that rich 
 revenue which would not fail of being gathered from 
 goods imported into the city of New-York. 
 
 Mr. Clinton, being governor, was the distributor of near- 
 ly all the state patronage. He was also ex-officio com- 
 mander of the army and admiral of the navy. It was, 
 therefore, more than insinuated by political writers of the 
 day, that personal ambition and a love of power had a 
 controling influence in inducing him to oppose the adop- 
 tion of the federal constitution ; or at any rate that sinis- 
 ter views and feelings sharpened his opposition, and added 
 fire to his zeal. 
 
 It is somewhat remarkable that Gov. Clinton in his speech 
 to the legislature in 1788, although the United States Con- 
 stitution must have been long before that time reported 
 and published, and although it had been recommended 
 that the legislature of each state should provide by law 
 for the choice of delegates by the people to decide on 
 the question whether the proposed constitution should be
 
 1788.] OF NEW-YORK. 19 
 
 adopted, was wholly silent on that subject. He does not 
 make the slightest allusion to that great and important 
 question, which, while he was penning his speech, he well 
 knew excited the anxious solicitude of all men, not only 
 in this, but in every state in the Union. 
 
 The subject was, however, brought before the legisla- 
 ture on the 17th of January, 1788, by a resolution offer- 
 ed by Mr. Egbert Benson, the purport of which was that 
 a convention, the members of which should be elect- 
 ed by the people, should be called in pursuance of the 
 recommendation of Congress. Mr. Schoonmaker, a mem- 
 ber from Ulster, thereupon proposed a preamble to the 
 resolution to the following effect : " Whereas the said 
 convention of the states, instead of revising and reporting 
 alterations and revisions in the Articles of Confederation, 
 have reported a new constitution for the United States, 
 which, if adopted, would materially alter the constitution 
 and government of this state, and greatly affect the rights 
 and privileges of the people thereof." Therefore, &c. 
 
 Mr. Jones in support of this preamble, said, " when the 
 members of the convention were elected, they were au- 
 thorized only to amend the constitution and make such 
 alterations therein as upon being confirmed by Congress^ 
 and the respective state legislatures would be more adequate 
 to the preservation of the Union. * * * Tj^g conven- 
 tion had gone beyond their powers, and instead of amend'- 
 ing the constitution, had framed a new one.'''' 
 
 The resolution, however, for the call of a state con- 
 vention finally passed both branches of the legislature. 
 
 The election of delegates took place in the sprino- of 
 1788. The sole question which appears to have govern- 
 ed the electors in the choice of delegates, was whether 
 the candidates were for or against the adoption of the new 
 constitution. The people of the northern and middle 
 counties were generally against, and of the southern
 
 20 POLITICAL HISTORY [17S8. 
 
 counties in favor of the measure. Very acrimonious pub- 
 lications appeared in pamphlets and in the newspapers on 
 each side of the question. There were also written and 
 published many very able dissertations both for and against 
 the new scheme of government, and it was about this peri- 
 od that the celebrated numbers of the Federalist, written by 
 Hamilton, Jay and Madison were published, extensively 
 circulated and generally read. 
 
 In the city of New-York, John Jay, Alexander Hamil- 
 ton, Chancellor Livingston, Richard Morris, then chief 
 justice, and James Duane, mayor of the city, were chosen. 
 The strength of the federal party in the city of New- 
 York, and the personal popularity of Mr. Jay, may be 
 inferred from the fact that out of 2833 votes, which were 
 the whole number taken, he received 2735. 
 
 In the county of Albany, where the new constitution 
 had been burned, it is said, in presence of some of the 
 officers of the city of Albany,* Abraham Ten Broeck, 
 
 * The occasion which produced this occurrence, was as follows. The federal- 
 ists of Albany on receiving news that the constitution had been ratified by the requi- 
 site number of states, appointed a day to celebrate the event. Having met on 
 that day, they formed into a procession with the intention of marching through 
 the principal streets of the city. They were led by Gen. Schuyler and Stephen 
 Van Rensselaer. The anti-federalists on the same day came together ; and some 
 inflammatory speeches were made, and the constitution was burnt. While thus 
 highly excited, the two parties met in Green-street, and the anti-federalists pro- 
 jected a scheme of preventing the march of the federalists through that street. 
 They procurred a cannon and loaded it with pebbles and gravel, with a view to 
 discharge it in case the federalists should have the temerityto attempt to force a 
 passage; but some of the more reflecting and moderate anti-federalists, in ordfr 
 to prevent such an outrage, without the knowledge of the majority of their poli- 
 tical friends spiked the cannon. The belligerent parties were, however, by this 
 time so much excited, that this prudent precaution did not prevent an affray. 
 
 Many of the federalists with a view of adding to the pomp of their celebration, 
 were clad in military dress, and carried with them swords, guns and bayonets. 
 It is now uncertain which party committed the first act of violence ; it is only 
 certain that they came to blows, and that the anti-federalists threw brick-bats 
 and paving stones at the federalists, and were in their turn assailed with cutlas- 
 ses and bayonets. Several persons were dangerously wounded, but fortunately 
 none were fatally injured. Isaac DenniSon, Esq., of Albany, who, though at that 
 time quite young, was an eye witness of this transaction, has favored me with 
 this account. Peter W. Yates, at that day a lawyer of considerable eminence, 
 wa« one of the most active leaders of the anti-federalists in this fracas, and
 
 1788.] OF NEW-YORK. 21 
 
 Jacob Cuyler, Francis Nicoll, J. Bloodgood, Peter Gan- 
 sevoort, (the late Gen. Gansevoort,) John Lansing, jr., 
 Robert Yates, Henry Outhout, Peter Vrooman, T. A. 
 Ten Eyck, and Derick Swart, were the anti-federal candi- 
 dates, and were elected. 
 
 The general result through the state, was that New- York, 
 Westchester, Kings and Richmond counties chose federal- 
 ists; the counties of Albany, Montgomery, Washington, 
 Columbia, Dutchess, Ulster and Orange anti-federalists, 
 and the delegations from Suffolk and Queens, were divi- 
 ded. The whole number of delegates was 67. This 
 statement of their number and political character, is taken 
 from the Albany Gazette of July, 1788, and which pur- 
 ports to have been copied by the Gazette from a Pough- 
 keepsie Journal which contained the proceedings of the 
 convention. Mr. William Jay, in his life of John Jay, 
 (1 vol. p. 266) states the number of delegates at fifty-se- 
 ven, and of this number he says " no less than forty-six 
 were anti-federalists." In this I think he must have been 
 incorrect. 
 
 Besides the eminent men elected from the cities of 
 New- York and Albany, Gov. Clinton was chosen from 
 the county of Ulster, Gen. James Clinton, the father of 
 De Witt Clinton, from the county of Orange; Melancton 
 Smith from the county of Dutchess, and sundry other em- 
 inent men from the counties situate on the North River. 
 Indeed I think it reasonable to believe that this conven- 
 tion contained, if not all, a very large proportion of the 
 men of influence and talents who were then on the poli- 
 tical stage. 
 
 would probably have lost his life in the conflict, if he had not been saved by the 
 address of Mr. Dennison, and furnished by him with a place of safety. Mr. Abra- 
 ham G. Lansing, another anti-federalist, was also exposed to imminent danger. 
 This, I believe, was the only instance in which the public peace was violated 
 during this controversy.
 
 22 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 It was organized on the 17th June, 1788, by the ap- 
 pointment of George Clinton president^ and it immediate- 
 ly proceeded to form a code of rules for its government. 
 On the 19th, the discusssion commenced. 
 
 Chancellor Livingston opened the debate by a very elo- 
 quent address to the convention. He pointed out the ne- 
 cessity of the union to this state, especially on account 
 of its peculiar local situation. He traced generally the 
 leading and radical defects of the then existing confede- 
 ration, and strongly urged the magnitude and importance 
 of the question then to be considered; and the duty of the 
 members of the convention, that they should divest them- 
 selves of every preconceived prejudice, and deliberate 
 with the utmost coolness, moderation and candor. 
 
 The discussion of the various clauses of the constitu- 
 tion continued three weeks, during which several impor- 
 tant amendments were proposed and adopted. In addi 
 tion to the amendments which had been proposed by the 
 convention of Massachusetts, (for which see 2d Pitkin's 
 Civil and Political History of the United States, 267—8,) 
 the New-York convention proposed (2 Ham. 281) " among 
 others of less importance, that no persons, except natural 
 born citizens, or such as were citizens on or before the 
 4th of July, 1776, or held commissions under the United 
 States during the war, and had since July 4th, 1776, be- 
 come citizens of some one of the states, should be eligible 
 to the places of president, vice-president, or members of 
 congress — that no standing army be kept up in time of 
 peace, without the assent of two thirds of both houses — 
 that congress should not declare war without the same 
 majority — that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus 
 should not be suspended for a longer term than six months 
 — that no capitation tax should ever be laid — that no per- 
 son be eligible as a senator for more than six years in any 
 term of twelve years ; and that the state legislatures might
 
 1788.] OF NEW- YORK. 23 
 
 recall their senators — that no member of Congress be ap- 
 pointed to any office under the authority of the United 
 States — that the power of Congress to pass laws of bank- 
 ruptcy, should only extend to merchants and other tra- 
 ders — that no person be eligible to the office of president 
 a third time — that the president should not command an 
 army in the field without the previous consent of Congress 
 — that Congress should not constitute any tribunals or in- 
 ferior courts, with any other than appellate jurisdiction^ 
 except in causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, 
 and for the trial of piracies and felonies committed on the 
 high seas ; and in all other cases, to which the judicial 
 power of the United States extended, and in which the 
 supreme court had not original jurisdiction, the causes 
 should be heard in the state courts, with right of appeal 
 to the supreme or other courts of the United States — that 
 the court for the trial of impeachments should consist of 
 the senate, the judges of the supreme court of the United 
 States, and the senior judge of the highest court in each 
 state — that persons aggrieved by any judgment of the su- 
 preme court in any case in which that court had original 
 jurisdiction, should be entitled to a review of the same by 
 commmissioners, not exceeding seven, to be appointed by 
 the president and senate — that the judicial power should 
 extend to no controversies respecting land^ unless relating 
 to claims of territory or jurisdiction between states or be- 
 tween individuals, or between states and individuals under 
 grants of different states — that the militia should not be 
 compelled to serve without the limits of the state for a long- 
 er term than stxwjeefcs, without the consent of the legislature 
 thereof — and that Congress should not impose any excise 
 on any article, (ardent spirits excepted,) of the growth, 
 production, or manufacture of the United States, or any 
 of them.
 
 24 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 On the 11th of July, Mr. Jay moved " that the consti- 
 tution be ratified, and that whatever amendments might 
 be deemed expedient, should be recommended.''^ This 
 motion called out the most vigorous opposition on the 
 part of the anti-federalists. They had been elected with 
 the express understanding that unless the proposed consti- 
 tution should be materially altered, they should vote for 
 its rejection ; and no doubt they sincerely believed it 
 would be unsafe to adopt it, as it came from the hands 
 of the national convention. They therefore proposed 
 to amend Mr. Jay's resolution so that it should read, " that 
 the constitution be ratified on the condition that certain 
 specified amendments should be made. A long, able and 
 eloquent discussion followed; but before any decisive vote 
 was taken, news arrived that the convention of New- 
 Hampshire had adopted the constitution as reported by 
 the national convention. It will be recollected that by 
 an article of the constitution, when nine states should ra- 
 tify it, it was then declared adopted, and of course the re- 
 maining states, which refused their assent to its adoption, 
 were to be considered as seceding from the Union. The ra- 
 tification of the constitution by New-Hampshire, furnished 
 evidence that the requisite number of the states had adopt- 
 ed it. After the news of this event was received at 
 Poughkeepsie, the question which the New-York conven- 
 tion had to decide was changed. It was no longer a ques- 
 tion whether they preferred the new constitution to the 
 Articles of Confederation ; but the true question now 
 was, whether they would secede from the Union 1 And 
 here, in passing, I take leave to remark that Gov. Clin- 
 ton and his friends discovered a defect in policy or party 
 tact, in postponing to so late a day, the meeting of the 
 New- York convention (for they had the power to fix the 
 time of meeting,) because, if they had appointed an ear- 
 lier day, the state of New- York, being at that time a cen-
 
 1788.] OF NEW-YORK. 25 
 
 tral state, and even then influential and powerful, if it 
 had early decided against the constitution, its opinion and 
 decision might have had sufficient influence with the other 
 states to have prevented so many as nine of them from 
 adopting it. This the anti-federalists should have done, 
 instead of waiting until nine or ten states had met and 
 decided in its favor, and thus changing the character and 
 nature of the question from one of constitution making, 
 to a question involving in it the tremendous consequence 
 of a secession from the Union. 
 
 The federalists now proposed to amend the amendment 
 offered by the anti-federalists, by substituting the words 
 ^^ in full coiijidence''' for the words" on condition^'' so that 
 Mr. Jay's resolution would read, 
 
 " Resolved^ That the constitution be ratified in full con- 
 fidence that the amendments proposed by this convention 
 will be adopted." 
 
 To this resolution, a resolution of immense moment, a 
 portion of the anti-federalists — I presume, under the con- 
 fidential advisement of Gov. Clinton, (forMelancton Smith, 
 his constant and unwavering friend, the man whom Gen. 
 Hamilton regarded as his most formidable opponent, was 
 one of them) — with great hesitation and reluctance, yielded 
 their assent. 
 
 They were no doubt deeply impressed with the idea 
 that New- York was sacrificing too much political power, 
 and too great a proportion of the natural advantages secu- 
 red to her by her geographical position, and with the 
 painful apprehension that so much power by the proposed 
 constitution was conferred on the general government, as 
 might endanger the personal liberty of the citizen, and 
 the independence of the states. On the other hand, the 
 confusion then prevailing in the commercial regulations 
 of the different states^ the jealousies and collisions which 
 it was reasonable to anticipate would grow up, and
 
 26 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 already began to shew themselves among the states; the 
 prostration of the credit of the national confederacy which 
 at that time had occurred; the want of confidence evinced 
 by the European governments in the ability of Congress 
 to enforce the performance of treaties; the incompetency 
 of the Articles of Confederation to enable Congress to 
 regulate commerce, to resuscitate public credit and compel 
 the performance of treaties; the improbability that the 
 requisite number of states would concur in such amend- 
 ments to the Articles of Confederation as suited the views 
 of the anti-federalists; the danger which would inevitably 
 result to the state of New-York, by a secession of that 
 state from the Union; and the already threatened determi- 
 nation of the old southern district to separate from the 
 other part of the state, and become an integral portion of 
 that section of the Union which should adopt the constitu- 
 tion in case the convention should reject it, finally induced 
 a sufficient number of the anti-federal members of the 
 convention to vote in favor of the adoption of the consti- 
 tution, as with the federalists to constitute a small majo- 
 rity of that body. 
 
 On this solemn occasion, Mr. Gilbert Livingston, who 
 bad been elected as an anti-federalist, and in truth was 
 such, is reported to have expressed his own views, and 
 probably the views and feelings of the political friends 
 who acted with him, in the following manner: 
 
 " Mr. President — I hope for indulgence from this hono- 
 rable house, that I may shortly state the reasons which 
 actuate me, for taking the part I do in the business before 
 us. The great and final question on the constitution is 
 now to be taken. Permit me, sir, again to say, that I 
 have had a severe struggle in my mind between duty and 
 prejudice. I entered this house as fully determined on 
 previous amendments, (I sincerely believe,) as any one 
 member in it. Nothing, sir, but a conviction that I am
 
 1788.] OF NEW-YORK. 27 
 
 serving the most essential interests of my country, could 
 ever induce me to take another ground, and differ from so 
 many of my friends on this floor. I think, sir, I am in 
 this, pursuing the object I had at first in view — the real 
 good of my country. With respect to the constitution 
 itself, I have the same idea I ever had — that is, that there 
 is not safety under it unless amended. Sometime after 
 we first met, sir, a majority of those in this house who 
 opposed it, did not determine to reject it. Only one 
 question then remained — which was the most eligible mode 
 to ensure a general convention of the states, to reconsider 
 it, in order to have the essential amendments engrafted in 
 it 1 I do not mean to go into the reasons which have 
 repeatedly been urged on this head, but only to say, that 
 on the most mature and deliberate reflection on this mo- 
 mentous occasion, the result of my judgment is, that the 
 adoption of the resolution on the table, with the bill of 
 rights and amendments contained in it, and the circular 
 letter to the different states accompanying it, is, consider- 
 ing our present situation with respect to our sister states, 
 the wisest and best measure we can possibly pursue. I 
 shall therefore vote for it, 
 
 "As an American, I am proud of my country — as a 
 whig, I love it, and feel the duty of guarding its rights 
 and freedom to the utmost of my power. And, sir, con- 
 sidering my situation in this house, as a representative of 
 a respectable county, I feel the weight of duty increasing 
 in a redoubled proportion. 
 
 " Sir, I know I was elected a member of this convention 
 from a confidence the people had in my integrity; and, 
 sir, I trust I am at this instant giving them an unques- 
 tionable evidence of it. The people of the county I have 
 the honor to represent, are, in general, thinking and sen- 
 sible, and I have not the least doubt, but they soon will,
 
 28 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 if they at present do not, see the propriety of the measure 
 here pursued. 
 
 " But, sir, I would beg leave to mention another consi- 
 deration, of a nature infinitely superior to anything which 
 possibly can be put in competition with it, as a motive of 
 action — an approving conscience, and an approving God. 
 I must hereafter stand at a bar, where, if the most trifling 
 conduct must be accounted for, (and which I fully be- 
 lieve,) truly this most important transaction of my life 
 will be strictly scrutinized. To that awful Being who 
 will there preside, I would, with due submission and hu- 
 mility, appeal for the rectitude of ray intentions. I hope, 
 sir, the house will pardon me for having been so personal 
 in this address. I owe it, sir, to them as well as myself, 
 especially to a part of our side of the house, who I have 
 no doubt, are actuated by the purest motives, and are 
 equally consciencious with myself, on this occasion^, and 
 with whom and every friend to his country, I will steadily 
 persevere in every possible means to procure this desira- 
 ble object — a revision of the constitution. For a con- 
 sistency in conduct to this honorable house, to my consti- 
 tuents, and to my country, on this occasion, with the 
 utmost cheerfulness do I submit myself." 
 
 The final vote was taken soon after the delivery of this 
 speech. Fifty-seven members, exclusive of the President, 
 (Gov. Clinton,) were present, thirty of whom voted for 
 the ratification of the constitution, and twenty-seven 
 against it. Mr William Jay (2 Jay, 269.) says the con- 
 stitution was adopted by a majority of two votes only. 
 In this he errs — I have now before me the names of those 
 who voted and the manner in which they voted. There 
 was a majority of three in favor of the constitution. 
 
 This momentous decision took place on 26th July, 1788. 
 A correspondent from Poughkeepsie on this occasion
 
 1788.] or NEW- YORK. ' 29 
 
 wrote to his Iriend in New-York in the following rather 
 sarcastic manner: 
 
 " After ratifying, his excellency the President, according 
 to a notice given last Thursday, addressed the convention 
 very politely. The purport of which was, that until a 
 convention was called to consider the amendments now 
 recommended by this convention, the probability was 
 that the body of the people who are opposed to the con- 
 stitution would not be satisfied; he would, however, as 
 far as his power and influence would extend, endeavor to 
 keep up peace and good order among them. To which 
 the members and spectators were very attentive, and more 
 than a common pleasantness appeared in their counte- 
 nances." 
 
 A circular letter drawn by Mr. Jay, addressed to the 
 other states of the Union, earnestly requesting them to 
 co-operate with this state in an effort to obtain, by means 
 of a convention to be called for that purpose, the adoption 
 of the amendments which the New-York convention had 
 annexed to their ratification, was then read and subscrib- 
 ed by all the members present. The convention immedi- 
 ately afterwards adjourned without day.
 
 30 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 [1788. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 FROM THE ADOPTION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, TO THE 
 GENERAL STATE ELECTION IN 1192. 
 
 After the adoption of the federal constitution, and the 
 organization of a national government in pursuance of it, 
 and the unanimous election of Gen. Washington for the 
 first President, all disputes about the principles contained 
 in the constitution seemed for a moment to subside, and 
 all men appeared to unite in supporting the general go- 
 vernment in the exercise of its legitimate functions. 
 Judge Yates, whom we have seen zealously opposing the 
 constitution, both in the national and state conventions, 
 a few days after the ratification at Poughkeepsie, in giv- 
 ing a charge to the grand jury in Albany, stated to them 
 that, although " before the constitution was ratified he had 
 been opposed to it, it was now his and every other man's 
 duty to support it." But notwithstanding this apparent 
 general acquiescence, the parties which had been formed 
 in the state of New-York, on the question of adopting the 
 United States constitution, still continued to exist, although 
 the cause of their political association had ceased. The 
 patronage of the national government, through the influ- 
 ence of Gen. Hamilton, Mr. Jay and Gen. Schuyler with 
 the president, was generally bestowed upon men either 
 personally or politically hostile to Gov. Clinton; and 
 Gen. Hamilton, it will be found, always spoke of him un- 
 favorably. Accordingly, John Jay was appointed chief 
 justice of the United States; James Duane judge of the 
 district of New-York; Richard Harrison, United States 
 attorney, and William S. Smith, marshal; all active and 
 zealous opponents of Gov. Clinton. Gen. Hamilton 
 himself, who was at the head of the opposition to the
 
 1788.] OF NEW- YORK. 31 
 
 Clinton party, and was indeed the life and soul of that 
 opposition, was made secretary of the treasury of the 
 United States. Although these gentlemen were all of 
 them eminently fitted for the offices to which they were 
 respectively appointed, yet while such men as Melancton 
 Smith, Judge Yates, &c. &c. were to be found among 
 the friends of Gov. Clinton, it is not to be presumed that 
 this exclusive selection of his opponents as the recipients 
 of the bounty of the United States government, would 
 have been made in the entire absence of party views. 
 There seems to me good reasons for believing that the 
 design of Gen. Hamilton and his federal friends in this 
 state, who had the ear of Washington, was, so to use the 
 national patronage as to curtail the influence of Gov. 
 Clinton, and finally prostrate both him and his party. 
 But Mr. Clinton was still strong in the affections of the 
 people. A majority of the legislature was with him, and 
 the absolute control he held over the patronage of the 
 state, gave him an influence far greater than the patronage 
 of the general government would have conferred on any 
 individual citizen, if the power of distributing it had been 
 vested in that individual alone. 
 
 There were in the constitution of this state, which w^as 
 adopted in 1777, two anomalies. The one was the coun- 
 cil of revision, composed of the chancellor, judges of 
 the supreme court and governor, which held a nega 
 tive upon all laws unless passed by two-thirds of both 
 houses of the legislature; and the other was, the organi- 
 zation of the appointing power. That power was created 
 in the following manner: The state, for the purpose of 
 electing senators, was divided into four great districts, 
 the southern, middle, eastern and western. Out of each 
 district, once in every year, the assembly were required 
 openly to nominate and appoint one senator, which sena- 
 tors when thus selected, were, together with the governor,
 
 32 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 to form a council of appointment. The governor had a 
 right to give a casting vote, but had no vote for any other 
 purpose. He was constituted the president of this board, 
 and by the 23d article of the constitution, he was required 
 " with the advice and consent of the council, to appoint 
 all officers" whose appointment was not otherwise pro- 
 vided for in that constitution. Under this clause, the 
 governor claimed and exercised, and in my judgment, 
 rightfully, (although that claim, when attempted to be 
 exercised by Gov. Clinton's successor, was resisted,) the 
 exclusive right of nomination. All civil and military 
 officers, from the heads of the departments, chancellor 
 and judges of the supreme court, down to and including 
 all justices of the peace and auctioneers, with the excep- 
 tion of the state treasurer and a few petty city and town 
 officers, were thus in effect, appointed by the governor. 
 
 Perhaps it may be as well to remark in this place as 
 any other, that the form of the government of New- 
 York, was originally less democratic than that of any 
 other state in the Union. This was probably owing to 
 two causes. The one was, that at the commencement of 
 the revolution, there was more of aristocracy here than in 
 any other state. In the city of New-York, there were 
 several wealthy, and what, although the country was 
 young, may be called ancient families. In Westchester 
 were the Morrises and Van Cortlands; along the North 
 river, were the Livingstons, Coldens, &c.; at Albany, 
 were the Van Rensselaers and Schuylersj and as far west 
 as Johnstown, the powerful and popular Sir William 
 Johnson had stationed himself. Several of these families 
 held large tracts of land, and derived a princely support 
 from a numerous tAantry. Such a condition of things 
 must have created different manners, a different current of 
 thought and reasoning, and in fact, an entirely different
 
 1788.] OF NEW- YORK. 33 
 
 state of society from that which existed in most of our 
 sister states, and particularly those of New-England. 
 
 The other cause which I shall mention, is that the con- 
 stitution of New-York, was one of the first that was 
 framed. That pure and patriotic lover of liberty, John 
 Jay, who was its principal author, had neither precedent 
 nor experience to guide him. He knew from the history 
 of ancient republics, that national liberty had been of- 
 ten endangered and sometimes annihilated, by that state 
 of anarchy which resulted from vesting too much power 
 in the multitude ; and was anxious to guard against it. 
 Hence the independent tenure of office of the state ju- 
 diciary; hence the restriction on the right of suffrage, and 
 hence the immense patronage conferred by the constitu- 
 tion of 1777, on the executive.* Mr. Jay did not at that 
 time know — he could not know, what a flood of light the 
 common school system was about to pour upon the mass 
 of mind. He did not anticipate that a moral revolution in 
 the human intellect was to succeed the political revolution 
 in the United States. [* See Note K.] 
 
 But if the patronage placed by the constitution in the 
 hands of Gov. Clinton was great, certain it is that few 
 men ever lived in this or any other state, who knew better 
 how to render that patronage subservient to the political 
 views of himself and his friends, and at the same time 
 avoid any just ground of complaint on the part of the 
 public. He knew men, and knew them wellj and knew 
 how by the means within his power, to mould them to his 
 purposes; while his sagacity and prudence prevented him 
 from resorting to violent acts, or to an apparent proscrip- 
 tive system against those who differed from him in opinion. 
 In the exercise of the appointing power, his policy, though 
 liberal, was steady; and all his appointments seem to have 
 been, and no doubt were, well calculated to sustain him- 
 self and his party against the weight of character and in- 
 
 3
 
 34 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 fluence of his opponents, wielding as they did, the whole 
 patronage of the general government 
 
 On the 13th Oct., 1788, the governor issued a procla- 
 mation requiring the legislature to meet at Albany on the 
 eighth day of December, alleging that events had occur- 
 red since their last meeting, which rendered it necessary 
 that they should convene at an earlier day than that fixed 
 by law for their annual meeting. On the day appointed, 
 the legislature met, and John Lansing, Jr., was unanimous- 
 ly elected speaker of the assembly. 
 
 The governor in his speech, stated to the two houses, 
 that he had convened them at that early day, that he might 
 seasonably lay before them the proceedings of the con- 
 vention at Poughkeepsie, and the ordinance of congress 
 for putting in operation the constitution for the United 
 States, which had been adopted by that convention. He 
 invited the attention of the legislature to the amendments 
 proposed by the New-York convention, and to the decla- 
 ration of rights which accompanied the ratification, and he 
 alleged that the act of ratification was assented to " on 
 the express confidence, that the exercise of different pow- 
 ers, would be suspended until it should undergo a revi- 
 sion by a general convention of the states." He there- 
 fore urged them to use their best endeavors for effecting a 
 measure (a general convention,) so earnestly recommend- 
 ed by the convention, and anxiously desired by their con- 
 stituents." 
 
 I cannot persuade myself that so sagacious a politician 
 as Gov. Clinton, seriously anticipated that another na- 
 tional convention would or could be called. It seems 
 more probable that this recommendation, and the early 
 call of the legislature, were intended to afford evidence of 
 the sincerity of his past opposition to the federal constitu- 
 tion, and as a manoeuvre to keep his party together in the 
 state of New-York. Eleven states had adopted the con-
 
 1788.] OF NEW- YORK. 35 
 
 stitution in the form reported by the national convention, 
 and most of them, I believe, without suggesting any ma- 
 terial alterations. Was it to be expected that these states 
 would consent to give up all they had done, suffer the 
 great questions which had been settled by a majority of 
 the states to be again agitated, and put every thing afloat 
 by the call of a new convention ? 
 
 On the 15th of December, the two houses proceeded to 
 elect five delegates to represent the state in the continen- 
 tal congress. In the election of these delegates, the par- 
 ty lines were distinctly developed. The delegates sup- 
 ported by the anti-federal party in the assembly were, 
 Abraham Yates, Jun., David Gelston, Philip Pell, John 
 Hathorn, and Samuel Jones; those supported by the fe- 
 deralists were Ezra L'Hommedieu, Egbert Benson, Leo- 
 nard Gansevoort, Alexander Hamilton, and John Law- 
 rence. The anti-federal candidates were nominated by 
 the assembly by an average majority of about ten votes, 
 but the senate nominated Mr. L'Hommedieu and the oth- 
 er federal candidates. Upon a joint ballot the anti-fede- 
 ralists were elected. This vote shows that the federalists 
 had gained considerably in the assembly since the session 
 of 1787, and had actually obtained a majority in the senate. 
 It is worthy of remark that, although by the United States 
 constitution, the government under it was to go into ope- 
 ration the succeeding spring, and therefore, provision by 
 a law of the respective states for the appointment of elec- 
 tors of president and vice-president, and for the election 
 of senators and representatives in congress, was required 
 to be made, the governor in his annual address, did not 
 allude to the subject. The senate, however, early sent 
 to the assembly, a bill providing for the appointment of 
 presidential electors, but on the 22d of December, the 
 house, by a vote of 33 to 21, on the motion of Mr. Ad- 
 gate, rejected the bill. The assembly, on the same day.
 
 36 POLITICAL HISTORY [1788. 
 
 in committee of the whole, resolved that a committee be 
 appointed to draft an address of the legislature to con- 
 gress, requesting that body as early as possible, to call a 
 convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to 
 the constitution of the United States. These acts show 
 very conclusively the temper and feelings of the party 
 which held the majority in the assembly. But I cannot 
 persuade myself that such men as Samuel Jones, Gilbert 
 Livingston, Edward Savage and other members of that 
 body, really entertained an expectation that a second con- 
 vention would be called, or that the constitution as adopt- 
 ed, would not go into operation. I regard their move- 
 ments as having been prompted solely by a desire of ex- 
 citing public attention, and of disciplining and more effec- 
 tually combining together their party, of which Gov. Clin- 
 ton was the head. Accordingly we find that provision was 
 shortly afterwards made for the appointment of electors 
 of president and vice-president, and on the 19th January, 
 Mr. Jones (an an ti- federalist) introduced into the assem- 
 bly a bill prescribing the time and manner of choosing 
 senators of the United States. But the two houses could 
 not agree on the mode of choosing senators, the conse- 
 quence of which was, that no senators in congress were 
 elected by that legislature, and New- York was not repre- 
 sented in the United States senate, during the first session 
 of the first congress. Presidential electors were, how- 
 ever, chosen, and a law was passed by the New-York le- 
 gislature for dividing the state into Districts, and provid- 
 ing for the election of six members of the house of re- 
 presentatives of the United States. Egbert Benson, Wil- 
 liam Floyd, John Hathorn, Jeremiah Van Rensselaer, and 
 Peter Sylvester, were, under this law, elected the first 
 members of congress from this state, under the present 
 constitution.
 
 1789.] 4 OF NEW- YORK. 37 
 
 During this session of the New-York legislature, the 
 act " for the amendment of the law and better advance- 
 ment of justice" was passed. This important statute, 
 which not only greatly improved the practice of law, 
 but introduced some new and valuable improvements in 
 our system of jurisprudence, was drawn by Samuel Jones, 
 and probably its passage was in a great measure effected 
 through one or both branches of the legislature, (for it 
 encountered a vigorous opposition in the senate,) by his 
 address, talents and influence. This act, together with 
 many other important laws, particularly those relating to 
 real estate, were drawn by that great man and eminent and 
 learned lawyer. They are, it is true, mainly transcripts 
 from, and digests of, the British statutes, but the ex- 
 treme care and accuracy with which he executed this task^ 
 afford decisive evidence of clearness of intellect and great 
 legal acumen. [See Note L.] 
 
 The term of office of Gov. Clinton would expire in 
 July, 1789, the political year under the old constitution ter- 
 minating at that period of time. As the election for go- 
 vernor was to take place in April following, that circum- 
 stance added to the excitement in the ranks of the two 
 parties ; and their movements, both as respected mea- 
 sures and the state appointments, appear to have been 
 made with some reference to that event. I shall relate 
 one instance of the management of the governor, with 
 regard to an important appointment which was proposed. 
 
 The supreme court at that time consisted of three judg- 
 es only. It was urged, and at this juncture particularly 
 pressed by the federalists, that the increase of population, 
 business and consequent litigation in the state, required 
 the appointment of an additional judge ; and it will not 
 be forgotten that under the old constitution, the council 
 of appointment might, in their discretion, increase the 
 number of judges, it being, however, optional with the le
 
 38 POLITICAL HISTORY [1789. 
 
 gislature whether they would make provision for the sa- 
 lary of such additional judges. The members of the 
 council of appointment chosen, in 1788, were Jacob Swart- 
 wout, David Hopkins, Lewis Morris and Philip Schuyler, 
 a majority of whom were federalists. From a letter pur- 
 porting to have been written by a member of the legisla- 
 ture, published in the Albany Gazette, in January, 1789, it 
 appears that early in the session, the members of the 
 council, urged the governor to call them together for the 
 purpose of appointing a fourth judge. " He gave them 
 for answer," (says the letter writer,) " that when his bu- 
 siness would admit, and necessity required, he would do 
 so. The next day the house elected a new council, 
 consisting of Messrs. Van Ness, Williams, Townsend 
 and Hathorn, all anti-federalists." 
 
 The success of the federalists in procuring the adoption 
 of the United States constitution, and the disposition 
 generally manifested by the people to support the general 
 government, induced their leaders in New-York and Alba- 
 ny, to make a vigorous opposition to the re-election of 
 Gov. Clinton J and the open and zealous opposition he had 
 made to the adoption of the federal constitution, inspired 
 them with sanguine hopes of success. Their great diffi- 
 culty was to find a suitable and strong candidate. In the 
 year 1785, Mr. Jay had been applied to, to stand a candi- 
 date for governor, by Gen. Schuyler and other distinguish- 
 ed federalists, but he peremptorily declined. His reasons 
 for declining are contained In a letter addressed by him 
 to Gen. Schuyler, dated June 10, 1785. They are credit- 
 able to him as a citizen and a patriot. He stated, that " if 
 a change had, in the general opinion, become not only 
 advisable but necessary^ and the good expected from that 
 change depended on Am," the objections he then made, 
 would have yielded to the consideration that a good citi- 
 zen ought cheerfully to take any station which on such
 
 1789.] OF NEW-YOBK. 39 
 
 occasions, his country might think proper to assign to 
 him, without in the least regarding personal consequences; 
 but that he had arrived at the conclusion that such occasion 
 did not then exist. (1 Jay, 198.) In 1789, the official 
 services of Mr. Jay in organizing the new national govern- 
 ment, were much needed; and we have seen that he was 
 soon after placed at the head of the judiciary of the United 
 States. He therefore was not to be thought of. 
 
 On the 11th February, a meeting of Federalists was 
 held in the city of New-York, at which Robert Yates was 
 nominated as the opposing candidate to Gov. Clinton. 
 At this meeting, Alexander Hamilton, Robert Troup, 
 Wm. Duer, Aaron Burr, and sundry other persons, were 
 appointed a committee of correspondence to promote the 
 election of Judge Yates; and on the 17th of February, 
 Gen.||Schuyler and Gen. Abraham Ten Broeck, in con- 
 nection with several other citizens of Albany, together 
 with Philip Livingston and Richard Harrison, of New- 
 York, addressed a letter to him, requesting him to allow 
 his name to be used as a candidate for governor, with a 
 view to " heal the unhappy divisions in the country." To 
 this letter, Judge Yates replied on the 24th of February, 
 and consented to stand as such candidate. 
 
 The object which Gen. Hamilton and the leading fede- 
 ralists had in view, in selecting Mr. Yates as their candi- 
 date, is very obvious. It was true he had been a zealous 
 and efficient opponent to the adoption of the new con- 
 stitution, both in the state and national conventions. He 
 could not therefore, have been their first choice. But 
 the result of the preceding annual election, had indica- 
 ted that a majority of the electors were in favor of 
 sustaining Gov. Clinton, and they hoped by having 
 Judge Yates for their candidate, to detach from Mr. 
 Clinton so many of his political friends as combined 
 with all the federalists, would procure the election of Mr.
 
 40 POLITICAL HISTORY [1769. 
 
 Yates. That such was the object, is rendered the more cer- 
 tain from the fact, that chief justice Morris — who undoubt- 
 edly, would have better suited the majority of the fede- 
 ralists, had been spoken of, and who, there is good rea- 
 son to believe, would have accepted the nomination, had 
 it been tendered to him, by his letter dated and published 
 27th February, three days after Judge Yates accepted the 
 nomination — publicly declined, alleging as a reason, that 
 if he continued to permit himself to be mentioned as a 
 candidate, the tendency would be to divide the votes of 
 his political friends. In fact, the federalists in their ad- 
 dress, according to Mr. Davis (1. Memoirs of Burr, 287.) 
 issued on announcing the nomination of Mr. Yates, avow 
 their preference to chief justice Morris. This sort of par- 
 ty management is generally weak and puerile, and al- 
 ways wrong. The legitimate base upon which parties in 
 a free government are founded, is an honest difference of 
 opinion in respect to measures; — and this is, at any rate, 
 the pretence which all political parties put forth. To 
 support therefore, a candidate for an important office who 
 avows that he in principle is in favor of the measures to 
 which we profess ourselves opposed, and upon which op- 
 position, our party associations are ostensibly founded, is 
 at once yielding the ground of principle, upon which we 
 stand. Probably the declaration made by Judge Yates, 
 in his charge to the grand jury at Albany, to which I have 
 before alluded, may have been used by the federal lead- 
 ers as an apology to their friends for supporting an anti- 
 federalist ; and possibly the declaration then made by Mr. 
 Yates, may have been made in pursuance of a previous 
 understanding between him and some of his former poli- 
 tical enemies. It will be perceived that Col. Burr was 
 appointed a member of the committee of correspondence, 
 by the meeting in New-York, held on the 21st of Febru- 
 ary. He therefore, it seems, was one of the anti-federal-
 
 1789.] OF NEw-yoRK. 41 
 
 ists who joined in the opposition to Gov. Clinton; and 1 
 find in the newspapers of that day that at Albany, Schenecta 
 dy, and several other places, meetings were held, claiming 
 to be exclusively an ti- federal, who nevertheless resolved 
 to support Judge Yates. I remark, however, in passing, 
 that the assertion of Mr. Davis in his life of Burr, that 
 he uniformly acted with the democratic party, is contra- 
 dicted by his course at this election. [See Note V.] 
 
 {April^ 1789.) — The election was warmly contested. 
 It generally terminated in favor of the federalists. 
 
 The counties of New-York, Westchester, Dutchess, 
 Columbia, Albany, and Montgomery, gave federal majori- 
 ties, and generally elected federal members of Assembly, 
 so that that party was now in the majority in that house, 
 and in the senate they fully retained their strength j but 
 Gov. Clinton was notwithstanding, re-elected by a majo- 
 rity of four hundred and twenty-nine votes. . His election 
 was saved by the county of Ulster; — the county in which 
 he commenced his professional and political life. Out of 
 twelve hundred and forty-five votes polled, Ulster gave 
 Mr. Clinton ten hundred and thirty-nine. For the grati- 
 fication of the curious, and to show the astonishing in- 
 crease of votes in the state since the year of 1789, 1 will 
 give the result of the canvass of that year in the several 
 senatorial districts, reminding the reader in the meantime, 
 that only freeholders voted for governor : ^i^^.J't 
 
 Clinton. Yates. 
 
 Southern District, 1885 1875 
 
 Middle " 2059 1175 
 
 Western " 2004 2761 
 
 Eastern " 443 148 
 
 6391 5962 
 
 From the above statement, it will appear, that although 
 the election was sharply contested, the whole number of
 
 42 POLITICAL HISTORY [1789. 
 
 votes given in the (now) empire state, was but twelve 
 thousand three hundred and fifty-three. 
 
 That Governor Clinton succeeded in this election, is a 
 high evidence of his personal popularity. His friends 
 around him were slain, but he himself walked off the 
 field of battle in triumph. 
 
 On the 6th day of June, the governor issued his pro- 
 clamation to convene the legislature at Albany on the 6th 
 day of July following. They met on that day, and Mr. 
 Gulian Verplanck, a member from the city of New-York, 
 was elected speaker of the assembly without opposition. 
 It will be recollected that in consequence of a disagree- 
 ment between the two houses about the manner of elect- 
 ing United States senators, none were chosen by the legis- 
 lature in 1788. The governor therefore, in his speech at 
 the opening of the session, stated that the reason he had 
 called an extra session was, that the legislature at the ear- 
 liest day, might again have an opportunity of electing se- 
 nators to represent the state in the senate of the United 
 States; and he made no other specific recommendations. 
 The answer of the two houses was respectful, and, in fact, 
 a mere echo to the speech of the governor. 
 
 At this time the principal offices in the state were held 
 by the following gentlemen: 
 
 Pierre Van Courtland, lieutenant-governor. 
 
 R. R. Livingston, chancellor. 
 
 Richard Morris, chief justice of the supreme court. 
 
 Robert Yates, and } • . 
 
 T 1, CI tr I, 4. } associates. 
 John bloss Hobert, ) 
 
 Lewis Allain Scott, secretary of state. 
 
 Richard Varick, attorney general. 
 
 Simeon De Witt, surveyor general. 
 
 Mr. Egbert Benson had been attorney general, but upon 
 
 being elected a member of congress, he resigned that of-
 
 1789.] OF NEW-YORK. 43 
 
 fice, and on the Mth May, 1789, Mr. Varick was ap- 
 pointed his successor. 
 
 The council of appointment were composed of Samuel 
 Townsend, Peter Van Ness, John Hathorn, and John Wil- 
 liams, all anti-federalists. On the 29th September, the 
 governor, by the consent of the council, appointed John 
 Lansing, Jun., mayor of Albany, and Samuel Jones, re- 
 corder of New-York; Aaron Burr was, on the same day, 
 appointed attorney general, in place of Mr. Varick, who 
 had resigned. 
 
 In pursuance of the recommendation of the governor, 
 the two houses immediately proceeded to make provision 
 by law, for the choice of senators in congress, and on the 
 21st July, they passed a bill providing that when two se- 
 nators were to be chosen, and each house nominated dif- 
 ferent persons, the senate should choose one of the per- 
 sons nominated by the assembly, and that that house 
 should elect one of the persons nominated by the se- 
 nate, and that in case one senator only was to be cho- 
 sen, and the two houses disagreed in their nominations, 
 either house might offer to the other a resolution of con- 
 currence from time to time, naming therein such person 
 as the house in which the resolution originated, might 
 think proper, until a senator should be chosen by the 
 concurrence of both houses. This singular project did 
 not receive the approbation of the council of revision, 
 and they returned the bill to the legislature, with the fol- 
 lowing objections: 
 
 1. Because, by the constitution of the United States, 
 the senators are required to be chosen by the state legis- 
 lature. The council therefore argued that if in the choice 
 of senators, the two houses do not act in their legislative 
 capacity, no law is necessary, and the senators may be 
 chosen by concurrent resolution. If the two houses act 
 in their legislative capacity, then the senators must be ap-
 
 44 POLITICAL HISTORY [1790. 
 
 pointed by a law passed in the usual form. [In the latter 
 case, no senator could have been elected against the wish- 
 es of the council of revision, unless two-thirds of the 
 members of both houses concurred.] 
 
 2. Because, when two senators are to be chosen by the 
 mode proposed by the bill, one or both may be chosen 
 contrary to the wishes of one branch of the legislature. 
 
 Two-thirds of both houses not being in favor of the 
 bill, it was lost, and the legislature on the 19th of July, 
 by joint resolution^ appointed Gen. Philip Schuyler and 
 Rufus King senators. Mr. King had then recently remo- 
 ved from the state of Massachusetts, which state he had 
 for a considerable time next and immediately before his 
 removal to this state, represented in the continental con- 
 gress, and had distinguished himself for talents and use- 
 fulness in a manner highly creditable in that venerable 
 and venerated body. 
 
 No other important business was transacted during this 
 session. 
 
 At the winter session in 1790, on the 15th of Janu- 
 ary, Philip Livingston, John Cantine, Philip Schuyler and 
 Edward Savage were elected members of the council of 
 appointment. Mr. Livingston from the southern and 
 Gen. Schuyler from the western districts were federalists, 
 and Mr. Cantine from the middle, and Mr. Savage (the 
 father of the late chief justice John Savage) were repub- 
 licans, a name which the party headed by Gov. Clinton, 
 began now to assume. I am inclined to think, although 
 I am not sure of the fact, that all the senators from the 
 middle and eastern districts were republicans, and that for 
 this reason the federal majority in the assembly elected 
 Mr. Cantine and Mr. Savage. 
 
 It must not be forgotten, that Gen Schuyler was at that 
 time a senator in congress, which by the bye, was then in 
 session, he at the same time holding his seat as a senator
 
 1790.] OF NEW- YORK. 45 
 
 of this state, and as a member of the council of appoint- 
 ment. It is somewhat singular that under such circum- 
 stances he should have been elected by the assembly as a 
 member of the council. It is more than probable that as 
 the relations of the state with the general government, 
 were just being commenced, the incompatibility of the 
 the two offices was not thought of at the time the council 
 was chosen, for in less than two weeks afterwards, Jan- 
 uary 27th, the assembly resolved 34 to 22 — 
 
 1. That it was incompatible with the United States 
 constitution for any person holding an office under the 
 United States government, at the same time to have a seat 
 in the legislature of this state. 2. That when a mem- 
 ber of the state legislature was elected or appointed to 
 office under the United States, (he as I presume, accepting 
 such office) his seat in this body should be and was de- 
 clared vacant. 
 
 . These resolutions passed as well the senate as the as- 
 sembly, and thereupon the senate resolved that the seat 
 of James Duane, a senator from the southern district, who 
 had been appointed United States district judge, of Philip 
 Schuyler from the western district, who was a senator in 
 congress, of John Hathorn, a senator from the middle, and 
 John Lawrence, a senator from the southern district, who 
 were members of the United States house of represent- 
 atives, were vacant. 
 
 There was obviously a most conclusive reason why 
 the same persons could not be members of the national 
 and state legislature at the same time, for in such case 
 neither legislature could compel the attendance of their 
 own members without the danger of a collision with the 
 other'. After the passage of these resolutions, Mr. Can- 
 tine, on the 3d April, raised the question in council, whe- 
 ther, as General Schuyler was not then a member of the 
 senate, his seat at that board had not become vacant?
 
 46 POLITICAL HISTORY [1790. 
 
 Mr. Livingston offered a resolution to the effect, that af- 
 ter the assembly have appointed a senator a member of 
 the council, if his seat should afterwards be vacated by 
 the senate, this board are incompetent to disqualify and 
 vacate the seat of such member. The question was of 
 course novel, and certainly curious, and somewhat difficult 
 to decide. On the one hand the constitution required that 
 a member of the council of appointment, should be a se- 
 nator, and on the other, if an expulsion by the senate 
 would disqualify a person from acting as a member of the 
 council of appointment, then the majority of the senate 
 would possess a control in relation to the persons of whom 
 the appointing power should be composed, inconsistent 
 with what was intended by the framers of the constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 I find that a case occurred as early as the year 1781, 
 which brought up this same question, but w4iich I do not 
 perceive was referred to on the present occasion. 
 
 In October, 1780, Ephraim Paine, a senator, was elect- 
 ed a member of the council of appointment. During the 
 succeeding winter session, he w'as expelled from the se 
 nate. After his expulsion, the assembly elected Arthui 
 Parks, a senator from the middle district, a member of 
 the council in lieu of Mr. Paine. On the 29th March, 
 Mr. Parks took his seat at the council board, but it ap- 
 pears from the records of the proceedings of that board, 
 [Book B. p. 221.] that the council unanimously protested 
 against his right to a seat, and entered their protest on the 
 minutes. What is somewhat remarkable is, that although 
 Mr. Parks himself signed the protest, he continued to act 
 as a member of the council till another was chosen the 
 next year by the assembly. It does not appear that the 
 council of" 1790, acted on the proposition either of Mr. 
 Cantine, or Mr. Livingston, but a day or two after these 
 propositions were made, Mr. Savage moved that the opin-
 
 1790.] OF NEW- YORK. 47 
 
 ion of the legislature, on the questions before the council, 
 be requested. That motion was concurred in, and on the 
 5th April, Governor Clinton sent a message to the assem- 
 bly, informing them of the proceedings in the council, and 
 requesting their opinion as to the proper course which the 
 board ought to take in relation to Gen. Schuyler. 
 
 The assembly, after some discussion, resolved, that if 
 by any legal disability, the seat of a senator becomes va- 
 cant, the consequences resulting from such vacancy in re- 
 lation to his subsequent acts, is a question of law, and 
 therefore it was improper for the house to express any 
 opinion on the questions growing out of the message, un- 
 less a bill embracing those questions should be presented 
 to them, in which case it would then become their duty 
 to act as a branch of the law making power. 
 
 Gen. Schuyler persisted in his right to a seat at the ap- 
 pointing board ; for at a subsequent day an objection was 
 again made in the council to his appearance there, but 
 he himself moved that the council proceed in the despatch 
 of its ordinary business. Whether the question arising 
 on this motion in form, was decided by the council, does 
 not appear; but it is certain the general continued to act 
 as a member of the council until a new one was the next 
 year chosen. 
 
 About this time, Richard Morris, the chief justice, re- 
 signed his office, and Robert Yates was appointed to suc- 
 ceed him. By the resignation of chief justice Morris, 
 and the appointment of Judge Yates in his place, a va- 
 cancy of an associate judge was created. Egbert Benson 
 was the federal candidate, and received the votes of gen- 
 eral Schuyler and Mr. Livingston ; John Lansing, Jun., 
 was the republican candidate, and was supported by 
 Messrs. Cantine and Savage, and appointed by the cast- 
 mg vote of the governor. About the same time Abra- 
 ham Yatesj Jun., was appointed mayor of Albany, Peter
 
 48 POLITICAL HISTORY [1790. 
 
 Gansevoort sheriff, and Richard Lush clerk. These ap- 
 pointments were also made by the casting vote of the go- 
 vernor. Gen. Schuyler and Mr. Livingston voting for 
 Gen. Ten Broeck for mayor, and John Tayler for clerk. 
 
 It would seem from the fact that the dissenting coun- 
 cillors caused to be entered on the minutes, the names of 
 the persons whom they wished appointed, instead of a 
 mere entry of no, to the governor's nomination, that the 
 exclusive right of the governor to nominate was ques- 
 tioned at this early day, but I have not perceived that it 
 became a matter of discussion in the newspapers until 
 several years afterwards. 
 
 From the result of the general election in April, 1790, 
 I cannot perceive evidence of any material change in the 
 political opinion of the electors. The election, no doubt, 
 resulted in a nominal federal majority in both houses, but 
 party lines were not then as distinctly marked as they are 
 at present, and several of the members of assembly and 
 senate, who were called federalists, were friendly to Gov. 
 Clinton, and were unwilling to be governed in their offi- 
 cial acts by party considerations. The election of Aaron 
 Burr to the United States senate, in opposition to so dis- 
 tinguished a federalist as Gen. Schuyler, of which I shall 
 speak more particularly hereafter, is a decisive proof of 
 this position. 
 
 Ever since the organization of the United States go- 
 vernment under the new constitution, the funding system 
 proposed by Gen. Hamilton, and the creation of a nation- 
 al bank, had been a subject which excited much attention, 
 and about which the public mind was greatly divided. 
 The most objectionable part of General Hamilton's scheme 
 was the assumption by the nation, of the debts of the re- 
 spective states, and the chartering of a bank. To these 
 measures the republicans of this state were generally op- 
 posed. But at the session of congress in New-York, du-
 
 1791.] OF NEW-yoRK. 49 
 
 ring this summer, a majority was obtained in favor of the 
 assumption. Both Gen. Schuyler and Mr. King voted 
 for the measure in the senatej in the house of represent- 
 atives the vote of New-York was equally divided,* 3 to 3. 
 
 The New-York legislature met in the city of New-York, 
 January 3, 1791, and Mr. John Watts was unanimously 
 elected speaker of the assembly. A census had been ta- 
 ken in the year 1790, from which it appeared that the 
 population of the state then amounted to three hundred 
 and twenty-four thousand one hundred and twenty-seven, 
 and that the increase was more than eighty-five thousand 
 since 1786. This increase was mainly in the northern 
 and western parts of the state. The governor in his 
 speech therefore called the attention of the legislature to 
 that subject, and suggested that a new apportionment of 
 the representation in the legislature was required to be 
 made, and a new division of the senatorial districts. Scat- 
 tering settlements having been made westerly along the 
 valley of the Mohawk river as far as the Oneida lake, 
 and northerly along the shores of lake Champlain, the 
 country bordering on those regions had been explored, 
 and Gov. Clinton at that early period suggested that fa- 
 cilities ought to be afforded by clearing out the obstruc- 
 tions in the Mohawk river, and by cutting canals, to open 
 a communication between lake Champlain and Hudson's 
 river at the north, and Wood creek at the west. The an- 
 swer of the two houses was a mere echo to the gover- 
 nor's speech. 
 
 This session seems to have been a very quiet and use- 
 ful one, with a single exception. It will be seen hereaf- 
 ter, that this legislature invested the commissioners of the 
 land office with too great discretionary powers relative to 
 the disposition and sale of the public lands. The coun- 
 cil of appointment chosen this year, consisted of Isaac 
 
 •See Note M. ^
 
 50 POLITICAL HISTORY [1791. 
 
 Roseveltj Peter Schuyler, Thomas Tillotson and Alexan- 
 der Webster. 
 
 Gen. Schuyler having, on casting lots, drawn the short- 
 est term, in the United States senate, his seat became va- 
 cant on the dth March, 1791; it therefore became neces- 
 sary in the early part of this session to elect a senator. 
 The general was a candidate for re-election, and Mr. 
 Aaron Burr was his competitor. Col. Burr was nominat- 
 ed by both houses — in the assembly his majority was five, 
 in the senate eight. At this time, the senators were cho- 
 sen by concurrent resolution. In the assembly, after the 
 vote between Schuyler and Burr had been taken, a mo- 
 tion was made to strike out the name of Burr, with 
 a view to insert the name of Egbert Benson, but the ef- 
 fort was unsuccessful. It may appear singular that the ma- 
 jority in the senate was so large against Gen. Schuyler, as 
 the majority in that body must have been nominally federal. 
 But Schuyler, although he was unquestionably a man of 
 high honor and integrity, possessing enlarged, liberal and 
 patriotic views as regarded the great interests of the state, 
 was an ardent and violent partizan, and was presumed to 
 act under the influence of Gen. Hamilton, who was his 
 son-in-law, and although he was a man of commanding 
 appearance, yet his manners having been formed in camps 
 and not in courts or among the people, were austere and 
 aristocratic, and rendered him personally unpopular. Burr, 
 on the contrary, was a man of very pleasing and fascinat- 
 ing address, and at that period of his life was considered 
 one of the most persuasive and eloquent speakers of the 
 age. In politics, he belonged to the medium party. He 
 must have been considered as opposed to the ultras of 
 both parties, and could not at any rate have been viewed 
 as identified with the republican party, for we have seen 
 him in 1789, acting as a member of a corresponding com- 
 mittee to promote the election of Judge Yates, against Mr.
 
 1791.] OF NEW- YORK. 61 
 
 Clinton. He was evidently opposed, both to Clinton and 
 Hamilton. Indeed in his correspondence with Hamilton, 
 which terminated in a duel fatal to the latter, several years 
 afterwards, he avows with a frankness unusual to him, 
 he always considered Clinton and Hamilton as his rivals. 
 (2 Burr.) In fact the whole tenor of this gentleman's 
 political life,impresses on my mind a conviction that per- 
 sonal motives rather than his opinions as to measures, had 
 a controlling influence over his political conduct. From 
 all these considerations, I infer that several of the fede- 
 ralists in the senate preferred him to Gen. Schuyler. 
 Hence we find that although the senate at that time con- 
 sisted of twenty-four members, only sixteen votes were giv- 
 en at the election between Burr and Schuyler, and twelve 
 of these votes were given to Burr. Had the assembly 
 nominated Judge Benson, is it not probable that the re- 
 sult in the senate would have been different ? "^ 
 
 After Mr. Burr was elected senator, his office of attor- 
 ney-general was, by the council, declared vacant, and 
 Morgan Lewis was appointed his successor, November 
 8, 1791. Mr, Lewis was connected with the Livingston 
 family — a family which had great influence in the legisla- 
 ture. Might not this arrangement have been anticipated 
 before the senatorial election, and have had some influ- 
 ence on its result ? It is proper, however, to add that 
 Philip Livingston, a federal senator from the southern 
 district, remained at his post, and voted for Gen. Schuy- 
 ler. 
 
 The legislature proceeded to apportion the representa- 
 tion according to the last census, and to make a new divi- 
 sion of the senate districts. It appeared there were, at 
 that time, nineteen thousand six hundred and twenty- 
 six electors for senators in the state. This would give 
 one senator to eight hundred and seventeen electors; and 
 on this basis the ratio of representation was fixed. The
 
 52 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1791. 
 
 new act proyided that the southern district should be com- 
 posed of the counties of Suffolk, Queens, Kings, Rich- 
 mond, New-York, and Westchester, and should be enti- 
 tled to elect eight senators ; that the middle district should 
 contain the coimties of Dutchess, Ulster and Orange, and 
 elect six senators; that the eastern district should be form- 
 ed by the counties of Columbia, Rensselaer, (which had 
 been recently created) Washington and Clinton, with the 
 right to elect five senators, and that the western district 
 should be comprised of the counties of Albany, Montgo- 
 mery, Saratoga and Ontario, (the two latter counties had 
 then been lately created) and should be represented by 
 five senators. This act was passed February 7, 1791. 
 That the subsequent narration may be better understood, 
 I will here insert the names of the members of the senate 
 in 1791. 
 
 From the southern district, Isaac Rosevelt, Philip Liv- 
 ingston, Samuel Micheau, Ezra L'Hommedieu, Samuel 
 Jones, Durand Gelston, Philip Van Cortland, and Joshua 
 Sands. 
 
 Middle J James Clinton, (brother of the governor,) Ja- 
 cobus Swartwout, John Cantine, James Carpenter, Tho- 
 mas Tillotson, and David Pye. 
 
 Wester7i, Philip Schuyler, Stephen Van Rensselaer, 
 Volkert P. Douw, Peter Schuyler, and Leonard Ganse- 
 voort. 
 
 Eastern^ Peter Van Ness, John Williams, Edward Sa- 
 vage, Alexander Webster, and William Powers. 
 
 Subsequent to the passing of the act for a new divi- 
 sion of the state into senatorial districts, the legislature 
 erected out of the county of Montgomery three new 
 counties, to wit, Herkimer, Otsego and Tioga. The act 
 creating these counties was passed on the 17th day of 
 February. The assembly was to consist of seventy-three 
 members, and to be elected from the several counties in
 
 1791.] OF KEW-YORK. 63 
 
 the proportions following : New- York 7, Suffolk 4, 
 Queens 3, Kings 1, Richmond 1, Dutchess 7, Westches- 
 ter 5, Oran-ge5, Columbia 6, Rensselaer 5, Washington 4, 
 Albany 7, Saratoga 4, Montgomery 5, Ontario 1, and 
 three counties, Herkimer, Otsego and Tioga, each one. 
 
 James Kent was this year a member of the assembly 
 from the county of Dutchess. This was the first appear- 
 ance in public life of that able writer and eminent and 
 learned jurist. 
 
 In addition to the ordinary appointments, it became ne- 
 cessary for the governor and council to appoint officers 
 for all the new counties which had recently been created 
 by the legislature. An entire civil list was to be formed, 
 and in doing this it would appear from examining the 
 catalogue of appointments, that the governor made his se- 
 lections with the view to the personal merits and fitness 
 of the candidates, irrespective of the political party to 
 which they happened to belong; a circumstance credita- 
 ble to him, and honorable to the principle of action which 
 seems to have governed the conduct of the political par- 
 ties of that day. Thus, William Cooper was appointed 
 first judge of Otsego county, Richard R. Smith sheriff, 
 and Jacob Morris clerk; all of them open, zealous and 
 decided political opponents of the governor. In other 
 counties, the appointments appear to have been equally li- 
 beral, and to have been made without reference to the 
 course the persons appointed might pursue at the great 
 election which was to be held the next year. I observe 
 that Jonas Piatt, afterwards a justice of the supreme court 
 and a distinguished politician, who had then lately estab- 
 lished himself at Whitesborough, at that time in the bo- 
 som of the wild, uncultivated western forests, was this 
 year appointed clerk of the county of Herkimer, which 
 then included the county of Oneida and the territory which 
 now composes the great northern counties of Oswego, Jef-
 
 54 POLITICAL HISTORY [1791. 
 
 ferson, &c. The result of the general election in April, 
 
 1791, would seem to indicate an increase of strength to 
 the republican party, but so many local and personal con- 
 siderations operated on the minds of the electors, that it 
 is difficult at this time to form a judgment of the exact 
 state of public sentiment, by the result of an election in 
 any particular county. Thus Melancton Smith, one of 
 the most zealous, able and deserving friends of Gov. Clin- 
 ton was chosen one of the members from the city of New- 
 York, although at that very time, the city was strongly 
 federal, and elected Josiah Ogden Hoffman, and other 
 ardent and efficient federalists as his colleagues. 
 
 The legislature met at New-York, on the 5th January, 
 
 1792, and again Mr. Watts was elected speaker of the 
 assembly. 
 
 Among other matters communicated by the governor in 
 his speech, at the opening of the session, to the legisla- 
 ture, he informed them that large and extensive sales had 
 been made of the public lands, or as he termed them, " the 
 waste and unappropriated lands," and he advised that the 
 proceeds should be applied to the discharge of the state 
 debts, and the surplus invested in such manner that the 
 income arising therefrom should be applied annually to 
 defray the ordinary expenses of the state. 
 
 The assembly this year chose David Pye, Pilip Van 
 Cortland, Stephen Van Rensselaer, and William Powers 
 members of the council of appointment. 
 
 The term of Gov. Clinton's office expired this year, 
 and both political parties early displayed a most intense 
 anxiety in relation to the result of the next general elec- 
 tion. The federalists were for some time in doubt about 
 the selection of their candidate, and had great difficulty in 
 fixing upon one that was agreeable to them, who would 
 consent to run. Judge Yates positively declined another 
 contest. Mr. Van Rensselaer, the patroon, was applied
 
 1791.] OF NEW- YORK. 55 
 
 to, but refused to be a candidate. Chancellor Livingston, 
 it seemsj was also spoken of, and Chief Justice Jay Avas 
 much desiredj but it was very doubtful considering the 
 exalted station he held under the general government, and 
 his known aversion to personal collision and party war- 
 fare whether, under any circumstances, he would permit 
 his name to be used. Mr. Burr was spoken of by those 
 who called themselves the moderate men of both parties. 
 Indeed there would seem to have been a disposition among 
 a portion of the republican party to make him the 
 regular republican candidate. In an anonymous letter, 
 dated at New- York, February 13, and published in the 
 Albany Gazette, probably written by some federal mem- 
 ber of the legislature, it is stated that " Judge Yates re- 
 fuses to be a candidate for governor^ that Col. Burr has 
 come forward, and now openly declares himself a candi- 
 date. Judge Yates' friends, southern and northern, are 
 against Col. Burr, and we are uncertain who our candi- 
 dates will be. Stephen Van Rensselaer and John Jay 
 are spoken of. S. Van Rensselaer has been waited on, but 
 has declined. He will be again called on. The chan- 
 cellor and Jay have also been spoken to, but they have 
 declined." But it seems that Mr. Jay, probably by the 
 persuasion of General Hamilton, Schuyler and other friends 
 was induced to change his determination; for on the eve- 
 ning of the 13th of February, a meeting was held in New- 
 York, at which Peter Van Ness, a senator from the east- 
 ern district, presided, and at which John Jay was nominat- 
 ed for governor, and Stephen Van Rensselaer for lieuten- 
 ant governor. Judge Yates attended this meeting, and 
 repeated his determination not to be a candidate, but ex- 
 pressed a firm resolution to support the federal nominee, 
 and stated that he had not declined with a view, as some 
 had asserted, to favor Col. Burr's success.
 
 56 POLITICAL HISTORY [1791. 
 
 At a more general meeting, held a few days afterwards 
 of which Gen. Ten Broeck was chairman, and Gen. North 
 secretary, the nomination of Mr. Jay and Mr. Van 
 Rensselaer was reiterated and confirmed, and the most 
 efficient means were put in requisition to insure their elec- 
 tion. This was a strong ticket, probably the strongest 
 which could have been formed by the federal party in 
 the state. 
 
 On the 15th February, a republican meeting was held 
 in New- York, composed as was alledged, of gentlemen 
 from various parts of the state, of which Jonathan Law- 
 rence was chairman, at which George Clinton and Pierre 
 Van Cortland were nominated for a re-election. Even 
 after this public annunciation of the will of the republi- 
 can party, it would seem that the support of Col. Burr 
 was still urged by his friends, for I find in the Albany 
 Gazette of the 27th of February, an able and well writ- 
 ten communication over the signature of a Plain Farmer ^ 
 in which Col. Burr is recommended for governor to the 
 moderate men of both parties, on account of his superior 
 talents, and because " he did not belong to either party P 
 If however, an attempt was really made by Col. Burr and 
 his friends to get up a third party, of which he was to be 
 the head, it was entirely unsuccessful, for public meetings 
 were forthwith held in almost every county in the state 
 both of the federal and republican parties, at which 
 the nominations of Mr. Clinton and Mr. Jay were 
 unanimously and with apparent cordiality concurred m 
 by the parties to which they respectively belonged. Af- 
 ter all these demonstrations of the feelings and wishes of 
 the two parties, on the 15th of March, Col. Burr caused 
 it to be announced in the newspapers that he was not a 
 candidate. 
 
 While these movements were being made among the 
 people, a violent attack was made on governor Clinton in 
 
 'fr.'
 
 1791.] OF NEW-YORK. 67 
 
 the legislature on account of the agency lie had had in 
 the sale of the public lands, being the same sale to which 
 he alluded in his speech at the opening of the session. 
 
 When this state became independent of Great Britain, 
 it held more than seven millions of acres of wild unculti- 
 vated and unappropriated lands. Sundry laws had been 
 passed during and subsequent to the revolutionary war, 
 providing for the sale and settlement of those lands. 
 But before the year 1790, few sales, considering the quan- 
 tity of land in market, had been effected. The state be- 
 ing in want of funds, and all well wishers of its growth 
 and prosperity being desirous of encouraging adventurers 
 to make lodgments in the vast wilds of the west, the 
 legislature at their session in 1791, in order to quicken the 
 sales and hasten settlements, passed a law authorizing the 
 commissioners of the land office to dispose of any of the 
 waste and unappropriated lands in this state, in such par- 
 cels and on such terms and in such manner as they should 
 judge most condusive to the interest of the public. The 
 reader will, at one glance, perceive the immensity of the 
 power conferred on the commissioners. In the language 
 of a report not long since made by commissioners to the 
 legislature on another subject, it was " too great a power 
 to be entrusted to mortal hands." And yet it seems to 
 have been done by the consent of both political parties. 
 The commissioners of the land office consisted of the 
 governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer, 
 and auditor. Mr. J. A. Scott was secretary of state, 
 Aaron Burr attorney general, Girard Bancker treasurer, 
 and Peter T. Curtenius was auditor. Under the authori- 
 ty of the act to which I have referred, these gentlemen 
 sold, during the year 1791, five millions five hundred and 
 forty-two thousand one hundred and seventy-three acres 
 of land, for the sura of one million thirty thousand, four 
 hundred and thirty-three dollars. Among the sales was
 
 58 POLITICAL HISTORY [1791. 
 
 one to Alexander McComb, of the enormous quantity of 
 three million six hundred and thirty-five thousand two 
 hundred acres. The price to him was eight pence per 
 acre, payable in five annual instalments, without inte- 
 rest, subject to a discount of six per cent, on payment in 
 advance, which reduced still lower the actual price. (1 
 Davis* Memoirs of Btcrr, 326.) Large parcels of land 
 were also sold to other individuals, among whom were 
 the Messrs. Rosevelts, James Caldwell, McGregor, &c., 
 but these sales were made at a higher rate. Some a little 
 exceeded three shillings per acre, some for two shillings 
 and six pence, and some for one shilling. 
 
 When the report was under consideration in the assem- 
 bly. Col. Talbot, a member from Montgomery county, 
 offered a series of resolutions severely condemnatory of 
 the conduct of the commissioners. 
 
 It was alledged that the lands were sold in too large 
 tracts; that they should have been sold in parcels not ex- 
 ceeding twenty-five thousand acres each; that if they had 
 been sold in that way, the avails of the sales would 
 have been much greater; and that it was detrimental to 
 the advance of the state in aggregate wealth, and incon- 
 sistent with our republican institutions to encourage a 
 monopoly of land in the hands of a few individuals. 
 Again, it was urged as a suspicious circumstance, that 
 lands were sold to McComb for eight pence per acre, 
 whereas five hundred thousand acres were sold by the 
 same commissioners and about the same time, to John and 
 Nicholas Rosevelt for three shillings and a penny per acre. 
 In the heat of debate upon Mr. Talbot's resolutions, it 
 was broadly insinuated that Gov. Clinton and his imme- 
 diate friends were personally, but secretly interested in 
 these sales.* The answer was a total denial of all cor- 
 
 • As the election for governor was to take place in April following, it is very 
 probable that this charge was made partly with a view to prevent the re-electioA
 
 1791.] OF NEW-YORK. 59 
 
 rupt motives on the part of the commissioners, and in 
 fact, it does not appear that any such were attempted to 
 be provedj and an allegation that the intention of the 
 legislature was, that the lands should be sold at any rate. 
 It was further alledged, and boldly asserted, that no high- 
 er offers could be obtained, than those which were finally 
 accepted by the commissioners. It might have been, and 
 probably was urged, that the purchasers of these lands 
 would become active and powerful agents to procure emi- 
 grants from other states and from abroad, to settle those 
 wild and uncultivated forests, and thus a rapid increase 
 would be made to the population, wealth, and resources 
 of the state; and events have proved that such has been 
 the consequence; but still I cannot help thinking, that 
 the commissioners acted not only injudiciously, but pal- 
 pably wrong, in selling such large tracts at one time to 
 individuals. The wants of the state were surely not so 
 pressing but that if the commissioners had confined their 
 sales to from one hundred to ten thousand acres to each 
 purchaser, enough funds might have been raised to have 
 met all the public exigencies. Land agents on the part of 
 the state, might have been created, whose sole business 
 should have been to make sales of lands to actual settlers; 
 and whose gains should have been in proportion to the 
 quantity of land they should have sold. In some such 
 way it appears to me the wants of the state might have 
 been supplied, the settlement and cultivation of the wild 
 lands rapidly made, and a fund preserved for the benefit 
 of the state, of incalculable amount. Mr. Davis, in his 
 Memoirs of the Life of Col. Burr, says, (1 vol. p. 329) 
 
 of Mr. Clinton ; and there can be little doubt that it did have a considerable effect 
 unfavorable to him. 
 
 The lands purchased by McComb, were those in which it was alledped the 
 governor was interested. But in May, 1792, after the election, Mr. McConib made 
 oath before Richard Varick, then mayor of New-York, (a federalist,) that Gov. 
 Clinton was neither directly nor indirectly interested in the lands purchased by 
 him. I have seen and read McComb's affidavit.
 
 60 POLITICAL HISTORY [1791. 
 
 "these resolutions (Col. Talbot's,) exempted Col. Burr 
 from any participation in the malconduct 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 alledged, to the interest of the state, were made." 
 The resolutions do not exempt Col. Burr, but it is true 
 that they refer only to " such of the commissioners as had 
 an agency in the sales." But if Col. Burr did not choose 
 to appear personally at the board, can it be possible that 
 these enormous sales and speculations were negotiating 
 probably for months and months in the city where Col. Burr 
 resided, and principally effected with business men, with 
 some of whom he no doubt was in the habit of daily inter- 
 course, by a board of which he constituted one member of 
 the five of which it was composed, without knowing any 
 thing of the matter 1 Is this consistent with the idea we 
 form of the vigilant, scrutinizing Col. Burr, who his friends 
 in those days alledged, if he did not know every thing in 
 *' Heaven and earth," at least knew every thing material 
 that was passing in the city of New-York 7 But Mr. Da- 
 vis says, " he was absent on official business." This Mr. 
 D. does not affirm from his own knowledge; and as he 
 does not, it is fair to inquire where Col. Burr was, and 
 what was that official business which kept him for months 
 out of the city of New-York 1 In page 288, Mr. Davis 
 assigns as a reason why Mr. Burr accepted the oflEice of 
 Attorney General, " that the seat of government was in 
 New-York, and Mr. Burr's ofl&cial business seldom requi- 
 red his absence from home." On the whole, I think it 
 preposterous to suppose that Col. Burr was not consulted, 
 or that he did not in fact consent to these sales. If he 
 did not appear personally at the board at the time when 
 any question was formally decided, it was in accordance
 
 1791.1 OF NEW- YORK. 61 
 
 "with that extreme caution and wariness which always 
 governed his public conduct. 
 
 After a very long and acrimonious discussion of Col. 
 Talbot's resolutions, they were finally rejected, and on the 
 10th of April, Mr. Melancton Smith, as pure a man as 
 ever lived, introduced a resolution approving of the con- 
 duct of the commissioners^ which was adopted in the as- 
 sembly by a vote of thirty-five to twenty.
 
 62 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 FKOM THE GENERAL STATE ELECTION IN 1792, TO MAY 1, 1796. 
 
 The election of governor in April, 1792, was conduct- 
 ed with much zeal, and called out, in every county in the 
 state, the most rancorous criminations and recriminations. 
 The state canvassers who met on the second Tuesday in 
 June, 1792, declared George Clinton duly elected go- 
 vernor by a majority of one hundred and eight votes. 
 But the close of the election in this instance, proved to 
 be the beginning of evils, growing out of party collisions. 
 I By the laws of this state, from the organization of its 
 government down to and subsequent to the period of 
 which I am now writing, the votes for governor, lieuten- 
 ant governor, and senators, were canvassed by a joint 
 committee of the two houses of the legislature. This 
 committee consisted of twelve persons, six of w^hom were 
 chosen by each house. The ballots taken in each town, 
 were by law required to be delivered to the sheriffs of the 
 respective counties, w^hose duty it was to put them into a 
 box and transmit them to the secretary of state, who was 
 required to deliver the boxes containing the ballots to the 
 canvassing committee, who were to count them, and de- 
 clare what candidates were elected. The decision of the 
 canvassers was declared by the statute to be final and con- 
 clusive. By the constitution, article 12, in connexion 
 with article 9, the senate are constituted judges of their 
 own members. The colonial assemblies had always ex- 
 ercised the right of judging whether their members were 
 duly elected, a right which seems to me inherent in all 
 representative bodies. It, therefore, seems to follow, that 
 when the legislature enacted a law that the decision of the
 
 1792.] OF NEW-YORK. 63 
 
 canvassers was conclusive as respected the election of sena 
 tors, they exceeded their powersj but as the constitution 
 had not designated the persons who were to decide on the 
 evidence of the election of a governor, the legislature had 
 of course the right, and it was their duty to provide by 
 law for their appointment. These remarks will be found 
 to have a bearing on the controversy, the history of which 
 I am about to relate. 
 
 The acting canvassers this year, were David Gelston, 
 Thomas Tillotson, Melancton Smith, Daniel Graham, P. 
 Van Cortland Jr., David McCarty, Jonathan N. Havens, 
 Samuel Jones, Isaac Rosevelt, Leonard Ganesvoort, and 
 Joshua Sands. These gentlemen differed in opinion as to 
 the right of canvassing and allowing the votes given in 
 the counties of Otsego, Clinton, and Tioga, the seven first 
 named being for rejecting, and Messrs. Jones, Rosevelt, 
 Ganesvoort, and Sands, being for allowing them. The 
 question was vitally important, because it was generally 
 admitted that the county of Otsego had given about four 
 hundred majority for Mr. Jay, and that Clinton and 
 Tioga would not materially diminish that majority. If, 
 therefore, the votes from these counties were counted and 
 allowed, Mr. Jay was elected; if rejected, Mr. Clinton 
 was the successful candidate. 
 
 After considerable discussion, the canvassers agreed to 
 request the opinion of Rufus King and Aaron Burr, the 
 two state senators, and both of them eminent lawyers. 
 The facts in the case are so clearly and distinctly stated 
 by the committee in their communication to Messrs. King 
 and Burr, that I cannot better present them to the reader 
 than by transcribing that statement. 
 
 The canvassers commence by stating the facts in relation 
 to the Otsego votes. They say that " by the twenty-sixth 
 section of the constitution of the state of New- York, it is 
 ordained that sheriffs and coroners be annually appointed,
 
 64 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 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 bal- 
 lots and poll-lists, sealed up, to the sherijQf of the county; 
 and, by the tenth section of the said act, it is further enact- 
 ed, that each and every sheriff of the respective counties 
 in this state, shall, upon recei%dng the said enclosures, 
 directed to be delivered to him as aforesaid, without open- 
 ing 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 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 secre- 
 tary 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 canvass and esti- 
 mate 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 canvassers requires them faith- 
 fully, honestly, and impartially to canvass 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, inform- 
 ing them that, as the year for which he was appointed 
 had nearly elapsed, he should decline a re-appointment. 
 
 " On the 30th of March, 1792, the council of appoint- 
 ment appointed Benjamin Gilbert to the office of sheriff of
 
 1792.] OF NEW-YOKK 65 
 
 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 Ben- 
 jamin Gilbert, herewith delivered, it appears that he quali- 
 fied 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 assisted in the ap- 
 pointment 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 wuth the box, on which is writ- 
 ten, 'The votes of the town of Cherry Valley, in the 
 county of Otsego. Richard R. Smith, sheriff.' Several 
 affidavits, herewith delivered, state certain facts respect- 
 ing 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 1 
 
 " 2. If he was not sheriff, can the votes sent by him be 
 legally canvassed? 
 
 5
 
 66 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 " 3. Can the joint committee canvass 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 canvass 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 de- 
 livered it into the secretary's office. 
 
 " Question. Ought the votes of Tioga to be canvass- 
 ed 1 
 
 " Clintox. — It appears that the sheriff of Clinton de- 
 livered the box containing the ballots to Theodorus Piatt, 
 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 canvass- 
 ed 1" 
 
 Upon this statement of the case, Mr. King's opinion 
 was that inasmuch as the term of four years had not ex- 
 pired from the time of Smith's appointment, and his suc- 
 cessor had not taken possession of the office, he was 
 legally sheriff of the county of Otsego at the time the votes 
 were forwarded. 
 
 2. If he was not legally sheriff, he was sheriff in fact, 
 and though such acts of an officer de facto as are volun- 
 tarily and exclusively beneficial to himself are void, yet 
 such acts as tend to the public utility are valid. 
 
 3. The votes from Cherry Valley, which were put into 
 the box ought to be canvassed but not those attached to 
 the outside of it. 
 
 4. The votes from Clinton ought to be canvassed, be- 
 cause a sheriff may deputize by parol. 
 
 s
 
 1792.] OF NEW-YORK. 67 
 
 5. The votes of Tioga ought to be canvassed, although 
 it is doubtful whether a deputy of a sheriff can make a 
 deputy, yet the election law ought to be construed libe- 
 rally, and in furtherance of the right of suffrage. 
 
 Col. Burr's opinion was, 
 
 1. That the Otsego votes ought to be rejected. Be- 
 cause, the right of a sheriff to hold over, was in England, 
 created by statute, which was evidence that at com- 
 mon law the right did not exist. In New-York, there is 
 no statute authorizing the sheriff to exercise the functions 
 of his office after his term expires ; therefore the com- 
 mon law is the law of the state, and by it the sheriff, 
 when his term expires, ceases officially to exist. 
 
 2. The facts show that Smith was not sheriff de facto. 
 With respect to the ballots of Clinton county, Mr. 
 
 Burr said that verbal and written deputations by a sheriff 
 to perform a single ministerial act, are of equal validity. 
 I therefore infer that he was of opinion that the votes 
 from this county ought to be allowed. 
 
 As to the Tioga votes, Mr. B. declared it as his opi 
 nion, that a deputy sheriff could not authorize a special 
 deputy to perforn so important a trust as that of taking 
 charge of the ballots of a county, and he therefore 
 thought that the votes from Tioga could not be adjudged 
 to have been delivered by the sheriff to the secretary. 
 The opinions of Mr. King and Mr. Burr, are given in 
 extenso by Mr. Davis, in the first volume of his Memoirs 
 of Col. Burr, page 336, to which the reader is referred. 
 
 A majority of the canvassers, namely, Messrs. Gellston 
 Tillotson, Smith, Graham, Van Cortland, M'Carty and Ha- 
 vens finally decided on rejecting the votes from the three 
 counties. Against this decision Messrs. Jones, Rosevelt 
 and Gansevoort protested jointly, and Mr. Sands separate- 
 ly, and caused their protest to be entered on the minutes 
 of the proceedings of the committee.
 
 68 POLITICAL HISTOKY [1792. 
 
 To my mind, the reasons assigned by Mr. King and by 
 the minority of the committee in their protest, are strong 
 and convincing. I think Richard R. Smith, if not de 
 jure was de facto sheriff, and that his acts as such in this 
 case were valid. It would be preposterous to assume that 
 the law of this state, as it then existed, could have been 
 fairly construed, that whenever from insanity, sudden 
 death, or any other cause, the new sheriff, after he receiv- 
 ed his commission, did not qualify himself to discharge 
 the duties of his office, by the very day the term of office 
 of the old sheriff expired, that in such case the county 
 was without a sheriff. That no such construction had 
 been recognized, is proved by the fact that the settled usage 
 and practice had long been that the old sheriff held until 
 the new one actually took possession of the office. I 
 also think that the verbal deputation by the sheriff of 
 Clinton to Mr. Piatt was competent, and that the deputy 
 sheriff of Tioga had a right to depute a person to carry 
 the votes of that county to the secretary of state, and in 
 this position I am sustained by the opinion of the New- 
 York supreme court.* But I have another reason for be- 
 lieving that the canvassers ought not to have rejected 
 these votes. The right of suffrage is a sacred and inva- 
 luable right which belongs to the elector, and of which 
 he cannot be divested. When he has deposited his vote 
 in the ballot box, he has exercised that right. And he 
 ought not and cannot be deprived of the effect of it, either 
 by the non-feasance or misfeasance of the agent to whom 
 the law commits the custody and care of his ballot. If 
 it be in existence at the time of the canvass, whatever 
 may have been the negligence or misconduct of the agent 
 
 * In the case of Hunt vs. Burrill, 5 John. R. 137, the court expressly decide that 
 a deputy sheriff may depute another to do a particular act, and the same doctrine 
 ■was held in England so early as the time of Lord Holt. 1 Salkeld 95, Parker 
 *» Kelt.
 
 1792.] OF NEW- YORK. C9 
 
 who was charged with the keeping of it, the persons who 
 adjudicate upon the election of the candidate are bound 
 to allow it. If it be lost or destroyed, and that vote 
 would have changed the result, in such case a new elec- 
 tion ought to be directed. The United States house of 
 representatives have long since established the rule that 
 the intention of the voter, when it can be ascertained, 
 shall be fully carried into effect. It was in accordance 
 with this principle, that they decided the case of Isaac 
 Williams, Jr., and John M. Bowers in the year 1813. 
 
 But what could Mr. Clinton do ? He was declared 
 governor by the only tribunal which had a right to speak 
 on the subject. If he declined acting, the state for the 
 time being would be without an executive department, 
 elected by the freeholders ; for Mr. Van Cortland was in 
 the same position with him as respected the result of the 
 election. It seems to me he was right in acting upon the 
 assumption, that the decision of the canvassers was correct. 
 Still I cannot think he ought to be exonerated from all 
 blame. He must have been apprised of the state of the 
 case, before the canvassers decided — as time was taken by 
 them to consult counsel and obtain their written opinions. 
 Ought not Gov. Clinton to have volunteered his advice to 
 them ■? And if he had advised them to allow the disputed 
 votes, is it probable that a majority of the committee being 
 his personal and political friends, would have rejected 
 them 1 The excitement produced by a heated and sharply 
 contested election, in the result of which he was personal- 
 ly concerned, must have biassed and clouded the otherwise 
 clear and pure mind of the governor. But how easy is it 
 for us to persuade ourselves that what we ardently wish 
 should be done, it is right that it should be done 1 How 
 hard is it for the most pure minded man to adjudicate 
 upon a question against his own wishes and interest ? 
 Besides this, the governor would have had to contend, and
 
 70 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 did have to contend, not only against his own interest and 
 wishes, but against the persuasions and wishes of all 
 those political friends who had steadily and zealously sup- 
 ported him, and whose political prospects greatly depend- 
 ed on the decision of the canvassers. Considering there- 
 fore, the strength of party excitement, and the weakness 
 of human nature, it is not surprising that Mr. Clinton 
 should have desired that the canvassing committee should 
 decide the election in his favor. 
 
 The senators elected this year from the southern dis- 
 trict, were Henry Cruger, Joshua Sands, and Selah Strong, 
 all federalists; from the middle, Joseph Hasbrouck, re- 
 publican; from the western, John Frey, in lieu of Peter 
 Schuyler deceased, federal; and from the eastern, Robert 
 Woodworth and John Livingston, republican. 
 
 Upon the annunciation of the decision of the canvassers, 
 great excitement was manifested on the part of the fede- 
 ralists in every county in the state. Public meetings 
 were held, and the governor was denounced as an usurper, 
 and the canvassing committee as corrupt. Some of the 
 public meetings protested against the legality of the acts 
 of Mr. Clinton as governor; and the state seemed mena- 
 ced with the ascendancy of anarchy and utter confusion. 
 In this state of the public mind, it is consoling as well as 
 gratifying to refer to the conduct of John Jay. When 
 the canvassers decided, he was holding a circuit court at 
 Bennington in Vermont. On his return, upon entering 
 the borders of this state, his political friends ran together 
 in crowds to meet him. At Lansingburgh, Albany and 
 Hudson, he was publicly addressed; and when he arrived 
 within eight miles of New-York, he was met by a body 
 of citizens who escorted him to his house in the city. 
 Some of their addresses to him on this occasion, were 
 highly inflammatory and very severe upon the conduct, 
 character and motives of the friends of Gov. Clinton. At
 
 1792,] OF NEW-YORK. 71 
 
 New- York, immediately after his arrival, a public meet- 
 ing of " the friends of liberty" was held, " and a commit- 
 tee was appointed to congratulate him on his return, and 
 to express to him the sentiments of the inhabitants on the 
 late attempt which had been made ' in contempt of the 
 sacred voice of the people, in defiance of the constitution^ 
 and in violation of the uniform practice and settled prin- 
 ciples of lawj to deprive him of the high office to which 
 he had been elected." (1 Jay, 291.) Amidst these ex- 
 citing scenes, Mr. Jay's deportment was calm and digni- 
 fied; no bitter or heated expressions escaped him, and his 
 replies to public addresses were modest, mild and concili- 
 atory, tending to quiet the heated feelings of his friends, 
 and to produce not only a respect and obedience to the 
 laws, but harmony and good feeling in society. I cannot 
 on this occasion, forbear transcribing a sentence from his 
 answer to the address of his New-York friends, not only 
 because it does great honor to this pure and upright man, 
 but because it is a sentiment which ought to be cherished 
 by every friend to social happiness and the stability of our 
 civil institutions. " Every consideration," says Chief 
 Justice Jay, " of propriety, forbids that difference in opi- 
 nion respecting candidates, should suspend or interrupt that 
 natural good humor which harmonizes society and softens 
 the asperities incident to human life and human affairs.". 
 Governor Clinton took the oath of office on the first day 
 of July; and on the 19th of that month, partook of a pub- 
 lic dinner tendered to him by his political friends in New- 
 York. The venerable Samuel Osgood, then late post- 
 master general, as chairman of a committee of the citizens, 
 delivered an address to the governor alluding to, and ani- 
 madverting with some severity on, the conduct of his op- 
 ponents; to which he replied in a conciliatory but dignified 
 manner. Some of the regular toasts drank at this dinner, 
 may afford an index to the political views of the republi-
 
 72 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 can party in New- York, at that time. The company 
 toasted J 
 
 " The Constitution of the United States." 
 
 " General Washington." 
 
 " Thomas Jefferson." 
 
 " The French Republic." 
 
 No national officer or member of the United States 
 government was named at this meeting, but Gen. Wash- 
 ington and Mr. Jefferson. 
 
 It may be proper here to remark, that when the French 
 revolution first commenced, and indeed after it had pro- 
 gressed for a considerable time, there was in America but 
 one feeling and one view in relation to it. All rejoiced 
 that any people, and especially a people to whose aid the 
 United States, in their struggle for independence, were 
 deeply indebted, had thrown off the shackles of tyranny 
 and resolved to be freej but at the period of which I am 
 now writing, many of the American politicians began to 
 disapprove of the outrages committed by the Jacobins of 
 France, and to be seriously apprehensive that, considering 
 the good feeling so universally entertained in America 
 towards the French nation, that the intrigues of the latter, 
 and the honest sympathy of the former, might involve the 
 American republic in an European war. These appre- 
 hensions carried many intelligent men so far that they 
 began to denounce the original revolution in France. Is 
 there not reason to suspect that some of the latter class of 
 politicians were in part influenced by their mercantile and 
 other friends in Great Britain 7 The republican party, on 
 the other hand, advocated with great warmth, the French 
 revolution, and hailed its authors as friends and brothers. 
 It is the tendency of political parties to magnify their 
 differences on all theoretical questions, and apparently to 
 diverge wider and wider from each other. The federalists 
 accused the republicans of an undue attachment to France;
 
 1792.1 OF NEW-YORK. 73 
 
 and affected to hold them responsible for all the wild the- 
 ories both in politics and religion, which at times appeared 
 and disappeared in France. While the republicans charged 
 the federalists with being hostile to the French revolution, 
 unreasonably favorable to the British nation, and in fact, 
 unfriendly not only to liberty and freedom in France, but 
 in this country. At the time the dinner was given to the 
 governor, these feelings were just beginning to take root 
 in the minds of the leaders of the two parties. I regret 
 to be compelled to add, that they sprung up and continued 
 to grow until they eventually furnished a distinguishing 
 characteristic of the respective parties. 
 
 It is much to be lamented that political parties should 
 ever be based on a difference of jopinion about the merits 
 or demerits of a foreign nation. Political controversies 
 of this description tend to degrade us in the eyes of 
 foreigners, to create the most bitter animosities at home, 
 and to extinguish that patriotic ardor so essential to the 
 independence, and I may add, the existence of a free 
 people. 
 
 I have before stated the reasons why the appointment 
 of a fourth judge of the supreme court was deemed ne- 
 cessary, and to those reasons may now be added the late 
 creation by the legislature of several new counties. The 
 council in view of all the circumstances, determined to 
 appoint a fourth judge, and by the casting vote of the 
 governor, that office was in the first instance offered to 
 Aaron Burr. He hesitated about accepting the appoint- 
 ment, but inasmuch as the acceptance of that office would 
 render it necessary for him to resign his seat in the senate 
 of the United States, he finally concluded to decline 
 receiving the office of judge. After Col. Burr had de- 
 clined, Morgan Lewis, the attorney general, was appoint- 
 ed and Nathaniel Lawrence was created attorney general 
 in the place of Mr. Lewis. These appointments were
 
 74 POLITICAL HISTORY ''179-2^ 
 
 all made by the votes of Messrs. Pye and Van Cortland, 
 and the casting vote of the governor. 
 
 On the sixth of November, the legislature met in New- 
 York, and Mr. Watts was again without opposition, elected 
 speaker. The governor's speech was very concise. He 
 stated that the reason why the session had been appointed so 
 early, was, in order that a choice of electors for president 
 and vice-president of the United States, might be made in 
 due time; and he urged their immediate attention to that 
 subject, and suggested the propriety of an early despatch 
 of other public business, so as to render the session as 
 short as possible. It may be that this suggestion was 
 made in anticipation of the tedious investigation and in- 
 terminable acrimonious disputes in which, notwithstand- 
 ing that suggestion, the two houses soon afterwards be- 
 came engaged, in relation to the conduct of the canvassing 
 committee. In the senate, the canvassing question was 
 immediately raised, by an objection made by the federal 
 ists in that body, to the right of John Livingston, whom 
 the canvassers had declared duly elected a senator from 
 the eastern district. That district included the county of 
 Clinton. Thomas Jenkins was ftie opposing candidate to 
 Mr. Livingston; and if all the votes in Clinton county had 
 been given for Mr. Thos. Jenkins, he would have been 
 elected. As there was a legal possibility that all the 
 votes were so given, it was urged that if those votes were 
 improperly rejected, Mr. Livingston was not entitled to 
 his seat, and that a new election ought to be directed. 
 The federalists, therefore, contended that it was the duty 
 of the senate to review the decision of the canvassers. On 
 the other hand, it was urged that the decision of the can- 
 vassers was final and conclusive, even on the senate. 
 
 This question was decided in favor of the right of Mr. 
 Livingston to his seat, by the following vote : — In the 
 affirmative, Williams, Swartwout, Van Cortland, Gels-
 
 1792.1 ^^ NEW-YORK. 75 
 
 ton, Schenck, Woodworth, Hasbrouck, Webster, Pye, 
 Tillotson, Cantine, Carpenter. Negative, Frey, Schuy- 
 ler, Van Rensselaer, Sands, P. Ganesvoort, Jones, Duow, 
 Cruger, Strong, Powers. For the affirmative, 12 — nega- 
 tive, 11. This vote shows the strength of the parties in 
 the senate, which it will be perceived, was unusually 
 full. After Mr. J. Livingston had taken his seat, there 
 was a republican majority of two. Mr. Williams of 
 Washington county, seems to have been the most active 
 on the democratic side ; and Mr. Jones, who it will be 
 perceived, had changed from being a zealous anti-fede- 
 ralist, to an equally zealous federalist, was the most effi- 
 cient member in the opposition. He with several other 
 senators, caused a protest to be entered on the journals, 
 in which they insist with great force, that the senate are 
 by a right, secured by the constitution, of which they 
 could not be deprived by any law passed by the legisla- 
 ture, the judges of their own members, and whether they 
 were duly elected.* 
 
 * This able lawyer and useful legislator, it is said, was a little inclined to 
 what is called trimming in politics. A mariner, if he has sea-room enough, will 
 sail with great ease, provided he will shift his sails every time the wind clKinges, 
 so that his vessel may be constantly running before the wind ; and therefore in an 
 elective government, the politician who tacks and trims his sails on all occasions 
 so as to catch the popular gale, is very appropriately called a trimmer. As Mr. 
 Jones was generally found acting with the majority of the southern district, it i- 
 not surprising that he acquired something of the character of a time server. 
 Though he by no means deserved it, for on all questions of principle, he was deci- 
 ded, firm, and unyielding. But he was a kind-hearted, social, companionable 
 man; and not only devised, but undoubtedly did much to advance the real pros- 
 perity of the community. There is so much frankness and good nature evinced by 
 the following anecdote related of him by the late "Thief Justice Spencer, that I can. 
 not refrain from inserting it. While Judge Spencer was a state senator with Mr. 
 Jones, he said to him one day in a jocular manner, "how is this, Mr. Jones, the 
 majority in the southern district frequently changes ; at one time it is federal, 
 then it is republican; but whether the one or the other party have the majority, 
 you always get your election. Pray acquaint me with the means you use, wliich 
 secures yousuch constant success'" " Why, Spancer," said Jones, (his pronun- 
 ciation was broad,) '' to tell you the truth, icAen my troops wo'nt follow mc, 1 fol- 
 low them." The fact was, Mr. Jones while a member of the convention at Pough- 
 keepsie which adopted the constitution, became in principle, separated from 
 Gov. Clinton, he being in favor, and the governor being opposed to that instru- 
 ment; but Mr. J. continued to be ranked among the supporters of Ciinton, until 
 the election in April 1792, and the contest in relation to the canvassing committee.
 
 76 POLITICAL HISTORY [1792. 
 
 On the 13th of November, about eighty men, caUing 
 themselves deputies, from various parts of the state, ap- 
 peared in New- York " to solicit," as they alledged, " a 
 legislative remedy for the late outrage said to have been 
 committed on the right of suffrage by a majority of the 
 canvassing committee." They were introduced to the 
 bar of the assembly with great formality and solemnity 
 by Mr. J. O. Hoffman, who presented their memorial. 
 It was referred to a committee of the whole house ; and 
 ten days afterwards, the assembly went into committee 
 on that subject. A great number of witnesses were 
 sworn, and their depositions are entered at length on the 
 journals. Mr. Hoffman and Mr. James Kent were the 
 principal managers on the part of the memorialists. It 
 soon appeared very evident that there was a decided 
 majority opposed to any legislative action on the sub- 
 ject; but the investigation was pursued with great 
 eagerness on the part of the federalists, probably in order 
 to keep up and increase the popular excitement against 
 the governor and his political friends. The disputes 
 about the formality of the proceedings and the proper 
 questions to be put to witnesses, together with the sub- 
 ject matter of the complaint, seemed to furnish never 
 ending topics of discussion. 
 
 On the other hand, the friends of Gov. Clinton, intro- 
 duced a memorial against William Cooper, first judge of 
 Otsego county, setting forth facts on which the memo- 
 rialists alledged that an impeachment might be founded 
 and prosecuted by the house against him. In support 
 of the charges, a vast number of witnesses were sworn 
 for and against Judge Cooper. The depositions of these 
 witnesses, so far as I have examined them, do not go to 
 prove any palpable misconduct in Mr. Cooper in the dis- 
 charge of his duty as a judge, or any illegal or corrupt 
 acts done under color of his office ; but they certainly
 
 1792.] OP NEW-YORK. 77 
 
 do show gross misconduct in him as a citizen, during the 
 canvass in Otsego, at the election between Jay and Clin- 
 ton. It was deposed that he encouraged illegal voting 
 in favor of Mr. Jay; that he knowingly had caused men 
 to vote who were not freeholders ; that he threatened 
 voters with suits who expressed a wish to vote for Mr. 
 Clinton, and that he menaced a Mr. Cannon, who came 
 to the polls to challenge illegal voters, that if he chal- 
 lenged any one, he (the judge,) would forthwith commit 
 him to jail. It must, however, very soon have been 
 evident that nothing could be proved against Judge 
 Cooper, on which an impeachment could be founded. 
 Still the investigation was pursued, and indeed was not 
 disposed of during that long session, which continued 
 through the winter, and I believe ran into the spring of 
 1793. For my part, I regard this legislature as spend- 
 ing the greater part of several months for the sole pur- 
 pose of playing a political game. The federalists had 
 instituted an investigation into the conduct of the can- 
 vassing committee ; not with a view of inducing any 
 legislative action, (for I do not believe that such 
 men as James Kent and many other federal members 
 would, if they had had the power, have ventured at that 
 time, by legislative enactments, to have declared the 
 election of Gov. Clinton, void,) but for the purpose of 
 rendering the governor odious, in consequence of the 
 rejection of the Otsego votes. As a sort of an offset or 
 countermine, I suppose the democratic party got up the 
 proceedings against judge Cooper with a view to turn 
 the attention of the public from the proceedings of the 
 convassers, to the improper conduct of the leader of the 
 Jay party in Otsego, and the illegal votes which were 
 there given for Mr. Jay. The assembly finally decided 
 in favor of the proceedings of the majority of the can- 
 vassers.
 
 78 POLITICAL HISTORY [1793. 
 
 The Presidential electors cliosen at this session were 
 John Woodhull, Edward Savage, Johanus Brown, Wil- 
 liam Floyd, Abraham Ten Eyck, David Van Ness, Sam- 
 uel Clark, Abraham Yates, Jr., Volkert Veeder, Samuel 
 Ward and Samuel Osgood, all I believe republicans. 
 They were nominated by ballot in each house, and the 
 successful candidates were nominated on the first ballot. 
 This is a very decisive proof that there was a decided 
 republican majority in both houses. 
 
 The election in April, 1793, resulted in a triumphant 
 federal majority — the southern, eastern and western dis- 
 tricts returned federal senators. From the southern dis- 
 trict Ezra L'Hommedieu and Matthew Clarkson were 
 chosen, in the eastern district; Zina Hitchcock was elect- 
 ed by about three hundred majority over Edward Savage, 
 and in the w^estern. Jacobus Van Schoonhoven and Mi- 
 chael Myers were elected by more than sixteen hundred 
 majority. It was in the middle district only, where the 
 republican senatorial ticket succeeded by the election 
 of John Cantine and Reuben Hopkins. 
 
 During tlie summer of 1793, Mr. Genett, wdio had 
 lately arrived in the United States in quality of minis- 
 ter of tlie French Republic, visited New-York. He 
 was received by the republicans of that city with the 
 most cordial greetings. A committee was appointed, of 
 which James Nicholson was chairman, who in behalf of 
 the republicans of New-York, made an address to him 
 expressive of great sympathy for the French people, and 
 highly complimentary to the minister. The federalists 
 of New-York thereupon held a meeting and adopted and 
 published spirited resolutions in support of the neutral 
 attitude assumed by the United States government, as 
 respected the belligerent nations of Europe. 
 
 The legislature met at Albany on the 7th of January, 
 1794. Jas. Watson of New-York was chosen speaker. 
 
 1
 
 1794.] OP Ni:w-YORK. 79 
 
 The governor in his address to the two houses, made 
 some general remarks in relation to the war in Europe. 
 He expressed a wish for the preservation of peace, but 
 complained that the British had not surrendered the 
 western posts, according to the stipulation contained in 
 the treaty of 1783 ; and he animadverted with some 
 severity on the delay of Great Britain in the perform- 
 ance of that part of the treaty. 
 
 At that time our criminal code was much more san- 
 guinary than at present. Several felonies besides that 
 of. murder, by the laws then existing, were punished 
 with death. The governor recommended a revision 
 and amelioration of the criminal code. He urged that 
 the certainty rather than the severity of punishment was 
 the best and surest means of preventing crime, and he 
 closed his address with recommending union and harmo- 
 ny, and a speedy despatch of the public business. I 
 cannot refrain from remarking, that the speeches of Gov. 
 Clinton were all short, an example which it were to be 
 wished his successors had followed. Gov. Clinton's 
 speech on this occasion will be found excellent, both 
 in manner and matter. 
 
 In a few minutes after the governor and senate with- 
 drew from the assembly chamber, and as soon as the 
 speaker resumed the chair, Mr. Josiah Ogden Hoffman 
 of New- York, moved that the house should forthwith 
 proceed to the choice of a council of appointment. He 
 delivered a most violent pliilipic against the existing 
 council, and urged that they ought to be immediately 
 arrested in their nefarious course. He was supported 
 by Mr. Ambrose Spencer, who that session, was a mem- 
 ber of the assembly, and several other federal members. 
 The motion was opposed by Mr. Smith of Suffolk, and 
 Mr. Comstock of Saratoga, as unusual and unprece- 
 dented J and it was suggested that by the constitution,
 
 80 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1794. 
 
 the members of the council had a right to hold their 
 offices for one year; that the present council had not 
 been in office a year, and should another council be 
 that evening chosen, the present council would have a 
 right to hold their offices and discharge the functions 
 appertaining to the council of appointment until a year 
 from the time of their election had expired. They 
 finally moved that the further consideration of the motion 
 should be postponed until the next morning. 
 
 The postponement was resisted by Mr. Hoffman. He 
 alleged that the appointment of a fifth judge of the 
 supreme court had become necessary, that he had rea- 
 son to believe that if that officer should be appointed 
 by the present council, a very unsuitable man would be 
 selected — and he apprehended that unless the house 
 immediately elected a new council, the mischief would 
 be consummated that very evening. 
 
 The existing council, it will be remembered, consist- 
 ed of Messrs. Gelston, Hasbrouck and Woodworth, 
 republican, and Mr. Frey, a federalist. The federal par- 
 ty desired the appointment of Egbert Benson to the 
 office of supreme court judge, but the republicans were 
 generally in favor of Peter W. Yates, and Mr. H. knew 
 at any rate, that the majority of the council never 
 would consent to the appointment of Mr. Benson. It 
 is said Gov. Clinton doubted the propriety of adding 
 another judge to the bench of the supreme court, and 
 that the republican part of the council were divided in 
 their opinion as to the propriety of appointing Mr. 
 Yates. I find an entry in the books kept by the coun- 
 cil, at a meeting held some time before, from which it 
 appears, that the subject of appointing a fifth judge was 
 then agitated; that the council were divided, two of the 
 them expressing an opinion that an additional judge 
 was unnecessary, and that the other held an adverse
 
 1794.] • OP NEW-YORK. 81 
 
 opinion, but the two last mentioned councillors could 
 not agree on the person who ought to be appointed. It 
 does not appear that the governor expressed any opin- 
 ion ; but I am told by a gentleman* now living, of great 
 respectability, who is a son of one of the members of the 
 council, that the governor was indisposed to the ap- 
 pointment of Mr. Yates, but at the same time he wished 
 to avoid a direct refusal to nominate him, because such 
 refusal would disafFect some of his best friends. Under 
 these circumstances, it strikes me that the hot and 
 indecent haste of Mr. Hoffman and his friends, was 
 quite unjustifiable, it being most evident that as the 
 majority of the council were decided political friends 
 of the governor, had he been desirious that the appoint- 
 ment of a judge should have been made by that coun- 
 cil, he might have effected it, even at the very time and 
 while Mr. Hoffman was delivering his inflammatory 
 speech against the governor and council. One object of 
 Mr. Hoffman, hovrever, might have been to continue and 
 increase the agitation of the public mind. Mr. Hoff- 
 man's motion was, notwithstanding the vigorous oppo- 
 sition made to it, adopted, and a council was that eve- 
 ning chosen, consisting of Philip Schuyler, Zina Hitch- 
 cock, Selah Strong and Reuben Hopkins, the three first 
 named gentlemen being federalists. Shortly after the 
 creation of the new council, Egbert Eenson was appoint- 
 ed a judge of the supreme court. 
 
 On this occasion the members of the council, for the 
 first time, so far as I can ascertain, claimed and exer- 
 cised a concurrent right with the governor, to the nomi- 
 nation of officers. Mr. Clinton having refused to nom- 
 nate Mr. Benson, one of the council nominated him, 
 and three of them voting for him, he was declared duly 
 appointed. Gov. Clinton protested against this proceed- 
 
 * The Hon. John Woodworth. 
 
 6
 
 k 
 
 82 POLITICAL HISTORY • [1794. 
 
 ingj insisting that the exclusive right of nomination was 
 vested in him by the constitution. 
 
 A joint resolution, during this session, passed the 
 assembly, requiring the council of appointment to cause 
 the minutes of their proceedings to be published, but I 
 cannot find that it passed the senate. 
 
 A bill was introduced into the senate, authorizing 
 sheriffs of counties to hold their offices respectively 
 until new sheriff's should be appointed and should duly 
 qualify themselves for the execution of their office. 
 A preamble was attached to this bill, making the 
 act declaratory, and so worded as to imply a censure 
 upon the canvassing committee of 1792 ; but on the 
 motion of IMr. Tillotson, it was struck out by one ma- 
 jority. This vote would seem to indicate that a majo- 
 rity of the senate was friendly to the governor. Four 
 senators were absent. 
 
 The assembly took into consideration the proceed- 
 ings on the memorial against Wiliam Cooper, which had 
 occupied so much of the time of that house at the last 
 session, and which was left by them as unfinished 
 business ; but Mr. Hoffman, previous to any discussion, 
 offered a resolution purporting that the complaints 
 against Judge Cooper, of official misconduct, was not 
 supported by the evidence, and that the memorial be 
 dismissed " as frivolous and vexatious." A motion was 
 made to strike out that part of the resolution which 
 directed the memorial to be dismissed as frivolous and 
 vexatious, but it failed, forty to nineteen. Among the 
 names of those who voted witli the majority, I find that 
 of Ambrose Spencer. The assembly further resolved 
 that the clerk should cause that resolution to be pub- 
 lished In three of the public newspapers. That there 
 was no proof of official misconduct, is undoubtedly 
 correct;, for the depositions are to be found among the
 
 1794.] OF NEW- YORK. 83 
 
 minutes of the assembly, and I have examined them 
 with care. But unless the testimony of Andrew Can- 
 non, James Moore, (a very respectable man,) Mr. Tur- 
 niclifF, who was then a magistrate, and Judge Hudson, 
 of Cherry Valley, were absolutely false, surely the me- 
 morial was not ''frivolous.^^ This was unquestionably 
 a party vote, and shows the great strength of the fede- 
 ralists that year in the assembly. fSee JVote A. Vol. 2.] 
 
 A bill was introduced into the assembly, which be- 
 came a law, amending the statute regulating elec- 
 tions, and requiring the town inspectors to canvass the 
 votes, and return the result of their canvass in the 
 same manner substantially, as is now practised. * 
 
 After this, nothing material occurred, as relates to 
 the movements of the two parties, until after the election, 
 in 1794. That election terminated as the preceding 
 one had done, in favor of the federalists. 
 
 In the western district, Stephen Van Rensselaer and 
 John Frey were re-elected to the senate almost without 
 opposition. They received more than five thousand 
 votes, and the opposing candidates failed of obtaining 
 more than two hundred and forty. 
 
 In October, 1794, the governor caused to be published 
 a protest, drawn up by him on the last day of the meet- 
 ing of the council, which was the 24th of March prece- 
 ding, and filed by him in the office of the secretary of 
 state, against the proceedings of the majority of the 
 council. 
 
 It appears that the council had decided, that in all ca- 
 ses where the number of officers, such as judges, justices 
 of the peace, &c., was not ascertained and limited by 
 law, the number should be fixed by the majority of the 
 council, and that in cases where the officer was required 
 to be commissioned annually, as in the case of sheriffs, 
 
 the council had a right to resist the re-appointment of 
 * See Note N.
 
 84 POLITICAL HISTORY [1794. 
 
 the Incumbent without assigning any cause ; and there- 
 by, as Mr. Clinton alleged, displacing the officer. The 
 governor in his protest, alleged that by the constitution 
 he was charged with the faithful execution of the laws, 
 and he therefore inferred, that according to the spirit of 
 the constitution, he was, in cases not provided for by le- 
 gislative enactment, vested with exclusive discretion in 
 respect to the number of officers necessary for the proper 
 execution of the laws. He, being held responsible for 
 such execution, was necessarily the judge of the proper 
 means of effecting it. If that discretion was confided to 
 others, so many officers might be created as to cause 
 confusion, or so few that the force would not be compe- 
 tent to accomplish the end. 
 
 Again, he alleged that although by the words of the 
 constitution, the continuation of an incumbent in office, 
 was, by the constitution, referred to the pleasure of the 
 council, " by this was not intended a capricious, arhitrary 
 pleasure, hut a sound disci etion to he exercised for the 
 promotion of the puhlic good?'' That a contrary practice 
 would tend to render the action of the government un- 
 stable, and the administration of justice unsafe; and he 
 added, that whenever parties exist, the consequence of 
 this practice would be " to deprive men of their offices be- 
 cause they have too much independence of spirit to sup- 
 port measures they suppose injurious to the community ; 
 and might induce others from undue attachment to office, 
 to sacrifice their iyitegrity to imi^roper considerations." 
 When it is recollected, that at the time this remark was 
 made, neither the council on whose conduct the governor 
 animadverted, nor any other class of men, entertained 
 for a moment, the idea of removing able and faithful offi' 
 cers because of their political opinions ; but that the 
 governor complained because the council then in office 
 had merely refused to re-appoint persons eligible to a
 
 1794.1 OF NEW-YORK. 85 
 
 re-appointment, who had discharged their duty faith- 
 fully, we cannot fail to perceive the severity of this re- 
 buke to subsequent councils, many of whom we shall 
 see were the governor's own political friends. 
 
 Upon the publication of this document. Gen. Schuyler, 
 Selah Strong and Zina Hitchcock, the three federal 
 members of the council, published a very long reply to 
 it, in which they endeavored to show that Gov. Clin- 
 ton's practice had not corresponded with the precepts 
 contained in his protest. But it will be found that they 
 do not make out a very strong case. They cite several 
 instances where appointments in the militia were made 
 not according to seniority ; and particularly the case of 
 Gen. John Williams of Washington county, then a mem- 
 ber of the state senate, who had, during the revolution- 
 ary war, been removed from the office of colonel, and 
 expelled from the senate, in consequence of a charge 
 against him of peculation and of defrauding the officers 
 and privates of his regiment, but who had subsequently 
 been appointed out of the regular order of military pro- 
 motion to the office of brigadier general. The only civil 
 case to which they refer, is that of Benjamin Gilbert, 
 who in the winter of 1792, was appointed sheriflf of the 
 county of Otsego, and at the end of the year, in 1793, the 
 governor had nominated, and with the consent of the 
 council, appointed Samuel Dickson liis successor, with- 
 out giving Mr. Gilbert any notice of charges against 
 him. Mr. G. was an active and zealous partizan of 
 Judge Cooper ; and the documents which had been com- 
 municated to the legislature on the subject of the re- 
 jection of the Otsego votes with the memorial against 
 Judge Cooper, implicated him, or at least shewed him to 
 be an heated and over-zealous partizan. That these 
 grave counsellors, after their laborious search, should 
 have been able to find only one instance of a civil ap-
 
 86 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1795. 
 
 pointment, and that an extreme one, wherein they 
 thought they had a right to complain of the governor's 
 practice as having been inconsistent with his doctrine, 
 is, in my judgment, high evidence of the unexception- 
 ble manner in which he had generally exercised the ap- 
 pointing power.* 
 
 The legislature met in Poughkeepsie, January 6, 1795. 
 Gen. North of Duanesburgh was chosen speaker. The 
 contest was between him and the late speaker, Mr. Wat- 
 
 * To show the manner of proceeding by the council during Got. Clinton's 
 administration, when an attempt was made to remove an officer who held his 
 office during the pleasure of the appointing power, I give the following extract 
 from the minutes of the council of 1787, at which time the collectors of the cus* 
 toms were appointed by that body. 
 
 "At a council of appointment held at the senate chamber in the city of New- 
 York, on Saturday, the 21st day of April, 1787. 
 
 Fresent — His Excellency George Clinton, Esq. President, 
 
 Mr. Russell, ) Mp^hpr, ^r. Hathorn, ) Members 
 
 Mr. Floyd, \ Members. jyj^ Schuyler. \ »iemDers. 
 
 James Giles, Esq. exhibited the following charges against John Lamb, collector 
 of the port of New-York : 
 
 " That one Stone informed him that three cheeses were taken coming on shore 
 from the packet, without a permit ; that the collector being informed thereof, 
 s&d it would not answer to libel them, as the expense of libelling was too high ; 
 that they were thereupon divided, and the collector took one. That Mr. Stevens, 
 one of the tide waiters, had applied to him to libel seven cheeses which had 
 been seized for being landed contrary to law; that he drew the libel ; on which 
 Mr. Stevens desired him to stop the prosecution, because the collector told him the 
 expenses would exceed the value of the cheese ; that the said Stevens informed 
 him that the said cheeses were divided between the collector and him. 
 
 " The said John Lamb being present, requested of the council to be heard in his 
 defence; whereupon Resoh-ed, that the council will be ready to hear the parties 
 with their respective evidences on Monday next, at nine o'clock in the morning," 
 to which time the council then adjourned. 
 
 On Monday, 23d April, the council met pursuant to adjournment. The parties 
 appeared, and the above and several other charges were exhibited by Mr. Giles 
 and Mr. Roorback against Mr. Lamb. The record then states that 
 
 "The council having heard the proofs, and allegations in support of the seve- 
 ral charges exhibited as aforesaid against John Lamb, esquire, and having also 
 examined the books of the custom house, and the several manifests and vouchers, 
 as to the duties in the several cases in which such malpractices where charged, 
 and having duly considered the same, 
 
 " Resolved, That in the opinion of this council, the charges exhibited against the 
 said John Lamb, esquire, are wholly unsupported and groundless, and that from 
 the investigation of the said charges, and the evidence produced in support of them 
 nothing hath appeared to alter in the least degree, the good opinion this council 
 entertains of the fidelity and integrity of thn said collector in the execution of 
 tiis office."
 
 1795.] OF NEW-YOBK. 87 
 
 son. Both gentlemen were federalists, but the northern 
 and western members generally supported North, and he 
 was elected by a vote of thirty-three against twenty-eight. 
 
 Governor Clinton addressed a letter to the lieutenant gov- 
 ernor and speaker of the house, dated at Greenwich, where 
 he then was, informing them that he was and had been for 
 a longtime confined to his room by sickness, (the inflamma- 
 tory rheumatism,) and that he was apprehensive he should 
 be unable personally to be at Poughkeepsie during the 
 session ; he therefore, instead of the usual annual speech, 
 sent them a written message. 
 
 In his messsage, he exhorted the legislature to take 
 measures for putting the state in a better condition to re- 
 pel invasion, and he again urged upon the legislature the 
 propriety of revising the criminal laws. He recommended 
 confinement at hard labor to be substituted for the punish- 
 ment of many crimes for which death was then inflicted. 
 He also reminded the legislature, that while liberal provi- 
 sions had been made for the endowment of colleges and 
 other seminaries in which the higher branches of learning 
 were taught, no legislative aid had yet been given to Com- 
 mon Schools, and he recommended that provi^ons should 
 be made for their improvement and encouragement. This 
 was the first official movement made in this state in behalf 
 of those institutions — institutions upon which, under God, 
 depend the preservation of the rights and liberties of the 
 people of this state. I am happy to perceive that the legis- 
 lature did not disregard this recommendation j on the 
 contrary, at that very session, they passed a law appropri- 
 ating annually for five years the simi of fifty thousand dol- 
 lars, and directed the specific sums to be paid by the treas- 
 urer to each county. The act further provided, that the 
 board of supervisors in the respective counties, should ap- 
 portion the money among the respective towns, and a sum 
 equal to one-half the sum received from the state by the
 
 88 POLITICAL HISTORY [1795. 
 
 several towns was required to be raised by a tax on such 
 town and added to the bounty of the state. The sum thus 
 made up was to be distributed in each school district un- 
 der the direction of town commissioners. 
 
 Jacobus Van Schoouhoven, Richard Hatfield, William 
 Powers, and Joseph Hasbrouck were elected members of 
 the council of appointment this year, the three former of 
 whom were federalists. The election of Mr. Hasbrouck 
 was unanimous. The average vote on the choice of the 
 other members was thirty-six to twenty-nine j showing a 
 federal majority in the assembly of seven. 
 
 The term of service of Rufus King, in the U. S. Senate, 
 was to expire on the 4th March, 1795, and on the 27th 
 January, he was re-elected for the six succeeding years. 
 The vote stood for Mr. K. in the senate, two majority ; in 
 the assembly, five. About this time. Gov. Clinton publish- 
 ed an address to the Freeholders of the state of New- 
 York, dated on the 22nd January, in which he declined 
 being a candidate for governor at the ensuing election. 
 The letter, like all his written communications, is short, 
 but it does honor to his head and heart. He had held, he 
 said, for n^rly thirty years elective offices, [he was seve- 
 ral years a member of the colonial assembly,] which had 
 cornp^lled him to devote almost all his time to the dis- 
 ^-"•dliarge of the duties connected with them, and his private 
 ^X affairs required his attention. His health, too, had be- 
 
 come, so much impaired, as to render it his duty to retire 
 from active business. In allusion to the office he then 
 held, he said he " withdrew from a situation never solicit- 
 ed by him, which he accepted with diffidence, and from 
 which," said he, " I shall retire with pleasure." He thank- 
 ed them cordially and feelingly for their continued confi- 
 dence and support during the tryingscenes through which 
 he had passed. He was then about fifty-six years old.
 
 1795.] OF NEW-YORK. 89 
 
 Lieut. Gov. Van Cortland at the same time declined 
 a re-election in consequence of his advanced age. 
 
 Mr. Clinton had filled the exective chair from the 
 organization of the government; but the step now 
 taken by him rendered certain that a change in that im- 
 portant office would be produced at the next election. 
 Some difficulty was felt by the federalists in the selec- 
 tion of a candidate for governor. Mr- Hamilton was 
 spoken of, but he positively declined. Mr. Jay was in 
 England, where he had been sent, much against his own 
 wishes, to negotiate a treaty with the government of 
 that country. He was beyond question, not only the 
 most competent, but personally the most unexception- 
 able candidate ; and the indignation felt at the manner 
 in which his election had been defeated in 1792, furnish- 
 ed additional capital in his favor. It was, however, then 
 generally anticipated that Mr. Jay would conclude a 
 treaty with Great Britain, and the warm sympathy felt 
 for the French republic, combined with the existing 
 prejudices against Great Britain, which pervaded the 
 mass of people in the state of New-York, rendered it 
 more than probable, that Mr. Jay's treaty would be 
 unpopular, and that a portion of odium would attach to 
 the negociator. This consideration might well have 
 excited, and did in fact produce doubts of the expedi- 
 ency of fixing upon Mr. Jay as the gubernatorial candi- 
 date ; but then it was expected that the contents of the 
 treaty, if one should be concluded, would not be made 
 public until after the election, and it would be too absurd 
 for a party to oppose Mr. Jay for agreeing to make a 
 treaty, without knowing what that treaty contained. 
 The event justified the expectation of the federalists. 
 The contents of the treaty were not publicly known till 
 the 2nd July, 1795.
 
 90 POLITICAL HISTORY [1795. 
 
 The federalists finally, at a sort of legislative caucus, 
 nominated John Jay for governor, and Stephen Van 
 Rensselaer for lieutenant governor. Mr. William Jay 
 (1 Jay, 355) says this nomination was made without the 
 knowledge of his father. 
 
 The democratic party, after anxiously looking about 
 for candidates, at length selected Chief Justice Yates 
 for governor, and William Floyd for lieutenant gover- 
 nor. Col. Burr had been spoken of as a candidate, I 
 believe, by individuals of both parties, but his nomina- 
 tion by the majority of either party could not be obtain- 
 ed. Judge Yates surely could not complain of a want 
 of public attention, for within the space of six years, 
 he was the candidate for both political parties, and must 
 at one time and the other have received the votes of 
 nearly all the freeholders in the state. If we were 
 allowed to consider the two elections one, he actually 
 received the votes of nearly all the freeholders in the 
 state for the office of governor, and yet was not elected. 
 Was not such a result politically right ? 
 
 At the April election, in 1795, Mr. Jay and Mr. Van 
 Rensselaer received a large majority of the votes of the 
 freeholders of the state, and were declared by the state 
 canvassers duly elected. The federalists also obtained a 
 maiority in both houses of the legislature.
 
 ^^%7l J6l
 
 1795.] OF NEW-YORK. 91 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 FROM APRIL, 1796, TO MAY, 179S. 
 
 The senators elected this year, were John D. Coe, 
 Richard Hatfield, Philip Livingston, Ambrose Spencer 
 and John Frey, all of them federalists. 
 
 De Witt Clinton, afterwards governor of the state, 
 was one of the candidates of the republicans of New- 
 York, for member of the assembly from the city, but fail- 
 ed of obtaining his election. 
 
 The result of the state canvass was declared on the 
 26th May, and two days afterwards, Mr. Jay arrived in 
 New-York, from the court of London, after an absence of 
 a year and sixteen days.* His arrival was hailed by the 
 acclamations of the inhabitants of his native city. " A 
 large concourse of citizens," says Mr. William Jay, " as- 
 sembled to welcome their new governor, and to greet the 
 envoy whose successful mission procured peace to the 
 country j the crowd attended him to his dwelling, and 
 the ringing of bells and the firing of cannon evinced the 
 joy his arrival had inspired." — (1 Jay^ 356.) 
 
 Although the biography of Gov. Jay, to which I have 
 referred, was written by his son, Judge Jay of Westches- 
 ter county, it is nevertheless most evidently executed with 
 great candor and impartiality, and a sacred regard to 
 truth, as is everything else that comes from the pen of^ 
 that pure and benevolent man. Notwithstanding this, 1 
 
 * He sailed for England, May 12, 1794.— 1 Jay, 314.
 
 92 POLITICAL HISTORY [l79o. 
 
 cannot but suggest that public demonstrations of approba- 
 tion and respect for men possessed of power, and who at 
 their discretion, dispose of state patronage, are in most 
 ■^' instances, even in this free country, extremely deceptive. 
 That there were many in that great assemblage of citi- 
 zens, who joined with the multitude in shouting hosannas 
 to Mr. Jay, " who followed him for the loaves andjishesy^ 
 but whose hearts at that moment burned with envy and 
 jealousy, I have not a shadow of doubt. The outbreak 
 of popular indignation which -shortly afterwards was ex- 
 hibited on the publication of the British treaty, afford pre- 
 sumptive evidence of the truth of this suggestion. 
 
 It would be quite foreign from my object to discuss the 
 merits of that treaty, and at this time, such a discussion 
 would be useless, even if its merits came within the scope 
 of the task I have undertaken to perform. It must suffice 
 to remark, that while on the one hand, I believe it will be 
 now admitted, that the treaty did contain some stipulations 
 seriously objectionable ; on the other, that, considering 
 the relative situation of the two nations, it was the best 
 treaty which could at that time have been obtained, that 
 few men, and perhaps no other man in the United States 
 except Mr. Jay, would have been able to have procured 
 a treaty as favorable to America as the one in question j* 
 that its rejection would have brought on a war between 
 Great Britain and this country, and that its ratification with 
 all its imperfections, was less injurious to the United 
 States than a w^ar at that time would have been. 
 
 But so prevalent was party spirit, and so intemperate 
 was its zeal, that the treaty was denounced before its con- 
 tents were known. Some of the newspapers, claiming to 
 be republican, being, as I fear, too much under the influ- 
 ence of Mr. Genet, who dexterously availed himself of 
 
 • Gov. Jay and Lord Grenrille the British negociator, were personal ftiends
 
 1795.] OF NEW-YORK. 93 
 
 tlie sympathy of the Americans in favor of the French m 
 their struggle for liberty and equality, before it was knoivn 
 what the treaty contained, discoursed in the following 
 manner : " The United States are a republic. Is it advan- 
 tageous for a republic to have a connexion with a mon- 
 arch 7 Treaties lead to war. * * * If the influence 
 of a treaty is added to the influence which Great Brit- 
 ain already has in our goverament, we shall be colonized 
 anew." * * * " No treaty ought to have been made 
 with Great Britain. * * To make a treaty with Great 
 Britain is forming connexion with a monarch." 
 
 On the 2d of July, the treaty was published in a news- 
 paper in Philadelphia. " This act" says Wm. Jay, " was 
 putting the torch to that vast mass of combustibles which 
 the party had long been engaged in collecting, and the in- 
 tended explosion instantly followed." Mr. Jay was 
 burnt in eflSgy by the mob in Philadelphia, two days after 
 the treaty was made public. The eflSgy bore a pair of 
 scales, one labelled " American Liberty and Indepen- 
 dence," and the other " British Gold." From the mouth 
 of the figure, proceeded the following words : " Come up 
 to my price, and I will sell you my country." Public 
 meetings were held in almost every part of the union, 
 denouncing the treaty. In New- York, one was convened 
 in the open air, and attended by an immense crowd. 
 Gen. Hamilton attempted to address the meeting, but 
 was pelted with stones, and compelled to retreat. The 
 party, after adopting violent resolutions against the treaty, 
 marched with the American and French colors flying, to 
 a place opposite the goveinor's house, and burned the 
 treaty.— (1. Jay, 360.) 
 
 It is by no means impossible, that some of the very men 
 who were active in this violent outrage, composed a part 
 of the company who but " a little month " before, had con-
 
 94 POLITICAL HISTORY [1795. 
 
 ducted Mr. Jay to his house with shouts of applause — so 
 transient is popular favor ! 
 
 It would be doing injustice to the great body of the re- 
 publicans of this state, to charge them with participating in, 
 or approving of, these outrages. The candid and reflect- 
 ing part of that party opposed Mr, Jay, because they con- 
 sidered him as acting in concert wnth Gen. Hamilton, in 
 the attempt to monopolize and so to bestow the patronage 
 of the general government as to prostrate all who, (how- 
 ever conscientiously,) had opposed the adoption of the 
 federal constitution ; and especially Governor Clinton, 
 whom the republicans considered an able statesman and 
 sound patriot. They also apprehended that Mr. Jay being 
 now constituted the dispenser of the patronage of the state 
 government would, in connection with Gen. Hamilton, 
 who in reality wielded the national patronage, so distri- 
 bute the same as greatly to increase the personal influence 
 of Mr. Hamilton and his immediate coadjutors, which they 
 considered already too formidable. But the substantial 
 ground of opposition, by the republicans to Mr. Jay and 
 the leading federalists was, that they entirely disapproved 
 of some of their avowed political opinions, of which I 
 shall speak more particularly hereafter, in relation to the 
 powers which of right ought to be exercised by the gene- 
 ral government. 
 
 If the British treaty had been published on the first of 
 April, instead of the first of July, it is not probable that 
 Mr. Jay would hav€ been elected governor j for to those 
 who from the considerations I have just mentioned were 
 opposed to him, would have been added all those who, at 
 the instant the treaty was published, disapproved of it. 
 It is true Mr. Jay was re-elected in 1798, but that was af- 
 ter the federal party had had ample time to rally from the 
 shock produced by the publication of the treaty, and after 
 they had for three years enjoyed the aid of the patronage
 
 1796.] OF NEW- YORK. 95 
 
 of the state and national governments, with which to 
 strengthen themselves. In proof that this hypothesis is 
 correctj it may be remarked, that the city of New-York, 
 which until the summer of 1795, was nearly unanimously 
 federal, in December, (the month in which the election of 
 members of congress was at that time made,) Mr. Edward 
 Livingston, a very decided republican was elected to con- 
 gress in opposition to Mr. James Watson, a very popular 
 man, who was the federal candidate. 
 
 On the 6th January, 1796, the legislature convened in 
 the city of New- York. Gen. North was again elected 
 speaker against Mr. Watson, by a vote of twenty-nine to 
 eighteen. 
 
 The new governor in his speech at the opening of the 
 session, after expressing his gratitude to the freeholders 
 of the state for the confidence placed in him, as evinced by 
 their votes at the recent election, declared his determina- 
 tion " to regard all his fellow-citizens with an equal eye, 
 and to cherish and advance merit wherever found, '^'^ This 
 determination was in theory noble, and deserving of the 
 highest commendation ; but it is deeply to be regretted 
 that neither Gov. Jay or any other individual holding the 
 appointing power could, even if sincerely disposed, carry 
 it into effect in the then, and in the present, state of public 
 feeling, without a sacrifice of himself and his party. The 
 best and most virtuous men must, in the distribution of 
 patronage, yield to the influence of party considerations. 
 This is excused, if not justified, by the following process 
 of reasoning : — An honest and patriotic citizen will, from 
 conscientious motives, attach himself to that party which 
 he believes will pursue those measures which, in his judg- 
 ment, are best calculated to advance the prosperity and 
 happiness, and most effectually preserve the liberty and 
 independence of his country. If vested with the appoint- 
 ing power, it therefore becomes his duty to confer offices
 
 96 POLITICAL HISTOBY [1796. 
 
 on such men as will use the influence created by such of- 
 fice, to increase and strengthen that party, the ascendancy 
 of which, in the opinion of the person appointing, is iden- 
 tified with the best interests of the state. Hence, although 
 he ought not under any circumstances, to appoint incom- 
 petent or unworthy men to office, yet between worthy 
 men of equal capacity, it is his duty to select those who 
 concur with him in opinion, as respects the measures best 
 calculated to advance the public good. This reasoning, 
 if not conclusive, is at least plausible. The governor re- 
 commended to the legislature to provide without delay for 
 the defence of the state in case of war. In the course of 
 his speech, he stated that doubts had arisen as to the true 
 construction of the constitution in relation to the exclusive 
 right of the person administering the government, to nomi- 
 nate all officers to the council of appointment : alluding, 
 no doubt, to the disputes between the late Gov. Clinton 
 and the council, which occurred at the recent appointment 
 of Judge Benson ; and he requested the legislature to pass 
 a declaratory law on that subject. He also recommended 
 that provisions should be made for the payment of a sala- 
 ry or pension to the chancellor and judges of the supreme 
 court, after they should become ineligible by age to hold 
 their respective offices. 
 
 The answer of the two houses was respectful and high- 
 ly complimentary. To show how far the senate were in- 
 clined to extend their courtesy to the executive, and to 
 soothe if not flatter the feelings of the governor, I cannot 
 forbear to note, that in the original draft of the answer of 
 the senate, I find the following sentence : " The evidence 
 of ability, integrity and patriotism which have been afford- 
 ed by your conduct, in the discharge of the variety of ar- 
 duous and important public trusts, authorize us to antici- 
 pate an administration conducive to the welfare of your 
 constituents." When the senate was in committee of the
 
 1796.] OF NEW-YORK. 97 
 
 whole on the answer as reported by the select committee, 
 Mr. Spencer moved to add the word " invariably " be- 
 tween the words " been " and " afforded^^'' so that the sen- 
 tence would read, " The evidence of abilityj integrity and 
 patriotism which have been invariably afforded," &c. In 
 favor of this amendment, were Cruger, Hatfield, Frey, 
 Jones, Ph. Livingston, Myers, Russell, Schuyler, Spen- 
 cer, Strong, and Van Schoonhoven, 11 ; against it, were 
 Cantine, Hopkins, L'Hommedieu, Abm. Schenck, John 
 Schenck, and Woodworth, 6. It is unnecessary to com- 
 ment on this instance of legislative sycophancy. 
 
 So far as the two houses referred in their answer to par- 
 ticular parts of the governor's speech, they concurred with 
 him in the measures which he recommended, but they 
 carefully avoided any allusions to the questions relating to 
 the exclusive right of the governor to nominate to office, 
 or the propriety of pensioning the chancellor and judges 
 of the supreme court. The legislature declined acting on 
 either of those subjects.* On this question the parties 
 were situated rather singularly ; and action upon it would 
 have been embarrassing to each of them. The federalists 
 whose interest it now was that the governor should retain 
 the exclusive right of nomination, could not pass an act 
 declarmg that right vested in him, without an indirect 
 censure upon their friends in and out of the council of 
 appointment, who insisted that, by the constitution, the 
 council held a right of nomination concurrent with the 
 governor, at the time when Egbert Benson was appointed 
 a judge of the supreme court. On the other hand, it had 
 now become the interest of the republican party, which 
 then contended that the governor was vested with the ex- 
 clusive right of nomination, to resist the exercise of the 
 
 * Gen. Morris of Otsego did. it is true, on the 29th January, on his own motion, 
 biing a bill into the asscmblsr declaring tliat the governor possessed the sole right 
 of nomioalii>8 to office, but it does not appear to have been acted upon definitely. 
 
 7
 
 98 POLITICAL, HISTORY [1796. 
 
 right, and of course, to deny that it existed. Under such 
 circumstances, it is not at all surprising that Mr. Morris 
 was unable to obtain any decisive action on his bill, 
 although it was recommended by the governor. 
 
 It is to be presumed that reflecting men of both parties, 
 were indisposed to commence the practice of pensioning 
 persons who had held civil offices, because they had held 
 them. 
 
 The council of appointment chosen this year consisted of 
 Joshua Sands, Abraham Schenck, Ebenezer Russell, and 
 Michael Myers, three of whom were federalists. 
 
 During the session, Mr. Jones brought in a bill to facili- 
 tate the trial of criminal cases at the oyer and terminer 
 courts, by dividing the state into districts and providing 
 for the appointment of a prosecuting attorney in each dis- 
 trict, which passed into a law. I observe that these offi- 
 cers were called assistant attorney generals, a name more 
 appropriate than that of district attornies, which has since 
 been given them. Jacob RatclifF was, under this law, ap- 
 pointed assistant attorney general for the district compo- 
 sed of Dutchess, Orange, and Ulster ; Ambrose Spencer 
 for the district composed of Columbia, &c. Mr. James 
 Kent, who had recently removed from the county of 
 Dutchess to the city of New-York, was appointed master 
 in chancery. All these gentlemen afterwards held high 
 judicial stations. 
 
 By a census returned to the office of the secretary of 
 state on the 20th January, 1796, it appeared that the num- 
 ber of freeholders in the state amounted to thirty-six thou- 
 sand three hundred and thirty-eight, and the voters, inclu- 
 ding voters for members of assembly, amounted to sixty- 
 six thousand and seventeen. The number of freeholders 
 in the city and county of New-York, were two thousand 
 one hundred and forty-four, and the total number of voters 
 seven thousand two hundred and seventy-two. The
 
 1798.1 OF NEW- YORK. 99 
 
 great increase of freeholders, since the last census had 
 been taken, was caused principally by the constant and 
 rapid emigration from the New England states to the 
 western district. That district then included the county 
 of Albany and all the counties west of it. 
 
 At the time of the adoption of the constitution, in 1777, 
 the number of senators was fixed at twenty-four, but, by 
 the twelfth article, when the number of electors in any one 
 district should increase to an amount equal to one twenty- 
 fourth of their whole number in the state, as then existing, 
 an additional senator should be chosen by such district ; 
 and, by another article, the number of senators might be 
 thus increased until the whole number of senators should 
 amount to one hundred. Therefore, according to the 
 census of 1796, in pursuance of these regulations, forty- 
 four senators were to be chosen, seventeen of whom were 
 to be elected from the western district. But, for the pur- 
 pose of equalizing the districts, an act was soon afterwards 
 passed, annexing the counties of Albany and Saratoga to 
 the eastern district. 
 
 Governor Jay was known to be in favor of the abo- 
 lition of slavery in this state j but he omitted, as his son 
 (Judge Jay) thinks, to recommend that measure in his 
 speech, " from the conviction that in the present state of 
 politics such a proposition emanating from him would en- 
 list the spirit of party in opposition to a measure against 
 which the prejudices of a large portion of the community 
 were already enlisted." But, according to the same wri- 
 ter, a few days after the commencement of the session, 
 " an intimate friend of the governor's obtained leave to 
 introduce a bill for the gradual abolition of slavery." — (1 
 Jay^ 390.) 
 
 The bill underwent a long and somewhat heated dis- 
 cussion, and was finally got rid of by a resolution offered 
 by one of the members opposed to abolition, purporting
 
 idO POLITICAL HISTORY 1796.] 
 
 that it would be unjust to deprive any citizen of his pro- 
 perty, unless a reasonable compensation for the value of it 
 should be paid to him by the state. On this resolution, 
 the vote stood thirty-one to thirty-one, but it was carried 
 by the casting vote of the chairman of the committee of 
 the whole. Mr. Foote, afterwards first judge of the county 
 of Delaware, was the chairman, and gave the casting 
 vote. 
 
 No other material event operating on the; action of 
 political parties, occurred during this session of the legis- 
 lature. 
 
 The election in the spring of 1796, teiminated highly 
 favorable to the federalists. The excitement in relation 
 to the British treaty had partially subsided. The violent 
 conduct of the French republic and their agent in this 
 country, the popularity of Gen. Washington, the purity 
 of Gov. Jay's character, and the rectitude of his conduct, 
 together with the governmental patronage, had enabled 
 the federalists to recover the ground which they lost im- 
 mediately after the promulgation of the treaty. In the 
 southern district, Messrs. Haight, Onderdonk, Strong, and 
 Watson were elected to the senate by a majority of about 
 fifteen hundred. In the middle district, the senators cho- 
 sen were, Robert Sands, C. Tappan and Wm. Thomson. 
 The election in this district was very close, Mr. Tappan 
 being the only republican who succeeded. In the eastern 
 district, E. Clarke, M. Vail, J. Savage, P. Sylvester and 
 A. Ten Eyck, all federalists, were chosen by a majority 
 of from one to eight hundred. In the western district, 
 the federal ticket succeeded almost without opposition, 
 and Jed. Sanger, Jas. Gordon, Leonard Gansevoort, 
 Thomas Morris, Thomas R. Gold, John Richardson, 
 Johannes Dietz, Vincent Matthews, Jacob Morris, Leo- 
 nard Brown, Francis Nicol, Joseph White, and Abraham 
 Arndt were elected. The great number of new senators
 
 1796.] OF NEW-YORK. 101 
 
 chosen from the western district gave the federalists a 
 prodigious preponderance in the senate. 
 
 The legislature met in the city of New-York, on the 
 first of November. The occasion of meeting thus early 
 was in order to make choice of presidential electors. 
 Gulian Verplanck of New-York, was chosen speaker. 
 The governor's speech contained nothing which it is ne- 
 cessary particularly to notice. It is, however, an excel- 
 lent document, and the youthful student will find himself 
 Well repaid for perusing it. The governor's eulogy upon 
 Gen. Washington, who had declined a re-election, is ad- 
 mirable. Upon the refusal of Washington to become a 
 third time a candidate for the presidency, the federalists 
 of the northern and eastern states were in favor of Mr. 
 John Adams. That such was the inclination of an im- 
 mense majority of the federalists of New-York, I have no 
 manner of doubt. That Gov. Jay was not only the poli- 
 tical, but personal friend of Mr. Adams, is most evident 
 from his correspondence with that distinguished indivi- 
 dual. — (See 1 Jay, 417.) But from a letter or pamphlet, 
 written and published by Gen. Hamilton, in the year 
 1800, on which I shall have occasion hereafter to remark 
 more particularly, it appears that his favorite candidate 
 for the presidency was Thomas Pinckney, of South-Caro- 
 lina, the federal candidate for vice-president. I hardly 
 need mention, that by the United States constitution pre- 
 vious to its amendment, which was made shortly after the 
 election of 1800. the president and vice-president were to 
 be both voted for on one ticket, without designating which 
 was intended for the one or the other office; and the person 
 having the highest number of votes was elected president, 
 and he who received the next highest number of votes 
 was chosen vice-president. Mr. Hamilton urged the 
 northern and eastern federalists to give Messrs. Adams 
 and Pinckney an equal number of votes, and it appears 
 
 LIBRARY 
 XJNIVERSTTY OF Ci^LTFORMT,*:'
 
 102 POLITICAL HISTORY [1796. 
 
 from the letter to which I have referred, that he hoped 
 that by chance or some other means, Mr. Adams might be 
 left off of some of the southern tickets, which contained 
 the name of Mr. Pinckney, and in that event he would 
 have been elected. This event actually occurred. The 
 state of South-Carolina gave eight votes to Thomas Pinck- 
 ney, and eight votes to Thomas Jefferson. Whether this 
 was done by " chance" or design, it w^ould have caused 
 the election of Mr. Pinckney for president, had all the 
 other federal states followed the advice of Gen. Hamil- 
 ton, and it is not improbable that he and some of his 
 South-Carolina friends expected they would do so ; but, 
 unfortunately for the projectors of the scheme, if such a 
 scheme was projected, the federal states of Rhode-Island 
 and New-Hampshire gave their votes for Oliver Ells- 
 worth, Massachusetts gave two votes to Samuel Johnson, 
 and Connecticut gave four votes to John Jay, in conse- 
 quence of which Mr. Pinckney fell behind Mr. Jefferson, 
 the republican candidate, who was elected vice-presi- 
 dent.* 
 
 At the time of the choice of presidential electors in 
 New-York, the republican party must have been much 
 discouraged and disheartened by the result of the recent 
 
 * As I shall have occasion again to refer to this election, I will here give the ro 
 suit of the presidential canvass, as ascertained in congress, Feb. 8, 1797. 
 
 Adams. Jeffenon. Pinckney. Burr. S. Adams. Clinton. 
 
 Tennessee, — 3 — 3 — — 
 
 Kentucky, — 4 — 4 — — 
 
 Georgia, — 4 — — — 4 
 
 S.Carolina, — 8 e — — — 
 
 N.Carolina, 1 11 1 6 — — 
 
 Virginia, 1 20 1 1 16 — 
 
 Maryland, 7 4 4 3 — — 
 
 Delaware, 3 — 3 — — — 
 
 Pennsylvania, 1 14 2 13 — — 
 
 New-Jersey, 7 — 7 — — — 
 
 New-York, 12 — 12 — — — 
 
 Connecticut, o, 9 — 4 — — — 
 
 Rhode Island, 6, •••• 4 — _ _ _ 
 
 Massachusetts, c,-- • 16 — 13 — — — 
 
 Vermont, 4 — 4 — — — 
 
 New-Hampshire, d,- 6 — — — — — 
 
 71 68 63 30 13 4 
 
 •. John Jay, 4 votes. 6. Oliver Ellsworth, 4. c. S. Johnson, 2. d. Oliver B)l 
 worth, &
 
 4f » 
 
 X796. OF NEW-YORK. 103 
 
 election, and it is not probable that any considerable inter- 
 est was felt in the selection of candidates, either for presi- 
 dent or vice-president. There can, however, be little 
 doubt but that they were unanimous in their desire that 
 Mr. Jefferson should be elected president, and that Geo. 
 Clinton was their favorite candidate for the vice-presiden- 
 cy, however faint might be their hopes of success. The 
 result of the canvass proves, that the democratic party m 
 the nation, had not, as a party, fixed upon any individual 
 as their candidate for vice-president. Col. Burr, being at 
 that time in the senate of the U. S., and in habits of daily 
 intercourse with the southern republicans, received the 
 greatest number of the democratic votes, but the votes of 
 Georgia were given to gov. Clinton, and fifteen of the 
 votes of Virginia were cast for Samuel Adams of Massa- 
 chusetts. Before I dismiss this subject, I cannot help 
 remarking, that, at this early period, local and sectional 
 feelings seem to have had an influence. It is impossible, 
 in any other way, to account for the fact that Mr. Adams 
 received but two votes south of the Potomac, and that Mr. 
 Jefferson obtainedbut eighteen votes, (and those were from 
 Penn. and Maryland,) north of that river ; and that this 
 took place, notwithstanding the election was so very 
 close, — the majority for Mr. Adams being only three. 
 
 The legislature, early in the session, proceeded to 
 choose presidential electors. All of them, were of course, 
 federalists, and they, therefore, gave the twelve votes of 
 the state of New-York, to Mr. Adams, and Mr. Thomas 
 Pinckney of South Carolina. 
 
 Mr. Rufus King had been recently appointed minister 
 to London, which left his seat in the U. S. senate vacant. 
 It therefore became necessary to appoint a successor. 
 The two houses thereupon elected to that office John Law- 
 rence. What were the peculiar circumstances which in- 
 duced this gentleman's election, I have never been in-
 
 104 POLITICAL HISTORY [1796. 
 
 formed. He had, I believe, served in the army of the 
 revolution, as colonel of a regiment, and, after the peace, 
 had devoted himself to the practice of law in the city of 
 New-York, and was, at the time of his election, an U. S. 
 judge of the district of New-York. 
 
 On the 11th Nov. the legislature adjourned to meet at 
 the city of Albany, on the 3d of January, and on that day 
 accordingly, the two houses convened at Albany. On the 
 13th January, 1797, the assembly chose the following 
 gentlemen members of the council of appointment, for the 
 ensuing year : Andrew Onderdonk, Ambrose Spencer, 
 Leonard Gansevoort, and Thomas Morris, all federalists. 
 
 A law was passed this year, creating the office of comp- 
 troller. This bill transferred the powers and duties of 
 the auditor to the comptroller, and conferred on the latter 
 officer other powers, and required of him the performance 
 of other duties. It was evidently the intention of the fra- 
 mers of the constitution, that the treasurer should be the 
 great financial officer of the government j hence, the ex- 
 treme caution in relation to the frequency, and manner of 
 his appointment. But the law creating a comptroller, of 
 which Mr. Jones seems to have been the principal author, 
 and the subsequent acts of the legislature, in connexion 
 with the natural working of the governmental machinery, 
 have constituted the comptroller the great state officer ; 
 and the treasurer has become a mere clerk to the comp- 
 troller : a nominal keeper of the funds of the state, which 
 are managed and disbursed under the direction of the 
 comptroller. On the industry, capacity, and integrity 
 of that officer, the prosperity of the state is more depend- 
 ant than any single officer of the government, whether 
 such officer is created by the appointing power or by the 
 election of the people. After the adjournment of the 
 legislature. Gen. Banker, treasurer, resigned his office as
 
 1797.] or NEW- YORK. 105 
 
 treasurer. Mr. Samuel Jones of the senate, was appointed 
 by the council of appointment, the first comptroller. 
 
 The county of Delaware, was this year erected from the 
 counties of Otsego and Ulster, with the right of sending two 
 members to the legislature, A law also was passed fixing 
 permanently the seat of government in the city of Albany, 
 and measures were taken for the erection of public build- 
 ings, for the accommodation of the state officers. 
 
 The term of service of Aaron Burr in the senate of the 
 United States, expired this year, and on the 31st of March, 
 three days before the adjournment of the legislature, they 
 elected Gen. Philip Schuyler to that office. This evidence 
 of continued confidence on the part of his friends, must 
 have been extremely grateful to his feelings, after he had 
 been beaten in the manner I have before related, by Col. 
 Burr. It is evident that the General, appreciated with 
 great sensibility, this appointment j for, on the occasion, 
 he delivered a short address to the legislature. His 
 speech evinced much good feeling, and was, rather unu- 
 sual for him, conciliatory in manner and matter. He said 
 he had been forty years in the public service, and had de- 
 termined to retire to private life when his term in the state 
 senate should expire, but that the recent appointment and 
 the manner in which it had been conferred on him, impo- 
 sed on him an obligation to forego his private inclinations. 
 He stated that his feelings were ardent in support of his 
 political principles ; but he declared that he retained no 
 unkind impressions against those who differed from him 
 in opinion, in relation to public men or measures, and he 
 trusted that his opponents entertained corresponding 
 friendly sentiments towards him. He concluded with an 
 ardent and patriotic prayer for Llie preservation of our civil 
 institutions, and for the prosperity of the state. 
 
 Indications began to be exhibited, in various parts of 
 this state, of jealousy and dissatisfaction respecting the
 
 106 POLITICAL HISTORY [1797. 
 
 manner in which the national concerns were managed ; 
 particularly in respect to our foreign affairs, and especially 
 in relation to the French republic. The congressional 
 election which took place in December, 1796, had termi- 
 nated more favorable to the republican party than had 
 been anticipated. Edward Livingston had been re-elected 
 from New-York ; J. N. Havens from Suffolk ; Lucas El- 
 mendorff from Ulster, and Philip Van Cortland from 
 Westchester, all republicans, notwithstanding they respec- 
 tively encountered a zealous opposition from the fede- 
 ralists. 
 
 In the city of New-York, on the 6th February, 1796, a 
 grand celebration of the ninth anniversary of the treaty 
 of alliance between France and America, was held, 
 attended by many distinguished republican citizens of 
 New-York, and also by a considerable number of French 
 citizens. The meeting, it is said, was eloquently addressed 
 by Brockholts Livingston. The toasts drank on the occa- 
 sion, may be considered as indicating the feelings of the 
 company. On the subject of the president and the na- 
 tional government, they were silent. One of the regular 
 toasts was, " The British Treaty — May it be an awful 
 lesson how to trust to the justice and magnanimity of 
 those who ever have, and still do seek, the ruin of our 
 commerce, and destruction of our liberty." 
 
 The celebrated JVapper Tandy gave for a toast — " The 
 virtuous citizens of New-York, who, despite of British in- 
 fluence, returned their faithful representative to congress." 
 
 By Chancellor Livingston — " May the present coolness 
 between France and America, produce, like the quarrels 
 of lovers, a renewal of love." 
 
 It will be recollected, that Chancellor Livingston, at 
 the time of the adoption of the constitution, was an ardent 
 federalist ; and, I now add, that it is very doubtful 
 •whether, without his eloquence and personal influence,
 
 1797.] OF NEW-YORK. 107 
 
 the Poughkeepsie convention would have adopted it. He 
 continued to act with the federalists for some time after- 
 wards, and was politically opposed to Gov. Clinton 
 and his party. A little before the period of which I am 
 now speaking, he and his immediate connexions, known 
 as the " Livingston family^^ shifted their position, and 
 took ground in opposition to the state and national admin- 
 istrations. What were the causes which produced a 
 change in the politics of the chancellor 1 and at what 
 time did, that change take place 1 Being myself unable 
 to solve these questions, I caused the inquiry to be made 
 of a neighbor and cotemporary of Mr. Livingston, though 
 some years his junior, and who for a long time held with 
 distinguished ability, a high office under the government 
 of this state. His reply was, " The chancellor changed 
 in 1790. The ostensible cause was, his opposition to the 
 views of Mr. Hamilton, as contained in his reports as sec- 
 retary of the treasury, particularly those in relation to the 
 funding of the national debt, and in favor of a national 
 bank. The real cause was supposed to be disappointment 
 in not being appointed chief justice of the United States." 
 It is proper to add, that this information is derived from 
 an ardent friend of Gen. Hamilton, and of course, an op- 
 ponent of the chancellor. I have since been informed 
 that the family one evening had a meeting for the pur- 
 pose of deliberating on the subject, and that the result of 
 their deliberations was such, that the next morning every 
 member of it took a position in the ranks of the republican 
 party. It is, however, to be remarked, that some of the 
 Livingstons who resided in Columbia county, did not 
 change with the chancellor, but continued their adherence 
 to the federal party. Chancellor Livingston was one of 
 the most eloquent men of his day. He possessed talents 
 highly respectable as a lawyer and statesman, though 
 perhaps he may have been defective in that intense, per-
 
 108 POLITICAL HISTORY [1797. 
 
 severing application to study, absolutely necessary in. 
 order to enable the most gifted individual to sustain and 
 retain a high standing among the legal profession as a 
 jurist. His manners were said to be exceedingly agreeable 
 and fascinating. He was, as we have seen, one of the 
 most efficient agents in procuring the adoption of the 
 constitution. But in the selection of the great officers of 
 the general government, the heads of departments, the 
 supreme judiciary, and foreign embassies, he had been 
 wholly overlooked. Is it wonderful that he should have 
 been dissatisfied 1 How is this neglect of the chancellor, 
 with his shining talents, his fascinating address, and pow- 
 erful family connexions, to be accounted for 7 Was it 
 owing to the personal jealousy of Gen. Hamilton 7 — Be 
 the cause of that and his political change, what it may, it 
 is obvious that the accession of the Livingston family to 
 the republican party, rendered that party far more power- 
 ful than otherwise it would have been, and accelerated, if 
 it did not produce, their triumph over their opponents. 
 
 The general election of April, 1797, aflforded an evi- 
 dence that the republican party were gaining ground, 
 particularly in the southern district. Mr. L'Hommedieu, 
 ■who began now to act with the democracy, had been re- 
 turned as senator from that district. 
 
 In the eastern district, Messrs. Van Vechten, Ten Eyck, 
 Van Schoonhoven and Clark, and in the western, Messrs. 
 Phelps, Thomas Morris and M. Myers, all federalists were 
 elected senators. 
 
 In New- York, the republican candidates were elected 
 by more than an average majority of one thousand. 
 Among the members elected from the city, I find those of 
 Aaron Burr, Samuel L. Mitchell, (the learned Doctor 
 Mitchell) and De Witt Clinton. This gentleman, who 
 afterwards became so distinguished in this state, was the 
 son of Gen. James Clinton, and nephew to Gov. George
 
 1797.1 ®^ NEW-YORK. 109 
 
 Clinton. He was then about 28 years old. He had at 
 an early age graduated at Columbia College, with high 
 reputation for his scholastic attainments, and soon after 
 commenced reading law in the office of Samuel Jones, 
 whom I have several times mentioned as one of the most 
 efficient members of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. Clinton did not, however, complete his studies 
 without some interruption. In consequence of the death of 
 an elder brother, who was private secretary to the gover- 
 nor, he was pursuaded to relinquish for a time his legal 
 studies, and officiate in the office which had become va- 
 cant by his brother's death. This was in the midst of the 
 heat of debate on the subject of the adoption of the federal 
 constitution. He took side in that controversy with his 
 uncle, the governor, and though young, was one of the 
 ablest newspaper writers in opposition to those who ad- 
 vocated the adoption of the constitution. When, in 1795, 
 Mr. Jay was elected governor, Mr. Clinton was relieved 
 from every public employment, and again resorted to the 
 study and practice of law in the city of New-York. Al- 
 though he was distinctly known as a member of the re- 
 publican party, and an active one, and notwithstanding 
 he had written and said much against the federal constitu- 
 tion, yet after that instrument had become the supreme 
 law of the land he manifested his determination, and 
 urged his friends to support it in good faith. He also 
 was far from tolerating or apologizing for the insolent 
 conduct of the French government towards this country, 
 or the impertinent and officious intermeddling of Mr. Ge- 
 net, and other French agents, with our domestic affairs, 
 and with the opinions of the American people. Hence 
 some leading federalists in New- York entertained strong 
 hopes that he would abandon the republican party; and I 
 have heard it asserted that Gen. Hamilton had expressed 
 an opinion that Mr. De Witt Clinton would ultimately be
 
 110 POLITICAL HISTORY [1793. 
 
 identified with the federal party. Nothing material oc 
 curred during the recess of the legislature. 
 
 The legislature elected in April, 1797, met at Albany 
 on the 2d January, 1798. In the assembly, one hundred 
 and one members appeared and took their seats, and 
 Derick Ten Eyck was chosen speaker, against Mr. Wil- 
 liam Duning, by a vote of fifty-nine to forty-two. This 
 seemed to have been a clear party vote, and therefore ex- 
 hibits the strength of the parties during that session in the 
 assembly. The governor, in his speech, confined himself 
 to such domestic affairs and regulations of the state as in 
 his judgment demanded the attention of the legislature. 
 His address was judicious, and, as usual, able ; but he 
 carefully avoided any allusion to the political topics in 
 controversy between the two parties. 
 
 On the 3d of January, the assembly proceeded to 
 nominate a council of appointment ; and Ezra L'Homme- 
 dieu, William Thompson, Moses Vail, and Joseph White 
 were chosen. 
 
 In the early part of the session, Mr. Spencer raised a 
 question whether the incumbent of the office of comptrol- 
 ler could, with propriety, hold a seat in the senate, by in- 
 troducing a resolution that the seat of Samuel Jones be 
 declared vacant, in consequence of his acceptance of the 
 office of comptroller. This resolution elicited conside- 
 rable debate, but it was finally negatived by a large ma- 
 jority. 
 
 Gen. Schuyler, by a written communication, asked 
 and obtained leave to resign his office as senator in the 
 senate of the United States, and on the 12th of January, 
 the two houses nominated and appointed John Sloss Ho- 
 bart, one of the judges of the supreme court, his suc- 
 cessor. 
 
 Judge Hobart soon afterwards addressed a letter of 
 some length to the legislature. In this communication he
 
 1798.] OF NEW- YORK. Ill 
 
 states that Ae was not bred to the profession of law, that 
 he accepted the office when the supreme court was first 
 organized, and had held it for twenty years j that the 
 salary, for a considerable part of the time, had, in conse- 
 quence of the extreme pecuniary embarrassments of the 
 state, been insufficient to defray the expenses of his fami- 
 ly J that with a view of adding to his means of living, he 
 purchased a farm, for which he was utterly unable to pay; 
 and in conclusion he states that he accepts the office of 
 senator in the full confidence that " the legislature of his 
 own state will not suffer an old servant to drink of the 
 bitter cup of poverty and distress in the evening of his 
 life." 
 
 It is somewhat remarkable that a man who had not 
 studied the law as a profession, should have been selected 
 for a judge of the supreme court. Eut then, we are to 
 recollect that he was appointed in 1777, during the most 
 perilous period of the revolutionary war; that able whig 
 lawyers were then rarely to be found ; and that probably 
 patriotism, integrity and sound discretion and judgment 
 were more sought after, and in fact, in those times more 
 needed, than high legal attainments. 
 
 There are no reports of adjudications of the supreme 
 court while Judge Hobart sat as one of its members j but 
 from a letter written by him to Gov. Jay in 1795, on the 
 subject of the governor's thanksgiving proclamation, (1 
 Jay^ 386,) it may be inferred that he was a man of wit, 
 and a scholar. 
 
 The fact that Judge Hobart was not bred a lawyer ac- 
 counts for the appointment of Robert Yates chief justice, 
 when Hobart was the senior judge. 
 
 Shortly after the communication of Judge Hobart to the 
 legislature, of which I have been speaking, was received, 
 a motion was made that some pecuniary provisions should 
 be made for him, and also for the Chief Justice, Yates,
 
 112 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1798. 
 
 whose term of office was about to expire, but nothing ef- 
 fectual was done on the subject. 
 
 The expiration of the term of office of Chief Justice 
 Yates,* and the resignation of Judge Hobart produced 
 two vacancies on the bench of the supreme court. 
 
 In the month of February, James Kent, then recorder 
 of New-York, was appointed to supply one of the vacan- 
 cies, and John Lansing, Junior, was appointed chief justice; 
 but no appointment of a fifth judge was made until the 
 9th of August following, when John Cozine was appoint- 
 ed. He, however, died within a very short time after his 
 appointment, and on the 27th December, 1798, Jacob 
 Radcliflf, then assistant attorney general for the counties 
 of Dutchess, Ulster and Orange, was appointed in place 
 of the deceased judge. 
 
 During this session, Robert McClellan, who afterwards 
 became a defaulter, was appointed state treasurer. 
 
 The office of secretary of state became vacant by the 
 death of Mr. Scott, and Major Daniel Hale of Albany, was 
 appointed to that office. This appointment was made 
 against the wishes of Gov. Jay, and in consequence of the 
 strenuous effijrt of Doct. Joseph White, a member of the 
 council from the western district. Gov. Jay nominated 
 several persons, who were promptly rejected by the coun- 
 cil, and at last very reluctantly nominated Mr. Hale. 
 Mr. Hale, it is said, was an excellent officer, and the go- 
 vernor soon became convinced that his opposition to the 
 appointment was caused by erroneous impressions, and 
 
 * Chief Justice Yates never afterwards held any office of importance. Although 
 not distinguished as a great man or learned jurist, I have never heard his integ- 
 rity or impartiality as a judge impeached. In his temper and disposition he was 
 amiable, and his social qualities tendered him agreeable and interesting to all 
 classes in community. He was likewise kind and generous. Unhappily these 
 qualities caused him to be too inattentive to his pecuniary concerns, and he died 
 poor. Upon his decease, his son, John Van Ness Yates, Esquire, found his estate 
 insufficient to pay his debts, and afterwards, as I am informed, from his own 
 earnings, from filial affection and a regard to the memory of his father, very mnch 
 to bis own honor, paid all the creditors. Ought the state to have permitted this I
 
 1798.] OF NEW- YORK. 113 
 
 when so convinced he lost no time in communicating to 
 Doct. White and Major Hale his conviction that he was 
 well satisfied that he was wrong, and that the friends of 
 Mr. Hale were right. 
 
 After the legislature had adjourned, (which was on the 
 7th April,) Judge Hobart was appointed by the president 
 a district judge for the district of New-York, and there- 
 upon (the vacancy in the U. S. senate happening during 
 the recess of the legislature,) Gov. Jay appointed Gen. 
 William North of Duanesburgh, to supply the vacancy 
 in the senate. 
 
 The electioneering campaign was opened with great 
 vigor in the winter of 1798. 
 
 On the 6th March, at a very general meeting of the 
 federal members of the legislature, and citizens from vari- 
 ous parts of the state, John Jay and Stephen Van Rens- 
 selaer were nominated for re-election. Chancellor Liv- 
 ingston was nominated by the republican party in oppo- 
 sition to Mr. Jay. The republicans made no nomination 
 for lieutenant governor, but I believe generally concur- 
 red in the support of Mr. Van Rensselaer. The great 
 and well merited personal popularity of the lieutenant 
 governor, probably induced this course. 
 
 Judge Wm. Jay says, (1 Joy, 400,) that "Governor 
 Jay would gladly have retired from the contest, but the 
 indignities which France was at that time, heaping 
 upon this country, and the probability that they would 
 soon lead to a war, forbade him to consult only his per- 
 sonal gratification." "No competitor could, probably, 
 have been selected with whom he would have been more 
 reluctant to contend, than Chancellor Livingston. An- 
 cient friendship, and ancient associations, must have 
 rendered it peculiarly painful to him, to find in his old 
 companion and fellow laborer, a voluntary rival." The 
 subsequent conduct of Gov. Jay, renders it extremely 
 
 8
 
 114 POLITICAL HISTORY [1798. 
 
 probable that this opinion of Judge Jay, in relation to 
 the motives and desires of his father, is correct. 
 
 Although some of the unpopular measures of the ad- 
 ministration of Mr. Adams, had been adopted, and had 
 been met by strong and vigorous opposition by the lead- 
 ing democrats in this state, as well as in other states of the 
 Union, particularly the southern, yet sufficient time had 
 not elapsed to enable the great mass of the yeomanry 
 of the country to become so well acquainted with the 
 merits and demerits of the federal administration, as to 
 prepare them to pronounce a judgement of condemna- 
 tion ; and the offensive conduct of Genet, and the atti- 
 tude assumed by the French republic towards the Amer- 
 ican government, induced a majority of the people of 
 this state to support, for the present the national admin- 
 istration, and of course, to sustain the re-election of Gov. 
 Jay, in the purity of whose motives all men had unlimited 
 confidence. He was therefore elected by, at that time, 
 the large majority of two thousand three hundred and 
 eighty votes.
 
 1798.] OF NEW- YORK. 115 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 FROM MAY I, 1798, TO MA.Y 1, 1801. 
 
 Although Gov. Jay had been re-elected by a triumphant 
 majority, the election evinced that the republican party 
 was the rising party in the state. In the southern district, 
 De Witt Clinton and David Gelston were elected to the 
 senate ; Ambrose Spencer, John Schenck and Ebenezer 
 Foote,from the middle ; Leonard Gansevoort, John Frey 
 and John Saunders, from the eastern, and William Beeke- 
 man, Frederick Getman and Thomas R. Gold, from the 
 western district, were returned members of the senate. 
 The city of New-York again returned republican members 
 of the assembly, among whom, were Aaron Burr and 
 John Swartwout. Washington county also elected demo- 
 cratic members of the assembly, in despite of the strenuous 
 exertions of Gen. John Williams, who had changed from 
 a zealous democrat to a most heated federalist. He was 
 the federal candidate for congress, from the district com- 
 posed of Washington, Clinton and Saratoga counties, but 
 was beaten by Judge Thompson of Saratoga, who was 
 the republican candidate. 
 
 Several gentlemen, who afterwards made a distinguished 
 figure in the democratic party, this year made their first 
 appearance in public life, in the assembly. Among them 
 may be mentioned, David Thomas, of the county of Wash- 
 ington, Erastus Root, of the county of Delaware, Archi- 
 bald Mclntyre, of the county of Montgomery, Obadiah 
 German, of the county of Chenango, and Jedediah Peck, 
 of the county of Otsego. Mr. Peck had been elected as a 
 federalist, or rather, strictly speaking, the federal partv in 
 that county could hardly be said at that time, to have had
 
 116 POLITICAL HISTORY [1798. 
 
 any opposition, but in the course of the session, he gen- 
 erally acted with the republicans, and finally became iden- 
 tified with that party. 
 
 The year which succeeded the election, in April, 1798, 
 was one of unusual, perhaps unsurpassed, political excite- 
 ment in the United States ; but in no state was party heat 
 more intense than in the state of New- York. All the old 
 animosities which were generated in 1788, and had been 
 smothered for ten years, burst forth into a flame. This 
 excitement was mainly produced by the measures of the 
 general government. The friends of the administration 
 of Mr. Adams were openly charged with palpable and al- 
 most treasonable partiality for the British government, 
 and with attempting by construction to invest the national 
 government with powers not intended to be conferred on 
 them by the constitution, and finally to subvert our free 
 institutions and establish in lieu thereof, if not in name in 
 spirit, a limited monarchical government similar to that 
 of Great Britain. These charges may seem to us at this 
 day, entirely extravagant, and as having originated either 
 from an over heated disordered imagination, or from a de- 
 sign to impose on the less informed part of the community 
 by false representations and unfounded alarms, with a 
 view to accomplish electioneering purposes, and projects 
 of self aggrandizement. But in my judgement, we should 
 do injustice to a large portion of the intelligent and best 
 informed part of the republicans, who led on the attack 
 upon the federal administration, in arriving at such a con- 
 clusion. To prove the correctness of this opinion, it will 
 be necessary slightly to glance at the principles and move- 
 ments of the two great national parties of that day. It 
 cannot be denied but that many of the most intelligent of 
 the federalists, at the time of the adoption of the United 
 States constitution, believed that a pure representative 
 government, as contemplated by that instrument, could
 
 1798.] OF NEW- YORK. 117 
 
 not be sustained by any community on earth. They 
 therefore looked for a change to be produced either by 
 physical force, that is by a revolutiouj or by gradual and 
 almost insensible innovations, to be effected by those who 
 should administer the government ; and the latter course 
 was, from various and important considerations, to be pre- 
 ferred. I have no doubt that a large majority of those 
 men who thus thought and judged were honest in their 
 opinions. Why should it be otherwise 1 A representative 
 democracy was entirely novel. The ancient republics 
 were either real aristocracies or democracies. In the latter 
 case, the people, instead of acting by their representatives, 
 acted in masses. Such were some of the ancient Grecian 
 republics. These communities were, after a short time, 
 always misled by designing demagogues, and soon lost 
 their liberties. 
 
 In Rome, the government was partly aristocratic and 
 partly democratic. The democratic branch of the govern- 
 ment gradually gained ground and encroached on the 
 aristocratic, until the senate entirely lost its authority and 
 power. The democracy soon became a prey to the ambi- 
 tious projects of designing and corrupt demagogues. The 
 result was, that the Roman people, who were masters of 
 the world, became themselves the slaves of a single despot. 
 The more recent Italian and Dutch republics, (so called,) 
 were generally, properly speaking, mere oligarchies ; and 
 were so distracted by factions, caused by the ambitious 
 projects of individuals, or created by the corrupt influence 
 of neighboring and more powerful governments, as to af- 
 ford a feeble protection to the private rights and personal 
 liberty of the citizen, and an extremely unsafe and uncer- 
 tain guaranty of national independence. The government 
 of nearly all the American states, while colonies, had been 
 partially created by the hereditary executive and royal 
 authority of Great Britain. The little colonies of Connec-
 
 118 POLITICAL HISTORY [1798. 
 
 ticut and Rhode-Island furnished the only instances of the 
 existence of civil society, for any considerable period of 
 time, under a representative governmentj and these were 
 in factj in their infancy, and always had acted under the 
 tutelage of the mother country. It is an old maxim, " that 
 what has been, will be." Is it then, matter of astonish- 
 ment, that reflecting men, reading men, and honest men, 
 should have despaired of effecting that in this country, 
 which had never been effected in any age or by any coun- 
 try on this globe 1 I rather wonder that men were found 
 bold enough to venture on this new experiment, and to 
 disregard these doubts and apprehensions. Thank God, 
 there were such men ; among whom Thomas Jefferson, 
 Benjamin Franklin, George Clinton, and Samuel Adams, 
 stand pre-eminent. Thank God, too, that they were sus 
 tained by the mass of mind in the United States. The 
 men who were known to have entertained these doubts of 
 the capacity of man for self-governmentj stood in the front 
 ranks, and were the leaders of the federalism of 1798. 
 General Hamilton had, as we have seen, avowed his prin- 
 ciples frankly and fully, in the national convention, in 
 favor of a government which, in effect, would have been 
 a limited monarchy, and, in his letter to Timothy Picker- 
 ing, (see page 14,) at a later day, he intimates that he 
 yielded to the adoption of the constitution because the 
 prejudices of the people in favor of a republican govern- 
 ment were so strong that it seemed necessary to " try the 
 experiment,''^ Even the pure minded and patriotic John 
 Jay in his letter to Gen. Washington, dated March 7, 1787, 
 (1 Jay^ 256,) on the subject of the form of government, 
 which in his judgement ought to be adopted by the Uni- 
 ted States, says, " Shall we have a King 1 Not in my 
 opinion, while other experiments remain untried. Might 
 we not have a governor general limited in his prerog- 
 ative and duration % Might not congress be divided
 
 1798.1 OF KEW-YOEK. 119 
 
 into an upper and lower house, the former appointed for 
 life, the latter annually. * * * What powers should be 
 granted to the government so constituted 1 is a question 
 which deserves much thought. I think the more the bet- 
 ter ; the states retaining only so much as may he necessary 
 for domestic purposes j and all their principal officers ^ civil 
 and military^ being commissioned and removable by the 
 national government. Let it be remembered that this let- 
 ter was written to General Washington, the man first in 
 influence in the nation, and that in his answer he expressed 
 no suprise at the propositions made by Mr. Jay. 
 
 Is it, then, a matter of surprise that the populace should 
 have been alarmed when the stamp duty, the very mea- 
 sure which had induced them to rebel against Great Bri- 
 tain, was fixed upon them by congress ? 
 
 I ought to have mentioned that so late as 1798, lead- 
 ing federalists were in the habit, in their verbal commu- 
 nications, of declaring their convictions that our democra- 
 tic institutions could not long subsist. 
 
 Is it at all surprising that enlightened and highly intel- 
 ligent men of the republican party, when they perceived 
 that Gen. Hamilton and Gov. Jay were the dispensers of 
 governmental patronage in this state, when they found 
 that that patronage was almost exclusively bestowed on 
 those who declared themselves in favor of a strong and 
 energetic government, as it was called, when the general 
 goverment had adopted a system of internal taxation which 
 immensely increased its patronage j when a standing army 
 in time of peace had been raisedj when congress had con- 
 ferred on the president the power to borrow money, leav- 
 ing him unlimited in his discretion as to the rate of interest 
 to be paid j when the same authority had vested the presi- 
 dent with arbitrary control over the persons of aliens, and 
 when a law had been passed, rendering it highly penal to 
 speak or write any thing tending to bring odium and con-
 
 120 POLITICAL HISTORY [1798. 
 
 tempt on the president or upon his administration, or upon 
 congress, and especially when under this act, they saw a 
 member of congress confined for four months in a dungeon, 
 principally for charging Mr. Adams with living in a sump- 
 tous and princely style ; is it, I say, at all surprising that 
 intelligent and consciencious men should have honestly 
 entertained serious apprehensions, if not a firm belief that 
 those men w^ho had all along declared their opinion that 
 a free representative government could not be sustained, 
 they being the very men who were suppose^l to hold a 
 controling influence in the administration of Mr. Adams, 
 intended the subversion of our free institutions, and were 
 taking measures to accomplish that intention 1 
 
 While, therefore, I award to the great body, even of 
 the leading federalists of ninety-eight, honest and pure 
 motives, I insist that upright and well informed republi- 
 cans had good reasons to believe, and did sincerely believe 
 that a gradual subversion of the free principles of the con- 
 stitution was in progress by those who administered the go- 
 vernment. Another circumstance which at this time added 
 unusual bitterness to party controversies was, that unfortu- 
 nately for the federal party, nearly all the tories of the re- 
 volution then living, joined them. This view of the mate- 
 rials of which that party was composed, connected with the 
 sympathy felt by the Americans generally for the French, 
 produced an impression by no means unnatural, that the 
 federalists, as a party were unreasonably attached to the 
 British and desired to renew the connexion in some shape, 
 that formerly existed between the two countries. 
 
 It is easy to perceive, that all these causes acting at one 
 and the same time in connexion with the ordinary causes 
 which impel to action political partizans, such as person- 
 al rivalships, and the keen appetite for power and place, 
 must have rendered the contest from 1798 to 1800 ardent 
 to a degree of which we can scarcely form an adequate
 
 1798.1 °^ NEW-YORK. 121 
 
 conception. Soon after Governor Jay had taken the oath 
 of office upon his second election, he issued a proclama- 
 tion requiring an extraordinary session of the legislature, 
 in the month of August. They met at Albany in pursu- 
 ance of this proclamation, and Derick Ten Broeck was cho- 
 sen speaker. 
 
 The result of the mission to France of Messrs. Pinck- 
 ney, Gerry and Marshal became known in this country in 
 the early part of the summer of this year, and the vile 
 attempt made in the French capital under the eye of the 
 government, and evidently by their secret agents to extort 
 money from the American people, as the price of a trea- 
 ty with the French republic, rendered it almost certain in 
 the view of all well informed men that a war would be 
 the consequence of these disgraceful practices. 
 
 The governor, in his speech at the opening of the ses- 
 sion, assigned as a cause for the call of the extra session, 
 the alarming indications of a war with France, founded 
 principally on the recent disclosures, and the consequent 
 necessity of immediate preparations, for defence, by re- 
 pairing old and erecting new fortifications, by an efficient 
 organization of the militia, by replenishing our arsenals 
 with arms, and warlike munitions, and by providing funds 
 to defray the expenses of these defensive measures. His 
 speech w^as almost solely confined to national affairs, and 
 tended to inflame the minds of his auditors against the 
 French, and no doubt was intended by him to produce 
 that effect. 
 
 The answers of the two houses were responsive and 
 respectful. They adopted some measures for putting the 
 state in a position of defence, but did not enter into the 
 ordinary business of state legislation. 
 
 It will be recollected that a vacancy in the United 
 States senate had been created by the resignation of Judge 
 Hobart, and that Gen. North had been temporarily ap-
 
 122 POLITICAL HISTORY [1799. 
 
 pointed to that office during the recess. The legislature 
 therefore proceeded to choose James Watson as the suc- 
 cessor of Mr. Hobart. John Tayler, afterwards lieuten- 
 ant governor, was the democratic candidate. In the as- 
 sembly, Mr. Watson received fifty-seven votes, and Mr. 
 Tayler forty-eight. This, probably, exhibits the strength 
 of the parties in that house during the extra session in 
 1798. 
 
 This extra session was adjourned until the 2nd day of 
 January, 1799, on which day the legislature met at Albany, 
 and on the 6th of that month, the assembly proceeded to 
 elect a council of appointment, and Wm. Dunning of the 
 southern, Ebenezer Foote of the middle, Ebenezer Clark 
 of the eastern, and John Frey of the western district, were 
 chosen. Mr. Dunning had forty-nine votes, Mr. Foote 
 the same number, Mr. Clark had ninety-two votes, and 
 Mr. Frey ninety-six. The opposition candidates were 
 Mr. Adison and Mr. Haight, who each had forty-seven 
 votes. The eastern and w^estern districts were represented 
 entirely by federal, and the southern by democratic sena- 
 tors. This accounts for the choice of Mr. Dunning, who 
 was a republican. 
 
 The legislature of Massachusetts had proposed certain 
 amendments to the United States constitution, increasing 
 the disability of aliens, which were laid before the New- 
 York legislature by Gov. Jay. These amendments were 
 considered as partaking of a party character, and were 
 freely discussed in the assembly, but were rejected by a 
 vote of sixty-two to thirty-eight. 
 
 On the 7th of February, Mr, John Swartwout from New- 
 York, introduced into the assembly a resolution for the 
 appointment of a committee who should be directed to 
 bring in a bill dividing the state into districts, for the elec- 
 tion by the people, of presidential electors. This resolu- 
 tion was afterwards modified on the motion of Judge Peck,
 
 1799.] OF NEW-YORK. 123 
 
 so as to require the committee to embrace in the same bill, 
 a direction that each state senator should be chosen by 
 single districts, and in that shape the resolution passed, 
 fifty-five to forty. A bill to that effect was accordingly 
 brought into the assembly and passed that house, but was 
 rejected in the senate. 
 
 The republican members evidently anticipated that the 
 election in April, 1800, would result in a federal majority 
 in the legislature, and they advocated this measure with a 
 view of securing a part of the electoral college. This 
 project, therefore, among politicians, assumed entirely a 
 party aspect. The choice of a council of appointment, 
 and that of United States senator, had shown a federal 
 majority in the assembly; how, then, was the result last 
 mentioned produced *? I am informed by a distinguished 
 gentleman now living, who was then, though young, an 
 active and decided republican member of the assembly, 
 that there were at that time some eight or ten members 
 who had been chosen as federalists, but who began to 
 question the doctrines of their party, who, on all merely 
 personal questions, voted with the federalists, but on ques- 
 tions involving measures and principles, they on most 
 occasions voted on the democratic side- of these gentle- 
 man, Obadiah German, Judge Peck, and Mr. McKinstry, 
 of Hudson, were the principal. They were, in the lan- 
 guage of the day, denominated trimmers^ an appellation 
 which the subsequent conduct of most of them, particu- 
 larly Gen. German and Judge Peck, did not authorize or 
 warrant. In the management of these men, the tact and 
 address of Col. Burr were peculiarly useful. It was, 
 no doubt, owing to his contrivance, that Judge Peck was 
 selected to bring in the electoral resolutions. Judge 
 Peck, although a clearheaded sensible man, was an uned- 
 ucated emigrant from Connecticut. His appearance was 
 diminutive and almost disgusting. In religion he was
 
 124 POLITICAL HISTORY [1799. 
 
 fanatical, but in his political views, he was sincere, perse- 
 vering and bold; and although meek and humble in his 
 demeanor, he was by no means destitute of personal am- 
 bition. He was an itinerant surveyor in the coimty of 
 Otsego, then a new and uncultivated part of the state. 
 He would survey your farm in the day time, exhort and 
 pray in your family at night, and talk on politics the rest 
 part of the time. Perhaps on Sunday, or some evening 
 in the week, he would preach a sermon in your school 
 house. No man knew better the political importance of 
 such a man, in a society organized as the society of the 
 western counties then was, than CoL Burr, and he spared 
 no pains to cause Mr. Peck to be identified with the demo- 
 cratic party. Various anecdotes have been related to me, 
 which exhibit the care w^hich Col. Burr took to shape 
 trifling matters in such a way as to act on the mind of 
 Judge Peck and others, so as to produce the great result 
 at which he aimed. The selection of Judge Peck to offer 
 the electoral resolutions flattered his vanity, it called out 
 upon him the maledictions of leading federalists, and in that 
 way widened the breach between him and his old political 
 friends. Mr. B., it is said, with equal skill and perseve- 
 rance applied himself to Gen. German, then a plain, but 
 strong minded, and highly popular farmer of Chenango. 
 The support of the democratic cause by these two men, 
 was eventually of great importance to the success of the 
 republican party in April, 1800. I do not think it too 
 much to say, that had it not been for the papers circula- 
 ted by Judge Peck and Gen. German, and their personal 
 exertion and influence, the western district in the year 
 1800, would have been federal. Mr. Cheetham therefore, 
 in his pamphlet, which he wrote some years afterwards, 
 professing to present a " view " of Mr. Burr's political 
 conduct, and in his answer to Aristides is wrong in alleg- 
 ing that Col. Burr, while a member of the assemblv in
 
 1799.] OF NEW-YOBK. 125 
 
 1798-9, did not act efficiently in support of the republi- 
 can interest. He probably effected more than any other 
 individual. 
 
 The celebrated resolutions, drawn by Mr. Madison, of 
 Kentucky and Virginia, denouncing the alien and sedition 
 laws, and other measures of Mr. Adams were, by Gov. 
 Jay communicated to our legislature. When the assem 
 bly was in committee of the whole on these resolutions, 
 Mr. King, a federalist, moved a resolution reciting that 
 the right of deciding on the constitutionality of all 
 laws belongs to the judiciary department, that the 
 assumption of that right by the individual states, is 
 unwarrantable, and tends to destroy the independence 
 of the general government, &c. — He therefore, for this 
 extraordinary reason, moved that the committee of the 
 whole be discharged from the further consideration of the 
 subject. At this day the doctrine that members of a 
 state legislature had not, constitutionally, the right to ex- 
 press their opinion on the acts of the general government 
 would be regarded as too absurd to be advocated by a 
 man of sane mind ; but although the resolution of Mr. 
 King was ably and strenuously resisted by Mr. Root and 
 others, it was finally adopted by a vote of fifty to forty- 
 three. 
 
 In the senate, the same proceedings were had in sub- 
 stance, and Mr. King's resolution, together with the pre- 
 amble was adopted by a large majority, there being only 
 seven votes against it. These were Adison, Dunning, 
 L'Hommedieu, J. Schenck, Spencer, Tappan, and Tillot- 
 son. De Witt Clinton, who was then a member of the 
 senate, must have been necesarily absent. It will be 
 seen that Judge Spencer, who so lately had been an ardent 
 friend of Gov. Jay, and a most zealous federalist, is now 
 found voting with the republican party. The fact is, he 
 changed sides in the latter part of the session of 1798,
 
 126 POLITICAL HISTORY [1799. 
 
 and not long after Mr. Jones was appointed comptroller 
 It is said he was a candidate for that office. Hence, the 
 federalists charged him with abandoning his party in conse- 
 quence of disappointment, and from feelings of resent- 
 ment towards Gov. Jay. The truth of this allegation. 
 Judge Spencer has always denied, and has uniformly 
 treated the accusation as a calumny. His change of prin- 
 ciples was known in the spring of 1798, and before his 
 re-election to the senate from the middle district. 
 
 When the president of the United States was inform- 
 ed of the treatment by the French directory, of Messrs. 
 Pinckney, Marshal and Gerry, he, in a speech to congress, 
 declared that he never would send another minister to 
 France until he had assurance that an American envoy 
 would be received with the respect due to a great, free 
 and independent nation. But not long afterwards, Mr. 
 Adams having been advised by Mr. Vans Murray, our 
 minister at the Hague, that representations had been made 
 to him by some of the French diplomatic agents, that 
 France was still desirous to treat with America; not- 
 withstanding his former delaration, he (Mr. Adams) nomi- 
 nated to the United States senate, Mr. Vans Murray, as 
 the American envoy to the French court. This step was 
 severely censured by Gen. Hamilton, and many other 
 leading federalists in the nation, some of whom probably 
 really desired a war with France. Mr. Swartwout, how- 
 ever, moved in the assembly, an address of thanks to the 
 president, on account of the appointment of Vans Mur- 
 ray, but the motion was not sustained by a majority in 
 the assembly. The result of this motion, shews the very 
 great influence which the opinions of Gen. Hamilton had 
 on his political friends in the legislature. It seems to me 
 as a question of mere party policy, the federalists on this 
 occasion acted unwisely. They should, themselves, have 
 brought forward the motion made by Mr. Swartwout.
 
 1799.] OF NEW-YORK. 127 
 
 The tendency of it would have been to have increased the 
 confidence of the people in Mr. Adams, the head of the 
 federal party, and in his administration, but what was of 
 still greater importance, it would have diminished the 
 jealousy felt by many honest, upright men, that the fede- 
 ralists from an overweening partiality for Great Britain, 
 were determined on a war with France without regarding 
 the question whether there was or was not a sufficient 
 cause for such war. 
 
 Judge Jay, in his biography of the governor, says (1 
 Jay 392) that " during the six years of Gov. Jay's admin- 
 istration, not one individual was dismissed by him from of- 
 fice on account of his politics. So long as an officer dis- 
 charged his duties with fidelity and ability, he was certain 
 of being continued, and hence his devotion to the public, 
 became identified with his personal interest." It is related 
 that in the council, a member was urging in behalf of a 
 candidate, his zeal and usefulness as a federalist, when he 
 was interrupted by the governor, with " that, sir, is not 
 the question; is he fit for the office 7" [See Note O.] 
 
 These sentiments and principles of action are truly no- 
 ble, and in conformity with the pure motives which always 
 governed the conduct of John Jay. But Judge Jay was 
 mistaken in saying that no person was removed on account 
 of his politics, during Gov. Jay's administration. I find 
 on the minutes of the council, that Jacob John Lansing 
 was removed from the office of sheriff of New- York, 
 Dec. 28, 1798, and James Morris was appointed to succeed 
 him; also, that on the 9th of March, 1799, Jedediah Peck 
 was removed from the office of a judge of the common 
 pleas court of Otsego county, without any cause of the 
 removal appearing on the minutes. These are the first 
 cases I have been able to find since the year 1777, of re- 
 movalsj unless the cause of the removal was inserted on 
 the minutes. The accusation was in the first place en-
 
 128 POLITICAL HISTORY [1799. 
 
 tered, and a copy was served on the party accused. In 
 most cases the incumbent appeared in person before the 
 council, and made his defence. The council then either 
 dismissed the complaint, or removed the officer, as they 
 thought rightj but in the case of Mr. Lansing and Judge 
 Peck, no such proceedings were had. 
 
 I presume mal-conduct was charged against both 
 those gentlemen, and I cannot believe that at that day the 
 council would have removed the sheriff of New-York, so 
 near the end of his term, without special and good cause, 
 though that cause does not, as it ought, according to for- 
 mer practice, appear on the council books. In the case 
 of Judge Peck, too, no doubt, complaints of misconduct 
 were made against him by such heated politicians as Judge 
 Cooper and his immediate friends; but that Jedediah Peck 
 was guilty of official mal-conduct, I do not believe j and if 
 his removal was attempted to be put on that ground, that 
 circumstance probably added to the unpopularity of the 
 measure. His re-election as a member of the assembly, 
 by a triumphant majority, in less than sixty days after his 
 removal, affords evidence of the judgment his neighbors 
 formed of his conduct. In justice to Gov. Jay, it is proper 
 to add, that according to the practice then existing, a re- 
 moval from office might be made, against the wishes of 
 the governor, on the motion of any member of the council, 
 although an appointment could not be effected, according 
 to Gov. Jay's construction of the constitution, without his 
 consent, or rather without his nomination. 
 
 A bill for the gradual abolition of slavery, passed the 
 assembly during this session, but was lost in the senate. 
 
 Before the adjournment of the legislature. Judge Peck 
 introduced into the assembly a bill abolishing imprison- 
 ment for all debts arising on contract, express or implied, 
 which, when called up, was rejected without a division. 
 I mention this circumstance as evidence of the great
 
 1799.] OF NEW-YORK. 129 
 
 change which the public mind has undergone since the 
 close of the eighteenth century, in relation to this import- 
 ant question, and as creditable to the benevolent feelings 
 and native sagacity of Jedediah Peck. We shall pre- 
 sently see him, if not the projector, at least the perse- 
 vering and efficient advocate of another great measure — a 
 measure on the success of which depends the preservation 
 of the freedom and civil institutions of this country; I mean 
 the Common School System. The act for " supplying the 
 city of New-York with pure and wholesome water," or in 
 other words, the bill chartering the Manhattan Bank, 
 passed a few days before the adjournment of the legisla- 
 ture. The scheme of chartering this company was formed 
 and mainly executed by Col. Burr. The bill was so 
 drawn as to enable Col. Burr and his republican friends to 
 get the control of a majority of the stock, and of course, 
 of the funds of the company. It is an admitted fact, that 
 a large majority of the legislature at the time they granted 
 this charter, did not know that it contained a grant of 
 banking powers. I shall take another occasion to remark 
 on these proceedings, as well as those relating to the in- 
 corporation of the New-York State Bank at Albany, in 
 the year 1802, when I come to the time when the Bank 
 of America was chartered. As that event resulted in a new 
 organization of parties, the subject of procuring bank 
 charters will then be fully considered. 
 
 The election in April, 1799, terminated more unfavorably 
 to the republicans than had been anticipated. New-York, 
 which for the two preceding years had elected republicans, 
 this year elected federalists by the large majority of about 
 nine hundred. Col. Burr was placed at the head of the 
 republican ticket, and previous to the election, the secret 
 was out, that tlie charter to the Manhattan company con- 
 tained a clause that vested them with banking powers. 
 
 It was alleged, (and truly alleged,) that a very large 
 
 9
 
 130 POLITICAL HISTORY- J 1799. 
 
 majority of the legislature had been cheated, for that 
 while they believed they were simply providing the means 
 of supplying the city with pure and wholesome water, they 
 had created a bank which was to be managed as a great 
 party machine, and which was to minister to the personal 
 and ambitious projects of Col. Burr. A very inflammatory 
 pamphlet was written and generally circulated before the 
 election, presenting in bold relief these and other views 
 to the New-York public. The democratic newspapers of 
 the day, charged the loss of the election in New- York to 
 these efforts, and it is very probable that they had a pro- 
 digious and perhaps controlling efi'ect on the result of the 
 election. In Columbia county, too, where the republicans 
 expected success, the federalists elected their ticket j but, 
 in the eastern and western districts there was considerable 
 republican gain. In Otsego coimty. Judge Peck was re- 
 elected, notwithstanding the vigorous opposition made 
 against him by Judge Cooper and other active and influen 
 tial federalists. 
 
 In the southern district, in consequence of the large 
 majority in the city of New-York, Messrs. Hatfield and 
 Coles, the two federal candidates, were elected. In the 
 middle district, the republicans were more fortunate and 
 succeeded in electing Isaac Bloom of Dutchess, John 
 Hathorn of Orange, and John Suffern of Rockland. 
 Zina Hitchcock, Ebenezer Russell, and Moses Vail, were 
 re-elected from the eastern, and Moss Kent and Vincent 
 Matthews were elected from the western district. These 
 gentlemen were all federalists. During ihe summer which 
 succeeded the election of April, 1799, several very vexa- 
 tious prosecutions were instituted for a breach of the se- 
 dition law. Among others, Mr. Charles Holt, printer of 
 the Bee at New London, was prosecuted and imprisoned. 
 A Mr. Baldwin of New- Jersey, was also indicted, tried, 
 convicted, and fined, under color of the sedition law, for
 
 1799.] OF NEW-YORK. 131 
 
 the following offence: — ^Mr. Adams, on his return from the 
 seat of government, passed through Newark ; some can- 
 non were discharged in compliment to him, while passing 
 through that village j Mr. Baldwin, who it would appear, 
 was rather a low bred man, said he wished the wadding 
 discharged from the cannon had been lodged in the presi- 
 dent's backsides. For this he was fined one hundred dol 
 lars. The federalists of New-York, having triumphantly- 
 succeeded in the late election, and all branches both of 
 the state and national government being with them, should 
 have endeavored to quiet and soothe the feelings and miti- 
 gate the jealousies of their opponents. Buonaparte's 
 maxim was, that the proper time for making overtures of 
 peace was after a victory. It was a wise and sound max- 
 im, and is equally applicable to political parties. Then 
 was the time for the federalists of New-York to have acted 
 with magnanimity and kindness towards those political 
 enemies over whom they had so recently obtained a victory. 
 But their conduct was directly the reverse. They mani- 
 fested a vindictive and persecuting spirit towards their 
 opponents. I shall mention only one instance. Gen. 
 John Armstrong, though he was not then known as the 
 author, had written with his usual ability and in his usual 
 unequalled styie of bitterness and severity, a petition to 
 congress for the repeal of the alien and sedition laws. 
 Copies of this petition were sent into the various counties 
 in the state, ostensibly for the purpose of procuring signa- 
 tures, but no doubt, really with the view of keeping the 
 odious features of these laws before the people and con- 
 tinuing and increasing the agitation of the public mind. 
 Some copies of these petitions were sent to Judge Peck of 
 Otsego county, and he offered them for signature to his 
 neighbors. For this offence. Judge Cooper wrote to Mr. 
 Harrison, then United States district attorney, insisting 
 that a prosecution, under color of the sedition law, should
 
 132 POLITICAL HISTOaY [1799. 
 
 be instituted against Mr. Peck. Mr. Harrison was impru- 
 dent enough to listen to these complaints, and a grand jury 
 of the district of New-York was empannelled who were 
 weak enough to find a bill of indictment for this alleged 
 offence. A bench warrant was issued and Judge Peck 
 was taken from his family by an officer, to the city of 
 New-York. A hundred missionaries in the cause of de- 
 mocracy, stationed between New-York and Cooperstown, 
 could not have done so much for the republican cause as 
 this journey of Judge Peck, as a prisoner, from Otsego to 
 the capital of the state. It was nothing less than the 
 public exhibition of a suffering martyr for the freedom of 
 speech and the press, and the right of petitioning, to the 
 view of the citizens of the various places through which 
 the marshal travelled with his prisoner. Strange infatua- 
 tion ! But thus it is ; parties always have been and 
 always will be hurried into measures which result in their 
 own overthrow, by the indiscreet zeal, or the malignant 
 spirit of personal revenge, of their own friends. 
 
 On the 9th day of December, died General George 
 Washington. Independent of the loss which the country 
 in general sustained by the decease of this great and good 
 man, his death was to the federalists as a party, at this 
 particular juncture, an irreparable loss. Gen. Washington 
 was known to be a supporter of the administration of Mr. 
 Adams. He had accepted of the command of the provi- 
 sional army, raised by a recent law of congress, and al- 
 though that law was peculiarly offensive to the republican 
 party, so great and so universal was the confidence in Gen. 
 Washington, that it was difficult to convince the people 
 that any measure sanctioned by him could be dangerous, 
 or that an administration which received his approbation 
 could be unworthy of their support. But, upon his death, 
 the name of Gen. Washington could no longer be thrown
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YORK. 133 
 
 into the scales in balancing the merits of any future mea- 
 sure which might be adopted by the administration. 
 
 The legislature met at Albany on the 28th day of Janu- 
 ary, 1800. Derick Ten Broeck was re-elected speaker 
 without opposition. 
 
 The governor, in the introductory part of his speech, 
 pronounced a short but elegant eulogy on Gen. Washing- 
 ton. In the residue of his remarks he avoided touching 
 on any party questions, and confined himself to the recom- 
 mendation of several very salutary and judicious amend- 
 ments of the laws. He concluded by urging further pro- 
 visions for the support of common schools. 
 
 On the 5th February, the assembly effected Samuel Haight 
 from the southern, Robert Sands from the middle, James 
 Gordon from the eastern, and Thomas R. Gold from the 
 western district, members of the council of appointment 
 for the year ensuing. 
 
 The legislature, in the early part of this session, reduced 
 the salary of the comptroller from three thousand dollars 
 to two thousand five hundred,whereupon Mr.Jones declined 
 a re-appointment,(the comptroller, by the original law, was 
 appointed annually,) and on the 12th March, John V. 
 Henry, of Albany, since well known as an eminent law- 
 yer, who was then a member of the assembly, was ap- 
 pointed to that office. 
 
 On the same day, (12th March,) a debate arose in the 
 assembly on a bill brought in by Judge Peck, to divide the 
 state into districts, and for the choice of presidential elec- 
 tors by the people. This was opposed by the federalists, 
 principally on the ground that it was unconstitutional. 
 The constitution of the United States declares, " That each 
 state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature 
 thereof shall direct, such number of electors," &c. It was 
 contended that the direction that "each state shall appoint," 
 implied that the state should act as a body corporate, and
 
 134 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 therefore, that the electors coukl not be appointed by the 
 people. The debate, on the part of the federalists, was 
 principally conducted by Mr. John V. Henry. The spea- 
 kers on the other side, were Mr. Peck, Mr. Comstock of 
 Saratoga, and Mr. Thomas of Washington. The bill was 
 finally rejected, on the motion of Mr. Shurtleff of Sche- 
 nectady, by a vote of fifty-five to forty-seven. 
 
 Mr. Watson resigned his seat in the senate of the Uni- 
 ted States, and Governeur Morris was chosen in his 
 place, on the 3d day of April. Peter Gansevoort of 
 Albany, was the opposing candidate. In the senate, Mr. 
 Morris received twenty-five votes, and Mr. Gansevoort 
 eleven. In the assembly the vote stood fifty-four to forty- 
 eight. 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the 8th April, to the first 
 Tuesday of November. 
 
 The result of the election in April, 1800, afforded a com- 
 plete triumph to the democratic party in the state, and we 
 may add, also, in the nation. This extraordinory success 
 disappointed and surprised both federalists and republicans. 
 The city of New-York, although the year before it had 
 given a federal majority of nine hundred, this year elected 
 republican members. The republicans succeeded in three 
 out of the four senatorial districts, which reduced the fede- 
 ral majority in the senate to seven, while in the assembly 
 that party obtained a majority of twenty-eight. By this 
 means the election of electors in favor of Mr. Jefierson 
 was rendered certain, and his election to the presidency 
 was equally certain. The eastern district was the only 
 district which returned federal senators. From that dis- 
 trict, James Gordon and Stephen Fink were chosen; from 
 the southern, Wm. Dunning, Jonathan Purdy and Benja. 
 Hunting; from the middle, David Van Ness, Solomon 
 Sutherland, John C, Hogeboom, Jacobus S. Bruyn and 
 James W. Wilkin and from the western, Robert Rose-
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YORK. 135 
 
 boom and Jedediah Sanger, were elected. Mr. Sanger 
 afterwards acted with the federalists.* Out of the ten 
 congressional districts, six republicans were chosen. 
 
 The democratic success in the western district, which 
 was entirely unexpected, was, I have no doubt, produced 
 by the violent proceedings caused by the over zealous 
 federalists, particularly by the oppressive and tyrannical 
 manner in which the sedition law was executed. 
 
 In the city of New-York it is probable that in 1799 
 many republicans voted the federal ticket in consequence 
 of their dissatisfaction with the manner in which the law 
 granting banking powers to the Manhattan company had 
 been smuggled through the legislature, and for the rea- 
 son that Col. Burr, who was confessedly the contriver and 
 the agent who effected that extraordinary measure, was 
 then a candidate. But another very efficient cause of 
 the democratic success in 1800 in that city was, the ex- 
 ceedingly judicious selection of candidates. Col. Burr 
 was not himself a city candidate. This circumstance pre- 
 vented the Manhattan question from prejudicing the elec- 
 tion. Besides the bank was then in operation, and in- 
 stead of being an object to be dreaded and represented as 
 odious, it then had the power of conferring favors, and 
 was an object to be courted by all those whose situation or 
 business required pecuniary aid. The most consummate 
 prudence and skill were exercised in the selection of 
 candidates. The republican ticket contained thirteen 
 men, whose wealth, and talents and weight of charac- 
 ter were probably greater than any other equal number 
 of republicans then to be found in the city, or perhaps 
 any other equal number of citizens. But this was not 
 all. At that time some degree of rivalry existed be- 
 tween the Livingstons, and Clintons, and great jealousy 
 and suspicion were entertained between both the Living- 
 stons and Clintons and Col. Burr. Each had their warm 
 * He was probably nomiaated by the Federalists.
 
 136 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 personal friends, and those friends partook more or less of 
 the feelings and prejudices of their leaders. A set of 
 candidates therefore who were apparently particularly 
 friendly to either of these leaders would have been coldly 
 supported by the others. With a view to render these 
 jealousies and collisions innoxious, and to bring the whole 
 democratic party heartily into action, Gov. Clinton was 
 placed at the head of the ticket, Brockholst Livingston, 
 the most talented member of the Livingston family, was 
 also made a candidate, and to prevent any dissatisfaction 
 on the part of the friends of Col. Burr, Mr. John Swart- 
 wout, known to be his confidential friend was nominated 
 and Mr. Burr himself was nominated and elected from the 
 county of Orange. In order to call out the revolutionary 
 feelings and sympathies of the electors, Gen. Horatio 
 Gates was also placed on the ticket. John Broome, af- 
 terwards lieutenant governor, Henry Rutgers, Samuel 
 Osgood, and sundry other eminent citizens of great weight 
 of character and personal popularity, were likewise put in 
 nomination. To the address and skill, and indefatigable 
 perseverance of Col. Burr, this selection of candidates is 
 in a great measure owing. Mr. Cheetham, in his view 
 of the political conduct of Col. Burr, and in his reply to 
 Aristides, is, it appears to me, uncandid in denying to Mr. 
 B. the credit of being the principal agent in effecting this 
 arrangement. The large federal majority which had been 
 obtained by the federalists the preceding year, induced 
 many leading republicans to believe and declare to their 
 friends that all efforts would be vain; Col. Burr, on the 
 other hand, persisted in affirming that success was certain 
 if arrangements could be made which would bring to the 
 polls, the whole force of the democratic partyj and it was 
 his plastic hand which formed this excellent ticket. It 
 was, in a great measure, his ardent persuasions which in- 
 duced some of the candidates to permit their names to be
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YORK. 137 
 
 used. The arrangement was not finally consummated 
 until a few evenings before the election, when it was ef- 
 fected at an interview between Gov. Clinton and Col. 
 Burr and four or five other friends, at the house of Mr. 
 Gelston, in the city of New-York. 
 
 Smith Thompson made his first appearance in public life 
 this year, as a member of the assembly from the county 
 of Dutchess. 
 
 Before I enter upon the history of the November ses- 
 sion of the legislature, I shall endeavor to give some ac- 
 count of the conduct and movements of two distinguished 
 New-York politicians, in respect to the coming presiden- 
 tial election. The gentlemen to whom I allude are Aaron 
 Burr and Alexander Hamilton. In tracing their course, I 
 shall necessarily be carried beyond the first meeting of the 
 legislature, and into the winter of the year 180 Ij but I 
 think this method will enable the reader to get a more 
 distinct view of the political operations of that year, than 
 by confining myself to a strict chronological order of 
 events. 
 
 Congress was in session when the result of the New- 
 York election was made public. As soon as this event 
 was known, and it was consequently ascertained that a 
 republican president and vice-president could be elected, 
 it became necessary to settle on a candidate for the vice- 
 presidency, all being agreed that Mr. Jefferson should be 
 the presidential candidate. In the month of May, an 
 informal caucus was held by the republican members of 
 congress at Philadelphia, to deliberate on that question. 
 At this conference it was agreed that the vice-president 
 should be taken from New-York, and Chancellor Living- 
 ston, Gov. Clinton, and Mr. Burr were mentioned. The 
 members who composed this conference not knowing the 
 wishes of the majority of their democratic friends in New- 
 York, requested Mr. Gallatin to communicate with them
 
 138 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 and ascertain their views. Mr. Gallatin, in pursuance of 
 this request, wrote to Commodore Nickolson of New-York, 
 and requested him to converse frankly and freely with the 
 gentlemen who had been named as candidates, and to 
 consult other friends and inform him, (Mr. G.,) of the 
 result of his enquiries. 
 
 Com. Nickolson soon found that the deafness of Chan- 
 cellor Livingston presented an insuperable barrier to his 
 nomination. He then called on Gov. Clinton, who, at 
 first, strenuously objected to the nomination, alleging as 
 a reason his advanced age, impaired health, and the situa- 
 tion of his family. Com. Nickolson represented that their 
 political friends might think that the success of the demo- 
 cratic party would be endangered by his declension, upon 
 which, Mr. Clinton said, that if his name should be deemed 
 absolutely necessary to ensure success to the republicans, 
 he would consent to the nomination, on the express condi- 
 tion that he should be at liberty to resign, if he found his 
 health and circumstances rendered retirement from public 
 employment necessary. The friends of Gov. Clinton 
 allege, that upon this, Mr. Nickolson concluded to recom- 
 mend to the Philadelphia caucus, the selection of Gov. 
 Clinton, and actually wrote a letter to that effect; but that 
 he went from Gov. Clinton's to Col. Burr's, and showed 
 him the letter he had written; that Mr. B. w^as dissatisfied 
 and after some consultation with him and his friends, Mr. 
 Nickolson erased the name of Mr. Clinton and inserted 
 that of Col. Burr. {Cheetharn's Reply to Aristides, p. 52 
 to 57.) What the true version of this transaction was, it 
 is impossible, at this day, to ascertain with certainty. To 
 me, it seems probable, from the spirit of rivalry existing be- 
 tween Gov. Clinton and Col. Burr, from the tenor of Mr. 
 C's. communication to the commodore, and from his 
 subsequent conduct in suffering himself to be a candidate 
 for the office of governor and afterwards that of vice-pre-
 
 1800.] OF NEW-yoRK. 139 
 
 sidentj he really desired to be a candidate, in preference 
 to Col. Burr. On the other hand, it is probable as Mr. 
 B. had, while in the United States senate, formed an 
 acquaintance and friendship with many of the southern 
 politicians, as he had, at the election in 1797, received 
 thirty of the southern votes for the office of vice-president, 
 and as his friends and agents were very active in his favor, 
 that a majority of the members' of congress were really 
 desirous of his nomination, and that Commodore Nickolson 
 was apprised of this fact. In this way I account for his 
 conduct in so readily giving up Gov. Clinton, and recom- 
 mending Col. Burr. 
 
 On the arrival of the commodore's letter at Philadelphia, 
 Col. Burr was nominated for vice-president at a congres- 
 sional caucus. If Mr. Clinton was dissatisfied with this 
 nomination, or the manner in which it was effected, he had 
 too much discretion to manifest his disapprobation. On 
 the contrary, as a member of the legislature and on all 
 occasions, he supported with good faith the election of Mr. 
 Jefferson and Mr. Burr. 
 
 Upon canvassing the presidential votes, it was found 
 that Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Burr had each of them received 
 seventy-three votes. The whole number of votes were 
 one hundred and thirty-eight, leaving for Mr. Adams and 
 Mr. Pinckney sixty-five votes each.* This result produced 
 a convulsion, which imminently threatened a dissolution of 
 the government. The number of votes given to Mr. Jef- 
 ferson and Mr. Burr being equal, there was of course, no 
 election by the electors, and the election of president de- 
 volved on the states as represented in the house of repre- 
 sentatives of the United States. There were then sixteen 
 states. Eight of them were republican, six were federal, 
 and two were equally divided. It was necessary that a 
 majority of the states should cast their votes for one 
 person, in order to effect an election, lu this situation of 
 
 * This is an error— Mr. P. received in one of the eastern states two votes less 
 than Adams.
 
 140 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 affairs, Mr. Burr was charged with an attempt, by intrigue 
 and management, to cause himself to be elected president, 
 in preference to Mr. Jefferson. It was this charge, 
 " which was the weight that pulled him down " from the 
 pinnacle of power to which he seemed rising, and which, 
 as a politician, prostrated him forever. 
 
 It is not my intention to examine or recapitulate in detail 
 the facts urged in support of this charge, ortheargu-' 
 ments and facts presented by the friends of Col. Burr in 
 his defence. There are, how^ever, two circumstances 
 about which there can be no doubt, which notwithstanding 
 the letter of Col. Burr to Gen. Smith of Maryland, written 
 before the result of the canvass was known,* produce in 
 my mind a strong conviction that he did seek the presi- 
 dency, in opposition to Mr. Jefferson. 
 
 In the state of Pennsylvania a majority of the assembly 
 was democratic, but the senate was federal. It was for 
 some time doubtful what would be the political character 
 of the electors of that state, and indeed, whether any elec- 
 tors at all would be chosen; for the senate afforded some 
 indications that they would not meet the assembly for the 
 purpose of going into a joint ballot. The electors, it will 
 be recollected, were then chosen in that state by the legis- 
 lature. Again, it w^as uncertain whether the state of 
 South Carolina would elect federal or republican electors, 
 and the electors in that state were not to be chosen until 
 the second day of December, only two days before the 
 votes for president and vice-president were to be given. 
 
 It was ascertained that if Pennsylvania elected a full 
 college of republican electors, a republican president 
 would be chosen, whether South Carolina voted for him 
 or not. The electors from New- Jersey had been appointed, 
 and they were federalists. Those who held that Col. 
 
 la this letter Mr. Burr affects to decline a competition with Mr. Jefferson.
 
 1800.] OF NEW- YORK. 141 
 
 Burr had intrigued for the presidency, alleged that he 
 had agreed with the federal electors of New- Jersey, that 
 in case Pennsylvania should elect republican electors, and 
 thus insure the defeat of Mr. Adams, they should cast 
 their vote for Mr. Burr, leaving off Mr. Jefferson. Mr. 
 Cheetham, in his view of the political conduct of Aaron 
 Burr, published in 1802, (p. 44,) charges, that after the 
 election, Jonathan Dayton, who was speaker of the 
 house of representatives, and a distinguished federal leader 
 in New-Jersey, publicly declared that such was the ar- 
 rangement and agreement. The celebrated pamphlet of 
 Aristides, written by Judge Wm. P. Van Ness, in answer 
 to Cheetham's '* view,^ does not contradict this statement. 
 The subsequent intimacy between Mr. Dayton and Mr. 
 Burr, which resulted in the ruin of the former, goes still 
 further to confirm this statement. The arrangement, if 
 one was made, was not carried into effect, for the two 
 houses of the Pennsylvania legislature finally compromised 
 their differences, and the result was that the republicans 
 had but one majority in the electoral college of that state. 
 
 Was this agreement of the New-Jersey federalists to 
 vote for Col. Burr unknown to him 1 I cannot believe 
 that it was. 
 
 The other circumstance to which I shall call the atten- 
 tion of the reader, is, that after the electoral vote was 
 known, and before the action of the house of representa- 
 tives, in the winter of 1801, Col. Burr went to Albany to 
 attend the legislature as a member, and took with him 
 William P. Van Ness, one of the most shrewd and 
 sagacious men which this state ever produced. He was 
 Mr. B's most confidential friend. Mr. V. N., before the 
 election in the house of representatives, wrote to Edward 
 Livingston, a member of that house, advising him that it 
 " was the sense of the republican party of this state, that 
 after some trials in the house Mr. Jefferson should be given
 
 142 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 up for Mr. Burr." This, by the bye, was notoriously 
 untrue. Other letters were written to the same effect. 
 This charge is made in Cheetham's " tJzew," &c., which 
 was answered by Mr. Van Ness, as I have before stated, 
 in the pamphlet to which he affixed the signature of Ari- 
 stides. In that pamphlet he does not deny that he wrote 
 the letter, and such a letter^to Mr. Livingston. Can any 
 man doubt that that letter was written with the know- 
 ledge and approbation of Col. Burr *? Assurances were 
 given by the friends of Mr. B., that after several ballot- 
 iftgs the states of New-York, Tennessee, and perhaps 
 New-Jersey, would go for Col. Burr. When the house 
 of representatives commenced the business of president 
 making on the 11th of February, a dreadful scene was 
 opened. Thirty-six ballotings were had. The balloting 
 continued four days and four nights, and finally terminated 
 in the choice of Mr. Jefferson. The friends of Mr. Burr 
 charged Mr. Jefferson with purchasing, by a promise of 
 office, some of those members of congress who, it was 
 supposed, had intended to vote for Mr. B., and in fulfil- 
 ment of these engagements, it is alleged that Mr. Linn 
 was appointed supervisor of the revenue of New-Jersey, 
 Mr. Livingston district attorney of New- York, Gen. Bailey 
 post-master at the city of New- York, and Mr. Clairborne 
 of Tennessee, governor of the territory of Missisippi. 
 
 The conduct of Col. Burr was as impolitic as it was 
 faithless to his party. He remained at Albany during the 
 whole winter. He shrouded himself in mystery. His 
 scheme undoubtedly was, to suffer the federalists and a 
 few republicans to elect him, without appearing himself 
 to take part in the election and without any special com- 
 mitments. If Mr. Jefferson should be chosen, he supposed 
 by this mysterious course of action, or rather no apparent 
 action, he could still retain his standing with the republi- 
 can party. If, on the contrary, he should be the success-
 
 1800.] OF KEW-YORK. 143 
 
 fiil candidate, he imagined that the power and patronage 
 conferred by the office would enable him to sustain himself 
 and to form a party out of the wreck of the two parties, 
 * which would constitute a majority in the nation. This 
 course of conduct was weak as well as wicked. There 
 are times when it may be discreet for a politician to tempo- 
 rize; but there are also times when a temporizing policy 
 is the most injudicious policy which can be pursued. 
 The present was, with Col. Burr, a time for action, and 
 not for halting and hesitating. Although, as an honorable 
 member of the republican party, he could not with pro- 
 priety enter the list against Mr. Jefferson, there was no 
 treason in doing so; and had he done so openly, a 
 large and respectable portion of community would have 
 sustained him. He would, in the then excited state of 
 party feeling, at any rate by taking this course, probably 
 have succeeded; and success in politics, as in war, too 
 generally in public estimation, sanctifies the means by 
 which it is procured. That Col. Burr, if he had pursued 
 this line of conduct, would have received the support of 
 the federalits and would ultimately have been elected, is 
 rendered probable by a letter written by Judge Cooper, 
 then a member of the house of representatives, from this 
 state, to Thomas Morris, on the last day of balloting, in 
 which he says, " Had Burr done any thing for himself, he 
 would long ere this have been president," (2 Davis j 116.) 
 Judge Cooper was an uneducated man, but very few knew 
 men better than he, Mr. Burr, therefore, in my judgment, 
 ought either frankly and openly to have declared himself 
 a candidate in opposition to Mr. Jefferson, and manifested 
 a readiness to make a common cause with his friends; or 
 he should have repaired in person to the seat of govern- 
 ment and requested his friends to support Mr. Jefferson. 
 He should have publicly and unequivocally declared he 
 would not accept of an election made in the way his
 
 / 
 
 144 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 election, if effected at all, must have been made, and the 
 latter was, beyond question, the path of duty as well as 
 that of honor. While he was himself vaguely intimating 
 that he did not wish to enter into competition with Mr. 
 Jefferson, his friends were urging republican members of 
 congress to abandon Mr. Jefferson and support Burr. He 
 balanced — he hesitated — he equivocated. In reviewing 
 his conduct on this occasion, one cannot help being re- 
 minded of the ludicrous description given by Casca of 
 Ceesar's refusal to accept a crown : — " I saw Mark An- 
 thony offer him a crown, * * * And as I told you, he put 
 it by once, but for all that, to my thinking, he would fain 
 have had it. Then he offered it to him again, then he put 
 it by again; but to my thinking he was very loath to lay 
 his fingers off it." 
 
 The high character o f Gen. Hamilton, his acknowledged 
 transcendency of talents and commanding influence with 
 the federalists in this state and nation, render his conduct 
 in relation to the presidential election in 1800, worthy of 
 particular attention. 
 
 Immediately after the result of the state election was 
 knowm, and on the seventh day of May, Gen. Hamilton, 
 with the approbation, as is said, of a caucus of his political 
 friends in New-York, addressed a letter to Gov. Jay, 
 requesting and urging him forthwith to call the then exist- 
 ing legislature together, with a view that before the legis- 
 lative year expired, (and it will be remembered that under 
 the old constitution it expired on the first of July,) they 
 should pass an act dividing the state into districts for the 
 choice of presidential electors by the people. It was 
 supposed, and the event proved the supposition well 
 founded, that Mr. Jefferson could not get, including the 
 twelve New-York votes, more than 73 votes, and seventy 
 votes were necessary to a choice. If, therefore, four fed- 
 eral votes could be obtained in this state, (and that there
 
 1800.1 OF NEW-YORK. 145 
 
 could, if the state was divided into districts, did not admit 
 of any doubt,) the election of Jefferson would be defeated. 
 Mr. Hamilton, in his letter, uses this extraordinary lan- 
 guage, " You, sir, know in a great degree the anti-federal 
 party, but I fear you do not know them as well as I do. 
 'Tis a composition indeed of very incongruous materials, 
 but all tending to mischief ; some of them to the over- 
 throw of the government by stripping it of its due ener- 
 gies," [Jefiersonians;] " others of them," [Burr,] a revo- 
 lution after the manner of Buonaparte. " I speak from 
 indubitable facts, not from conjecture and inferences." 
 How Gen. Hamilton could feel authorized to make these 
 bold, and as all will now admit, unwarrantable assertions, 
 to such a man as Gov. Jay, it is difficult to conceive. He 
 concluded by urging the governor to make the call as the 
 only remaining means of saving the nation. 
 
 At the time Mr. Hamilton made this recommendation 
 to Gov. Jay, he must have known that a proposition in- 
 volving this very scheme, had been made in the assembly 
 by Mr. Swartwout and Judge Peck a few months before, 
 and in that body had been rejected by the united votes ©/" 
 the federalists. He must have known that that able law- 
 yer, and honest and honorable man, John V. Henry, 
 had opposed it mainly on the ground that it was unconsti- 
 tutional. Had the constitution changed, or was Mr. Henry 
 and the whole federal party in the assembly to change at 
 the bidding of Gen. Hamilton 1 John Jay, the pure, the 
 honest, the patriotic John Jay, who at that moment was 
 as zealous a federalist as the United States contained, to 
 his immortal honor, refused to yield to this pressing soli- 
 citation. On the back of that letter will now be found 
 the following endorsement. " Proposing a measure for 
 •party purposes J which I think it would not become me to 
 adopts In the history of man, amidst his follies, his 
 rices, and his crimes, there are now and then green spots 
 
 10
 
 146 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 on which the mind delights to dwell, and this is one of 
 them. This demonstration of virtue and high integrity, 
 ought to embalm the memory of John Jay in the heart of 
 every honest man and true patriot. It brings to one's 
 mind the so much admired decision of the people of 
 Athens, on the proposition made to them byTbemistocles 
 through Aristides. The letter of Gen. Hamilton may be 
 seen in 1 Jay, 412 — The general's name is not printed at 
 the foot of it, but it is, I believe, universally admitted that 
 he wrote and subscribed it. 
 
 There is something singular, and to my mind mysteri- 
 ous, in the character of Gen. Hamilton. That he was a 
 very great man — perhaps the greatest man on the score 
 of talents, who flourished during the revolution, I believe. 
 The testimony of good judges now living, who knew him 
 well, and the writings which he has left behind him, par- 
 ticularly the Federalist, together with his official reports 
 as secretary of the treasury, sustain me in this opinion; 
 and that he honestly believed the measures which he ad- 
 vocated were the measures best calculated to advance the 
 prosperity of the country; and also, that he honestly, 
 frankly, and fearlessly declared his opinions on all proper 
 occasions, both publicly, and privately, I have no manner 
 of doubt. But there were many things in his conduct 
 towards men^ which we shall find it difficult to approve; 
 and in some of his political movements his actions seem 
 to have been inconsistent with that good faith which a 
 member, and especially a leader of a political party owes 
 to the friends with whom he is associated. Upon a close 
 analysis of his conduct, his errors, I think, will be found 
 to have originated from having formed too low an estimate 
 of the intelligence and patriotism of the mass of commu- 
 nity, and to an immoderate and most intense personal 
 ambition. 
 
 He was always opposed to Gov. Clinton, but his oppo-
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YORK. 147 
 
 sition to him was founded oh a radical difference in 
 opinionj respecting what ought to be the principles and 
 the policy of the government. That opposition was open 
 and frank, and always conducted honorably. Of Col. 
 Burr, he was the professional rival, (though vastly his 
 superior,) and he was unwaveringly politically opposed to 
 him; although Col, Burr at times supported the party to 
 which Gen. Hamilton was attached, the hostility of the 
 latter to the former, seems never for one moment to have 
 undergone the least mitigation. There were good reasons 
 why he should have been politically opposed to Gov. 
 Clintonj and there were also, equally good reasons why 
 he should have been opposed to Burr, probably as well 
 personally as politicallyj — but he was also unfriendly, and 
 for a long period was opposed to Mr. John Adams. Why 
 should he have been hostile to Mr. Adams? Both he 
 and Mr. Adams were pursuing the same object, the 
 support of the federal cause in the Union. Adams could 
 not, had he been disposed to do so, cross the track or 
 thwart the views of Gen. Hamilton in the state of New- 
 York. Why then, should the latter have been the early, 
 the constant, and finally, the vindictive opponent of the 
 former 1 Did Hamilton believe that the northern section 
 of the union could not sustain two great men 1 
 
 On the 22d October, 1800, a few days before the presi- 
 dential electors were to be chosen in every state in the 
 nation. Gen. Hamilton published a pamphlet, in the form 
 of a letter, " on the public conduct and character of John 
 Adams." It contained a virulent attack upon him, per- 
 sonally as well as politically; it is said, and indeed it is 
 intimated by Gen. Hamilton, that he did not intend this 
 for the public eye; that he caused it to be printed for the 
 purpose of more conveniently sending it to his confidential 
 friends. This circumstance, if the attack was unjustifia- 
 ble, rendered the act more culpable. To attempt to rob
 
 148 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1800. 
 
 a man of the esteem and confidence of his friends by 
 secret communications, against which he cannot defend 
 himself, because he does not know of their existence, is 
 more unjust, more cruel than to attack him openly. This 
 I can not believe that Mr. Hamilton intended, as it is in- 
 consistent with the general tenor of his conduct. It is 
 however, certain, that parts of the letter were made public, 
 contrary to the wishes of Mr. H., or sooner than he 
 desired. If the following anecdote be founded upon fact, 
 it accounts for the premature publication of this document. 
 It is said that Hamilton ordered it to be privately printed 
 and the copies all sent to him; that the printer after excu- 
 ting the work early in the morning, sent the pamphlets by 
 a boy to Gen. Hamilton; that Burr, who was an early 
 riser, happening that morning to be walking in the streets 
 near the house of Hamilton, met the boy with a cov- 
 ered basket on his arm, coming from the printing office, 
 and travelling in the direction of the residence of Hamil- 
 ton, and casually asked the lad what he had in his basket ? 
 He said "pamphlets for Gen. Hamilton;" not knowing 
 that they were of the least importance. Burr then per- 
 suaded the boy to let him have one of them, and forthwith 
 caused extracts from it to be published and widely circu- 
 lated. I can not vouch for the truth of this story; I have 
 it, however, from a gentleman of high standing, who him- 
 self believed it. Mr. Davis, (2 life of Burr, 65,) gives a 
 different account of the means by which the letter of Gen. 
 H. was first made public. 
 
 Gen. Hamilton commences this letter by affirming that 
 Mr. Adams had great and intrinsic defects in his character, 
 which rendered him unfit for the office of chief magistrate, 
 and that his talents were not adapted to the administration 
 of the government. Mr. H. says in page seven of his 
 letter, that Mr. Adams " is a man of an imagination 
 sublimated and eccentric, propitious neither to the regular
 
 * 
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YOKK. 149 
 
 display of a sound judgment, nor to steady perseverance 
 in a systematic plan of conductj and to this defect is 
 added the unfortunate foible of a vanity without bounds, 
 and a jealousy capable of discoloring every object." For 
 proof of this he relates several anecdotes of Mr. Adams, 
 some of them referring to occurrences in France, To 
 show the propensity of Mr. Adams to b^ jealous of his 
 friends, Mr. H., after stating that it was agreed among the 
 federalists in 1796, when the presidential office became 
 vacant by the declension of Gen. Washington, that Mr. 
 Adams and Mr. Pinckney should be equally supported, 
 leaving it to casual accession of votes in favor of the one 
 or the other of them to turn the scale between them, says, 
 " it is true that a faithful execution of this plan would 
 have given Mr, Pinckney a better chance than Mr, Adams, 
 nor shall it he concealed that an issue favorable to the for- 
 mer would not have heen disagreeable to me. * * * My 
 position was, that if chance should decide in favor of Mr. 
 Pinckney it probably would not be a misfortune, since he, 
 to every essential qualification for the office, added a tem- 
 per far more discreet and conciliatory than that of Mr. 
 Adams." {^Letter p. 11, 12.) Now let us, for one mo- 
 ment, look at this project, and first, let me remark that 
 the public proceedings and papers of that day, (1796,) 
 show as clearly that Mr. Adams was the candidate of the 
 federal party for president, as that Mr, Jefferson was the 
 candidate for that office, in 1800, of the republican party 
 Probably not one out of a thousand of the federalists, 
 dreamed of Mr. Pinckney for president. This General 
 H must have known. He knew, too, that the southern 
 states generally would vote for Mr. Jefferson. Is it not 
 probable that he knew, (certainly he had good reason to 
 believe,) that South-Carolina would do what she actually 
 did do, give eight votes to Mr. Jefferson and eight to their 
 own favorite citizen, Pinckney 1 If then, the plan of
 
 150 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 Gen. H. had been carried out and the northern federal 
 states had given an equal number of votes to Mr. Adams 
 and Mr. Pinckney, Gen. H. must have known Pinckney 
 would have been elected president contrary to the expec- 
 tations and wishes of ninety-nine hundredths of the fede- 
 ralists. Would this have been fair 1 Would it have been 
 honorable ? • * • > 
 
 Mr. Hamilton complains that Mr. Adams spoke un- 
 kindly of him, and was jealous of him. Is it matter of 
 surprise that Mr. Adams should have so spoken and felt 1 
 He and his friends must have discovered the plot. The 
 votes given for Ellsworth and Jay in the New-England 
 states prove this, {seep. 102.) These yankees discovering 
 that a trick was about to be played upon them, were very 
 quiet, but eventually played a yankee trick upon the plot- 
 ters. Mr. Hamilton says " Mr. Adams never could for- 
 give those engaged in this plan;" but for my part I cannot 
 deem him blamable for remembering and distrusting 
 those who formed and attempted to execute it. 
 
 Gen. Hamilton then animadverts with great severity on 
 many of the measures of Mr. Adams, and pronounces his 
 conduct as president to be " a heterogenous mass of right 
 and wrong." Gen. Hamilton, towards the close, says, he 
 " does not advise the withholding from Mr. Adams a sin- 
 gle vote, but he claims an equal support of Mr. Pinckney 
 with Mr. Adams," (p. 51.) He says he intends the cir- 
 culation of that letter to be confined to narrow limits. 
 Now, did not Gen. H. know that, in this country, you 
 might as well attempt to confine the light of the sun, as 
 the matter contained in a printed sheet, when once given 
 to the public 1 
 
 Again, did not that sagacious politician know that to 
 impair the confidence of the public, or any considerable 
 portion of the federal party, in Mr. Adams, at that par- 
 ticular juncture, would be fatal to the federal cause in
 
 1800.] OF NEW-YORK. 151 
 
 Americaj and would render certain the event he so much 
 deprecated in his letter to Mr. Jay — the election of Mr. 
 Jeflferson. Why, then, should he have written and pub- 
 lished this letter 1 Why, in 1796, did he deliberately 
 concoct a scheme, which, had it been successful, must 
 have thrown the federal party into utter confusion, and 
 thwarted the ardent and anxious wishes of an immense 
 majority of his political friends 1 Did he suppose that 
 the election of a southern president, even if he was a mis- 
 chievous democrat, would hasten the elevation to the first 
 office in the nation of the great northern financier"?* 
 
 The friends of Col. Burr charged Gen. Hamilton with 
 inducing Mr. David A. Ogden to call on Col. Burr, previ- 
 ous to the election by the house of representatives, osten- 
 sibly with a view to ascertain what would be his course 
 of conduct towards the federalists, if elected president; but 
 really for the purpose of destroying his standing with the 
 republican party by drawing him out on that subject. 
 This however, appears not to be correct, from the state- 
 ment made by Mr. Ogden, in the Morning Chronicle, in 
 the year 1802. Indeed, if Mr. O. had not made this 
 statement, no man would have believed that Gen. Hamil- 
 ton could have descended to such trickery. He was en- 
 tirely incapable of anything like meanness. It is however, 
 
 • It would seem that as commander-in-chief of the army of the United States, 
 Gen. Hamilton made, in the summer of 1800, a tour through some of the New- 
 England states. A writer in the Boston Independent Chronicle, who claims to be 
 a friend of John Adams, over the signatureofManlius, charges that the General's 
 visit was political, having for its object the prostration of Mr. Adams. On that 
 tour Gen. Hamilton is charged with predicting among his friends — and the names 
 of Messrs. Pinckney, Ames, and Cabot, are mentioned as some of them — that "If 
 Mr. Pinckney was not elected president a revolution would be the consequence ; 
 and that within the next four years he," (Hamilton,) " should lose his head or be 
 the leader of a triumphant army." 
 
 I have been unable to find a contradiction of this story in the federal paperfi 
 published during that year; but the style of conversation is so unlike that which 
 ■was geneally adopted by Gen. Hamilton, I cannot credit it. 
 
 The communication of Manlius will be found in the Albany Register of Aq. 
 gust 12, IflOO
 
 152 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 certain, that as between Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Burr, Gen. 
 Hamilton was in favor of Mr. Jefferson, and so advised his 
 friends in congress. He considered Jefferson the least 
 dangerous man of the two. 
 
 On the first Tuesday of November the new legislature 
 convened, and Samuel Osgood of New-York, was chosen 
 speaker. 
 
 The governor, in his speech, alluded to the appointment 
 of presidential electors as the cause of that early session, 
 and intimated that danger might arise from allowing too 
 much excitement to prevail at times when the chief magi- 
 strate of the nation was to be chosen. He therefore re- 
 commended the suppression of all inflammatory feeling. 
 The residue of his address was confined to local objects 
 proper for state legislation. He recommended the pap- 
 sage of an act for the call of a convention for the sole 
 purpose of restricting the number of senators and members 
 of the assembly. 
 
 The two houses immediately proceeded to choose elec- 
 tors, for president and vice-president. The senate nomi- 
 nated federal electors and the assembly republican. Upon 
 a joint ballot the following persons, all republicans, were 
 declared duly elected — Isaac Ledyard of Queens, Anthony 
 Lispenard of New- York, Pierre Van Cortland, jun. of 
 Westchester, James Burt of Orange, Gilbert Livingston 
 of Dutchess, Thomas Jenkins and Peter Van Ness of Co- 
 lumbia, Robert Ellis of Saratoga, John Woodworth of 
 Rensselaer, Jeremiah Van Rensselaer of Albany, Jacob 
 Acker of Montgomery, and William Floyd of Suffolk. 
 
 In the senate the federal electoral ticket received twen- 
 ty-four votes, and the republican eighteen. In the assem- 
 bly the republican ticket received sixty- four votes, and the 
 federal thirty-nine. On joint ballot the republican candi- 
 dates for electors were chosen by twenty-two majority. 
 
 On the 7th November a resolution was offered in the
 
 ► 
 
 1800.] OF NEW- YORK. 153 
 
 assembly, to elect a council of appointment. This reso- 
 lution was opposed by the federalists, on the ground that 
 the council then in existence had not been in office for a 
 year from the time of their appointment. The same ques- 
 tion, it will be recollected, arose in 1794. The only dif- 
 ference was, the parties had reversed their position. The 
 federalists now held the same doctrine and urged the 
 same arguments that the republicans did then; and the re- 
 publicans now adopted the arguments of the federalists in 
 1794. Such is the consistency of partizans ! 
 
 The resolution was adopted, and De Witt Clinton, Am- 
 brose Spencer, Robert Roseboom, and John Sanders, were 
 elected members of the council of appointment for the 
 ensuing year. All were republicans except Mr. Sanders. 
 It may however, be proper to mention, that the old coun- 
 cil continued to act, notwithstanding the choice of the 
 new, until the expiration of a year from the time they 
 were chosen j for I find them in session on the 23d 
 January, 1801, when Solomon Van Rensselaer was ap- 
 pointed adjutant general, in lieu of Col. Van Home, whose 
 illness rendered him incapable of performing the duties 
 of the office. And here I cannot help remarking, that 
 when this question was agitated in 1794, the assertion by 
 the republicans, that the old council would have a right to 
 act until the end of the year, was treated by the federa- 
 lists as preposterous, and as an attempt at a dangerous and 
 unconstitutional usurpation of power. In that case the 
 old council did not insist upon their right to continue in 
 office, and the new council forthwith proceeded to appoint 
 a judge of the supreme court, (Judge Benson;) this ap- 
 pointment being in truth the cause of the collision which 
 then occurred. 
 
 On the 6ih November, John Armstrong was, by almost 
 an unanimous vote, elected to the senate of the United 
 States, in place of John Lawrence, who had resigned.
 
 154 POLITICAL HISTORY [1800. 
 
 Gen. Armstrong was connected by marriage with the Liv- 
 ingston family. As a man eminent for talents, and espe- 
 cially as one of the most powerful political writers in 
 America, and as a national politician, he is well known; 
 but it does not appear that either at that or any other time 
 he was apparently very active in the management of 
 the political concerns of this state. I am unacquainted 
 with the causes which, at this period of high political ex- 
 citement, procured him an almost unanimous nomination 
 from the senate of this state, which we have seen was de- 
 cidedly federal. It maybe that the federalists in the sen- 
 ate, knowing that they could not succeed in the choice of 
 one of their political friends, in consequence of the repub- 
 lican majority in joint ballot, yielded to the appointment 
 of General Armstrong as the least exceptionable republi- 
 can candidate for that office. Gen. Armstrong had been 
 a federalist, and continued such till about the year 1797 
 or 1798. 
 
 The answers of the two houses to the governor's speech, 
 were respectful. That from the senate was a mere echo, 
 but the answer of the assembly was interlarded with innu- 
 endoes of a party character. 
 
 The legislature, on the 8th Nov., adjourned to the last 
 Tuesday in January. 
 
 Before the members separated, and on the evening of 
 the 8th, the republicans nominated George Clinton to be 
 supported at the next gubernatorial election, and at a sub- 
 sequent meeting of citizens Jeremiah Van Rensselaer was 
 nominated lieutenant governor. At the caucus which 
 nominated Mr. Clinton, Henry Rutgers was chairman, and 
 Smith Thompson was secretary. 
 
 On the same day the federal members held a meeting 
 and addressed Gov. Jay, highly approving of his official 
 conduct, and requesting him to stand a candidate for a re- 
 election. By a written answer the governor thanKed
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YORK. 155 
 
 them cordially for the approbation they had expressed of 
 his conduct, and for the evidence their address afforded of 
 continued confidence, but positively declined being again 
 a candidate, declaring that he had years before determined 
 that at this period of his life he would retire from all pub- 
 lic employment. He afterwards repeated the same decla- 
 rations to a meeting of New-York freeholders,(5ee 1 Jay.") 
 His communications in both cases were affectionate and 
 patriotic, and in accordance with the purity and excellence 
 of his private and public character. He kept his resolu- 
 tion most firmly and religiously. It is said that after he 
 went into retirement he would not even read the political 
 newspapers of the day. This great and good man may 
 have occasionally erred in judgment, but for purity of 
 motive and character no man ever lived who exceeded 
 him. In saying that he may have erred in judgment, I 
 do not mean that he was not a man of great powers of 
 mind and highly capable of judging. John Jay was be- 
 yond question not only one of the purest, but one of the 
 ablest of the revolutionary statesmen and patriots. Note D. 
 
 The federalists afterwards nominated Stephen Van 
 Rensselaer for governor and James Watson for lieutenant 
 governor. 
 
 On the 11th of February the new council met the ffov- 
 ernor for the first time, and the war between them and the^^^ 
 governor was forthwith commenced. Gov. Jay nominated^*:- 
 Jesse Thompson for sheriff of the county of Dutchessj 
 which nomination was non-concurred in by a majority of 
 the council. He then proceeded to nominate seven others 
 for the same office, who were successively rejected by the 
 council. He made some other nominations which were 
 approved by the council. The cpuncil then adjourned to 
 the 18th of the same month, when Robert Williams, after- 
 wards celebrated in the party annals of the state, was ap- 
 pointed sheriff of Dutchess. Williams was a republican.
 
 156 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 On the 24tli the council again met, when an unsuccessful 
 attempt was made to appoint a sheriff of the county of 
 Schoharie, and also of the county of Orange. The gover- 
 nor nominated Benjamin Jackson as sheriff of Orange, 
 who was negatived. He then nominated several other 
 persons with the same result. Mr. Clinton thereupon 
 nominated John Blake, jun. The governor, instead of 
 putting the question, nominated John Nickolson. On 
 this nomination the majority of the council refused to vote. 
 The parties were in this predicament, the governor insist- 
 ing on the exclusive right of nomination, and the council 
 on a concurrent right; the governor refusing to put the 
 question upon any nomination made by a member of the 
 council, and the council refusing to vote on the nomina- 
 tions made by the governor. Upon these issues being 
 formed, Mr. Jay stated to the council that he desired time 
 for consideration before he determined on the course which 
 he should pursue; and thereupon the council adjourned. 
 Gov. Jay never convened them again. It is not impro- 
 bable that Mr. Clinton and Judge Spencer were rather 
 desirous to produce a breach, and so great a breach as to 
 prevent the future action of the council with Gov. Jay as 
 its president. While he occupied that station, it was im- 
 ossible for them to bestow the patronage of the state in 
 all respects as they desired, and they had good reason to 
 believe that the election in April would result in the 
 choice of a governor who accorded with them in political 
 views. On the 26th February, Gov. Jay sent a message 
 to the assembly setting forth his difficulties with the ma- 
 jority of the council and the causes of those difficulties. 
 He reminded them that in his first speech after his election 
 he had besought the legislature to pass an act declaratory 
 of the powers of the governor while acting as president 
 of the council; that the legislature had neglected to act 
 upon that recommendation; that in the absence of all le-
 
 > 
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YORK. 157 
 
 gislative direction he was bound to act according to his 
 own views of the true construction of the twenty-third 
 article of the constitution j that he conscientiously believ- 
 ed that the constitution vested in the governor the exclu- 
 sive right of nomination; and this being his sincere and 
 honest opinion, he should violate his oath were he to yield 
 the right to the council. He was not surprised, he said, 
 that the council should claim a concurrent right of nomi- 
 nation, because that claim had been before made, and be- 
 cause intelligent men might differ as to the propriety of 
 that claim J but he complained of the council for refusing 
 to vote on his nominations. This course of conduct, if 
 carried out, might result in establishing a claim of exclu- 
 sive nomination by the senators who were members of the 
 council. He concluded by asking the directions of the 
 legislature. The assembly, however, resolved that it was 
 a constitutional question to be decided not by them, but by 
 the governor and council. The governor also addressed 
 the chancellor and judges of the supreme court, and re- 
 quested their opinion, which they unanimously declined 
 giving, on the ground, that the expression of an opinion 
 by them was not within the scope of their official duties, 
 but entirely extrajudicial. 
 
 On the 17th March, Messrs. Clinton, Spencer and 
 Roseboom made a written communication to the assembly 
 in which they give their version of the transactions of the 
 governor and the council, which does not materially differ 
 from that given by Gov. Jay. They say they have only 
 in one instance claimed the right of nomination, (the case 
 of Mr. Blake,) but they insist they have such right, and 
 they go into a long train of reasoning to support that po- 
 sition. They say the right has never been yielded by the 
 council, (although it will be remembered Gov. Clinton 
 protested against it;) on the contrary, they refer to its 
 exercise under Gov. Clinton in the case of Judge Benson.
 
 158 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 This commuication is written with some degree of asperity, 
 and alludes to the character and conduct of Mr. Jay in a 
 spirit of decided hostility. 
 
 Upon looking back to the proceedings of the senate in 
 1796, it is impossible to avoid some surprise and regret to 
 find Judge Spencer, not satisfied with a declaration on the 
 part of the senate that the previous official conduct of 
 Gov. Jay inspired the members of that house with confi- 
 dence that his administration would be in every respect 
 beneficial to their constituents, but insisting that the senate 
 should declare that Mr. Jay's whole official life had " inva- 
 riably " afforded evidence of integrity, patriotism and 
 wisdom; which, in effect, amounted to a solemn affirma- 
 tion that under all circumstances and on all occasions it 
 had been precisely what it ought to have been, and inva- 
 riably free from error ; thus ascribing to him a perfec- 
 tion incompatible with human nature, and then to find, 
 after the lapse of so short a period of time, the name of the 
 same Judge Spencer subscribed to this communication — a 
 communication which contains intrinsic evidence of having 
 been partly, if not wholly, written by himself. 
 
 Very few occurrences of much interest took place in 
 either house of the legislature during the remainder of this 
 session. On the 6th of March, Judge Peck reported a 
 bill for the regulation of common schools. What the 
 particular provisions of that bill were, I do not know, for 
 it seems it was not passed into a law. A bill however, 
 was passed before the legislature adjourned, directing the 
 raising, by means of four successive lotteries, of the sum 
 of one hundred thousand dollars, twelve thousand five 
 hundred dollars of which were to be paid to the regents of 
 the university, to be by them distributed among the acade- 
 mies in such manner as they should deem most proper; 
 and the residue, eighty-seven thousand and five hundred 
 dollars, was to be paid into the treasury, to be appropriated
 
 1801.] OP NEW-YORK. 159 
 
 for the encouragement of common schools, as the legisla- 
 ture should thereafter direct. This bill probably grew out 
 of the project proposed by Judge Peck. It is due to this 
 plain, unlettered farmer to add, that he was intent upon 
 making some permanent provisions for these institutions, 
 and that he formed the project of establishing a common 
 school fund in pursuance of the example then lately fur- 
 nished by Connecticut, the state from whence he emigrated; 
 that he never lost sight of it, and that to his indefatigable 
 and persevering efforts, aided by Mr. Adam Comstock of 
 Saratoga, another uneducated and plain, but clear sighted 
 and patriotic man,we are principally indebted for our school 
 fund and our common school system. What military 
 chieftain — what mere conqueror by brute force, has con- 
 ferred so deep, so enduring an obligation upon posterity 1 
 
 On the 6th April a law was passed entitled " An Act 
 recommending a Convention." 
 
 One great defect in the constitution of 1777 was, that 
 it did not contain within itself any provisions for its alte- 
 ration or amendment. 
 
 According to that constitution, the assembly and the 
 senate, especially the senate, were increasing in numbers 
 to a degree extremely inconvenient. Hence the gover- 
 nor, in his speech, invited the attention of the legisla- 
 ture to that subject, and the recent dispute between the 
 governor and council about the right of nomination to 
 office convinced all reflecting men that that question 
 should be definitively settled. Under these circumstances 
 some alteration in the constitution became absolutely ne- 
 cessary. But the legislature found themselves wholly 
 unauthorised to pass a law which would warrant any class 
 of men to alter the old constitution, or make a new one. 
 However, as necessity knows no law, they recommended 
 to the people to choose delegates who should be authorised 
 solely to take into consideration that part of the constitu-
 
 160 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 Hon which related to the members of the senate and as- 
 sembly, and to determine the true construction of the 
 twenty-third article of the constitution. The act further 
 provided that the delegates should be equal in number 
 from the respective counties to the members of the assem- 
 bly; that they should be chosen in the month of August 
 then next, by all freemen over twenty-one years of age; 
 that the delegates thus elected should meet at Albany 
 on the second Tuesday in October; that the determina- 
 tion of the convention respecting the matters therein be- 
 fore mentioned should be entered of record and should 
 thereupon be considered as a part of the constitution of 
 this state. 
 
 It can scarcely be necessary to add that on the 17th of 
 February Mr, Jefferson was, by the states in congress, 
 elected president, or to speak of the manner of that elec- 
 tion. The history of that fearful contest, which from day 
 to day threatened a dissolution of the government, is well 
 known. The news of the result was received by the re- 
 publicans in every part of the nation with acclamations of 
 joy, but perhaps, nowhere with more heartfelt exultation 
 than in the state of New-York. On the 4th of March, 
 meetings were held, processions were formed, and orations 
 were delivered in almost every city and village in the 
 state. The republican members of the legislature and the 
 citizens of Albany, and citizens from other parts of the 
 state, joined in the general festivity. A splendid dinner 
 was provided and toasts were drank. I allude to the pro- 
 ceedings of this meeting to show that at that time, what- 
 ever views individuals may have entertained of the recent 
 conduct of Col. Burr, the republican party generally had 
 confidence in him, and that he stood high in their esteem. 
 The Albany Register, then the organ of the republican 
 party in the state, in reference to this celebration, says: — 
 " In rejoicing on this occasion they, [the company,] did
 
 1801.] or NEW-YORK. 161 
 
 not forget the important success of the republicans in the 
 choice of that firm and tried patriot Aaron Burr as vice- 
 president of the United States." 
 
 Among the regular toasts drank, the next after the toast 
 to Mr. Jefferson, was — 
 
 '* Aaron Burr^ Vice-President of the United States — 
 His uniform and patriotic exertions in favor of republi- 
 canism eclipsed only by his late disinterested conduct." 
 
 Mr. De Witt Clinton was present, and gave the follow- 
 ing volunteer — 
 
 " Our republican brethren of the south — May we always 
 be united with them in the elevation of patriots and the 
 promotion of good principles." 
 
 Could any one imagine that the bitter waters of strife 
 were so soon to succeed the copious drafts from the flow- 
 ing bowl, which then circulated with such apparent cordial 
 conviviality 1 Man is mutable — politicians are most mu- 
 table ! 
 
 The electioneering campaign between Gov. Clinton and 
 Gen. Van Rensselaer was opened and prosecuted with 
 great spirit and vigor. It gives me pleasure on this occa- 
 sion, to notice one circumstance highly honorable to Mr. 
 Van Rensselaer, but which, indeed, is in perfect keeping 
 with the character and conduct of that good man. 
 
 It had, it seems, been given out, probably by some ot 
 his over zealous friends, that those of his tenantry who 
 ■were in arrears in the payment of their rent, (and there 
 were probably thousands who were so,) if they refused to 
 vote for him would be prosecuted for those arrears. Upon 
 this report coming to the ears of the patroon he forth- 
 with published, in all the papers printed in Albany and 
 Rensselaer counties, that the report was wholly untrue. 
 He assured his tenants that he wished them to vote as in 
 their judgment their duty to the country required, and 
 that no man should be prosecuted who voted against him. 
 
 11
 
 162 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 After such a noble and magnanimous declaration, I am 
 not at all surprised that in the county of Albany the pa- 
 troon received two thousand one hundred and thirty-eight 
 votes, while Gov. Clinton received but seven hundred and 
 fifty-five. This vote \vas equally honorable to those who 
 gave as to him who received it. The general result of 
 the election however, in the state, was in favor of the re- 
 publican party. Gov. Clinton was chosen by more than 
 four thousand majority, and a majority of republicans 
 were elected members of the assembly. 
 
 We have thus seen a great party, which had for twelve 
 years been in the ascendancy in the nation, and the greater 
 part of that time had controlled the political destinies of 
 the state of New-York j a party which claimed for its 
 head and leader one of the greatest and best men who ever 
 existed in any age or country — the immortal Washington; 
 a party which contained in its ranks a majority of the emi- 
 nent sages and patriots of the revolution, and an host of 
 men possessing talents of the highest order, and justly dis- 
 tinguished for their public and private virtue, prostrated by 
 the fiat of the people of this state and of the United States, 
 expressed through the polls of election. I should assume 
 too much, w^ere I to attempt to speculate on the causes 
 which produced this great civil revolution. I may, how- 
 ever, be permitted to mention one leading error, which in 
 my opinion, was embraced by the prominent federalists, 
 and which gradually extended itself among their ranks. 
 They did not properly appreciate the intelligence and 
 good sense of the mass of the community. They con- 
 sidered them as incapable of judging what was for their 
 best good. It is said General Hamilton, in addressing a 
 mass meeting in New^-York, told the people that they 
 themselves were their own worst enemies. It was not 
 discreet to make such a declaration had it been true; but, 
 in my judgment, it is not true. Although there are many
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YORK. 1C3 
 
 among us who are incapable of judging of the merits of 
 great political measures, yet in every community, in every 
 neighborhood, and I may add, among every twelve men, 
 promiscuously gathered, in the most benighted corners of 
 the state, you will find some men of good sound common 
 sense, very capable of weighing and deciding upon ques- 
 tions upon which they are required to decide and act. It 
 was this unjust estimate of the intelligence and virtue of 
 the mass of the people, which induced the federalists to 
 sigh for a more energetic government, and which carried 
 them into a course of reasoning and action which resulted 
 in the utter overthrow of that great, talented and powerful 
 party.
 
 164 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 FROM MAY I, 1801, TO MAY 1, 1802. 
 
 In the southern district E. L'Hommedieu was this year 
 re-elected to the senate; from the middle James G. Gra- 
 ham, Jacobus S. Bruyn and Peter A. Van Bergen; from 
 the eastern John Tayler, Christopher Hutton, Abraham 
 Van Vechten, Ebenezer Clark and James Van Schoonho- 
 ven, the two first named being republicans and the three 
 last federalists, and from the western district Lemuel Chip- 
 man, John Myers and Isaac Foote, all federalists, were 
 elected. Thus, it will be seen, there were six republicans 
 and six federalists elected. It will be recollected that in 
 April, 1800, there was a democratic majority in the west- 
 ern district. As the democratic party from April, 1800, 
 to 1801, was generally on the gain, it is probable the suc- 
 cess of the federal party in the western district was owing 
 to some local causes with which we are at present unac- 
 quainted. Perhaps the republican candidates, or some of 
 them, were personally unpopular. In the assembly a 
 large majority of republicans were elected. 
 
 On the last Tuesday in August, and the two succeeding 
 days, the members for a convention to amend the consti- 
 tion were chosen, in pursuance of the act passed in April 
 preceding, of which I have already spoken. The election 
 resulted in the choice of a great majority of republicans. 
 Indeed, from the tone of the political press of that day, it 
 does not appear that the federalists, as a party, made any 
 considerable efforts. 
 
 John V. Henry, a principal and leading federalist, was 
 elected from Albany county. De Witt Clinton was cho- 
 sen by the electors of the county of Kings; Aaron Burr,
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YOBK. 165 
 
 though he, as well as Mr. Clintonj resided in New-York, 
 was elected a member of the convention from the county 
 of Orange; William P. Van Ness, of whom we have pre- 
 viously spoken as the confidential friend of Col. Burr, 
 was elected from New- York, and Smith Thompson, at 
 present an associate judge of the United States supreme 
 court, was elected from the county of Dutchess. Daniel » 
 D. Tompkins, who afterwards made so distinguished a 
 figure in the political controversies of the state, made his 
 first appearance in public life as a member of this conven 
 tion from the city of New- York. 
 
 The convention met on the 13th of October at Albany, 
 and organized by unanimously electing Col. Burr presi- ' 
 dent. 
 
 It must not be forgotten that the convention was re- 
 stricted to the determination of two questions only. The 
 first was, to fix a limit to the number of senators and 
 members of assembly, and the other question which they 
 were authorised to decide was that relating to " the true 
 construction of the twenty-third article of the consti- 
 tution." They soon agreed as to the limitation of the 
 number of the members of the two houses of the legisla- 
 ture. De Witt Clinton proposed the plan which was 
 adopted. In fact there seems not to have been much 
 difficulty in settling the question of the right of nomina- 
 tion to office by the members of the appointing power j 
 for on the question of adopting the clause on that subject, 
 there were but fourteen members who voted in the nega- 
 tive. This unanimity seoms to me somewhat extraordinary. 
 Had the question been an oiiginal one, that is, whether it 
 was most discreet and wise that the members of the coun- 
 cil of appointment should possess a concurrent right with 
 the governor to nominate all officers, or whether the right 
 of nomination should be exclusively vested in the gover- 
 nor, there would not be much cause of surprise that party
 
 J 66 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 men, although engaged in amending or making a constitu 
 tion, should have unanimously supported the doctrines of 
 their party. But the power of deciding upon the expedi- 
 ency or propriety of exclusive or concurrent nomination 
 was not, by the act to which the convention owed their 
 existence, committed to them. They were merely autho- 
 rized to declare " the true consruction of the twenty-third 
 article of the constitution," but not to alter the terms of that 
 article, or abolish and make a new one in lieu of it. The 
 act recommending a convention, under which they had 
 been elected and were then sitting, vested them with judi- 
 cial powers only. They were merely authorized to 
 expound and declare the true intent and meaning of the 
 convention of 1777, when they adopted the twenty-third 
 article. Perhaps the true cause of the apparent unanimity 
 of opinion on this occasion, was, that both the federal and 
 republican parties had in their conflicts with each other, 
 committed themselves in favor of the construction that the 
 members of the council possessed a concurrent right of 
 nomination with the governor — the federalists in 1794, 
 when Judge Benson was appointed, and the republicans 
 in the winter of 1801. 
 
 From the meagre reports of the proceedings of the con- 
 vention it appears that Mr. John V. Henry was the only 
 man who made an argument in favor of the exclusive risrht 
 of the governor to nominate. De Witt Clinton, who took 
 the other side of the question and voted with the majority, 
 lived long enough to have reason from his own experience 
 bitterly to deplore that the convention had not adopted 
 the construction given to the article by his venerable uncle, 
 George Clinton, and by the learned, judicious and consci- 
 entious John Jay. Here then, is another proof that legis- 
 lators, and especially constitution-makers, in passing gene- 
 ral laws and establishing general rules, should never act 
 from party considerations. William P. Van Ness was
 
 1801.] or NEW-YORK. 167 
 
 one of the fourteen who voted against this construction of 
 the constitution, and Daniel D. Tompkins was another. 
 Precisely twenty years afterwards, in the convention of 
 1821 J Gov. Tompkins referred to his conduct on this 
 occasion with self-satisfaction and just cause of triumph. 
 He said, [Debates in the Convention j p. 116,] " The con- 
 vention of 1801 was assembled to sanction a violent 
 construction of the constitution. Then, the maxim was, 
 to strip the governor of as much power as possible. Now, 
 gentlemen are for giving him more power. In the con- 
 vention of 1801 he was opposed to retrenching the power 
 of the executive. To him it was a proud triumph, that at 
 the age of twenty-six, he stood alone against the then 
 dominant party; and he believed that there were members 
 who would now be proud if it could be said that they had 
 taken the same ground." 
 
 Gov. Tompkins was mistaken in saying that he was the 
 only republican who took this course. William P. Van 
 Ness was with him, a circumstance which he had no doubt 
 forgotten. Ought not this incident in the life of Tomp- 
 kins to admonish young politicians to act according to the 
 dictates of their own consciences, without regard to the 
 popular breeze which at the moment may happen to agi- 
 tate the political atmosphere 1 
 
 The reader will recollect that the rupture between Gov. 
 Jay and his council took place on the 24th of February, 
 
 1801, and that, although he continued in office until July 
 following, he never again called the council together. 
 He will also bear in mind that the council, consisting of 
 De Witt Clinton, Ambrose Spencer, John Sanders and 
 Robert Roseboom, continued in office till the winter of 
 
 1802. On the 8th of August, 1801, Gov. Clinton invited 
 a meeting of the council. 
 
 The proceedings of this council, after Mr. Clinton was
 
 168 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 inducted into office, were, at the time, the subject of much 
 complaint and severe animadversion. 
 
 It has often been remarked by citizens and politicians 
 of our sister states, that the action of political parties in 
 the state of New-York was to them unaccountable and 
 mysterious. They saw men elevated to distinguished 
 stations many times, without any apparent cause of such 
 elevation ; they saw others assailed and denounced, and 
 they witnessed the total prostration of men high in office, 
 and proscribed even by the party professing to support 
 the same measures and holding the same political princi- 
 ples as those who were thus cast out of the political 
 church, without even an attempt to charge the proscribed 
 individuals with either a want of talent, of official miscon- 
 duct, of immorality, or of heresy in their political princi- 
 ples. Hence, hundreds of strangers have said to me that 
 the politics of New-York were to them a perfect enigma. 
 The cause of this mysterious development of the action of 
 parties will, I think, be in a great measure found in the 
 manner in which the appointing power executed its func- 
 tions, after the alteration of the constitution by the con- 
 vention of 1801. 
 
 In Vermont, and in several other of the United States, 
 nearly all the appointments are made by the most nume- 
 rous branch of the legislature, and in other slates they are 
 made by the governor and senate. In cases where so 
 many men are required to pass upon the fitness of an 
 appointment, it is difficult, and generally speaking, impos- 
 sible to distribute the state patronage for the purpose of 
 advancing the interest or influence of any individual, or 
 any particular clique of indi\-iduals. Some of the many 
 persons who hold the appointing power, will discover the 
 object of the prime movers and expose and denounce them. 
 Exposure forthwith puts an end to the successful prosecu- 
 tion of individual ambitious projects, whose success depends
 
 1801.] OF NEW-yORK. 169 
 
 on the bestowment of state patronage. In states where 
 the governor possesses the sole power of nominating or 
 appointing to office, he, feeling his responsibility to, and 
 his dependence upon the whole people, dare not, in gene- 
 ral, prostitute his power to the promotion of individual 
 interests and views. These checks could not be brought 
 effectually to bear on the members of the council of appoint- 
 ment. They were commonly men who, like Mr. Clinton 
 and Mr. Spencer, were about to retire from the legislature 
 and who cherished high and ambitious projects; or, like Mr. 
 Robert Roseboom, honest and unpretending, but who were 
 suddenly raised from a mediocrity of standing in life, and 
 in the legislature, to the possession of great power. This 
 last sort of men, for the space of one year, were followed, 
 caressed and flattered; but, on the expiration of that year, 
 when they ceased to be members of the council, they in- 
 stantly fell back to the position in society and in the 
 public eye, which they formerly occupied. They remind 
 one of the transitions produced by the power of magic, as 
 detailed by the author of the Arabian Night's tales. Like 
 the player who, while clothed with royal habiliments and 
 enacting Julius Caesar or Richard the Third, excites your 
 admiration and perhaps your veneration and awe, yet, the 
 moment the curtain drops, he is transformed to a street 
 stroller, about whom, individually, you think little and 
 care less. It is evident that neither of these classes of 
 men, while members of the council of appointment, could 
 feel that high sense of responsibility to the people which 
 the genius of our government demands from officers pos- 
 sessing such important delegated powers. Besides, it was 
 often difficult to ascertain who ought to be charged with 
 the sin of an improper appointment. The ayes and noes 
 are not entered on the minutes of the council unless ex- 
 pressly directed by the dissenting councillors. An incom 
 petent and dishonest man was appointed a justice of the
 
 170 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 peace in your neighborhood. A. B, C. and D. arc mem- 
 bers of the council. Charge A. with the improper act, 
 and ten to one he would tell you, " I had nothing to do 
 with it," and that he either voted against it or had no re- 
 collection of the transaction^ and the same answer might 
 be given by B. C. and D. 
 
 From this hasty view of the council of appointment, 
 one cannot fail of perceiving that it constituted a branch 
 of the government which would be likely to be wielded 
 for the immediate benefit of the councillors themselves, or 
 that its members were extremely liable to become the tools 
 of artful and designing men, either in or out of the legisla- 
 ture. 
 
 Mr. Clinton and Mr. Spencer were both young men, 
 and after the latter abandoned the federal party, they be- 
 came cordial and confidential friends. Mr. Clinton was 
 then but thirty-two years old. Both were ambitious ani 
 highly talented. Mr. Spencer was already distinguished 
 as a lawyer, and Mr. Clinton, from his near relationship 
 with the governor, the talents he had displayed as a writer 
 and his energy as a politician and legislator, was viewed 
 by all as a person who might reasonably entertain high 
 expectations in public life. These gentlemen were under- 
 stood as acting, and no doubt did act, in perfect concert 
 as members of the present council; but a general impres- 
 sion prevailed that Mr. Clinton was the leader of the two, 
 and of course the master spirit which controlled the coun- 
 cil ; Mr. Roseboom on all important questions, following 
 the lead of the other two republican members. Mr. Clin- 
 ton, on his arrival in Albany, previous to the first meeting 
 of the council after Gov. Clinton was seated in the guber- 
 natorial chair, caused it to be publicly made known that 
 in his judgment the heads of the executive departments of 
 the state ought to be composed of men who accorded Avith 
 the majority of the people of the state in their political
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YORK. 171 
 
 viewsj and that the minor offices ought to be equally dis- 
 tributed between each party according to their respective 
 numbers. His views, as represented by the Albany Re- 
 gister, on the subject of appointments, were substantially 
 the same as those expressed by Mr. Jefferson in his cele- 
 brated letter to the New-Haven merchants, in answer to 
 their remonstrance against the removal of the collector of 
 that port and the appointment of Mr. Bishop. Even this 
 line of conduct, moderate as it may now seem, was carry- 
 ing the exercise and influence of the appointing power 
 much farther than had been done by any preceding admi- 
 nistration. Gov. Clinton, during the eighteen years he 
 had administered the government, never in a single in- 
 stance had consented to the removal of an officer on 
 account of his political opinions and without proof of 
 incompetence or misconduct; and even then not without 
 notice having been given to the incumbent, and opportu- 
 nity afforded him to make his defence before the council. 
 Gov. Jay professed to adhere, and I presume did himself 
 adhere, to the same rule of action, although there were, 
 as we have seen, one or two removals from small offices 
 without notice to the incumbents, and without any cause 
 appearing on the journals of the council. But these 
 removals, it is fair to presume, were made by the members 
 of the council against the wishes of Mr. Jay. It strikes 
 me, however, that there is no just cause to complain of the 
 rule of action which Mr. Clinton declared would govern 
 his conduct as a councillor. The public interest certainly 
 requires that the heads of the executive department should 
 entertain the same views, on all great political questions, 
 as the chief executive, otherwise jealousies will grow up 
 and obstructions will be likely to be thrown in the way 
 of the action of one department by the other, and the 
 governmental machine, instead of each part moving in 
 unison with all the other parts, will be checked and
 
 172 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 clogged in its operation; and as respects the inferior offi- 
 ces surely no party in the minority ought to complain if 
 they have a proportion of the offices and emoluments 
 equal to their numbers when compared with the party in 
 the majority. But when the public once learned that 
 office and its emoluments were to be conferred on accoimt 
 of the political opinion held by the candidate, both Mr. 
 Jefferson and Mr. Clinton soon must have been convinced 
 that the importunity of political friends could not be re- 
 sisted, and accordingly they themselves were the first to 
 violate their own rules. 
 
 When the political control of the state was transferred 
 from the federal to the republican party, by the elections 
 of April 1800 and 1801, the republican party in New-York 
 may be said to have had three leaders. These were the 
 Clintons, the Livingstons, and Aaron Burr. By far the 
 greatest number of people belonged to that portion of the 
 republican party who were attached to Gov. Clinton; the 
 Livingstons, as a family, were numerous, more wealthy, 
 and hence the most powerful; and Col. Burr possessed a 
 small number of friends and admirers, most of whom 
 resided in the city of New-York, but he had a few follow- 
 ers in almost every county in the state. He had no 
 family connexions, nor were his supporters, generally 
 speaking, men of wealth. He himself seems always to 
 have been insolvent, although he received and expended 
 a great amount of money. But his friends, though few 
 in number, were extremely devoted to their chief, and 
 most of them were men of considerable political tact and 
 uncommonly active. Before the council, of which we 
 are now speaking, commenced their operations, Burr had 
 rendered himself obnoxious to the animadversions and 
 suspicions of the republican party by his conduct in rela- 
 tion to the pending presidential election, and there is 
 every reason to believe that, notwithstanding the senti-
 
 1801.] OF NEW- YORK. 173 
 
 ments expressed at the Albany festival in the winter of 
 1801, held in commemoration of the democratic triumph 
 in the election of Jefferson and Burr, on which occasion 
 Mr. Burr was toasted as a person whose " uniform and 
 patriotic exertions in the cause of republicanism were 
 eclipsed only by his late dismterested conduct" (referring 
 undoubtedly to his conduct during the presidential can- 
 vass,) before that council made a single appointment, it 
 was determined by the Clintons and Livingstons that 
 Burr and his immediate partizans should no longer be 
 considered as members of the republican party. The 
 great offices of state were therefore to be divided between 
 the Clintons and the Livingstons, and their immediate 
 friends. 
 
 At the first meeting of the council on the 8th of August, 
 John Blake was appointed sheriff of Orange county, and 
 Peter Vrooman sheriff of Schoharie. These gentlemen 
 Gov. Jay had, on the 24th February, refused to nominate, 
 and that refusal was the immediate cause of the breach 
 between him and the council. Sylvanus Miller was 
 appointed surrogate of New-York. He was the ardent 
 friend of Mr. De Witt Clinton, and continued, through all 
 the changes of fortune which were then in reserve for his 
 patron, his unwavering supporter. Mr. Miller at, or 
 shortly before his appointment, was a resident of the 
 county of Ulster; and the New- York people complained 
 of the council for importing a surrogate from the country 
 for that city. But the good nature and prepossessing 
 deportment of Mr. Miller soon dissipated those complaints. 
 Possessed of a great fund of anecdote, fine conversational 
 powers and ready wit, which was dealt out in such a 
 manner as never to wound the feelings of others, and of a 
 disposition the most social, he soon became what he now 
 is, though far advanced in life, the favorite of all who 
 knew him. He, for many years, held the office of surro-
 
 174 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 gate, which in the great city of New-York is an highly 
 important office; and I have never heard him charged 
 with official misconduct. Edward Livingston, then a 
 distinguished member of congress, was created mayor of 
 New-York. Maj. Daniel Hale was removed from the 
 office of secretary of state, and Doct. Thomas Tillotson 
 was appointed in his place. This gentleman was, by 
 marriage, connected with the Livingston family. I be- 
 lieve he was the brother-in-law of the chancellor. John 
 V. Henry was removed from the office of comptroller, and 
 Elisha Jenkins was appointed his successor, Mr. Jen- 
 kins was a merchant of the city of Hudson. His ap- 
 pointment to this office was undoubtedly produced by Mr. 
 Spencer. Mr. J. abandoned the federal party in company 
 with Mr. Spencer, and has ever since steadily adhered to 
 his political fortunes. From the principles upon which 
 the council assumed to act, as declared by Mr. Clinton, 
 the removal of Mr. Henry followed as a matter of course; 
 but it is nevertheless to be regretted that a man of such 
 pure integrity, high principles of honor and distinguished 
 talents, could not have been retained in the service of the 
 state. It is not derogatory to Mr. Jenkins to say, he was 
 far inferior to the person who was removed in order to 
 make a place for him. 
 
 Mr. Henry was so deeply disgusted at the transaction, 
 that, at the moment of his removal, he resolved never 
 again to accept of any office, but devote himself entirely 
 to the practice of his profession. That resolution he 
 religiously kept to the end of his life. By his industry 
 and talent he established a professional reputation, in my 
 judgment, infinitely more valuable than any merely politi- 
 cal, or rather partizan, reputation which has been achieved 
 in this state. The council, probably in order further to 
 afford a demonstration of what their future course would 
 be, removed Thomas Mumfoid from the paltry office of
 
 1801.] OF NEW- YORK. 175 
 
 master in chancery and John Richardson from the office 
 of judge of the court of common pleas for the county of 
 Cayuga. As these removals were wholly without any 
 other cause than that the incumbents entertained political 
 opinions different from the majority of the council. Gov. 
 Clinton caused his protest against them to be entered on 
 the journals of the council. In other cases of removals 
 the governor refused to sign the minutes of the proceed- 
 ings of the council. Thus it appears that, although Gov. 
 Clinton had been the great object of attack of the federa- 
 lists, the target to which their most envenomed arrows 
 had, for years gone by been directed, so firmly had the 
 principles of the right and duty of every freeman to form 
 and express his own opinions of public men and measures 
 become fixed in his mind during the revolutionary struggle, 
 that this venerable patriot could not bring his conscience 
 to consent that any of his fellow-citizens through his agen- 
 cy, or even by his tacit acquiescence, should be subjected 
 to any loss on account of the frank, open and independent 
 exercise of such right. 
 
 At the next meeting of the council, which was on the 
 11th of August, Cadwallader D. Golden, a man highly 
 esteemed for his talents and private virtues, and a descen- 
 dant from the colonial lieutenant governor of that name, 
 was removed from the office of district attorney, and 
 Richard Riker appointed in his placej Robert Benson 
 was removed from the office of clerk of the city of New- 
 York, and Teunis Wortman, a young man of talents, but 
 of irregular habits, was appointed his successor; Richard 
 Harrison, a celebrated and learned lawyer, was removed 
 from the office of recorder, and John B. Prevost appoint- 
 ed ; John McKisson was appointed clerk of the circuit, 
 and William Coleman was removed to make place for 
 him. Mr. Coleman was then a young man, (a native of 
 Massachusetts,) of very respectable attainments asascho-
 
 176 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1801 
 
 lar and considerable talents as a political -writer. After 
 his removal Mr. Coleman established, under the patronage 
 of Gen. Hamiltonj the newspaper called the Evening Post, 
 of which he, (Mr. C.,) continued the sole editor until his 
 death. The Evening Post was considered the organ of 
 Gen. Hamilton's political views, and I presume generally 
 promulgated his sentiments. On the same day Conrad E. 
 Elmendorf and Thomas R. Gold, the latter gentleman 
 being a senator from the western district and an eminent 
 lawyer, were removed from the office of district attorney, 
 and Smith Thompson aud Nathan Williams were appoint- 
 ed in their places. 
 
 During the succeeding sessions of this council various 
 removals were made of clerks of counties, sherifis and 
 other county officers. Among other county clerks who 
 were removed, Ebenezer Foote of the county of Delaware, 
 was removed from the clerkship of that county. Mr. 
 Foote was a federalist of considerable standing and influ- 
 ence. He had been a senator from the middle district, 
 and in the year 1797, when Mr. Spencer was a member 
 of the council, was appointed, and as Mr. F. alleged, was 
 warmly supported by Mr. S. Much complaint was made 
 about this removal, and a writer in the Albany Register 
 under the signature of a Friend to Justice in justification 
 of the removal charged Foote with official mal-conduct. 
 This led to a correspondence between Foote and Spencer, 
 which appeared in the party newspapers of the day, and 
 was afterwards published in a pamphlet form by Mr. 
 Foote. Mr. Philip Gebhard was the successor of Mr. 
 Foote. Previous to the action of the council a personal 
 controversy had occurred between these men, in the course 
 of which Mr. Gebhard's name had been struck from the 
 roll of attorneys of the Delaware common pleas. It was 
 charged by the Frie?id to Justice that Foote had taken a very 
 .ictive part and had used unjustifiable means to cause Geb-
 
 1801.] OF NEW-YORK. 1T7 
 
 hard to be expelled from the Delaware bar. Mr. Foote, in 
 his first publication, denies these charges. He alleges that 
 Mr. Spencer was their author, and charges him with base 
 and unworthy conduct as a public man and a member of 
 the council. To this Mr. Spencer replied that he had no 
 knowledge of the production of the "Friend of Justice," 
 till he saw it in print, and that his reasons for voting for 
 Mr. F's removal were different from those assigned by the 
 Friend of Justice. In speaking of Mr. Foote's removal, 
 Mr. Spencer says, " It was an act of justice to the public, 
 inasmuch as in removing you, the veriest hypocrite and 
 the most malignant villain in the state, was deprived of 
 the power of perpetrating mischief." He adds, in his 
 own peculiar style of severity and sarcasm, *' If, as you 
 insinuate, your interests have by your removal been mate- 
 rially affected, then, sir, like many men more honest than 
 yourself^ earn your bread by the sweat of your brow." 
 
 To this Mr. Foote replied, giving, or claiming to give, 
 a sketch of Mr. Spencer's political life, charging him with 
 being an applicant, in 1797, for the office of comptroller, 
 and offering to prove it if he, [Mr. Spencer,] would ab- 
 solve Thomas Morris from all honorary obligations to 
 keep secret his knowledge of the application. Mr. Spen- 
 cer replied, and denied that he was a candidate for the 
 office of comptroller, and he called for proof of the charge. 
 He further stated, " To facilitate you in your enquiry I 
 absolve the whole world from injunctions of secresy and 
 the restraints of delicacy on the subject." 
 
 This correspondence deserves notice only for the reason 
 that it affords evidence of the style and manner in which 
 political controversies were at that day conducted; and as 
 furnishing proof that Judge Spencer was not a candidate 
 for the office of comptroller at any time before he aban- 
 doned the federal party. This proof is important because 
 Judge Spencer is still charged, (and perhaps some believe 
 
 12
 
 178 POLITICAL HISTORY [1801. 
 
 the charge,) with having deserted the federal party from 
 feelings of resentment growing out of the refusal of Gov. 
 Jay to nominate him to the office of comptroller. If the 
 charge had been true, the fact must have been known at 
 the date of this correspondence, and after this public defi- 
 ance to highly excited opponents, is not their failure to 
 produce any proofs of its truth decisive evidence that none 
 existed, and that the allegation was false ? 
 
 By the twenty-eighth article of the constitution of 1777, 
 it was required that " new commissions should be issued 
 to judges of the county courts other than the first judge, 
 and to justices of the peace, once at the least in three years." 
 When this new commission came into the county and was 
 promulgated, all judges and justices of the peace whose 
 names were not included in it were superseded of course. 
 As all offices, excepting those particularly specified, were 
 declared by this same article to be held during the plea- 
 sure of the council of appointment, it was holden that new 
 commissions might issue at the pleasure of the appointing 
 power at any time short of three years, with the same 
 effect as if issued at the expiration of three years from the 
 time of issuing the last commission. In pursuance of 
 this construction, the present council, and whenever the 
 political power changed from one party to the other, all 
 subsequent councils, issued new commissions to most of 
 the counties in the state. The consequence was, that by 
 the leaving out of the new commissions federal judges and 
 justices, and inserting the names of republicans in their 
 places, the political power and influence of the council 
 was carried into almost every neighborhood in the state. 
 The tendency of this practice was to produce an impres- 
 sion among all ranks of people that men were to be pun- 
 ished or rewarded for their political opinions according to 
 their standing and influence in society, and more especially 
 at the polls of the election. The eflfect naturally was to 
 
 I
 
 1801.] OF NEW-rORK. 179 
 
 create a corps of electioneerers in every township in the 
 state, under the name of justices of the peace, and thus 
 judicial officers, who of all others ought to be entirely re- 
 moved from party bias, were made the most active and 
 zealous combatants in the political arena. 
 
 Chancellor Livingston had become incompetent by age 
 longer to hold his office, of which he advised the governor; 
 and John Lansing, jr., chief justice of the supreme court, 
 was thereupon appointed chancellor. Mr. Livingston was 
 soon after appointed minister to France, and terminated a 
 brilliant and useful public life by a successful mission » 
 abroad, in which he had the good fortune, at a compara- 
 tively trifling expense, to negotiate the acquisition of the 
 extensive and rich territory of Louisiana to the United 
 States, and secure forever peaceable and convenient access 
 to the ocean to our fellow-citizens, located, or to be loca 
 ted, in the vallies of the Mississippi and Ohio, and the 
 great and almost interminable and fertile plains of the 
 west. 
 
 Judge Benson had been appointed, under what w^as called 
 the midnight Act of John Adams, a circuit judge of the 
 United States, on the 3d March, 1801, and had of course 
 resigned his office as judge of the supreme court of this 
 state. This resignation, and the appointment of chief 
 justice Lansing, chancellor, caused two vacancies on the 
 bench of the supreme court. These vacancies were not 
 supplied by new appointments until several months after 
 they happened, and loud complaints of delay were made. 
 The particular cause of this delay does not appear, but the 
 federalists publicly charged Mr. Clinton and Mr. Spencer 
 with a design to appropriate those offices to themselves. 
 It is possible that Mr. Spencer may have desired a judicial 
 appointment, but the previous as well as subsequent course 
 of Mr. Clinton's life affords decisive evidence that the 
 suspicion, as to him, was not well founded. But before
 
 180 POLITICAL HISTORY [1802. 
 
 the expiration of the year after this council commenced 
 acting, they appointed Morgan Lewis chief justice, and 
 Brockholst Livingston and Smith Thompson judges of the 
 supreme court. 
 
 In reviewing the appointments made by this council it 
 will be perceived that not a single appointment of the 
 least importance was conferred on the known friends of 
 Col. Burr. In the city of New-York the persons selected to 
 fill the offices seem generally to have been the personal as 
 well as political friends of Mr. Clinton; but of the great 
 state offices the Livingstons had much the greatest share. 
 If there was an implied or express understanding that the 
 offices should be divided according to the wishes of the 
 Clintons and Livingstons, the Livingstons certainly took 
 the lion's part. Chancellor Livingston was undoubtedly 
 by the aid and influence of Gov. Clinton appointed on a 
 foreign embassy; at any rate it is reasonable to infer he 
 would not have received the appointment had Mr. Clinton 
 been opposed to him, Edward Livingston was made 
 mayor of New-York, an office at that time probably worth 
 ten thousand dollars per annum; Doct. Tillotson, a bro- 
 ther-in-law of the chancellor, was created secretary of 
 state; Morgan Lewis, connected by marriage with the 
 family, was elevated to the office of chief justice of the 
 supreme court; Gen. Armstrong, who was in the same 
 way connected with the Livingstons, was appointed by 
 the legislature, a short time before. United States senator, 
 and Brockholst Livingston and Smith Thompson, whose 
 wife was a Livingston, were created judges of the supreme 
 court. It is nevertheless but an act of simple justice, in 
 this place to add, that the gentlemen belonging to the 
 Livingston family who received these appointments were 
 all of them men of high character for talents, and in all 
 respects well fitted for the offices to which they were 
 respectively appointed. Edward Livingston was not only
 
 1802,] OF NEW-YORK. 181 
 
 competent to execute properly the duties pertaining to the 
 mayoralty, but all will now admit that his talents qualified 
 him for any office within the control of the people of the 
 state or nation. The reports of the supreme court of this 
 state are enduring monuments of the learning and abilities 
 of both Brockholst Livingston and Smith Thompson. As 
 a man of genius Livingston was unquestionably the supe- 
 rior of Thompson; but for legal acumen, clearness of per- 
 ception, and logical powers of mind, there are few if any 
 men, in this or any other country, who excel Judge 
 Thompson. 
 
 The legislature met at Albany, Jan. 26, 1802. Thom- 
 as Storm of the city of New- York was chosen speaker of 
 the assembly. 
 
 Nothing remarkable was contained in the governor's 
 speech, but like all the communications of George Clinton 
 it presented in a very brief form the general condition of 
 the state, accompanied with suitable and judicious remarks 
 on the various subjects of legislation, which in the judg- 
 ment of the governor demanded the attention and action 
 of the legislature. 
 
 On the third of February the assembly elected a council 
 of appointment for the ensuing year. It consisted of 
 Benjamin Hunting from the southern, James W. Wilkin 
 from the middle, Edward Savage from the eastern, and 
 Lemuel Chipman from the western district. Josiah Ogden 
 Hoffman had, for a long time, held the office of attorney 
 general, and on referring to the removals and appointments 
 by the preceding council it will be perceived that although 
 the secretary of state, comptroller, &c., were removed, 
 Mr. Hoffman was not disturbed in the enjoyment of his 
 office, notwithstanding he had distinguisned himself as one 
 of the most active and zealous federalists. 
 
 The following facts will account for the forbearance of 
 the council of 1801 towards Mr. Hoffman.
 
 i82 POLITICAL HISTOEY [1802. 
 
 When Mr. Spencer was a member of the federal council 
 in 1797j an attempt was made, probably on the suggestion 
 of Gov. Jay, or possibly by some of the friends of Mr. 
 Jones or Mr. Henry, to pass a resolution and enter the 
 same on the minutes of the council, that it was improper 
 for any person while a member of the council of appoint- 
 ment to receive an office from that body. Mr. Spencer 
 opposed the adoption of that resolution, and in one of his 
 letters to Mr. Foote, to which I have above referred, he 
 assigns the reasons of his opposition. He, no doubt, had 
 fixed his eye upon the office of attorney general, while he 
 was a member of the council in 1801; but as the propriety 
 of a councillor's receiving an office from a body of which 
 he himself constituted a fifth part had been so recently a 
 subject of public discussion, Mr. S. no doubt felt that it 
 Avould be indelicate for him to receive the office in ques- 
 tion until another council should be chosen j and it is more 
 than probable that an understanding existed between Mr. 
 Hoffman and Mr. Spencer, that as soon as a new council 
 should be formed, if that council should be republican, 
 Mr. Hoffman should resign his office. Accordingly, at the 
 first meeting of the council of 1802, Mr. Hoffman resigned 
 the office of attorney general, and Mr. Spencer was ap- 
 pointed in his place. [ See Mote A. end of Vol. 2. J 
 
 William Stewart of Tioga county, a brother-in-law of 
 Gov. Clinton, who had been removed from the office of 
 district attorney of the counties of Ontario, Tioga, &c.,by 
 a federal council, under the administration of Gov. Jay, 
 was, on the same day, restored to that office, which was 
 vacated by the resignation of Mr. Nathaniel W. Howell of 
 Canandaigua. 
 
 Very few other appointments of any importance were 
 made by this council. They, however, appear to have 
 pursued the policy of their immediate predecessors by 
 tilling the offices which became vacant exclusively with
 
 1802.] OP NEW-YORK. 183 
 
 men of their own party j and in the general commissions 
 of the peace which they sent into several counties, they left 
 oflf all the federal judges and justices of the peace whom 
 they with decency could, and supplied their places by re- 
 publicans. 
 
 Under the constitution, as amended, the assembly was 
 to consist of one hundred members, and an apportionment 
 was made by a law of this session giving each county its 
 share of representation in that branch of the legislature in 
 proportion to its population; but no other law of any 
 importance, at least politically, was passed during this 
 session. Mr. Clinton introduced a resolution proposing 
 an amendment to the United States constitution, so that 
 each state should be divided into districts, and the people 
 of each district should choose one elector of president and 
 vice-president, and also requiring the electors to designate 
 on their ballot which candidate they voted for, for presi- 
 dent and whichfor vice-president. These resolutions were 
 adopted. 
 
 At the commencement of the session Gen. John Arm- 
 strong resigned his seat in the senate of the United States, 
 and on the 9th of February De Witt Clinton was chosen 
 to supply his place. Mr. Clinton was nominated by the 
 assembly, and a federalist was nominated by the senate; 
 but at a meeting of the two houses, on joint ballot Mr. 
 Clinton received eighty-two votes and his opponent forty- 
 five. In the controversy which occurred the succeeding 
 summer, between Mr. Clinton and Col. JBurr and his 
 friends, the latter charged the former with much manoeu- 
 vering and bargaining in order to procure the resignation 
 of Gen. Armstrong and the election of Mr. Clinton. The 
 writers in the interest of Mr. Burr, affirmed that the ap- 
 pointment of Doct. Tillotson as secretary of state, was 
 made on the condition that he should procure the resigna- 
 tion of Gen. Armstrong; but these allegations are entirely
 
 184' POLITICAL HISTORY [1802. 
 
 void of any shadow of proof. Gen. Armstrong was not 
 the man who would permit himself to be made an article 
 of political merchandise or traffic, and the office of a sena- 
 tor of the United States being for any cause vacant, who 
 is the man at that day who would have been more likely, 
 without factitious aid, to receive the support of the majo- 
 rity of the republican members of the legislature than De 
 Witt Clinton 1 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the second day of April. 
 
 The result of the spring election was decidedly favora- 
 ble to the republican party. In the assembly a large 
 majority of democratic members were returned, and all the 
 senators chosen that spring were republicans. 
 
 John Schenck was elected from the southern j Solomon 
 Sutherland and Abraham Adriance from the middle, and 
 Jacob Snell, Matthias B. Talmadge, Asa Danforth, Joseph 
 Annin and George Tiffany from the western district. 
 The eastern district, under the new arrangement, was not 
 entitled to elect any senators this year.
 
 1802.] POLITICAL HISTORY 186 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 FROM MAY ;, 1802, TO MAY 1, 1803, 
 
 Immediately after the result of the election was known, 
 the war between Aaron Burr and his partizans, and the 
 Clintons and Livingstons, the materials for which had 
 for a long time been gathering, burst forth and was car- 
 ried on with extreme asperity and bitterness. 
 
 A daily paper had been established in New- York, call- 
 ed the American Citizen, which was considered the organ 
 of the majority of the democratic partyj but was under- 
 stood to be more especially under the influenee of De 
 Witt Clinton.' '. That paper first broke ground against Col. 
 Burr, and openly and bitterly denounced him as a traitor 
 to the republican cause, and in proof of his tr€ach€ry, it 
 charged him with intriguing with the federalists to defeat 
 the election of Mr. Jefferson, and through their aid place 
 himself in the presidential chair. James Cheetham, an 
 Englishman by birth, a man of wit and great talents as a 
 periodical writer, but as a political writer sometimes too 
 regardless of truth, was the senior editor and conductor 
 of this paper. 
 
 On the other hand. Col. Burr and his friends established 
 a paper in New- York, denominated the Morning Chroni- 
 cle, of which Dr. Irving was the editor, which was the 
 antagonist of the American Citizen. Mr. Irving, who 
 was a man of respectable literary attainments, did not 
 seem so well qualified for that kind of cut and thrust war- 
 fare which then was, and now is, too much the fashion of 
 the day, as Mr. Cheetham. The Morning Chronicle, 
 however, carried the war into the camp of the opponents 
 of Mr. Burr, charging the Clintons and Livingstons with
 
 186 POLITICAL HISTORY [1S02. 
 
 inordinate personal ambition, with exercising an unwar 
 rantable and dictatorial power over the democratic party, 
 and with having appropriated an unreasonable por- 
 tion of the spoils of victory to their own immediate use. 
 It affirmed that the conduct of Col. Burr had been cor- 
 rect and honorable, and that the opposition to him was 
 produced by a desire to get rid of him, in order to bring 
 forward some member of the Clinton or Livingston fami- 
 ly as the prominent favorite of the democracy of the 
 north, for the high office which Burr then held, and ulti- 
 mately for the first office in the nation. The controversy 
 was conducted, as I have remarked, with extreme asperi- 
 ty, and the leaders of the two sections of the republicans 
 became personally hostile to each other; so much so that 
 social intercourse was broken off between them, and even 
 pecuniary transactions were affected and controlled by their 
 political prejudices and animosities. The Manhattan 
 Bank, we have seen, was owned and controlled by the 
 republicans of New-York, and the power of that institu- 
 tion was now wielded against the Burrites. Col. Burr 
 and his warm personal and political friend. Col, John 
 Swartwout, were turned out of the direction of that 
 bank after a sharply contested election. Judge Brock- 
 hoist Livingston was chosen a director to the exclusion 
 of Mr. Swartwout. The language used by gentlemen in 
 speaking of each other, was rude and offensive. Mr. De 
 Witt Clinton, in a conversation relating to Mr. Swart- 
 wout, called him a " a liar, a scoundrel and a villain^ 
 And here I may remark, that one defect in Mr. Clinton's 
 character as a public man, and indeed as a private citizen, 
 was that he was too reckless in his remarks about gentle- 
 men who differed with him in political opinions. He was 
 too apt to treat and speak of every man who opposed 
 his political views as dishonest, or wholly incompetent 
 to judge between right and wrong. It is singular that
 
 1802.] OF NEW-YORK. 187 
 
 his long experience as a politician, and his extensive ac- 
 quaintance with men, did not more effectually convince 
 him that it was not true that every man who did not ac- 
 cord with him in sentiment was either a knave or a fool. 
 Mr. Swartwout was a generous and brave man, ardent 
 in his friendships, and equally heated against those he 
 chose to consider as his enemies. He was passionately de- 
 voted to Col. Burr, but like most of Burr's adherents, too 
 careless about the means used for the accomplishment of 
 political ends. The offensive language of Mr. Clinton in 
 respect to Col. Swartwout, which I have quoted, induced 
 the latter gentleman to demand through his friend Col. 
 Smith, an apology or recantation from Mr. Clinton. Mr. 
 C. replied that Swartwout had charged him with opposing 
 Col. Burr from unworthy and selfish motives, that he had 
 applied the epithets to Mr, Swartwout in reference to that 
 charge, and that if Swartwout would retract his charge, 
 he (Mr. C.) would apologize for, or take back the offensive 
 expressions. This Swartwout refused to do. A duel was 
 the consequence. Five shots were exchanged, and Mr. 
 Swartwout was twice wounded, notwithstanding which he 
 expressed his desire to continue the fight. Mr. Clinton 
 declared that he was shooting at a man against whom he 
 felt no personal enmity, and the surgeons finally interfered 
 and declared that the situation o£ Mr. Swartwout was 
 such as rendered it improper that the contest should be 
 continued.* 
 
 • Mr. John C. Hamilton, in the second volume of the Biography of his Father, 
 p. 276, after speaking of a pamphlet, written by Gen. Hamilton, recommending 
 mild and lenient treatment towards the tories of the revolution, and of the effect 
 that pamphlet had on the public mind in allaying the persecuting spirit which ex 
 isted among the whigs against that class of people says, " that the pamphlet and 
 its effects excited bitter animosity against the General among a portion of the 
 citizens of New- York; and he states that "there existed at this lime an even 
 ing club, composed of persons conspicuous in the prosecution of these attain- 
 ders," (of diaaffected persons,) " some of whom had written in opposition to 
 Phocion, (the signature assumed by Gen. Hamilton,) and who felt themselves the 
 deserved objects of its just denunciation \" 
 
 " Early in the evening of this meeting, it was proposed that Hamilton shonld
 
 188 POLITICAL HISTORY [1802. 
 
 About this time Mr. Cheetham published a pamphlet 
 entitled ^^ A view of the political conduct of Aaron Burr^^ 
 in which he professed to give a history of his political 
 conduct, from the time of his first entrance into public life 
 down to the time when the pamphlet was written. It was 
 written with great tact, and although evidently too bold 
 in its denunciations and too reckless in assuming charges 
 proved which rested upon slight circumstantial evidence, 
 there seems, in my judgment, enough contained in it to 
 lead the mind fairly to the conclusion that Col. Burr was 
 a trimmer in politics, and an unsafe man to be entrusted 
 with an important office- Shortly afterwards a pamphlet 
 appeared to which the fictitious signature of Aristides was 
 affixed. This pamphlet attacked with unprecedented se- 
 verity the public and private character of nearly all the 
 distinguished men of the republican party. Doct. Tillot- 
 son and Judge Livingston, and indeed the whole Living- 
 ston family, were assailed with great bitterness. Their 
 motives were arraigned and impeached, and their private 
 character for honor and veracity was traduced and villified. 
 The writer alleges the governing maxim of the Livingston 
 family to be — 
 
 "Rem, facias rem, 
 
 Si possis recte, si noo, quoque rnodo, rem." 
 
 But the vials of his wrath, the dregs of his gall and bitter- 
 ness, seem to have been reserved to be poured on the 
 heads of De Witt Clinton and Ambrose Spencer. He 
 
 b« chaUenged, and in case the first challenger should faU that others should chal- 
 lenge him in succession," until someone should take his life. 
 
 This barbarous plot was defeated by the opposition of Mr. Ledyard, who was 
 one of the writers whom Hamilton had attacked, who came in in time to break 
 up this savage combination. 
 
 Suspicions were entertained by the opponents of Col. Burr, that some such 
 combination had been formed by the Burrites in relation to Mr. Clinton and his 
 leading friends. A subsequent challenge and duel with Richard Riker favored 
 this suspicion ; but no man who is acquainted with the frank and open hearted 
 JohnSwartwout can for one moment tolerate the idea that he was a party to 
 such a combination.
 
 1802.] or NEW-YORK. 189 
 
 charges them with every thing vile, every thing mean and 
 malignant. William P. Van Ness is now the admitted 
 author of this production. It is written with great talent. 
 As a political writer, its style renders Mr. Van Ness un- 
 rivalled since the days of Junius; and yet, every sentence 
 and line of it seems to have been written with such intense 
 hate and malice boiling in his bosom, that no man who 
 possesses the least portion of the milk of human kindness 
 would consent to enjoy the reputation for genius and ta- 
 lent, to which the author is entitled, if the possession of 
 that reputation must of necessity be connected with the 
 evidence which this pamphlet affords of the extreme ma- 
 lignity of the heart of the writer. 
 
 There can be no doubt but that both parties to this 
 controversy, in their speeches and writings, did injustice 
 to the adverse party, and it would be unsafe implicitly to 
 rely even on the statement of facts by either. Honorable 
 men, under high party excitement, will distort and disco- 
 lor facts in their statements, so that it will be often diffi- 
 cult for a disinterested person to arrive at a correct conclu 
 sion. Lady Betty Germain was right when she said, " 1 
 have lived long enough never wholly to believe any side 
 or party against the other." There were, however, a 
 combination of facts and circumstances connected with the 
 last presidential election, as we have heretofore seen, 
 which could neither be denied nor satisfactorily explained; 
 and which rendered it impossible for candid men to avoid 
 coming to the conclusion that Col. Burr had not conducted 
 with good faith towards his political friends. There is 
 no vice or frailty to which man is liable which excites 
 more abhorrence in a generous mind than treachery towards 
 friends. We can forgive an open enemy who has injured 
 us; we can sometimes admire his energy, his enterprise, 
 and his spirit, even when his efforts are exerted against 
 ourselves, but we cannot avoid despising as well as detest-
 
 190 POLITICAL HISTORY [1803. 
 
 ing the traitor. But the republican press, out of the city 
 of New-York, for a long time declined interfering in this 
 controversy, and it was not until the 16th of November 
 that the Albany Register came out openly against Mr. 
 Burr. The editor of that paper, (Mr. Barber,) a very 
 upright and honest man, then declared that he had for a 
 long time hesitated, but that the evidence of Col. Burr's 
 tergiversations had so multiplied upon him that he could 
 no longer resist the conclusion that Mr. B. had forfeited 
 the confidence of the republican party. Nearly all the 
 democratic newspapers followed in the wake of the Alba- 
 ny Register. 
 
 The legislature convened on the 24th January, 1803. 
 When the members came together it was soon ascertained 
 that an immense majority of the republicans disapproved 
 of the conduct of Col. Burr, and that he no longer pos- 
 sessed their confidence. Thomas Storm was re-elected 
 speaker, and Solomon Southwick was chosen clerk in 
 opposition to Mr. Van Ingen, a federalist who had long 
 been the clerk of the assembly. The vote stood forty- 
 two for Southwick and thirty-one for Van Ingen. This, 
 however, was not a true criterion of the strength of parties; 
 for shortly afterwards a question was taken in the house 
 on the answer to the governor's speech, when it appeared 
 there were but twenty federalists in that branch of the 
 legislature; at any rate there were but twenty who voted. 
 Mr. Southwick was the brother-in-law of Mr. Barber, the 
 proprietor and the editor of the Albany Register, and 
 connected with him in the printing and management of 
 that paper. Mr. S. was then a young man, elegant and 
 prepossessing in his personal appearance, of ardent feel- 
 ings and fascinating manners. He was a most zealous 
 democrat. His intercourse with his acquaintance was 
 frank and cordial. He was warm in his friendships, and 
 magnanimous and generous to his enemies. These quali-
 
 1803.] OF NEW-YORK. 191 
 
 ties soon procured him a powerful influence with the 
 members of the legislature, and the republican party in 
 general. 
 
 It became necessary during this session to elect a sena 
 tor of the United States, in lieu of Governeur Morris 
 whose term of service expired on the 4th of March, 1803. 
 The prominent republican candidates for that office were 
 Gen. Theodorus Bailey, then of Dutchess county, and Mr. 
 John Woodworth of Rensselaer county, afterwards attor- 
 ney general, and lately a judge of the supreme court. 
 The election was to take place on the first day of Feb- 
 ruary; and on the evening preceding, a caucus of the 
 republican members was held, at which, upon a ballot, Mr. 
 Bailey had thirty votes and Mr. Woodworth forty-five, 
 who, of course, was declared duly nominated. Matthias 
 B. Talmadge, a senator and brother-in-law to Gen. Bailey, 
 was dissatisfied with this nomination, and set himself at 
 work to defeat the election of Mr. Woodworth. He 
 persuaded several of the democratic senators, chiefly those 
 coming from the southern part of the state, and some of the 
 members of assembly, of whom Mr. James Burt of Orange 
 county was the most active, to abandon the caucus nomi- 
 nation and agree to vote for Gen. Baileyj but a sufficient 
 number of members of assembly could not be dissuaded 
 from the regular usage of their party to prevent the nomi- 
 nation in that house of Mr. Woodworth; for the next day, 
 in the assembly, Mr. Bailey had nineteen votes, Mr. Morris 
 eighteen and Mr. Woodworth fifty-three, and he was of 
 course nominated. In the senate, where the federalists 
 were stronger in proportion than they were in the assem- 
 bly, a communication was opened with them, and Mr. 
 Van Vechten got up a federal caucus on the morning of 
 the first of February, and before the hour of meeting for 
 the senate had arrived, at which it was agreed ultimately 
 to support Gen. Bailey.
 
 192 POLITICAL HISTORY [1803. 
 
 When the senate came to act on the nomination of an 
 United States senator the federalists all voted for Gover- 
 neur Morris, and a few of the republicans voted for Mr. 
 Bailey, leaving a minority vote for Woodworth. A reso- 
 lution was then offered, that Mr. Bailey be declared nomi- 
 nated on the part of the senate, and carried by the follow- 
 ing vote: — Adriance, Bruyn, Chipman, Foote, Gordon, 
 Hatfield, Hathorn, Hitchcock, Hunting, Kent, L'Home- 
 dievLjLawyer, Suffern,Talmadge,Fan Schoonhoven andFan- 
 Vechten. Those whose names are in italics were federal- 
 ists. It will be perceived that Mr. Bailey was nominated 
 by the aid of six federal votes. When the two houses met 
 to compare nominations, Mr. Talmadge and his republican 
 friends of the senate, and Mr. Burt with his corps of nine- 
 teen in the assembly, voted with the federalists on joint 
 ballot, and the result was Mr. Woodworth had fifty-seven, 
 and Mr. Bailey fifty-nine votes, and he was declared duly 
 elected. 
 
 It is impossible to look upon this transaction without 
 disapprobation. I speak neither of the merits or demerits 
 of Gen. Bailey; for although, he was one of the members 
 of congress in 1800, whom Col. Burr had indicated as a 
 person who would eventually vote for him for president; 
 and although it has been alleged that he was persuaded to 
 decline the performance of his agreement with Burr, under a 
 promise of office from Mr. Jefferson, and that the New- 
 York post oflSce was finally given to him in fulfilment 
 of that promise, I have reason to believe he was a respect- 
 able man — certainly he was an amiable member of society. 
 Yet I think that when political friends consent to go into 
 caucus for the nomination of oflScers, every member of such 
 caucus is bound in honor to support and carry into effect 
 its determination. If you suspect that that determina- 
 tion will be so preposterous that you cannot in conscience 
 support it, then you ought on no account to become one
 
 1803.] OF NEW-YORK. 193 
 
 of its members. To try your chance in a caucus, and 
 then because your wishes are not gratified, to attempt to 
 defeat the result of the deliberation of your friends, 
 strikes me as a palpable violation of honor and good faith. 
 You caucus for no other possible purpose than under the 
 implied agreement, that the opinion and wishes of the 
 minority shall be yielded to the opinions of the majority 
 and the sole object of caucussing is to ascertain what 
 is the will of the majority. I repeat, that unless you in- 
 tend to carry into effect the wishes of the majority, how- 
 ever contrary to your own, you have no business at a 
 caucus. 
 
 During this session, it was ascertained that the treasurer, 
 Mr. McClanan, had become a defaulter in more than 
 thirty-three thousand dollars. It would seem from Mr. 
 C.'s statement which I have barely once casually and 
 hastily read, that he was in arrears with his creditors 
 when he was appointed; and that, pressed by their impor- 
 tunities he had applied some of the funds of the state to 
 satisfy those arrears. There was a sharp contest for the 
 office of treasurer when Mr. McClanan was appointed, 
 and if his statement be correct, is it not probable that 
 some of his creditors may have urged his appointment in 
 the hope of realizing their debts rightly if they could, if 
 not rightly, that at any rate they would realize them? 
 
 Upon the discovery of this defalcation, the legislature 
 appointed Abraham G. Lansing, brother of the chancel- 
 lor, a man of wealth and high character for integrity and 
 correct business habits, treasurer. They also by the same 
 law enacted that the treasurer should keep his accounts in 
 banks separate from his private accounts, that he should 
 forthwith deposit all monies he should receive in the 
 Bank of Albany, that he should exhibit his bank book 
 once a month to the comptroller, who, if he discovered 
 any errors or irregularities, was required to report the 
 
 13
 
 194 POLITICAL HISTORY [1803. 
 
 same to the governor, who was authorized and requirea 
 immediately by proclamation to suspend the functions of 
 the treasurer, and from that moment the duties of the 
 treasurer devolved on the president and directors of the 
 Bank of Albany. This act was passed on the 8th day of 
 February. 
 
 On the 19th of March, a law was passed chartering the. 
 New-York State Bank. I shall, however, in pursuance 
 of what I have before intimated, omit any account of the 
 proceedings of the legislature on this subject till I come 
 to the year 1812, when the Bank of America was incor- 
 porated, other than to remark, that a new and very excep- 
 tionable ground was taken by the petitioners for this 
 charter, in support of their application. There were then 
 but three banks north and west of the city of New-York 
 These were the Bank of Columbia at Hudson, the Farm- 
 er's Bank between Lansingburgh and Troy, and the Bank 
 of Albany in the city of Albany. It was said, and no 
 doubt said truly, that the stock of these banks was prin- 
 cipally owned by federalists. A large majority of the 
 petitioners for the State Bank, claimed to be republicans; 
 they therefore asked for a charter upon party grounds, as 
 a political measure, upon the assumed principle, that the 
 bank, if chartered, was to be a republican bank! How 
 supremely absurd was this pretence! They might as well 
 have talked of republican wheat or corn, of republican 
 air and water, as of republican money or a republican 
 bank. 
 
 The April election this year, resulted in the complete 
 triumph of the democratic party, not only in this state but 
 in almost every other state in the union. Mr. Jefferson 
 was a southern man, and local feelings and personal pre- 
 dilections secured him the unanimous support of the south. 
 The northern and middle states were relieved from inter- 
 nal taxes, the army was principally disbanded, the odious
 
 1803.] OF NEW- YORK. |96 
 
 sedition law was abolished, and all men could speak and 
 write what they pleased, — a privilege of inestimable value 
 to the talking and scribbling eastern and northern people, — 
 Mr. Jay's treaty had secured a peace with England, and 
 with France we were on good terms, a considerable por- 
 tion of the transportation of the merchandize of Europe 
 was carried on by American vessels almost exclusively 
 owned by citizens of the eastern, northen and middle 
 states, the bread stuffs produced in those states were in 
 great demand in Europe to feed the countless legions of 
 soldiers which the nations of the old world then had in 
 the field, wheat was at the enormous price of from two 
 to three dollars per bushel, national and bank stocks 
 were steadily rising in value, and the great revolutionary 
 national debt was in a rapid progress of extinguishment^ 
 under such circumstances of unprecedented prosperity, it is 
 not at all surprising that the people should have been con- 
 tented and happy, and should have clung to that adminis- 
 tration which apparently secured to them such high ad- 
 vantages over any other nation on the globe. 
 
 John Broome, (afterwards lieutenant governor,) was 
 elected senator from the southern district, Robert Johnson, 
 Joshua H. Brett, and James Burt from the middle, John 
 Tayler, John Woodworth, Edward Savage, Simon Veeder, 
 and Thomas Treadwell from the eastern, and Caleb Hyde 
 from the western district, all republicans. The aggre- 
 gate vote of the freeholders of the state gave the demo- 
 cratic ticket a majority of eight thousand five hundred 
 and eighty-eight. In the assembly eighty-three republi- 
 cans were elected and but seventeen federalists. 
 
 In detailing the proceedings of the legislature during 
 the winter of 1803, I have omitted to mention that the 
 assembly chose Ebenezer Purdy of the southern, John C. 
 Hogeboom of the middle, Jacobus Van Schoonhoven of
 
 196 POLITICAL HISTORY [1803. 
 
 the eastern and Jacob Snell of the western districts mem- 
 bers of the council of appointment. 
 
 I cannot write the name of John C. Hogeboom with 
 out recording my testimony to the goodness of his heart 
 and the energy and vigor of his intellectual powers. He 
 was a native of Columbia county, where he died. His 
 education had been limited, but he was one of na- 
 ture's great men, possessing a sound judgment and clear 
 and discriminating mental faculties. Ardent and inde- 
 fatigable in advancing the interests and wishes of his 
 friends; he was courteous and liberal towards his political 
 opponents. He lived esteemed and respected, and died 
 bitterly lamented by all, and especially by those who had 
 the happiness of knowing him. 
 
 No important appointments were made by the council 
 during the winter.
 
 1803.] OF NEW-YORK. 197 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 FROM MAY, 1803, TO MAY, 1804. 
 
 In the summer of 1803, Mr. Edward Livingston, who ; 
 6ad been appointed United States attorney for the district 
 of New-Yorkj resigned the office of mayor of that city. 
 The mayor at that time possessed much more power and 
 greater patronage than at present, and the office, both on 
 account of its dignity and emoluments, was sought for by 
 men of high standing and character. Morgan Lewis then, 
 as we have seen, chief justice of the supreme court, was 
 a candidate, as also De Witt Clinton, at that time a sena- 
 tor of the United States, The office was not filled by the 
 council for a considerable period after it had been vacated, 
 and even Mr. Edward Livingston, although^ he had re- 
 signed it as incompatible with the performance of his 
 duties as United States attorney, it is said manifested a 
 desire to be re-appointed; but Mr. De Witt Clinton was 
 appointed the successor of Mr. Livingston. The accep- 
 tance of this office rendered it necessary for Mr. Clinton 
 to vacate his seat in the senate of the United States, and 
 accordingly he soon after resigned that station. 
 
 The political prospects of Mr. Clinton were, at that 
 time, justly considered equal if not superior to any man 
 of his age in the state of New- York, and perhaps it may 
 DC added, in the northern states. He has been charged 
 with being governed by a vaulting ambition, and there 
 can be no doubt that from the commencement of his public 
 career, his aspirations were of a character high and exalt- 
 ed. So lofty was his aim and mark, that whoever knew 
 him will bear me out in the remark, that it was always 
 inconsonant to his disposition to act in a capacity subordi-
 
 198 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1803. 
 
 nate to any man. I mention these traits in his character 
 for the purpose of justifying me in alleging that it is more 
 than probable that at this time he entertained views of 
 attaining the presidency of the United States. If, then, 
 such were his views, and he was at this period actually 
 aiming at that high object, then, I affirm, as a politician, 
 seeking by fair and honorable means to accomplish this 
 great end, he was guilty of an error; and so far as I can 
 perceive, his first error in respect to his own political for- 
 tunes, in resigning his seat in the senate of the United 
 States. He should not have left the service of the nation; 
 on the contrary he should, if in his power, have constantly 
 kept himself before the American people, in the service of 
 the United States. He had, during the short period he 
 was a member of the senate, taken an active part in the 
 deliberations and discussions of the senate, and had acquit- 
 ted himself in a creditable manner. He was the favorite 
 son of New- York. He was morally certain that the whole 
 popularity and weight of character of his venerable uncle, 
 then governor of the state, would be thrown into the scale 
 in his favor; and if at any time he should desire to aban- 
 don legislation, the influence of Gov. Clinton and the 
 whole republican party of the state was surely sufficient 
 to have secured him a seat in the national cabinet, or a 
 foreign embassy; which, as I have before remarked, would 
 have kept him constantly before the American people. 
 All these advantages he gave up in order to come back to 
 the city of New-York, thereby becoming a party in the 
 controversies of the bar-room politicians of that city, and 
 to the petty quarrels in the city and state of New-York 
 about the pitiful offices of masters in chancery, sheriffs, 
 clerks, county judges and justices of the peace. True, 
 he might have the momentary pleasure of disposing of 
 those appointments and enjoying the flattery which those 
 small and successful office-seekers might lavish upon him;
 
 1803.] OF NEW-YORK. 199 
 
 but did it not occur to him that the unsuccesful candidates 
 for office would be more numerous than the successful 
 ones, and that the disappointed would remember the injury 
 they imagined done to them, longer than the appointed 
 would the favor conferred on them, by the person who 
 procured their appointment 1 Mr. Clinton lived long 
 enough to be convinced by sad and bitter experience that 
 such was in fact the nature of man. It may be urged that 
 his pecuniary circumstances required the perquisites of the 
 mayoralty; but such was not the fact. Although Mr. C. 
 received very little from his father, he hart lately married 
 the daughter of Walter Franklin, a wealthy member of 
 the society of friends in New-York, by whom he received 
 a fortune of about forty thousand dollars in cash, or in 
 good investments. Mr. Clinton did not improvidently 
 expend money in an extravagant style of living. A 
 judicious investment of the fortune he received from his 
 wife would, together with what he would have received 
 for his services, even had he continued in the employment 
 of the national government, have afforded a sufficient 
 income to have enabled him to have lived decently without 
 impairing his capital. In the end, his return to New- 
 York had a disastrous effect on his pecuniary concerns. 
 Young and enterprising business men without capital, but 
 anxious to engage in business, who were vigorous and 
 energetic supporters of the democratic party, looked to Mr. 
 Clinton to aid them with credit or cash, and enable them 
 to commence business. Mr. Clinton was, at that time, a 
 director in the Manhattan Bank, and paper which he 
 endorsed and recommended was sure to be discounted. 
 Anxious to patronise young men, and liberal to a fault, 
 Mr. Clinton lent his influence and name to all republican 
 young men in whose capacity he had confidence, and 
 whose habits he supposed to be good. There were many 
 failures; some chargeable to the misfortunes incident to
 
 200 POLITICAL HISTORY [1803. 
 
 commercial life, and some to misconduct and downright 
 knavery. To discharge the liabilities thus incurred, Mr. 
 Clinton was obliged to create large debts, which embar- 
 rassed and harrassed him during his life. Among the 
 imperfections incident to humanity is one, which however 
 odious, always has existed and always will exist. It is 
 this: — When your neighbor has conferred on you an obli- 
 gation which you find it impossible to repay, it weighs 
 heavy on your mind; but if a man quarrels with his bene- 
 factor and declares him to be his enemy, then the vitiated 
 and distorted mind of the ingrate feels, or affects to feel, 
 that all previous obligations between him and his friend 
 are cancelled; and he fancies that the public no longer 
 expects that he shall do acts of kindness to one whom he 
 has declared his enemy. Hence cold and calculating 
 knaves will frequently seek a quarrel with the man who 
 has done them a kindness which they cannot or do not 
 wish to reciprocate, for the sole purpose of absolving 
 themselves, in their own opinion, from the obligation of 
 repaying past favors. 
 
 This detestable propensity in our nature, was afterwards 
 fully developed towards Mr. Clinton; and in the progress 
 of our enquiries we shall see nearly the whole host of 
 disappointed office-seekers and bankrupt makers of notes 
 which he had as endorser been compelled to pay, united 
 in a most vindictive and exterminating political war 
 against him. 
 
 In any aspect therefore, in which the question of the 
 policy of the withdrawal of Mr. Clinton from the political 
 theatre of Washington can be viewed, his decision was 
 indiscreet and unwise. 
 
 Gen. Bailey had scarcely taken his seat in the United 
 States senate when he was appointed post-master at the city 
 of New-York. He therefore resigned the office of senator, 
 and the state was now wholly unrepresented in one branch
 
 1803.] OF NEW-YORK. 201 
 
 of the national legislature. Early in the year 1804, Jacob 
 RadclifF resigned his office as judge of the supreme court. 
 I am ignorant of his reasons for resigning, but from his 
 subsequent conduct it is very evident that if he was dis- 
 gusted with the occupation of a public station at that 
 time, his taste for political life revived with great intense- 
 ness not long afterwards. On the 3d of February, Am- 
 brose Spencer, then attorney general, was elevated to the 
 bench of the supreme court, to supply the vacancy occa- 
 sioned by Judge Radclifl's resignation, and John Wood- 
 worth was appointed attorney general. 
 
 All parties, and especially the members of the bar, 
 highly venerated the talents and felt the most profound 
 respect for the legal learning and capacity of Judge 
 Spencer, but the federalists were alarmed lest his political 
 principles and partizan feelings should influence and bias his 
 judicial conduct. In this they were happily disappointed. 
 He discharged his official duties not only with great ability 
 but with undoubted integrity and rigid impartiality. I may 
 as well say in this place as any where, that although Judge 
 Spencer from the commencement of his professional and 
 political life, has at all periods of it, been an ardent and it 
 may be added, at sometimes a violent partizan, and his 
 conduct as such, may at times, have justly excited animad- 
 version; yet as a judge he was always able, always inde- 
 pendent, always impartial and always honest. 
 
 It is a somewhat singular coincidence that William W. 
 Van Ness, then a young lawyer, and a zealous federalist 
 of Columbia county, afterwards a judge of the supreme 
 court, was removed from the office of surrogate of the 
 county of Columbia, for political reasons, by the same 
 council at the same time that Mr. Spencer was appointed 
 a judge. Did either one or the other anticipate what 
 would be their official, social and political relations for 
 several years succeeding the year 1818] Politicians like
 
 202 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 all other men are blind to the future, and it is perhaps 
 "well that they are so. 
 
 The legislature met on the 31st day of January. Al 
 exander Sheldon of Montgomery county, was chosen 
 speaker, and Mr. Southwick was re-elected clerk. As 
 usual the governor's speech was short, but replete with 
 good sense. Among other things, he announced to them 
 the recent amendment of the United States constitution, 
 requiring the presidential electors to designate the candi- 
 dates voted for, for president and vice-president. He also 
 reminded the legislature that two senators of the United 
 States were to be chosen. The two houses immediately 
 proceeded to the choice of senators, and on the 2d Febru- 
 ary, John Armstrong and John Smith were elected with- 
 out much opposition. 
 
 On the 16th February, the assembly chose a council of 
 appointment, consisting of John Broome from the south- 
 ern, Abraham Adriance from the middle, Thomas Tread- 
 well from the eastern, and Caleb Hyde from the western 
 districts. 
 
 At Washington, as well as in the state of New-York, 
 all political confidence was withdrawn from Col. Burr, by 
 an immense majority of the republican party, and his 
 friends did not even attempt to procure his nomination 
 for vice president at the approaching presidential elec- 
 tion. The democratic party in the nation, with great 
 unanimity turned their attention to Gov. Clinton, and he 
 was nominated without opposition from any quarter. 
 The acceptance of that nomination by Gov. C. rendered it 
 necessary to select some other person as the republican 
 candidate for governor of the state of New-York, and 
 men began to cast about for a suitable person to be sup 
 ported for that office. 
 
 In the mean time Mr. Burr and his friends were not in- 
 active. The last annual election had exhibited so large a
 
 1801.] OF NEw-roRK. 203 
 
 democratic majority in the state that the federalists had 
 not the least hope of success in the election of a go- 
 vernor, if they should attempt to support a candidate from 
 their own party. Under these circumstances the Burrites 
 concluded to bring out their chief in opposition to the 
 regular republican candidate, whoever he might be,— in 
 the confident expectation that the federalists would gene- 
 rally cast their votes for him. I have before remarked 
 that this kind of political manoeuvering is generally weak 
 and in most cases terminates in the prostration and ruin 
 of the actors in the drama. Col. Burr's prospects, how- 
 ever, seemed to assume an imposing aspect. His repub- 
 lican friends in the city of New-York, though not nume- 
 rous, were talented, industrious, active and indefatigable 
 in their exertions; and in almost all the counties in the 
 state some distinguished republicans declared themselves 
 in his favor. In Dutchess and Orange counties he had 
 considerable strength among the republicans. In Orange 
 he had heretofore been a favorite, having been elected 
 once a member of assembly, and afterwards a delegate to 
 the convention by the republicans of that county, although 
 he resided in the city of New-York. Jonathan Fisk, 
 George Gardner, David M. Wescott and Peter Townsend, 
 efficient and influential democrats of that county, were 
 his zealous and active friends. Mr. Burt of the senate 
 was said to be inclined also to support Col. Burr. Gen. 
 Erastus Root of Delaware, the bold and decided republi- 
 can of 1798, and a member of congress, was his avowed 
 friend. John Van Ness Yates of Albany, son of the late 
 chief justice, came out in his favor. At the west, Judge 
 Annin of the senate, and Oliver Phelps the great eastern 
 land speculator, then living in Ontario county, announced 
 themselves the friends of Col. Burr, and Peter B. Porter, 
 then a young man and clerk of Ontario county, was also 
 a Burrite.
 
 204 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 The friends of Col. Burr in the legislature, first broke 
 ground. A meeting was held at the Tontine Coffee 
 House in Albany, on the 18th of February, of which 
 William Tabor, a member of assembly from Dutchess 
 county, was chairman, and Joseph Annin of the senate 
 was secretary* at which Col. Burr was nominated for 
 governor. I have been unable to ascertain how many 
 members of the legislature were in attendance and took 
 part in the meeting. Their numbers, however, must have 
 been very small. This nomination was reiterated at a 
 meeting held in New- York on the 20th of February, of 
 which Col. Marinus Willet was chairman, and Ezekiel 
 Robins, secretary. Shortly afterwards, at a meeting of 
 citizens in Albany, the nomination of Burr for governor 
 was concurred in, and Oliver Phelps of Ontario coun- 
 ty, was nominated for lieutenant governor. 
 
 Previous to the nomination of Col. Burr, a legislative 
 caucus of republican members was held in the assembly 
 chamber, of which Ebenezer Purdy was chairman, and S. 
 Southwick, secretary, when Chancellor Lansing was no- 
 minated for governor, and John Broome for lieutenant 
 governor. The chancellor in the first instance accepted 
 the nomination, but on the 18th day of February he ad- 
 dressed a letter to Mr, Purdy, the chairman, in which he 
 stated, that he had reluctantly accepted the nomination, be- 
 cause it was represented to him that his acceptance would 
 afford a point of union calculated to promote and procure 
 the ascendancy of republican principles, but said he 
 " subsequent events have induced me to believe that my 
 hopes on this subject were too sanguine." He therefore 
 declined to stand a candidate. What those " subsequent 
 events''^ were to which the chancellor alluded,! shall have 
 occasion to explain hereafter. On the 20th of February, 
 another republican caucus was held, at which Mr. Purdy 
 again presided. At this meeting, Morgan Lewis was
 
 1804.] OF NEW-YORK. 206 
 
 nominated for governor, and Mr. Broome was again nomi- 
 nated for lieutenant governor. It would seem that the 
 nomination of Chief Justice Lewis was made with some 
 reluctance. At any rate he was evidently not the first 
 choice of the party. Probably some jealousy was then en- 
 tertained of the influence and power of the Livingston fami- 
 ly. Others it is said, doubted his fitness and capacity for the 
 proper discharge of the duties of the chief executive of the 
 state. The declension however, of Chancellor Lansing, 
 was a complete surprise to the party, and no other person 
 on that emergency could be fixed upon. Mr. Clinton was 
 quite young, and no doubt the Livingstons, and perhaps 
 some others, began to entertain some jealousy of his 
 rapidly increasing influence and power. Judge Spencer 
 had so recently been a decided and active federalist, that 
 it was doubtful whether all the republican freeholders 
 could be induced to vote for him. The time for delibera 
 tion was necessarily short. In this state of things Mr. 
 Lewis was selected, and his political friends three years 
 afterwards alledged that " his nomination was caused by 
 fortuitous circumstances." An address, however, was 
 drawn up in favor of his election, and signed by one 
 hundred and four members. This was certainly evidence 
 of great unanimity, as that number included all the mem- 
 bers of both houses save twenty-eight only. It will, 
 therefore, be seen that, including federalists as well as 
 Burrites, their whole number amounted to no more than 
 twenty-eight out of one hundred and thirty-two. 
 
 At the February term of the supreme court, a cause was 
 argued which highly excited the attention of the New- 
 York public, as well from the importance of the question 
 disputed, as the eminent standing and transcendent ability 
 of the council who took part in the argument. 
 
 Harry Croswell, the printer and editor of a leading fed- 
 eral paper called The Ballance, published at Hudson, had
 
 206 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 attacked Mr. Jefferson with great severity. The grand 
 jury of the county of Columbia indicted him for a libel 
 The cause was tried by Spencer, attorney general, on the 
 part of the people, before chief justice Lewis. On the 
 trial Mr. Croswell offered to prove the trufh of the charges 
 contained in the libel set out in the indictment; and the 
 court, in accordance with the English common law doc- 
 trine, rejected the evidence. The court further instructed 
 the jury that the only question for them to decide, was the 
 fact whether the alleged libel had been published by the 
 defendant, and that the question of libel or no libel was to 
 be determined exclusively by the court. A motion was 
 made for a new trial, and was argued on the part of Mr. 
 Croswell by Wm. W. Van Ness, Harrison and Hamilton. 
 Gen. Hamilton, on this occasion, it is said, excelled all his 
 former efforts. He took a wide and entended range, and 
 shewed that the maxim " the greater the truth the greater 
 the libel," was of modern date in England: that it was at 
 war with the genius of all our civil institutions, and mani- 
 festly a palpable outrage on human rights, common justice 
 and even common sense. The effect of his eloquence is 
 still remembered with enthusiasm by those who had the 
 good fortune to hear him. Alas, that it was destined to be 
 the last effort, at the seat of government of this state, of 
 that wonderful man.* The court, however, did not feel 
 at liberty to depart from what they deemed the fixed and 
 settled rule of common law; but the views presented by 
 Gen. Hamilton and his associate council, made such a 
 
 * A correspondent of the Evening Post, writing from Albany, after giving an 
 account of the speeches of Gaines and Spencer for the prosecution, and Wm.W.Van 
 Ness and Harrison for the defendant, says : — "After all came the great, the pow- 
 erful Hamilton. No language can convey an adequate idea of the astonishing 
 powers evinced by him. The audience was numerous, and although composed 
 of those not " used to the melting mood," the effect produced on them was elec- 
 tric. * * * As a correct argument for a lawyer it was very imposing, as a pro- 
 found commentary upon the science and practice of government it has never been 
 Bitrpassed."
 
 1S04.] OF NEW-YORK. 207 
 
 strong impression on the public mind, that a movement 
 was soon after made in the legislature to pass a law au- 
 thorising the truth to be given in evidence, where the 
 matter written or printed was published from good and 
 justifiable motives, and constituting the jury in this, as in 
 all other criminal cases, judges of the law as well as the 
 fact. 
 
 A bill for this purpose was immediately brought into 
 the assembly by Mr. James Emmott, a federal member 
 from the county of Dutchess. By the terms of this bill, 
 as drawn by Mr. Emmott, the law proposed was made 
 declaratory. This phraseology was opposed, as implying 
 that such was then the common law, and as containing a 
 covert censure on the court which had decided the case 
 of Croswell. Other questions arose in proceeding on the 
 bill, relative to its details, and in consequence of those 
 disagreements the law of libels was not changed during 
 that session; but in the following session, in 1805, the 
 subject was again brought before the legislature, and an 
 act was passed in conformity to the principles of the bill 
 introduced by Mr. Emmott, not, however, including the 
 word " declared.'''^ Thus the law of libels was placed on 
 a true and correct foundation, perfectly consistent with 
 the liberty of the press and the protection of the good 
 name and reputation of every individual citizen. The 
 principles of this statute were incorporated in the constitu- 
 tion of 1821. But it is time to return to the electioneer- 
 ing contest. 
 
 Had I observed accurately the order of time, I ought 
 to have mentioned that, after the nomination of Chancellor 
 Lansing, and before he finally declined, and while Gen. 
 Hamilton was in Albany, a consultation or caucus was 
 held by the leading federalists at Lewis's city tavern, for 
 the purpose of comparing opinions on the question Avhether 
 the federalists, as a party, ought to support Col. Burr
 
 208 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 They intended that their deliberations should be secret 
 and confidential; but one or two Burrites were concealed 
 in a bed room adjoining the dining room where the fede- 
 ralists were assembled, and heard and reported what 
 passed in that assemblage. A correspondent of the 
 Morning Chronicle, under date of the 17th of February, 
 writes, that " last night the leading federal gentlemen in 
 this place had a meeting at the city tavern. Gen. Hamil- 
 ton addressed the meeting with his usual eloquence, and 
 pointed out the expediency of the federal party's voting 
 for Chancellor Lansing, in case they had no candidate of 
 their own. The principal part of his speech went to 
 show that no reliance ought to be placed on Mr. Burr." 
 Notwithstanding this opposition the great body of the 
 federalists manifested a determination to cast their votes 
 for Burrj and Gaylord Griswold, then a member of con- 
 gress from Herkimer county, wrote a letter which was 
 published, in which he urged his friends to support Mr. 
 Burr as the only means of breaking down the democratic 
 party, and charged the opposition of Gen. Hamilton to 
 " personal resentment towards Burr." This letter bore 
 date the 27th of February. 
 
 The contest terminated in the election of Judge Lewis 
 by a large majority; I believe about eight thousand. 
 
 Mr. Burr undoubtedly received a very considerable 
 number of republican votes; ne must have failed in conse- 
 quence of the defection of a portion of the federal party. 
 No doubt many federalists entertained an honest opinion 
 similar to that expressed by Gen. Hamilton, that Mr. Burr 
 was an unprincipled man, and that no reliance could be 
 placed on him. They, therefore, could not reconcile it 
 to their consciences to yield their aid to his support for 
 the first and most important office in the state. It is how- 
 ever probable that a larger portion of that party had be- 
 come convinced that the federalists, as a party, had no
 
 1804.] OF NEW-YORK. 209 
 
 prospect of gaining a permanent ascendancy in the staie, 
 and especially in the nation; that, even if Burr should be 
 successful at that election, his triumph would be momen- 
 tary, and they therefore seized the occasion of abandoning 
 a broken down, and as they deemed, a ruined party. The 
 result of the canvass showed, on a comparison with the 
 senatorial election of 1803, that the republican partv had 
 gained as many recruits from the federal ranks as they 
 had lost by the desertion of their own friends who voted 
 for Mr. Burr; and this will generally be found to be the 
 consequence resulting from this weak and puerile policy. 
 
 The result of the election for members of the legislature 
 was also favorable to the regular republican party. In 
 the assembly that party had a large majority. The sena- 
 tors elected this year were Ebenezer Purdy and Thomas 
 Thomas from the southern; Samuel Brewster and Stephen 
 Hogeboom from the middle; Stephen Thomas from the 
 eastern, and Jedediah Peck and Henry Huntington from 
 the western districts; all understood to belong to the same 
 party who supported Mr. Lewis. 
 
 Daniel D. Tompkins was at this election chosen a 
 member of congress from the city of New-York. 
 
 14
 
 2J0 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1S04, TO MAY 1, 1805. 
 
 The result of the New-York election had entirely pros- 
 trated the political prospects of Col. Burr. He was irre- 
 vocably cast off from the republican party in the nation; 
 and the event of the contest in this state had proved that 
 his friends were not sufficiently numerous when connected 
 with the federalists, or so many of them as would 
 join his standard, to sustain him here. Should the 
 federalists as a party ever gain the ascendency, the pros- 
 pect of which was extremely unpromising, he knew by 
 what had recently occurred, that he would have no hopes 
 of promotion from that party. His political fortunes 
 therefore seemed totally wrecked and irretrievably ruin- 
 ed. In reflecting upon the cause of that ruin, he un- 
 doubtedly regarded Gen. Hamilton as the principal agent 
 in effecting it. If at any time he had expected the aid 
 of the federal members of congress to elect him president 
 in preference to Mr. Jefferson, he had there met the oppo- 
 sition of Mr. Hamilton; for on that occasion Mr. Bay- 
 ard of Delaware, and Mr. Morris of Vermont, two of Mr. 
 H.'s friends, had given the election to Mr. Jefferson. In 
 the late contest, when his political life was at stake, the 
 same opponent had there stood in his way; and to his de- 
 nunciation and great and commanding influence, Mr. Burr 
 charged the defection and desertion of so large a portion 
 of federalists from their party. These considerations must 
 have produced in the gloomy and despairing mind of Col. 
 Burr a settled determination that he would have revenge 
 — ^a revenge that nothing short of the life of Hamilton 
 would satiate. It is impossible for me to account for the
 
 
 :®M©^w mii"Wii^ o 
 
 A Mirhrli'ni' f.'>/i /)' V.
 
 1804.] OF NEW- YORK. 211 
 
 duel which took place after this election, hetween Burr and 
 Hamilton, upon any other principle. It is true, that had 
 the answer of Gen. Hamilton to the first communication 
 of Burr been more guarded and more conciliatory in its 
 tone and manner, it might have put Burr more clearly in 
 the wrong, and furnished positive and decisive evidence 
 that from the commencement he premeditated and deter- 
 mined on a mortal contest. But he knew that Gen. Ham- 
 ilton from his youth, had been a military man, and that he 
 was sensitively alive to his honor as a soldier; and a care- 
 ful review of the correspondence as it was actually con 
 ducted, will convince all candid men that Burr, when he 
 wrote the first note, was resolved that the issue should be 
 nothing less than the death of one of the parties. 
 
 The ground on which Col. Burr founded his cause of 
 offence was purely technical. Doct. Charles D. Cooper, 
 who lived in the family of Judge Tayler of Albany, and 
 married his adopted daughter, was warmly and actively 
 engaged as a partisan, in the electioneering campaign be • 
 tween Burr and Lewis. 
 
 While Hamilton was attending the supreme court 
 in the preceding February term, he had dined at Judge 
 Tayler'sj and in conversation on that occasion, had ex- 
 pressed himself against the election of Col. Burr as go- 
 vernor. He spoke of Col. Burr's political conduct and 
 principles only, to which, on that, as on all other occa- 
 sions, he declared himself hostile. Doct. Cooper believ- 
 ing that the opinions of Gen. Hamilton might have an 
 effect favorable to the election of Mr. Lewis, wrote an 
 electioneering letter to Mr. Brown, who lived in one of the 
 country towns of the county of Albany. I suppose in 
 the haste with which such letters are commonly writ- 
 ten, he stated that Gen. Hamilton was openly and 
 decidedly opposed to Burr, and that Judge Kent and 
 the Patroon were indifferent and cold towards him. This
 
 212 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 statement was in part contradicted by a letter written by 
 Gen. Schuyler to Doct. Stringer, chairman of the federal 
 committee, in which Gen. S. stated that Mr. Hamilton and 
 Judge Kent had not stated that they were against Burr on 
 the question as between him and Lewis; but merely that 
 they preferred Chancellor Lansing to Col. Burr. On the 
 23d of April, Doct. Cooper replied to Gen. Schuyler's 
 letter, and reiterated the assertions contained in his letter 
 to Brown. He affirms that Hamilton and Kent both con- 
 sidered Burr " as a dangerous man, who ought not to be 
 trusted with the reins of government," and then adds that 
 he " could detail a still more despicable opinion," which 
 Hamilton had expressed of Burr. Now it is well known 
 to those acquainted with the manner in which political 
 letters are written near the morning of an excited elec- 
 tion, that the writers of those letters are not very particu- 
 lar in the choice of words to convey their ideas. The 
 meaning of Doct. Cooper undoubtedly was, " Hamilton 
 and Kent both consider Burr, politically, as a dangerous 
 man and unfit for the office of governor, and Hamilton 
 has expressed his opposition to Burr's election in terms 
 still more decided." This every man who read Cooper's 
 letter understood to be his real meaning, and in this way 
 Col. Burr must have understood it. He chose, however, 
 to fasten on the word " despicable j"*^ and consider that, as 
 perhaps it technically was, offensive. In his first note to 
 Gen. Hamilton, he without preface demands of him " a 
 prompt and unqualified acknowledgment or denial of 
 having said any thing which warranted such an expres- 
 sion." This note bore date the l8th July. On the 20th 
 Gen. Hamilton replied, declining an express admission or 
 denial, alleging that the charge was too vague and inde- 
 finite; and denying the right of Col. Burr to interrogate 
 him as to what he had said; but declaring his readiness to 
 avow or deny any declarations which Col. Burr would
 
 1804.] OF NEW- YORK. 213 
 
 specifically point out. He concludes by saying " I trust 
 on further reflection you will see the matter in the same 
 light with me. If not, I can only regret the circumstance 
 and must abide the consequences.^^ Now, without being 
 learned in the law of duelling, it strikes me that Mr. 
 Hamilton might, without degrading himself, have stated 
 that he had made no declarations in presence of Dr. ^ 
 Cooper, impeaching Col. Burr's private character or his 
 honor as a gentleman, but that his remarks were entirely 
 of a political nature, and thus to have inyited Col. Burr 
 to specify. 
 
 The reply of Col. Burr was acrid and ofiensive. After 
 Gen. Hamilton had replied to the second letter of Col. 
 Burr, he put into the hands of Mr. Pendleton, (his friend,) 
 a paper to be communicated to Col. Burr, in which he 
 stated, that in answer to a letter properly adapted to obtain 
 from him a declaration whether he had charged Col. Burr 
 with any particular instance of dishonorable conduct or 
 had impeached his private character, either in the conver- 
 sation alluded to by Doct. Cooper, or in any other partic 
 ular instance to be specified, he would be able to answer, 
 consistently with his honor and the truth, " that the 
 conversation, to which Doct. Cooper alluded, turned 
 wholly on political topics and did not attribute to Col. 
 Burr any instance of dishonorable conduct, nor relate 
 to his private character; and in relation to any other Ian 
 guage or conversation of Gen. Hamilton, which Col. Burr 
 will specify, a prompt and frank avowal or denial will be 
 given." This declaration, it appears to me, entirely re- 
 moved the cause of the alleged offence, and had not Col. 
 Burr been determined on a combat, which in all probability 
 would be fatal to one of the parties, would have put an 
 end to the controversy. Col. Burr, however, declared 
 that he considered this proposition " a mere evasion," and 
 persisted in his demand for satisfaction. Any person de-
 
 214 POLITICAL HISTORY [1804. 
 
 sirous of examining the whole correspondence will find it 
 in 2 D avisos Burr J 296 to 316. It was conducted, on the 
 part of Col. Burr, by his friend and second ,Wm. P. Van 
 Ness, and with his usual superior ability. Judging from 
 the style I should think the two notes signed by Mr. Burr 
 were also written by Mr. Van Ness. How far the dark 
 and malignant spirit of that talented man may have aided 
 in producing this melancholy affair is, and always will 
 remain, unknown. The issue of the correspondence, the 
 meeting and its melancholy and fatal consequences, are 
 too well known to require to be repeated.* 
 
 The recollection of Gen Hamilton's revolutionary servi- 
 ces — his transcendant talents — his private worth — the 
 amiable frankness of his nature, and the integrity of his 
 heart, connected with his sudden, unexpected and violent 
 death, produced a sensation among all ranks of society, 
 and all parties in New-York, more universal than was ever 
 before, or has since been excited. The lamentations 
 for Hamilton had the effect of politically sinking Col. Burr 
 below that " lowest deep " m which the last election had 
 cast him. From the moment Hamilton fell, Burr was 
 politically as dead as he now is naturally. 
 
 By the retirement of Gov, Jay and the death of Gen. 
 Hamilton, the federalists of New-York were left without 
 any acknowledged leader. 
 
 Gov. Lewis convened the council of appointment im- 
 mediately after his inauguration. His election to the 
 office of governor had left a vacancy on the supreme 
 court bench. Judge Kent ivas promoted to the office of 
 chief justice and Daniel 1) Tompkins was appointed a 
 judge. At the time of his appointment he must have been 
 about thirty years old. It is somewhat singular that so 
 
 • I have it from unquestionable authority that Col. Swartwout, on the morning 
 of the duel, called on Col. Burr and found him in a sound sleep. 
 That Bun was a man of great personal courage there can be no doubt.
 
 1804.1 OF NEW-YORK. 215 
 
 young a man should have been appointed to an office so 
 highly important^ but it may be remarked that the senior 
 members of the bar, whose age and talents had enabled 
 them to acquire any considerable reputation, were nearly 
 all federalists; and it was not and is not the fashion to 
 confer important offices on political opponents. Mr. 
 Tompkins was a young man of fair reputation, and ex- 
 ceedingly prepossessing and popular manners. He had 
 lately been elected a member of congress from the city of 
 New-York, a circumstance which, considering his youth, 
 aflforded evidence of the high opinion which those who 
 knew him best had formed of him. On the same day the 
 council removed Peter B. Porter from the office of clerk 
 of the county of Ontario, probably on account of his sup- 
 port of Col. Burr for governor, and appointed a man by 
 the name of Tiffany in his place. 
 
 On the 10th of November, Maturin Livingston, the 
 brother-in-law ot Gov. Lewis, was appointed recorder of 
 New-York. If we are to believe the federal newspapers, 
 this appointment was not well received. The manners of 
 Mr. Livingston, they alleged, were extremely unpopular. 
 He had not been distinguished as a lawyer, and he was 
 known to be more devoted to pleasurable amusements than 
 to business. It was also alleged that his connexion with 
 the governor, and not* his personal merit or fitness for the 
 proper discharge of the duties of the office, had caused his 
 appointment. 
 
 The legislature assembled in November for the choice 
 of presidential electors. Alexander Sheldon was again 
 chosen speaker. The governor, in his speech, among 
 other things, informed the legislature of the resignation of 
 Gen. Armstrong as United States senator, in consequence 
 of his appointment as American minister to France. The 
 legislature, after appointing electors, chose Dr. Samuel 
 L. Mitchell as the successor of Gen. Armstrong. Doct.
 
 216 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 Mitchell was a learned maiij and had read much. He 
 ■was perfectly honest and sincere, but almost ridiculously 
 vain. He was well acquainted with books, but knew lit- 
 tle of men. He supported the republican party because 
 Mr. Jeflferson was its leader, and he supported Mr. Jeffer- 
 son because he was a philosopher. 
 
 Very little else was done at this session except choosing 
 a senator in congress, and electors for president. 
 
 Upon the canvass of the presidential votes given in the 
 nation, it appeared that out of one hundred and seventy- 
 six, Mr. Jefferson and George Clinton received them all, 
 save fourteen which were given for Mr. Pinckney of 
 South Carolina and Mr. King of New-York. From this 
 canvass may be seen the prodigious increase of strength 
 of the republican party within a very few years. 
 
 On the 22nd January, 1805, the legislature again met 
 It is creditable to Gov. Lewis that on the 5th day of Feb- 
 ruary he sent an excellent and special message to the 
 legislature, in which he strongly urged the importance of 
 encouraging education, and especially of elevating the 
 character and increasing the capacity for usefulness of 
 common schools. He stated that the lands still owned by 
 the state amounted to one and an half millions of acres, 
 and he urged the appropriation of those lands to the exclu- 
 sive purpose of promoting education, and chiefly in aid of 
 common schools. 
 
 In pursuance of this recommendation, a bill was brought 
 into the legislature, which became a law on the 2nd of 
 April, by which the nett proceeds of the first five hundred 
 thousand acres of land which should be sold, should be 
 appropriated as a permanent fund for the support of com- 
 mon schools. The money paid for the sale of these lands 
 was required to be loaned out on bond and mortgage by 
 the comptroller, together with the interest, as from time 
 to time it should be paid into the treasury, until the prin-
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. 217 
 
 cipal sum should be sufficient to produce an interest of 
 fifty thousand dollars annually, when the interest was to 
 be annually distributed among the schools. This may be 
 said to be the commencement of the school fund. 
 
 Judge Hobert died this year at the age of sixty-seven, 
 leaving vacant the office of district judge for the state of 
 New-York. Upon his death, Brockholst Livingston was 
 appointed his successor, but he declined to accept the 
 office. The vacancy was eventually supplied b^ the ap- 
 pointment of Matthias B. Talmadge, who probably owed 
 his selection to the influence of the vice-president, Clinton, 
 with whom he was connected by marriage. This appoint- 
 ment was an unfortunate one. Judge Talmadge never 
 had been distinguished for his legal attainments, and he 
 was rather indisposed to laborious application to business 
 These circumstances, together with the bodily indisposi- 
 tion with which he was affected soon after his appoint- 
 ment, rendered him almost' useless as a public officer. 
 The consequence was, that not many years afterwards the 
 state of New-York was divided into two districts, northern 
 and southern, and William P. Van Ness was appointed 
 judge of the southern district. From this time Judge 
 Talmadge performed very little service, although he con- 
 tihued to receive his salary until his death, which happened 
 about the year 1820. 
 
 In the assembly this year, the number of federal mem- 
 bers was less than thirty, but they had for their leader 
 William W. Van Ness from Columbia county, a young law- 
 yer possessing talents of high promise. He was a man 
 naturally persuasive and eloquent, of fine intellectual 
 powers, ardent and warm in his pursuits, ambitious and 
 fond of distinction, extremely pleasing and fascinating in 
 his address, both in public life and in his social intercourse; 
 with a lively fancy and most brilliant wit; his conversa- 
 tional powers exceeded those of almost any other man I
 
 218 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 ever saw. He was fond of pleasure and sensual indul- 
 gence, and has been charged with being lax in his moral 
 principles^ but if this were so, he certainly was a man 
 who possessed much of the milk of human kindness, was 
 ardent and frequently disinterested in his friendships, and 
 humane and benevolent in his feelings. With these quali- 
 ties, at the head of his little party, Mr. Van Ness made 
 his influence and power considerably felt in the legisla- 
 ture and in the state. 
 
 Obadiah German of Chenango county, although unedu- 
 cated was a bold and resolute man, of great native intel- 
 lectual strength and vigor. He may be said to have stood 
 at the head of the democratic party in the assembly during 
 this session. 
 
 In the early part of the winter session the assembly 
 chose for the council of appointment, John Schenck of the 
 southern, Joshua H. Brett of the middle, Jedediah Peck 
 of the western, and Stephen Thorn of the eastern dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 Previous to the chartering of the State Bank in 1803, 
 a company of gentlemen, principally merchants in New- 
 York, had associated by articles of partnership, said to 
 have been drawn by Gen. Hamilton, as a joint stock 
 company, under the name of the president, directors 
 and company of the Merchant's Bank. A similar com- 
 pany was .formed in Albany about the same time, called 
 the " Mercantile Company." When the State Bank 
 (jompany was chartered, the Merchant's Bank company 
 also applied for the like grant, and it is said, that some 
 ot the persons interested in the State Bank, promis- 
 ed these applicants their support; but the question having 
 been taken on the State Bank charter, and the bill incor- 
 porating that bank having passed into a law, the State 
 Bank now opposed them, and the application of the 
 Merchant's Bank company, was unsuccessful. In 1804,
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. £19 
 
 tne company again applied and were again unsuccess- 
 ful. Mr. De Witt Clinton, and those interested in the 
 Manhattan company, which had then become a favorite 
 republican institution, were very active in resisting the 
 application of this association of merchants. 
 
 The legislature of 1804, did not content themselves 
 by merely refusing to grant a charter to this company, 
 but on the 11th day of April, they passed an act re- 
 straining banking by all unincorporated companies under 
 severe penalties, and declaring all notes or other secu- 
 rities for the payment of money to such unincorporated 
 companies absolutely void; but they by this act provid- 
 ed that the Mercantile company in Albany, and the 
 Merchant's Bank in New-York should have until the 
 first Tuesday of May, 1805, to close their concerns. If 
 after that day, they attempted to transact banking busi- 
 ness they were to be subjected to all the penalties of 
 other unchartered companies. 
 
 The Merchant's Bank company at the session of 1805, 
 made another great and vigorous effort to obtain a char- 
 ter. It is not my intention here to detail the facts in re- 
 lation to this application, further than to state, that it was 
 originally opposed by the American Citizen and Albany 
 Register, on party grounds, not because the chartering of 
 this bank would be prejudicial to the public interest, but 
 because the applicants were principally federalists. Event- 
 ually, it is true, it appeared that the company did resort to 
 vile and corrupt means to obtain their ends. It was proved 
 that several members of the legislature had been tampered 
 with, and Judge Purdy, who introduced in the senate the 
 bill to incorporate the company, finally was compelled 
 to resign his seat to avoid expulsion for bribery. Mr. 
 Maturin Livingston was sent to Albany by the republi- 
 cans of New-York, to oppose the charter; but in two 
 days after his arrival in Albany, changed his position and
 
 220 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 became its ardent supporter. Gov. Lewis was in favor 
 of incorporating the company. His reasons, as he stated 
 them, were, that the company had commenced banking 
 when by law they had a right so to do, that under the 
 faith of the existing law they had invested a large capital, 
 had erected buildings and incurred other expenses, and 
 that inasmuch as the exercise of banking powers by the 
 company, would not, in his judgment, be prejudicial to 
 the public interest, the legislature upon principles of com- 
 mon justice ought to charter the company or so modify 
 the restraining law as to render it inapplicable to them. 
 No one, I believe, ever charged Mr. Lewis with acting 
 from corrupt motives. His reasons, in the abstract, and 
 aside from the improper conduct of the applicants, ap- 
 pear to me sound and satisfactory; and yet there can be 
 no doubt that the opposition to him which was led on by 
 Mr. Clinton and Judge Spencer, was originally, certainly 
 it was ostensibly, founded upon his declarations in favor 
 of this bank, an opposition which ultimately resulted in 
 his political ruin at least for the time then being. 
 
 The Merchant's Bank charter finally passed both houses 
 by a considerable majority, but in the council of revision 
 Judge Spencer zealously protested and published his pro- 
 test against the passage of the bill; he founded his protest 
 on two grounds; 
 
 First, because the public interest did not require an in- 
 crease of banks or banking capital in New-York.* 
 
 Second, because the passage of the bill through one, if 
 not both branches of the legislature, was procured by 
 bribery and corruption. In illustration of this position, 
 among other allegations he stated that, in the senate the 
 bill passed by a vote of fourteen to twelve, that Ebene- 
 zer Purdy was bribed, that he constituted one of the four- 
 
 * There was then only the New-York Bank and the Manhattan Bank in the 
 great city of New- York.
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. 221 
 
 teen, and if he had voted in the negative the bill would 
 have been rejected. But the bill, notwithstanding, was 
 approved by a majority of the council of revision, con- 
 sisting of Lewis, Kent, B. Livingston, Lansing and 
 Thompson, and became a law. No doubt, that during 
 this session, considerable dissatisfaction was felt by the 
 republican members of the legislature with Gov. Lewis, 
 which was encouraged by the immediate friends of Messrs. 
 Clinton and Spencer, but no open outbreak ensued, and 
 the legislature adjourned at the usual time, without trans- 
 acting any important business, unless the chartering of a 
 third bank in New-York can be deemed important. 
 
 Mr. Broome having been chosen lieutenant governor, 
 Mr. De Witt Clinton was nominated from the southern 
 district to supply his place, and Mr. L'Hommedieu's term 
 of service having expired, he also was nominated for a 
 re-election from the same district. 
 
 In the address of the meeting which nominated these 
 gentlemen, of which Gen. Bailey was chairman, they say 
 that they have selected Mr. Clinton and Mr. L'Homme- 
 dieu as their candidates because the proceedings of the le- 
 gislature in chartering the Merchant's Bank, have greatly 
 alarmed them, and they charge the members at the last 
 session directly with corruption. They complain of the 
 conduct of their republican brethren in the country as 
 being inattentive to their feelings and interest. " A new 
 bank," say they, " has been created in our city, and its 
 charter granted to political enemies." Absurd! as if men 
 who happened to be federalists ought to be deprived of 
 the right of using their money for banking purposes. 
 
 There was a division in the republican party in respect 
 to one of the candidates for the senate from the eastern 
 district. Joseph C. Yates, afterwards a judge of the 
 supreme court and governor of the state, had been 
 nominated by the republicans of Schenectady, but 
 Mr. Quackenboss was nominated and supported by the
 
 222 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 Albanians. The Albany Register contended that the 
 nomination of Mr. Yates was spurious, and that Mr. 
 Quackenboss was the true republican candidate. That pa- 
 per had a commanding influence among the republicans 
 of the district, and it alleged, and probably truly, that a 
 large majority of the democratic votes were cast for 
 Quackenboss, and that the federalists generally voted for 
 Yates. 
 
 The senators elected this year from the southern district 
 were, De Witt Clinton and Ezra L'Hommedieu, from the 
 middle, Peter C. Adams and James G. Graham, from the 
 eastern, Joseph C. Yates, Adam Comstock and John 
 Veeder, and from the western Nathaniel Locke and John 
 Nicholas. 
 
 In the assembly, there was as usual a large majority of 
 democratic members returned. It does not appear that either 
 the selection of candidates or the election of members, turn- 
 ed upon the predilection for or opposition to the continued 
 support of Mr. Lewis as the republican candidate for go- 
 vernor. No doubt, the Avar which broke out in the suc- 
 ceeding winter among the members of the democratic 
 party, was foreseen by the leaders of both sections of the 
 republicans, but they probably perceived that the public 
 mind was not then ripe for an open and public declaration 
 of hostilities.
 
 1805.] OF NKW-YORK. 222 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1806, TO MAY 1, 1806. 
 
 Among the charges made by the republican against the 
 federal party, perhaps the most prominent one, and that 
 which had caused the greatest popular odium to attach 
 itself to the latter party, was, that they were not only 
 favorable to the principles of the British, but were in fact 
 partial to that nation. Two circumstances had afforded 
 some countenance to this accusation. The one was, 
 that in all previous disputes between this government and 
 Great Britain, in which the British charged the American 
 government with extending undue favors to the French, 
 with whom the English were at war, and in all controver- 
 sies which had arisen in relation to the rights of these 
 belligerents, the federalists had generally taken sides 
 against the French and in favor of the British. The other 
 circumstance to which I allude was, that in point of fact 
 many more of the tories of the revolution had attached 
 themselves to the federalists than to the republicans. This 
 being the state of things, the federalists of Albany, in my 
 iudgment, committed, previous to the celebration of Ame- 
 rican Independence on the fourth of July, a capital error. 
 The common council of that city, a majority of whom 
 were federal, passed a resolution that the Declaration of 
 Independence should not be read as a part of the perform- 
 ances of the day. The alleged reason for passing the 
 resolution was, that the reading oJ ^bc rlo^lq.'-otlon +ond*>4 
 to perpetuate prejudices and hostile feelings against the 
 British nation, when the causes of hostility had long since 
 ceased to exist. I might remark that the reading of that 
 document ought not, and among an intelligent people it
 
 224 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805, 
 
 will not, have that eflfect. True, it points out in bold 
 relief the causes of the revolutionary war, which it charges 
 to improper acts of the British government, but that same 
 instrument concludes with the solemn declaration that we 
 will regard that nation as " enemies in war, in peace, 
 FRIENDS." Why, then, should its reading perpetuate 
 prejudices 1 But, without discussing or deciding in the 
 abstract the merits or. demerits of the resolution, it strikes 
 me, that as a party movement, it was extremely impolitic. 
 It seemed to sustain and strengthen the allegation that the 
 federalists, as a party, were partial to Great Britain, or 
 that they disapproved of the liberal and just sentiments 
 iontained in that document, or both. 
 
 No man will deny but that the federalists, as a body, 
 were as sincerely and as warmly attached to this country 
 and its civil institutions, as any other body of men; and 
 yet, by little errors, such as the one I have mentioned, 
 more probably, than from erroneous opinions as to the 
 great measures which ought to be pursued by the state 
 and nation, were they kept out of power. 
 
 Not long after the result of the election was known, the 
 American Citizen and Albany Register began openly to 
 take ground against Governor Lewis and those republi- 
 cans who were known to be friendly to him. On the 
 other hand, a newspaper printed in Poughkeepsie and 
 edited by Mr. Isaac Mitchell, called the Poughkeepsie 
 Journal, and supposed to be influenced by Doct. Tillotson, 
 the secretary of state, assailed Mr. Clinton and Judge 
 Spencer with much bitterness. In the course of the sum- 
 mer, the Morning Chronicle, the Burr paper in New-York, 
 was discontinued J and it was alleged that it was joined 
 with the Journal, and that thereupon a new paper was 
 issued entitled " The Poughkeepsie Barometer." 
 
 A republican paper called the Plebian, printed in Ul- 
 ster county under the management of Jesse Buel, Esq.,
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. 225 
 
 afterwards editor of the Albany Argus, and state printer, 
 came out in favor of Gov. Lewis, and of course against 
 Mr. Clinton and his friends. In this controversy it has, 
 I believe, generally been conceded that Mr. Clinton was 
 the assailant. It has, at any rate, never to my knowledge 
 been pretended that Gov. Lewis manifested any hostility 
 to Mr. C. or his friends until they atts^cked him. 
 
 Was there a sufficient ca'use, or were there any good pub- 
 lic reasons, why Mr. Clinton should have made war on 
 Gov. Lewis 1 Had he done any act injurious to the state, 
 or even to the republican party as such 1 I confess, I 
 have looked in vain for such cause, or such act. Certainly 
 the simple declaration of Gov. Lewis that the Merchants 
 Bank company ought either to be chartered, or to be per- 
 mitted to exercise those rights, which by the law of the 
 land they had a right to exercise when they invested their 
 money, was not a good cause for denouncing him. To 
 wage war upon a public agent, who is discharging his 
 duties wisely and faithfully, merely for the purpose of 
 getting him out of the way and getting his place, under 
 the pretence that you are acting for the good of a party, 
 when no single act is designated showing that he has 
 abandoned the principles of that party, is not patriotism: 
 it is Jacobinic proscription. Mr. Clinton himself after- 
 wards suffered severely: bitterly indeed did he suffer, by 
 the same course of conduct, pursued against himself. 
 Mr. Clinton may have thought, he probably did think. 
 Governor Lewis was personally unsuitable, and, if you 
 please, unfit to discharge the duties of governor of this 
 state. But, if he thought so, he should have said so, and 
 made that the ground of complaint against him. But 
 instead of this, he charged him with bad faith to the re- 
 publican parly, and made war, not only on him, but on 
 all others who manifested a disposition to support him. 
 Having gained a numerical majority of the republican 
 
 15
 
 226 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 members of the legislature, he proceeded without cause, 
 (for nothing which may be called a cause was assigned in 
 the address subsequently published by Mr. Clinton and 
 his friendsj) to excommunicate Gov. Lewis from the re- 
 publican church. Did not personal considerations, in 
 some degree, influence Mr. Clinton's conduct ? Did it 
 not occur to him that if Gov. Lewis and the powerful 
 family of the Livingstons were exiled from the republican 
 party, his power, as the sole head of that party in the 
 great state of New- York, would be immensely increased t 
 Much as I esteem and venerate the man, in this I disap- 
 prove of his conduct. The only legitimate ground upon 
 which parties can be organized, is a difference of opinion 
 as to ineasures. All other party organizations are mere 
 combinations for the benefit of a few to the injury of the 
 many. 
 
 During the summer of 1805 Mr. Clinton and his friends 
 were not inactive. They foresaw that Mr. Lewis, in 
 connection with the Livingston family, would be able to 
 detach a very considerable number from the democratic 
 party, and if such detachment should be joined by the 
 federalists, serious apprehensions were entertained in rela- 
 tion to the result of the contest. 
 
 The duel with Hamilton, and its lamented termination, 
 had, in connection with the political sins of Col. Burr, 
 entirely annihilated him as a politician. There were, 
 however, a number of men in New-York, as well as in 
 several other counties in the state, active, ardent and influ- 
 ential, who had supported Burr, and in consequence of 
 that support were put in Coventry by the republican party. 
 Among the most active of the Burrite faction in the state, 
 were Col. John Swartwout, Matthew L. Davis, Peter Ir- 
 ving and Ezekiel Robins. 
 
 What part would this band of men take in the coming 
 contest ? Their chief had been pitted against Gov. Lewis
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. 227 
 
 and been beaten. Col. Burr, they believed, had been 
 proscribed by the republican party in consequence of his 
 accepting aid from the federal party, and his supposed 
 connection with them. Was it not natural, that the Burr- 
 ites should feel inclined to prostrate Mr. Lewis by the 
 same means with which they believed he had overcome 
 Mr. Burr ? Should the Burrites be influenced by these 
 considerations, then Mr. Clinton might reasonably calcu- 
 late on a reinforcement from their ranks which might, in 
 part or whole, supply the loss which would be sustained 
 by the desertion of the Livingston family and their friends. 
 
 It is highly probable that Mr. Clinton reasoned some- 
 thing in this way, for although there are various and 
 contradictory statements, it is very certain that in the 
 autumn of 1805 Mr. C.'s friends, and indeed Mr. Clinton 
 himself, were in communication with the leading Burrites 
 in New-York, and that the object of the negotiation was 
 to bring the Burrites to act with the republicans against 
 Gov. Lewis. 
 
 In the year 1810, a series of letters addressed to De 
 Witt Clinton appeared in a newspaper printed in New- 
 York, and afterwards printed in a pamphlet form untlerthe 
 signatures of Marcus and Philo Cato; long since avov.^ed 
 to be written by Matthew L. Davis. These letters charge, 
 that in December, 1805, Mr. Levi McKean, a Burrite 
 from Poughkeepsie, residing in the same village with 
 Gen. James Talmadge, then a zealous Clintonian, arrived 
 in New-York and called on several of his political friends, 
 stating to them that overtures had been made " by the 
 Clintonians to form a union with the Burrites." * * * * 
 " He added that he had conversed with Gen. Bailey on 
 the subject, and was desirous that Col. Swartwout should 
 consent to an interview for that purpose. It was suggest- 
 ed," says the writer, " that as Mr. Clinton had not the 
 power of giving offices at that moment, and thus publicly
 
 228 POLITICAL HISTORY [1805. 
 
 committing himself, he should give to Col. Burr's friends 
 pecuniary aid through the medium of the Manhattan 
 Bankj of which he was a director, and from which bank 
 they were almost totally excluded." That on the 7th of 
 January, 1806, Mr. Swartwout received from Gen. Bailey 
 a written note inviting him to spend an hour with him 
 that evening. 
 
 The invitation was accepted, and Gen. Bailey, on that 
 occasion, avowed himself to be acting as the agent of De 
 Witt Clinton. Several other interviews between these 
 gentlemen followed^ and" eventually, according to Mr. 
 Davis, an agreement, to the purport following, was made 
 and concluded on the 11th of January: — 
 
 ^''Firstly — That Col. Burr should be recognised by the 
 union party, as a republican. 
 
 ^^ Secondly — That the editor of the American Citizen 
 should desist from all attacks upon him or his friends ; 
 that he should advocate the union, if it became necessary, 
 in his paper; and that he should not defend the Burrites 
 as returning to republican principles, they persisting that 
 they never had abandoned them. 
 
 '■^Thirdly — That the friends of Col. Burr, as it respected 
 appointments to offices of honor or profit throughout the 
 state, should be placed on the same footing as the most 
 favored Clintonian, and that their Burrism should never 
 be urged as an objection to their filling those offices." 
 
 Mr. Davis, in his pamphlet, further states, that on the 
 24th January, Mr. Clinton himself met Col. Swartwout, 
 Peter Irving and M. L. Davis, in the evening, at the house 
 of Gen. Bailey; that he brought with him Mr. Ezekiel 
 Robins, a zealous partizan of Burr; and that congratula- 
 tions respecting the union mutually passed between the 
 contracting parties. Affairs remained in this condition 
 until the 20th February, when a meeting was held of the 
 leading Clintonians and Burrites at Dyde's hotel, in the
 
 1805.] OF NEW-YORK. 229 
 
 "vicinity of New-York, where the utmost good feeling was 
 manifested and toasts were drank highly complimentary 
 to the leaders of both parties. The Burrites drank the 
 health of Mr. Clinton, and the Clintonians toasted the 
 anticipated union of the republican party. [See Note Q,] 
 
 Mr. Clinton denied the truth of the statement contained 
 in the letters of Marcus. I am far from belieying in the ? 
 correctness of these representations. The letters were 
 written during the time of high party excitement and for 
 political effect. Most evidently the object of Mr. Davis, 
 who was an ardent, and, as many say, an unscrupulous 
 partizan, was effectually to ruin the political standing of 
 Mr. Clinton with his republican friends. That Mr. Clin- 
 ton should have stipulated for the bestowment of govern- 
 mental patronage, and more especially that he should have 
 expressly agreed that individuals, by name, should be 
 chosen members of the legislature, (for, among other 
 things, it was alleged that Mr. Clinton promised that 
 Peter Townsend, a Burrite, should be elected a member 
 of the assembly from Orange co., and also that Levi Mc 
 Kean should be appointed clerk of Dutchess,) I do not 
 believe. 
 
 Upon the appearance of these letters Mr. Clinton pub- 
 licly pronounced them false and libellous, and gave notice 
 in the newspapers that he had commenced a suit against 
 the publisher. The defendant appeared and gave notice 
 that he would prove the truth of all his allegations, but 
 Mr. Clinton never brought the cause to trial. 
 
 I have stated that I do not believe all the allegations 
 made by Marcus; yet I do believe that a political negoci- 
 ation of some sort was commenced by Mr. Clinton and 
 his friends wiih the Burrites, and that, previous to the 
 Dyde' supper, it was supposed to have been completed. 
 
 That Gen. Bailey was the confidential friend of Mr. 
 Clinton, and that he had repeated interviews with Col.
 
 230 POLITICAL HISTORY [1306. 
 
 Swartwoutj is not denied; that immediately after these 
 interviews a loan of eighteen thousand dollars was made 
 by the Manhattan Bank to a distinguished Burrite, (for, 
 if the allegation had been untrue its falsity might, and 
 would have been proved by the books of the bank); that 
 on the 24th January Mr. Clinton met Col. Swartwout and 
 his two friendsj in company with Mr. Robins, at the 
 house of Gen. Bailey, was an assertion, which, if false, 
 might have been disproved; and that there was a meeting 
 at Dyde's hotel of the leaders of both parties, at which 
 such proceedings were had as afforded evidence that the 
 gentlemen then present believed that a cordial union had 
 been consummated, it seems to me are facts, of the verity 
 of which we cannot doubt. 
 
 Until the supper at Dyde's, it would seem that the 
 knowledge of these proceedings was confined to a very 
 few persons; but, on the publication of the proceedings 
 of that supper party, much indignation was felt by many 
 republicans in the city, and on the 24th February, four 
 days after the Dyde supper, a very numerous meeting 
 was held at Martling's Long Room, at which the union 
 and its authors were denounced in unmeasured terms. 
 This meeting was got up by a few dissatisfied Burrites, 
 and many honest and well meaning republicans; and it is 
 highly probable that the immediate friends of Gov. Lewis 
 exerted themselves to increase the jealousy of the republi- 
 cans of Mr. Clinton and a few Clintonian leaders in the 
 city, among whom Richard Riker and P. C. Van Wyck 
 were conspicuous, and to fan the flame of discord and en- 
 mity among the followers of Mr. Clinton. Be this as it 
 may, this meeting, and the materials of which it was com- 
 posed, formed the nucleus of a party in the republican 
 ranks which ultimately destroyed the political standing of 
 Mr. Clinton with the majority of his friends. Hence his 
 democratic opponents, for a long time afterwards, were
 
 1806.] OF NEW-YORK. 231 
 
 known in other parts of the state by the name of " Mart- 
 ling MEN." Mr. Clinton, who was then at Albany, upon 
 being advised of these proceedings, wrote to his friend, 
 Gen. Bailey, approving in general of the course pursued 
 at Martling's long room, and condemning as imprudent 
 the conduct of his friends at Dyde's. The support of the 
 republican party, by the Burrites, he declared would be 
 universally agreeable, but that ought not to be purchased 
 by a promise of office. 
 
 But it is now time to return to Albany. The legisla 
 ture met on the 28th January. Dr. Alexander Sheldon, 
 of Montgomery county, was again chosen speaker, and 
 Mr. Southwick clerk. 
 
 The governor, in his speech, among other matters, com 
 municated to the legislature the case of Stephen Arnold, 
 who had been convicted at a court of oyer and terminer 
 held in Otsego county in the summer of 1805, of the mur- 
 der of a child. The child had refused to spell or pro 
 nounce a certain word, and to compel it to do so Arnold 
 had chastised it so severely as to cause its death. He 
 was sentenced to be hanged, but on the day appointed for 
 his execution the governor caused a reprieve to be deliv- 
 ered to the sheriff, being of opinion that the facts proved 
 the culprit guilty of manslaughter and not murder. For 
 this act Mr. Lewis was severely censured by his oppo 
 nents, and considerable popular indignation was excited 
 against him. If he committed an error that error was on 
 the side of humanity. In my judgment it is discreditable 
 to any party to attempt to create political capital by such 
 means. 
 
 The legislature passed a law commuting the punishment 
 of death in Arnold's case, for imprisonment in the state's 
 prison for life. Some of the men who had when at home 
 joined in the clamor against Gov. Lewis for suspending 
 the execution of Arnold, and perhaps excited it, voted for
 
 232 POLITICAL HISTORY [1806. 
 
 a commutation of his punishment. Such vote was a con- 
 demnation of themselves and a justification of the governor. 
 
 There was another part of the governor's speech which, 
 if-not more deserving of animadversion, at any rate expos- 
 ed him to some degree of merited ridicule. Mr. Lewis 
 had, during the revolutionary war, been engaged in the 
 military service of the country, and he was fond of milita- 
 ry bustle, parade and pageantry. During the autumn of 
 1805 he had in person, as commander-in-chief, inspected 
 the militia in most of the counties in the state, and in his 
 speech he said much about the militia and made several 
 suggestions as to the best means of improving their disci- 
 pline and martial appearance, and in the course of his ad- 
 dress he spoke of the importance of martial music, and 
 remarked that, " In our military equipments, there is the 
 almost universal want of ..experienced drummers. The 
 drum is all important in the day of battle." We have 
 often heard of drumming up recruits, but never of drum- 
 ming off enemies or frightening them away by the sound 
 of a drum. This sentence furnished much aliment for the 
 wits of that day. 
 
 The governor, in his speech, alluded in a very proper 
 manner to the difficulties between the American govern- 
 ment and the belligerents of Europe. He expressed an 
 apprehension that a war with one or both the belligerent 
 powers might become inevitable, and he urged the neces- 
 sity of putting the state in a posture of defence. He 
 stated the debt due from New-York to the general govern- 
 ment to be seven hundred and sixty-eight thousand three 
 hundred and twenty dollars and fourteen cents, of which, 
 according to a previous understanding, New-York had a 
 right to expend five hundred and twenty-four thousand 
 and sixty-six dollars and seventy cents in fortifying our 
 harbors and other exposed points, and he invited the atten- 
 tion of the legislature to that subject.
 
 1806.] OF NEW-YORK. 233 
 
 In the early part of the session the assembly proceeded 
 to elect a council of appointment, and De Witt Clinton 
 from the southern, Robert Johnson from the middle, Adam 
 Comstock from the eastern, and Henry Huntington from 
 the western districts were chosen. 
 
 These gentlemen had been nominated by a general cau- 
 cus of all the republican members. The friends of the 
 governor complained that this mode of nomination was 
 unusual J that before that time the custom was for the 
 republican members of assembly from each district to meet 
 and severally designate the member of the senate from 
 their district whom they desired should be chosen a coun- 
 cillor; and they insisted that had such course now have 
 been pursued, Mr. Clinton would not have been selected 
 as the favorite candidate of the southern district. This 
 complaint, however, does not seem to have produced 
 much impression. 
 
 On the 31st of March, Mr. Richard Riker, a member 
 from New-York, brought a bill into the assembly, " for 
 the prevention of bribery," &c., by which any person 
 who should promise, offer or give any member of either 
 house of the legislature or council of revision, any money, 
 goods or chattels, or chose in action, &c., with intent to 
 influence his vote, such person should, on conviction, be 
 fined in a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars, or im- 
 prisoned in the state prison for a term not exceeding two 
 years. The bill also provided that any member, &c , who 
 should give his vote in consequence of such gift or prom- 
 ise, should be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and 
 should, on conviction thereof, be fined &c.; and the bill 
 was passed into a law on the seventh of April, 
 
 This salutary law was probably introduced in conse- 
 quence of the exceptionable proceedings of the applicants 
 for a charter of the Merchants Bank, the preceding session. 
 Considering the quarter from which this bill emanated, is it
 
 234 POLITICAL HISTORY [1806. 
 
 not probable that one object in introducing it, was to fasten 
 more strongly in the public mind the odious character of 
 that transaction, in which some of the governor's friends 
 were implicated 1 
 
 In accordance with the same policy, Mr. Clinton had, 
 on the 15th March, offered a resolution in the senate for 
 the expulsion of Ebenezer Purdy, for the reason that he 
 had been bribed, and for his attempt to bribe Stephen 
 Thorne and Obadiah German. A day was appointed to 
 act on the resolution, but on the day after it was offered 
 Mr. Purdy resigned. 
 
 On the 26th March, the council of appointment com- 
 menced their operations by the removal of Maturin Liv- 
 ingston from the office of recorder of the city of New- York, 
 and the appointment of Pierre C. Van Wyck in his place. 
 They also removed Thomas Tillotson from the office of sec- 
 retary of state, and appointed Elisha Jenkins his successor. 
 Against these removals, the governor and Mr. Huntington 
 entered their protest. Mr. Huntington was a warm per- 
 sonal and political friend of Mr. Clinton, but he was also 
 a man of great moderation and prudence and altogether 
 incapable of persecution or proscription. The removal of 
 these officers, without any charge of official misconduct, 
 and merely because they were connected with and. sup- 
 porters of the governor, appeared to him too much like 
 persecution, and altogether inconsistent with the maxims 
 which always governed that excellent man's conduct. The 
 war upon the governor was now open and undisguised. 
 It was heated and extremely virulent. In all the minor 
 appointments, such as sheriffs, county clerks, surrogates, 
 county judges and justices of the peace, those candidates 
 were preferred by the council who were known to be hos- 
 tile to the re-election of Gov. Lewis. 
 
 By the appointment of Mr. Jenkins secretary of state 
 the office of comptroller was left vacant, and that vacancy
 
 1806.] OF NEW-YORK. 235 
 
 was supplied by the appointment of Archibald Mclntyre, 
 who long held the office and discharged its duties in a man- 
 ner highly satisfactory and beneficial to the public, and 
 creditable to himself. 
 
 When the dissensions between Gov. Lewis and Mr. 
 Clinton commenced, and after they had progressed for a 
 considerable time, the federalists looked on with apparent 
 indifFerencej but no sooner was the war openly declared 
 than they generally avowed their determination to support 
 the governor. William W. Van Ness was one of his 
 most zealous and efficient federal partizans. At the 
 annual election in April, the party rallied with considera- 
 ble energy, and in the counties where they were sure of a 
 federal majority, they supported federal candidates on 
 federal principles; in other counties, where two republi- 
 can tickets were run, they supported candidates who v/ere 
 friendly to the governor. The governor's republican 
 friends also made a rally, and the result was, that including 
 federalists, a majority of the members returned to the as- 
 sembly were favorable to Gov. Lewis. 
 
 In the senate, from the southern district, Benjamin Coe 
 and Johnathan Ward were elected; from the middle, Eli- 
 sha Barlow and James Burt; from the eastern, Jacob 
 Snell, and from the western, John Ballard, Salmon Buel 
 and Jacob Gebhard. 
 
 Eventually, the senators from the middle district, and 
 Mr. Snell from the eastern, attached themselves to the 
 party which supported Gov. Lewis.
 
 236 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 CHAPTER XI. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1806, TO MAY 1, 1807, 
 
 Shortly after the election, a circumstance occurred 
 which showed that the Lewisites or quids, as they w«re 
 called, were equally disposed with their adversaries to use 
 the appointing power, so as to reward friends and punish 
 opponents. The corporation election of New- York had 
 resulted in the choice of some federalists and some Lewis- 
 ites, but both classes united, constituted a majority over 
 the Clintonians in the common council. The new board 
 forthwith set about removing such of the Clintonians as 
 held offices during the pleasure of the common council, 
 for no other cause than the political opinions which they 
 entertained, among whom was the comptroller of the city. 
 A party character was given to nearly all the new ap- 
 pointments. 
 
 The republican friends of the governor, perceiving that 
 he could not be nominated for a re-election by a majority 
 of the democratic members of the legislature, in order to 
 get him in the field as the candidate of a portion of the re- 
 publicans, got up a meeting, on the 1st of January, 1807, 
 in the city of New-York, of which Thomas Storm was 
 chairman, and this meagre assembly in due form nomina- 
 ted Mr. Lewis as the republican candidate foi governor. 
 
 Very active measures were taken to secure a sufficient 
 number of the republican members of the assembly, cho- 
 sen in April preceding, who, in conjunction with the 
 federalists, would constitute a majority of that body; and 
 by this means the friends of the governor hoped to be able 
 to elect a speaker and a council of appointment, who would 
 be favorable to his views. Circular letters were written
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 237 
 
 to all the republican members who were not known to be 
 decided Clintonians, requesting that on their arrival in 
 Albany they would call on the treasurer, Mr. Abraham G. 
 Lansing, or on his son, G. Y. Lansing, Esq. who were 
 supporters of Gov. Lewis, for the purpose of consultation. 
 This legislature convened on the 27th of January. Of the 
 members of assembly who were in attendance on the first 
 day, eighteen were federalists and the residue were elected 
 as republicans. 
 
 Andrew McCord of Orange county, was the Lewisite 
 candidate for speaker, and Doct. Sheldon the Clintonian. 
 Upon canvassing the votes it appeared that Mr. McCord 
 had eleven majority. Mr. Garret Y. Lansing was elected 
 clerk by six majority over Mr. South wick. ^ 
 
 The governor's speech was a very ordinary production, 
 and seems to me inferior to his former addresses. On the 
 second day of the session, the assembly proceeded to choose 
 a council of appointment, and a Lewisite council was 
 chosen. 
 
 The following was the state of the vote: — Thomas 
 Thomas, fifty-one; James Burt, fifty-four; Edward Savage, 
 fifty-two; John Nicholas, fifty-two; E. L'Hommedieu, 
 forty-four; Peter C. Adams, forty-four; John Veeder, 
 forty-three; Nathan Smith, forty-three. 
 
 The Clintonians confidently charged that Mr. William 
 W. Van Ness was to be appointed attorney general, in con-. 
 sideration of the eighteen federal votes which were given, 
 and which enabled the Lewisites to succeed in the choice 
 of the speaker and council of appointment. It so turned 
 out that he obtained a better office. Gen. John Smith 
 having been elected senator of the United States to sup 
 ply a vacancy, his term expired on the 4th March, 1807, 
 and the two sections of the democratic party so far united 
 as to re-elect him on the first day of February.
 
 238 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 On the first clay of the meeting of the new council of 
 appointment, De Witt Clinton was removed from the 
 Mayoralty of New- York, and Smith Thompson one of the 
 judges of the supreme court, appointed in his place. 
 Judge Thompson, however, wisely declined to accept the 
 appointment, and subsequently Col. Marinus Willett was 
 appointed to that office. 
 
 On the 16th of February, the council proceeded to 
 remove Pierre C. Van Wyck from the office of recorder 
 of New-York, and re-appoint Maturin Livingston, they 
 also removed Mr. Jenkins and restored to Doct. Tillotson 
 the office of secretary of state. Thomas Morris, a dis- 
 tinguished federalist, was appointed clerk of the city 
 of ^ew-York, and Teunis Wortman was removed to 
 make place for him. Among other appointments in 
 New-York, I observe that Isaac Kibbe an active Burrite, 
 and afterwards notorious as a lobby member and zealous 
 supporter of De Witt Clinton, was appointed to the office 
 of harbor master of the city of New-York. This coun 
 cil exercised their power to its full extent in removing 
 those whose political course rendered them obnoxious, and 
 in the appointment of their own partisans. 
 
 On the evening of the very day, (the 16th February,) 
 when the council of appointment made the removal of 
 De Witt Clinton and the other great state officers, the ma 
 jority of the republican members of the legislature met in 
 caucus and nominated Daniel D. Tompkins as their can- 
 didate for governor. It may seem unaccountable, that a 
 person so little known in the political field, should have 
 been selected as a candidate for the most important office 
 in the state. It is probable that the following were some 
 of the circumstances which led to the nomination of Mr. 
 Tompkins. 
 
 Mr. De Witt Clinton and Judge Spencer were the only 
 two prominent men at that time in the republican party
 
 1807.] 
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 239 
 
 opposed to Gov. Lewis, who would have been much 
 thought of for governor. The whole artillery of the 
 Livingston party had for some time been directed towards 
 Mr. Clinton. He was represented as exercising dictatorial 
 authority over his partyj his influence by means of his 
 own political power and the popularity of his uncle was 
 said to be unreasonably great, and his manners and de- 
 portment were cold, repulsive and unpopular; besides, 
 the party opposed to Mr. Lewis, wished to alarm the 
 jealousies of the people against the overgrown power and 
 influence of the Livingston family, which they could not 
 with so much advantage and effect do, if they had for 
 their candidate a principal, though a junior member of the 
 Clinton family. 
 
 It is not known that Judge Spencer was desirous of the 
 the nomination, and if he was, nearly the same objections 
 existed against him as against Mr. Clinton. He had mar- 
 ried a sister of that gentleman for his second wife, and was 
 therefore considered one of the Clinton family, and he 
 had for many years been considered so closely united 
 with Mr. C. in all his movements, that in the public eye 
 the act of one was considered the act of the other. He 
 too, though highly esteemed as a judge, was never per- 
 sonally popular among the mass of the people. 
 
 Mr. Tompkins had, it is true, been but a short time be- 
 fore the people as a judgej but during that time he had 
 held circuits in almost every county in the state, and was 
 by that means personally known to a vast many people. 
 His appearance was extremely prepossessing, his manners 
 highly popular, and his address was every way pleasing. 
 And here let me remark, that there is no position in social 
 life so favorable to acquiring the esteem and confidence of 
 the people as that of a circuit judge of the supreme court, 
 if his manners are fascinating and agreeable. He goes 
 into a county where he is a stranger, and there meets at
 
 240 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1807. 
 
 the court house, grand and petit jurors, witnesses and spec- 
 tators from almost every neighborhood in the county. 
 The ordinary discharge of the duties of his office presents 
 him as the friend of virtue and good order, the protector of 
 the innocent, the detector of frauds, oppression and crime, 
 and the minstering angel of pure and unadulterated jus- 
 tice. What situation in social life, in a free gcvernment, 
 can be more favorable to the acquisition of the confidence, 
 esteem and love of the people? To all these advantages 
 Mr. Tompkin's added another. He had no family con- 
 nections to control him, or for whom he would be desirous 
 to provide* and his talents were not considered of such 
 superior order as to excite the jealousy of such men as 
 Clinton and Spencer. Indeed, I have frequently thought 
 that these gentlemen under estimated the talents of Mr. 
 Tompkins; and if so, it is not impossible that they might 
 have more readily acceded to his nomination on that 
 account, under the impression that they could more 
 easily mould him to their purposes; and if not, that there 
 would be no difficulty in getting rid of him. 
 
 John Broome was nominated for re-election as lieuten- 
 ant governor. 
 
 The address was signed by sixty-five republican mem- 
 bers of the legislature, being a majority of the whole 
 number of republicans in both houses. I have carefully 
 examined this address, and it is remarkable, that it does not 
 set forth any ground of principle as a reason why Mr. 
 Tompkins ought to be preferred to Mr. Lewis. Soon after 
 this, the Lewisite republican members of the legislature 
 held a meeting and nominated for re-election Gov. Lewis, 
 and they nominated Thomas Storm for lieutenant govern- 
 or. Their address was signed by forty. five members. 
 
 About this time Brockholst Livingston was appointed 
 an associate judge of the supreme court of the United 
 States, and it became a question in which the public felt
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 241 
 
 a deep interestj who should be his successor. The names of 
 John Woodworth, Jonas Piatt, and William W. Van Ness, 
 were mentioned in the newspapers as candidates, but the 
 council did not think it expedient at that time, nor in- 
 deed until after the general election, to act on that ques- 
 tion. It is probable they were unwilling to make the 
 appointment before the election, fearing on the one hand, 
 that if they selected a federalist they should offend their 
 republican friends, ^nd on the other, if they appointed a 
 republican that they would displease the federalists. To 
 such miserable straits the fragments of parties are always 
 liable to be driven, when their power and ascendency de- 
 pends on the action of a party to which they are in prin- 
 ciple opposed. 
 
 I have before remarked, that the advocates of Gov. 
 Lewis insisted that the sole cause of the opposition to 
 him was his refusal to be subservient to the individual 
 views of De Witt Clinton and Judge Spencer. In sup- 
 port of this charge, on the 6th of April, Chancellor Lan- 
 sing was induced to publish the reasons which prompted 
 him to decline the nomination of governor in 1804. It will 
 be recollected that before the nomination of Lewis, Lan- 
 sing was nominated, and accepted the nomination, but that 
 not long after his acceptance he addressed a letter to Mr. 
 Purdy, the chairman of the caucus which nominated him, 
 stating, that events had occurred subsequent to his ac- 
 ceptance of the nomination, which had induced him to 
 believe that he was mistaken in supposing that he, as go- 
 vernor, could be useful in promoting the republican inte- 
 rest in the state. The chancellor now informed the pub- 
 lic what those " events" were. He stated that a few days 
 after his nomination, in an interview with Gov. Clinton, 
 " an attempt was made by them to induce me," (these are 
 his words,) " to pledge myself for a particular course of 
 conduct in the administration of the government of the 
 
 16
 
 242 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 state." He adds, that he declined to give such pledge. 
 That immediately afterwards he learned from Doct. Til- 
 lotson that Mr. Clinton had thrown out some mysterious 
 expressions against him, and that he had read to him, 
 (Tillotson) letters from Washington, charging the chan- 
 cellor with having made stipulations with Aaron Burr. 
 Mr. Lansing further stated, that the mode in which his 
 nomination was announced in the Albany Register was 
 singular, and the manner exceptionable, which he believed 
 was premeditated and intentional, because, late in the eve- 
 ning before that article appeared in the Register, Judge 
 Tayler, De Witt Clinton, the governor's private secre- 
 tary and Solomon Southwick had been seen together com- 
 ing out of the office of the editor of that paper. From 
 these circumstances the chancellor inferred, that if elected 
 governor his situation w^ould be very uncomfortable, un- 
 less he should carry into effect the wishes and views of 
 Mr. Clinton, Judge Spencer, Judge Tayler, and their im 
 mediate friends. 
 
 Mr. Clinton and Judge Spencer very promptly denied 
 that they had expressed any unfavorable opinion of the 
 chancellor, or that they had ever exhibited any letter from 
 a Washington correspondent, containing any imputations 
 against him; and the vice-president, by a letter written at 
 Washington, dated 14th of April, also denied that he had 
 attempted to induce Mr. Lansing to pledge himself, in 
 case of his election as governor, that he would pursue 
 any particular course other than a general republican one. 
 To these publications and statements Chancellor Lansing 
 replied, that after his nomination the vice-president, then 
 governor, sent for him to call and see him, that he stated 
 that some of his friends were suspicious of him, (the 
 chancellor,) and in the course of the conversation Gov. 
 Clinton remarked, that he was spoken of as likely to be 
 chosen the next vice-president, that if Mr. Lansing should
 
 1807.} OF NEW-YORK. 243 
 
 be elected governor, the office of chancellor would be va- 
 cant, and that De Witt Clinton had been mentioned as a 
 suitable person to fill that office. Mr. Lansing states that 
 he replied, that in case the office of chancellor should 
 become vacant, in his judgment the senior judicial law 
 officer ought to be appointed to that office. On the 20th 
 of April, Mr. De Witt Clinton again replied, that he never 
 had any conversation about the office of chancellor in con- 
 nection with himself; and that he would not accept it, if 
 it were offered him. Some further correspondence of 
 considerable asperity and bitterness, took place between 
 Judge Spencer and Chancellor Lansing; but after the 
 election nothing further was heard about the controversy. 
 The probability is, that there was some misunderstand 
 ing and misrecollection on both sides. We all know that 
 it is quite impossible for men in public life to recollect 
 with accuracy, casual conversations among friends. No- 
 thing is more likely, and supported by Chancellor Lan 
 sing's assertion, scarcely anything can be more certain, than 
 that Gov. George Clinton, who had long been the decided 
 personal and political friend of Mr. Lansing, should, in 
 conversing with him, being desirous to make a provision 
 for his favorite nephew, have mentioned him as a fit person 
 ' for the office of chancellor, and should have endeavored to 
 prepossess the man, who it was then believed would have 
 the power of disposing of the office, in favor of that 
 nephew. At the same time, those who knew De Witt 
 Clinton well in after life, will readily give him credit for 
 sincerity, when he declared he would not take the office of 
 chancellor if it were tendered to him. Nothing is more 
 certain than that he was far from desiring a judicial office. 
 Mr. Lansing had no doubt reason to believe, and did be- 
 lieve, that Mr. Clinton and Judge Spencer wished to be 
 able to exercise a great influence over any state adminis- 
 tration which they should aid in creating; and feeling
 
 244 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 himself determinedj if he accepted office, to act inde- 
 pendent ofj and uncontrolled by any one, he was jealous that 
 they were at heart opposed to him. This view of the af- 
 fair enables us, I think, to account satisfactorily for the 
 apparent contradictory statements of the several parties 
 without imputing intentional error to any one of them. 
 
 The temporary control by Gov. Lewis of the state 
 patronage, was of very little use to him. Indeed, it is not 
 improbable that it was more injurious than beneficial. A 
 few clamorous friends in each county compelled him to 
 make some removals, and to give his appointments a party 
 character, in every considerable neighborhood in the 
 state. He dared not appoint federalists, because even 
 the appointment of a federalist to the petty office of jus- 
 tice of the peace, would be denounced and harped upon 
 as an evidence that he had become a traitor to the party 
 who had clothed him with power. A large majority of 
 the republicans in every part of the state were opposed 
 to him. As he would not appoint federalists nor Clinto- 
 nians, the circle within which he could make the selection 
 was extremely limited. Hence, unfit men were in many 
 cases appointed. A comparison between the person appoint- 
 ed, because he was a republican friend of the governor ^ 
 with Clintonian and federal citizens in the same neighbor- 
 hood, of respected moral standing in society, talents and 
 personal fitness for the station, was frequently very unfa- 
 vorable to the office-holder; and ordinary men could hard- 
 ly avoid estimating the merits of the administration 
 by the merits of its chosen officers. The federalists, too, 
 were disgusted with his course. Many of them, greedy 
 for office, could not perceive the reason why they should 
 be called on to support a governor who treated them as 
 aliens. Others felt a hearty contempt for his timidity and 
 want of decision of character and boldness of action. 
 The members of his council did not always harmonize in
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YOKK. 245 
 
 their views. Mr. John Nicholas, the member from the 
 western district, had recently emigrated from Virginia to 
 the county of Ontario. He had, while he resided in Vir- 
 ginia, been a member of the house of representatives of 
 the United States from that state, and acquired a respecta- 
 ble standing in that body- but in New-York he was a 
 stranger, and it was impossible for him to understand all 
 the sinuosities of New-York politics. He was for a 
 straight forward, open course, and for treating all sup- 
 porters of the state administration, whether republicans or 
 federalists, alike. 
 
 Mr. Edward Savage was strongly prejudiced in favor 
 of the old republican party, of which he had since the 
 adoption of the United States constitution been a uni- 
 form member. I can have no doubt his support of Gov. 
 Lewis was from pure and conscientious motives, and yet he 
 was complained of, as acting from selfish views. He was, I 
 believe, himself surrogate of the county of Washingtonj 
 his son John, the late chief justice, was district attorney 
 for the counties of Washington, Clinton, &c. He (the 
 son,) was a law partner of John Crary, Esq., and Mr. 
 Savage procured the removal of Mr. Sheppard, the clerk 
 of Washington county, and the appointment of Mr. Crary 
 in his place. Thus three of the best offices in that large 
 and respectable county, were secured between the mem- 
 ber of the council, his son, and his son's partner in busi- 
 ness. This accumulation of state patronage naturally ex- 
 cited some disgust in that part of the state, f 
 
 Mr. Burt was a shrewd, adroit man, and probably a bet 
 ter manager than either of the other members; but of his 
 particular views, I am not advised. In addition to the 
 difficulties I have mentioned, which Mr. Lewis and his 
 friends had to encounter, it was apparent that the great 
 mass of the republican party were against him, and calcu- 
 lating federalists as well as republicans foresaw that the 
 t Sec Note H.
 
 246 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 question would ultimately be between the federal and re- 
 publican parties, and from the strength of the latter party 
 in the state, aided as it was, by the popularity and patron- 
 age of the general government, little doubt could be en- 
 tertained of what the final result of such a contest would 
 be in this state. Hence, many federalists seized the op- 
 portunity, under various pretences, to desert from therr 
 former political associates, and connect themselves with a 
 political party whose fortunes seemed to promise better. 
 The change from a federalist to a republican was easily to 
 be effected. A federalist need do nothing but proclaim 
 himself an opponent to Gov. Lewis, and he was instantly 
 declared by the fathers of the church " a genuine repub- 
 lican." 
 
 The election terminated as might have been anticipated. 
 Mr. Tompkins was elected, by a less majority than 
 Lewis obtained over Burr. Mr. T.'s majority was four 
 thousand and eighty-five. 
 
 The senators chosen at this election, were De Witt Clin- 
 ton from the southern district, Robert Williams and Joshua 
 H. Brett from the middle, John Tayler, John McLean, 
 Charles Selden, and Isaac Kellogg from the eastern, and 
 William Floyd and Alexander Rhae from the western 
 All the senators elected were republican Clintonians, ex 
 cept Messrs. Williams and Brett from the middle district, 
 who were Lewisites. 
 
 In order to close the account of the administration of 
 Gov. Lewis, I may as well mention in this place, that 
 Gov. Lewis met the council of appointment on the ninth 
 day of June, for the purpose of appointing a judge of the 
 supreme court. The council were still divided in re- 
 lation to the proper candidate. If reports were correct 
 no two of them agreed on their man. 
 
 Mr. Nicholas was, as was said, for Jonas Piatt, Mr. 
 Savage %r John Woodworth, Mr. Burt for Van Ness, and
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 247 
 
 Mr. Thomas for Maturin Livingston. It was said that 
 the governor, true to the interest of his family, agreed 
 with Mr. Thomas. It is very probable that the federalists, 
 apprehending that a division of their influence between Van 
 Ness and Piatt might result in the appointment of either 
 Woodworth or Livingston, were, by means of the address 
 and importunity of Mr. Burt, aided by Mr. Van Ness 
 himself, induced to give up Mr. Piatt, and exert the whole 
 weight of their influence in favor of Van Ness. He was 
 appointed. Of his character and talents I have already 
 spoken. 
 
 In looking back to the year 1800, one cannot help being 
 struck with the reflection, that the great federal party in 
 the state were overthrown by the united exertions of the 
 Clintons, Livingstons, and Aaron Burr; that Burr was 
 prostrated by tho joint efforts of the Clintons and Living- 
 stons, and that shortly afterwards the Clintons and Liv- 
 ingstons fell out, and the Livingstons were overcome by 
 the Clintons. This view cannot fail to remind us of the 
 military fortune of the celebrated Roman Triumvirate, 
 and the destruction of Lepidus by the joint arms of An- 
 thony and Augustus, and the final overthrow of Anthony 
 by Augustus. 
 
 But although the present victory elevated Mr. Clinton 
 to the very pinnacle of political power in the state, yet 
 the means by which he obtained the victory, the princi- 
 ples, or rather the want of principle, which induced him 
 and his coadjutors to act in the contest, and the enemies 
 he made during this struggle, when added to those pro- 
 duced by the controversy with Aaron Burr, combined with 
 the envy excited by his elevated political position and 
 supposed influence, seriously checked his advancement, 
 and for a time threatened his utter and irretrievable ruin.
 
 248 POLITICAL HISTOBT [1807. 
 
 CHAPTER XII. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1807, TO MAY 1, 1803. 
 
 In the latter part of the month of May, 1807, Col. Burr 
 was brought before chief justice Marshall, at Richmond in 
 Virginia, on a charge of misdemeanor, and also of treason 
 against the United States. [See Note R.J 
 
 Although not expressly within the plan of these sketches, 
 yet as Mr. Burr was, for a considerable period of time, a 
 distinguished political partizan of this state, I shall present 
 a very succinct, but I fear, imperfect view of the singular 
 transactions in which he was the principal actor, and 
 which caused his arrest and trial. After his duel with 
 Gen. Hamilton, and after the term of his office as vice-pre- 
 sident had expired, he seemed to be left alone, and aban- 
 doned by all political parties. 
 
 The state of public feeling in New- York was such, after 
 the death of Hamilton, that his presence in that city could 
 not be endured. In New- Jersey he had been indicted by 
 a grand jury for murder. Thus situated, his ambitious, 
 active and restless spirit rendered his condition intolerable 
 to himself. On the 22nd March, but a few days after he 
 left forever the presidency of the United States senate, he 
 wrote to his son-in-law, Mr. Joseph Alston, that he " was 
 under ostracism. In New-York," said he, " I am to be 
 disfranchised, and in New-Jersey to be hanged. Having 
 substantial objections to both, I shall not, for the present, 
 hazard either, but shall seek another country.'''' Accord- 
 ingly, early in May, he left Philadelphia for the western 
 country, and arrived at Lexington, in Kentucky, on the 
 20th of that month. After travelling with great rapidity 
 through that state, he directed his course to Nashville, in
 
 .]^siD=TC®lifIIPTrJCSfS
 
 1807.] OF NEW-rORK. 249 
 
 Tennessee, and from thence he journied through the woods 
 to Natchez. From Natchez he went by land to New-Or- 
 leans, where he arrived on the 25th June, 1805. At that 
 time, Gen. Wilkinson was in that city, or in its neighbor- 
 hood, and commanded the United States troops stationed 
 there. It does not appear that he remained long in New- 
 Orleans, but soon again returned to Lexington, in Ken- 
 tucky, by the way of Nashville. He was at Cincinnati, 
 and at several places in Ohio, but in a very short time 
 made his appearance at St. Louis, in Missouri, and from 
 thence he travelled to Washington, at which place he ar- 
 rived on the 29th day of November. These immense 
 journies he performed in a little more than six monthsj 
 before the great western rivers were rendered navigable 
 by steam, and when the roads were badly constructed; 
 and through a considerable part of the country traversed 
 by him there were no roads at all. His movements were 
 veiled in mystery, and all men wondered what could be 
 the motive which induced these extraordinary journies. 
 From January, 1806, to the month of August following, 
 he spent his time principally in Washington and Philadel- 
 phiaj but, in the month of August, he again set his face 
 towards the west, and was soon afterwards found in Ken- 
 tucky. 
 
 About this time boats were provided, provisions and 
 munitions of war were collected, and men were gathering 
 at different points on the Ohio and Cumberland rivers. 
 Government now began to be alarmed. Mr. Tiffin, go- 
 vernor of Ohio, under the advice of the president, (Jeffer- 
 son,) seized the boats and their cargo, and Burr was ar- 
 rested in Kentucky; bat no sufficient proof appearing 
 against him he was discharged. 
 
 On the 23d January, 1807, Mr. Jefferson sent a mes 
 sage to congress, accompanied by several affidavits, in 
 which he gave the history of Burr's transactions, so far as
 
 250 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 they had come to the knowledge of the administration. 
 The message stated that, on the 21st of October, Gen. 
 Wilkinson wrote to the president that, from a letter he 
 had received from Burr, he had ascertained that his objects 
 were, a severance of the union on the line of the Allegany 
 mountains, an attack upon Mexico, and the establishment 
 of an independent government in Mexico, of which Burr 
 was to be the head. That to cover his movements, he had 
 purchased, or pretended to have purchased, of one Lynch, 
 a tract of country claimed by Baron Bastiop, lying near 
 Natchitoches, on which he proposed to make a settlement. 
 That he had found, by the proceedings of the governor 
 and people of Ohio and Kentucky, that the western people 
 "were not prepared to join him; but notwithstanding, there 
 was reason to believe, that he intended, with what force he 
 could collect, to attack New-Orleans, get the control of 
 the funds of the bank, seize upon the military and naval 
 stores which might be found there, and then proceed 
 against Mexico. The president assured congress that 
 there was no reason to apprehend that any foreign power 
 would aid Col. Burr. 
 
 A considerable part of the evidence going to show that 
 Burr entertained criminal designs, depended on the affida- 
 vit of Wilkinson. It is not my intention to examine into 
 the proofs of the guilt or innocence of Burr, further than 
 to remark, that from the character of the vain, vaporing 
 and unprincipled Wilkinson, as before and since developed, 
 no dependance can safely be placed upon his statements, 
 unless supported by strong circumstances, or other evi- 
 dence; and I believe it will not at this day be doubted, 
 that if Burr plotted treason, Wilkinson, in the first in- 
 stance, agreed to be his accomplice; that, as their opera- 
 tions progressed, he began seriously to doubt of success, 
 and then communicated his knowledge of the affair to the 
 government, in order to save himself, and perhaps obtain
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 251 
 
 a reward; and that he falsely represented to the president 
 that he had feigned a partial acquiescence in the schemes 
 of Burr, for the purpose of preventing the execution of 
 his projects. That Burr himself was deceived by Wil- 
 kinson, there can be no doubt, for had he not been confi- 
 dent Wilkinson would act with him, would he have sent 
 a letter to hira in cypher, by Swartwout, of the tenor of 
 the one produced by Wilkinson before the grand jury at 
 Richmond 1 But there was other evidence besides that 
 of Wilkinson, against Burr, which has never been ex- 
 plained. His extensive and hurried journies, in the sum- 
 mer of 1805 J his preparation of boats, munitions of war, 
 and provisions; his enlistment of men, and the letter in 
 cypher which he sent to Wilkinson ; what were they 
 for 1 If his object was merely an attack upon Mexico, 
 why did he not openly avow it, when charged and indicted 
 for treason against his country 1 The one, he knew, was 
 comparatively a slight misdemeanor, the other, the highest 
 crime known to the law. Again, unless Col. William 
 Eaton, the man who had then recently, so gallantly distin- 
 guished himself on the Barbary ccasts, has perjured him- 
 self, Burr did form a treasonable plot against his country. 
 Col. Eaton, on the 26th January, deposed, in open court, 
 held before Judge Cranch and others, at Washington, that 
 during the preceding winter, (1806,) Burr called upon 
 him, and, in the first instance, represented, that he was 
 employed by the government to raise a military force to 
 attack the Spanish Provinces in North America, and invi- 
 ted Eaton to take a command in the expedition ; that 
 Eaton, being a restless, enterprising man, readily acceded 
 to the proposal; that Burr made frequent calls upon him, 
 and in his subsequent interviews complained of the ineffi- 
 ciency and timidity of the government, and, eventually, 
 fully developed his project; which was to separate the 
 western states from the union, and establish himself as
 
 262 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 sovereign of the country; that measures were forthwith to 
 be taken for the conquest of Mexico 3 that the control of 
 the Mexican mines would allure to his standard a host of 
 gallant and enterprising spirits, both of the old and the 
 new world; and that Gen. Wilkinson was engaged in the 
 plot, and was to join him with the troops under his com- 
 mand. According to Eaton, Burr further stated, that if 
 he could gain over the marine corps, " and secure Trux- 
 ton, Preble and Decatur, he would turn congress neck and 
 heels out of doors, assassinate the president, seize on the 
 treasury, and declare himself the Protector of an energetic 
 government;" and he solicited Eaton to endeavor to per- 
 suade Preble and Decatur to join in the enterprise. Burr 
 did not succeed in collecting and organizing a force on 
 the western waters; but, on the 1st day of March, he was 
 discovered wandering alone in the Tombigbee country, 
 near the line of Florida, by a man named Perkins, who 
 found him in the evening at a little tavern. Perkins, at 
 first, was not certain that the stranger with whom he came 
 in contact, was Burr, but, on being satisfied that such was 
 the fact, procured a subordinate officer, who happened to 
 be stationed there, and a file of seven men, who arrested 
 the western Emperor, and conveyed him to Richmond. 
 
 The trial of the indictment against Burr, for treason, 
 occupied many weeks, but he was finally acquitted by the 
 jury, without swearing any witnesses in his defence. The 
 acquittal seems to have been on technical grounds. To 
 convict of treason, proof must not only be made of a trea- 
 sonable plot, but of an overt act, and that act must be 
 proved by at least two credible witnesses. The overt act 
 proved, was an assemblage of men at Blanerhassett's 
 Island in the Ohio river; but it was not proved that Col 
 Burr was present at that assemblage. This evidence, ac- 
 cording to the view of the court, was not sufficient to 
 convict him of an overt act, within the meaning of the
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 253 
 
 constitution, and thereupon the jury found this extraordi- 
 nary verdict, which they refused to modify: — 
 
 We J the jury, say that Aaron Burr is not proved to be 
 guilty, under this indictment j by any evidence submitted 
 to us. We, therefore^ find him not guilty." {^Sce 2 Da- 
 vis j 384.) 
 
 After his acquittal. Col. Burr appears still to have per^ 
 severed in the project of making an effort to detach Mexico 
 from the Spanish government. 
 
 On the 7th of June, 1808, he sailed from New-York for 
 Europe, it would seem in the hope of engaging the British 
 government, to fit out an expedition against Mexico, in 
 which he would take a part. In this he was entirely un- 
 successful. His application to the French government 
 was equally vain and useless. He spent four years wan- 
 dering about in Europe. Very little attention was paid 
 to him, and, at times, he was reduced to the greatest ex- 
 tremity of poverty and wretchedness. On the 8th June, 
 1812, precisely four years and one day from the time he 
 left New-York, he again landed in that city. Deserted 
 by his friends, destitute of the means of living, loaded 
 with heavy debts, and enervated by age, he opened a law 
 office, as his only means of procuring his daily bread. 
 But other, and more appalling misfortunes awaited him. 
 He had been in New-York but a few days, when he re- 
 ceived the news of the death of Aaron Burr Alston, the 
 only child of his only daughter. Even this melancholy 
 event did not terminate his calamities. A short time after 
 the tidings of his grandson's death was communicated to 
 him, his daughter, Mrs. Alston, who seems, from her let- 
 ters which have been published, to have been a superior 
 woman, anxious to see and embrace her father, on the 31st 
 day of December, sailed as a passenger in a schooner 
 from Charleston, for New-York, which was lost on its 
 passage, and every soul on board pc-ished. Col. Burr
 
 254 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 was now in his old age, deprived of character, steeped in 
 poverty, and the only human beings to whom he could 
 feel the least tender affection, were snatched from him by 
 death. He was left alone in the world — his cup of calami- 
 ties was full. I was going to say, the strongest evidence 
 I have, that he was a great man, is, that he did not sink 
 under this accumulation of his misfortunes — this utter 
 wreck of human hopes. Was it strength of mind or in- 
 sensibility which prevented it 1 Be this as it may, he did 
 live; he followed his profession, and mingled in society 
 for more than twenty years afterwards. He died on the 
 14th September, 1836, in the eighty-first year of his age. 
 
 Col. Burr possessed several traits of character quite 
 peculiar. One was, an utter indifference to public opinion. 
 Mr. Davis, (2 Davis, 379, in a note,) says, that a short 
 time before his death, and when that event was daily ex 
 pected, after informing him that his death was hourly 
 expected by his physician, he asked Col. Burr whether, at 
 any time, he had contemplated a separation of the union 1 
 To which, he replied, " No, I would as soon have thought 
 of taking possession of the moon, and informing my friends 
 that I intended to divide it among them." But if he was 
 sincere in that declaration, why did he not furnish Mr. 
 Davis, who, he probably knew, would write his biography, 
 with some satisfactory explanation of his western expedi- 
 tion 1 Why did he not give an account of the reasons of 
 his negotiations with Wilkinson, and his object in writing 
 to him the letter in cypher 1 The biography of Davis, 
 leaves the question, as to the real motives of Burr, as 
 much in the dark as it was when his trial closed at Rich- 
 mond; where the jury, who heard the whole of the case, 
 evidently arrived at the conclusion that Col. Burr, if not 
 technically, was morally guilty of treason. 
 
 Col. Burr seems, through his whole life, to have taken 
 pains to envelope all his political conduct in mystery.
 
 1807.] OF NEW- YORK. 255 
 
 He was one of those kind of men, who, if he had a given 
 end to accomplish, preferred the accomplishment of that 
 end by indirect, rather than direct means. Many parts of 
 his life afford proof of even an affectation of intrigue and 
 mystery, which, instead of being evidence of a great, is 
 evidence of a weak and little mind. It was an invariable 
 maxim with him, never to commit any thing on politics to 
 writing. So rigid was his regard to this rule, that, accord- 
 ing to Mr. Davis, he would not, in writing to his wife, 
 utter a word on political subjects. Why should not a 
 man commit to writing his political views, and the princi- 
 ples of his political action ? What has an honest man 
 to fear from it 1 The reasons which induced Col. Burr 
 to adopt this rule of conduct could not have been founded 
 either on patriotism or integrity. That he was a man of 
 great personal bravery there is no doubt. With respect 
 to his talents there is more difficulty in arriving at a satis- 
 factory conclusion. 
 
 We cannot test the powers of his mind by his writings. 
 He has left nothing, except the letters written by him to 
 his wife, daughter, and son-in-law. These letters are 
 written in an easy, familiar style, and are perfectly suitable 
 and proper to the connection existing between the writer 
 and those to whom the letters were addressed. He never 
 touches upon any serious or grave topic, either religious, 
 political, or philosophical; yet they are still of that kind 
 which are perfectly proper to be addressed by a husband 
 to his wife, or by a parent to his children. They contain 
 no evidence but that they were written by a man of a high 
 order of intellect, nor but that they might have been writ- 
 ten by the most common and ordinary educated man, 
 acquainted with life. Of course, no opinion can be formed 
 of the talents of Mr. Burr from the writings he has left. 
 
 But, from the year 1783, to the year 1800, Col. Burr 
 was in pretty full practice as a counsellor at law, and
 
 256 POLITICAL HISTORY [.1807. 
 
 from 1812, to within a year or two before his death, he 
 also generally attended the superior courts of this state. 
 
 It is certain, that during the first period of his practice, 
 he had a high standing at the bar. To have been viewed 
 by the public as the rival of Gen. Hamilton, may, of itself, 
 be considered as evidence of great legal learning and 
 talent; and yet, it must not be forgotten that there were, 
 during that period, but few democratic lawyers of eminence 
 in the city of New-York, and that political partialities 
 may have contributed something towards assigning to Col. 
 Burr the position which he held. There are gentlemen 
 now living, who heard him during his best days, who do 
 not speak of him as having deserved the reputation of a 
 profound, learned and able forensic debater. " Burr," 
 says Mr. John Van Ness Yates, in a note to Thurlow 
 Weed, written at the request, I presume, of Mr. Davis, 
 " was persuasive and imaginative. He first enslaved the 
 heart, then led captive the head. Hamilton addressed 
 himself to the head only." 
 
 These remarks of Mr. Yates were called forth by a re- 
 quest, coming, I presume, originally from Mr. Davis, that 
 he would furnish the notes taken by his father, chief jus- 
 tice Yates, of the argument of Burr, in the celebrated case 
 of Governeur and Kemble. The copy of the notes of the 
 chief justice, as given by Mr. Yates, reads as follows: — 
 {See 2 Davis, 21.) 
 
 '* Burr for Plaintiff. — I. The great principles of com- 
 mercial law which apply to this case are " — then follows 
 a hiatus of some lines, after which, as follows: 
 
 « II. The Plaintiff "—another hiatus, 
 
 "III." (!!!) 
 
 This concludes, says Mr. Yates, all I can find. Mr. 
 Yates adds, that his father's notes of Gen. Hamilton's ar- 
 gument are very copious. Whether the eloquence of Col. 
 Burr was so fascinating and astounding as deprived the
 
 1807.] OF NEW-YORK. 257 
 
 judge of the power of taking notes, or whether his argu- 
 ments were so immethodical and desultory that the learned 
 judge thought it not worth his while to attempt to follow 
 him, we are left to conjecture. 
 
 As respects the evidence of talents, as an advocate, af- 
 forded by Col. Burr, after his return from Europe, I can 
 speak with more confidence. From the year 1812, to the 
 time of his death, he never made a speech in any of our 
 courts, which can, with propriety, be called an argument. 
 In the last period of his professional life he cannot, there- 
 fore, be said to have merited, and indeed he did not ac- 
 quire, a standing above mediocrity. He seemed to labor 
 more to gain advantages by the meshes of technical rules of 
 practice, by contrivance and trick, than to succeed by 
 meeting his opponent fairly in the field, and elaborately 
 discussing the merits of his case. I am quite sure that in 
 this statement I shall be sustained by every member of 
 the New-York bar, who was acquainted with Col. Burr. 
 The conclusion" to which I have arrived, is, that in no pe- 
 riod of his life could he have been a learned lawyer, or a 
 profound, clear and logical reasoner. 
 
 The evidence which he afforded of talents as a politician 
 and statesman, is equally unsatisfactory. Neither in the 
 legislature of this state, nor in the senate of the United 
 States, did he ever originate any great measure, nor can I 
 find that he, at any time, distinguished himself in discus- 
 sing any important question raised by others. His eflforts 
 to obtain the gubernatorial chair of this state, and the 
 presidency of the United States, and more especially the 
 latter, I have before had occasion to show, independent of 
 all questions of principle, were ill judged, and not well 
 adapted to the accomplishment of the end he must have 
 had in view. In the project of his western expedition, 
 whatever his object was, that is, whether he intended an 
 attack on Mexico, or whether he contemplated a division 
 
 17
 
 258 POLITICAL HISTORY [1807. 
 
 of the union, he gave equal evidence of a want of a sound 
 and discriminating judgmentj in providing means adapted 
 to the accomplishment of his end. 
 
 It does not appear that he had the least prospect of any 
 foreign aid. He attempted in broad day, with the eyes of 
 an intelligent community upon him, to raise troops and 
 collect munitions of war, either to commit hostilities upon 
 a neighboring power with whom we were at peace, or 
 make war on his own government. He must have known 
 he could not move at all in such an enterprise without the 
 cordial aid of Wilkinson. Considering the known cha- 
 racter of that man, no discreet person would have done a 
 single act rendering himself accountable until Wilkinson 
 had committed himself in such a way as he could not re- 
 cede. Instead of which. Burr himself admits that he, 
 the great magician, was deceived by this weak, windy, 
 blustering bragadocia. This single fact is evidence that 
 Burr did not know men so well as he claimed to know 
 them, and that he was utterly unfit to conduct such an en- 
 terprize. The explosion of his plot and the facility with 
 which it was suppressed, in spite of his petty and puerile 
 efforts to carry it into effect; and his capture by a subal- 
 tern officer and seven men, furnisha just and proper com- 
 ment on the ability with whichit was contrived and attempt- 
 ed to be executed. 
 
 On the whole, my conclusion is, that Aaron Burr was 
 a man of imposing and fascinating manners, rapid and 
 quick perceptions, possessed of an uncommon share of 
 cunning, ambitious, imaginative and reckless about the 
 means he employed to accomplish his ends; but defective 
 in the deliberating, comparing and adjudicating powers of 
 mind. If he was a very cunning man, he was not a very 
 wise one; and if, at any period of his life he was brilliant 
 as an orator, he never was a profound reasoner.
 
 1807.] OF NEW- YORK. 259 
 
 The fate of Col. Burr presents a solemn memento to 
 the youthful aspirant for political fame and power. He 
 may see in Mr. Burr, a young man born of wealthy pa- 
 rents, of high character for virtue and talents, com- 
 mencing life with the advantage of an accomplished and 
 finished education and the most fascinating address; at one 
 period the idol of a great political party, and in the year 
 1800, second in influence and popularity only to one man 
 in America; in 1812, we see the same individual, bank- 
 rupt in fortune and reputation, who, having wandered for 
 years among various nations in Europe, had returned to 
 his native land, detested as a traitor to his country, and 
 shunned with horror by all good men as a murderer. 
 
 Will not the ingenuous mind, in view of such a career, 
 be forced to the conclusion, that although the mere poli- 
 tician may extol the tact and address, and management of 
 a partisan leader, the continued support of the great mass 
 of the American people, can only be obtained by afford- 
 ing evidence of honesty and integrity of purpose, and 
 that virtue and patriotism alone are safe and certain pass- 
 ports to power and glory. 
 
 It has been remarked, that the war between France and 
 the other European powers, had occasioned a great de- 
 mand for the bread stuffs produced by the grain growing 
 states, which had raised the price of produce in this coun- 
 try to an amount before unequalled; that as the Ameri- 
 cans occupied a neutral position, their vessels navigated 
 freely the ocean, and that thus a considerable portion of 
 the carrying trade of the belligerents, and particularly of 
 France, was engrossed by American ship owners. The 
 strength of the British on the ocean rendered that nation 
 less dependent than France on this country for carrying 
 on its transportation. The British were also desirous of 
 compelling the French to transport their own supplies 
 and goods in their own vessels, because the French vessels
 
 260 POLITICAL HISTOHY [1807. 
 
 when on the high seas, in all human probability, would 
 many of them be captured by the British privateers, and 
 vessels of war. For this reason, and with a view to cur- 
 tail the neutral trade of the United States, the English 
 government adopted orders in council, tending to check 
 and in a manner suppress all intercourse between America 
 and France. This state of things bore hard, not only upon 
 America but France, by depriving that nation of supplies 
 for its army. The French therefore adopted decrees 
 which rendered American vessels liable to seizure and 
 condemnation when carrying on what had heretofore been 
 a lawful trade with Great Britain. The American go- 
 vernment remonstrated against these orders and decrees 
 without effect, and under the impression that neither Eng- 
 land nor France could dispense with the use of our pro- 
 ductions, Mr. Jefferson recommended an embargo on all 
 American shipping, until one or both the belligerents 
 should acknowledge our neutral rights by a repeal of their 
 obnoxious orders and decrees. Congress adopted the re- 
 commendation by passing a law in accordance with it. 
 The embargo bore hard on the northern and middle states, 
 and particularly on the state of New- York. 
 
 It was contended that other and more efficient measures 
 less injurious to the nation, and especially to the grain 
 growing and commercial states, than a resort to an em- 
 bargo for an indefinite period of time, might have been 
 adopted. Shortly after the passage of this act by con- 
 gress, a public meeting was held in the city of New- York, 
 of which De Witt Clinton was chairman, and James 
 Townsencl was secretary, which adopted resolutions dis- 
 approving of the embargo; and Mr. Cheetham, in the 
 American Citizen, the Clintonian paper, came out decided- 
 ly against the measure. The federalists to a man de- 
 nounced, with great bitterness, the restrictive measures as 
 ruinous to the country. The republicans, however, gene-
 
 1808.] OF NEW- YORK. 261 
 
 rally expressed their approbation of the embargo, and it 
 was not long before the principal and almost the sole 
 topic of dispute between the two parties, was the question 
 as to the propriety and fitness of this measure, with which 
 was connected a dispute whether the British orders in 
 council were provoked by the French, or whether the 
 French decrees were not in some degree excusable as a 
 retaliatory measure to the English orders in council. The 
 federalists advocated the first position, and the latter was 
 contended for by the republicans. 
 
 While these national questions agitated the public mind, 
 the legislature convened at Albany. Doct. Alexander 
 Sheldon was again elected speaker, and Daniel Rodman 
 clerk, Rodman, the republican candidate, received sixty 
 votes, and Mr. G. Y. Lansing, the former clerk, twenty- 
 one. This vote may be considered as evidence of the 
 strength of parties in the assembly. 
 
 The speech of the new governor was well written. It 
 presented a succinct and clear view of the controversy 
 between the American government and the belligerents of 
 Europe, and decidedly approved of the embargo as the 
 most safe and efficient means of causing both the English 
 and French to respect our national rights. 
 
 In the assembly, when discussing the answer of that 
 body to the governor's speech, upon that part of it which 
 advocated the embargo laws, a warm debate ensued, but 
 in accordance with the views of the governor, was adopt- 
 ed by a vote of sixty-two to twenty-two. 
 
 On the first day of February, the assembly made choice 
 of a council of appointment, consisting of Benjamin Coe 
 from the southern, Peter C. Adams from the middle, Johr 
 Veeder from the eastern, and Nathan Smith of the west 
 ern districts. 
 
 The council immediately proceeded to the work for 
 •which they were created. They removed Dr. Tillotson
 
 262 POLITICAL HISTORY [1808. 
 
 from the office of secretary of state, and appointed Elisha 
 Jenkins. They restored Mr. Clinton to the Mayoralty of 
 New- York; they removed Maturin Livingston from the 
 office of recorder, and appointed P. C, Van Wyck to that 
 office. Sylvanus Miller, who had been by Gov. Lewis re- 
 moved from the office of surrogate of New-York to make 
 place for Ogden Edwards, was restored to his former 
 place, and eleven other removals and appointments were 
 made on the same day. 
 
 By the election of Mr. Tompkins to the office of go 
 vernor, another vacancy was caused on the bench of the 
 supreme court, and to fill that vacancy Joseph C. Yates 
 was appointed. This appointment occasioned some sur- 
 prise to the members of the bar. Though perfectly amia- 
 ble as a citizen, Judge Yates was not much known as a 
 lawyer. This appointment was said to have been pro- 
 cured principally by, the influence of the country members 
 of the legislature, among w^hom he was much esteemed, 
 and especially by Mr. Veeder, who was a member of the 
 council and his warm and personal friend. Mr. Clinton 
 was almost the only prominent man who advocated his 
 appointment. Mr. Woodworth, although he had from his 
 boyhood been a zealous republican, was, because he sup- 
 ported Gov. Lew'is, within a few days after the first or- 
 ganization of the council, removed from the office of at- 
 torney general, and Matthias B. Hildreth of Johnstown, 
 appointed in his place. 
 
 I observe from the minutes of the council that on the 
 18th of March, John W. Taylor and Sajniuel Young, men 
 who have since made a distinguished figure in political life, 
 were appointed justices of the peace for the town of 
 Ballston in Saratoga, and that on the 20th of the same 
 month Martin Van Buren, who has been still more dis- 
 tinguished, was appointed surrogate of the county of Co- 
 
 #
 
 1808.] OF NEW-YORK 263 
 
 lumbia. These, I presume, were the first civil offices 
 held by these gentlemen. 
 
 This council proceeded to send new general commis- 
 sions of the peace into many of the counties, and in the 
 course of a few months brought about almost an entire 
 change of persons holding civil offices in the state. Such 
 was the power of this strange, and formidable machine 
 called the council of appointment. 
 
 The legislature seems to have been effectually imbued 
 with the same spirit which governed the council. There 
 was one state office, and only one, over whose tenure 
 the constitution gave them control. It was the treasurer. 
 That office was then held by Abraham G, Lansing, an up- 
 right, responsible and capable man. Him the legislature 
 promptly removed, and appointed David Thomas, late a 
 member of congress from Washington county, in his 
 place. 
 
 Mr. De Witt Clinton, shortly before or after his arrival 
 in Albany, renounced his opposition to the embargo laws, 
 and professed his approbation of the measures of the 
 general administration. For this he was severely abused 
 by the federalists, and by his quondam friend Mr. Cheet- 
 ham, who persisted as editor of the American Citizen, in 
 his opposition, and charged Mr. Clinton with bad faith, in 
 persuading him to take the stand he had taken on the 
 question, and then of abandoning him. I can perceive no 
 just cause for this abuse. The embargo presented a great 
 question of national policy, of which Mr. Clinton at first 
 formed an unfavorable opinion, but upon more reflection, 
 he judged differently. Had he not a right, and was it not 
 his duty, thus to do 1 Having changed his opinion on 
 the subject, as an honest man, he was bound to act accord- 
 ing to the convictions of his own conscience. 
 
 The second term of Mr. Jefferson as president of the 
 United States, would expire on the 3d of March, 1809,
 
 264 POLITICAL HISTORY [1808. 
 
 and a new president was to be elected in December, 1808. 
 It was the fashion of the day to designate the candidate 
 for president by a congressional caucus; and James Madi- 
 son was nominated by such caucus. This nomination 
 gave offence to the vice-president, George Clinton, and his 
 friends. George Clinton was by the same caucus again 
 nominated for vice-president. 
 
 Seventeen republican members of congress protested 
 against this nomination. Some of the protestors were 
 from the state of New- York, among whom were John 
 Russel, Josiah Masters, George Clinton, Jr., brother to 
 De Witt, and Peter Swart. 
 
 The Albany Register, at that time conducted by Mr- 
 Southwick, who acted in every thing in concert with De 
 Witt Clinton, declared its confidence in Mr. Madison, but 
 at the same time expressed an opinion that the presidency 
 was due to the vice-president, Mr. Clinton. On the 5th 
 of March, the vice-president wrote from Washington to a 
 friend in Albany, probably De Witt Clinton, no doubt 
 with a view that his letter should be published, stating 
 that he was not consulted about the nomination, and had 
 neither refused or consented to be a candidate. He did 
 not, he said, even know of the caucus till the day on the 
 evening of which it was held, when he accidentally 
 saw a notice signed by Stephen Roe Bradley, summon- 
 ing one of the members to attend. I observe that the 
 Albany Register, shortly afterwards, (25th of March,) 
 spoke with some bitterness of the policy of Virginia, and 
 charged the Virginians with cherishing an opinion that no 
 one out of that state was fit for the first office in the 
 nation. 
 
 On the other hand, so early as the winter of 1806, 1 
 observe an article copied from the Richmond Enquirer 
 mto the Evening Post, describing the enormous power 
 -yielded by De Witt Clinton in this state, and alluding to
 
 1S08.] OF NEW-YORK. 265 
 
 the fact that, besides being a senator and member of the 
 council of appointment, he held the office of mayor of 
 New-York, which it alleged was worth twelve thousand 
 dollars a year. I mention these circumstances, to show 
 the origin of the jealousies and the eventual hostility 
 between Mr. De Witt Clinton and the Virginia dynasty, 
 as it was afterwards called. 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the 11th of April, but be- 
 fore separating, the republican members signed an address, 
 in which they justified the measures of the administration, 
 and urged its support. The address was signed by eighty- 
 nine members. 
 
 The effect of the embargo, among other things, was to 
 reduce the price of wheat from two dollars to seventy- 
 five cents per bushel. This roused the attention of the 
 people, and they listened with eagerness to the arguments 
 of the federalists. That party rallied with great vigor in 
 almost every county in the state, and obtained a considera- 
 ble accession of strength in the assembly, but the repub- 
 lican party still retained a majority in that house. From 
 the eastern district, David Hopkins, a federalist was elect- 
 ed, and from the middle, Edward P. Livingston, a Lewisite, 
 was chosen. Benjamin Coe and William W. Gilbert, 
 from the southern, and Luther Rich, Francis Bloodgood, 
 Sylvanus Smally, Walter Martin and Silas Halsey from 
 the western districts, all republicans, were this year elect- 
 ed to the senate.
 
 266 POLITICAL HISTORY [1808. 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1903, TO MAY 1, 1809. 
 
 John Quincy Adams, who had been elected a senator 
 of the United States, by the legislature of Massachusetts, 
 a majority of whom were federalists, and of course were 
 opposed to the embargo law, in the winter of 1808, had 
 addressed a letter to Harrison Gray Otis, in which he de- 
 clared himself in favor of that measure, and set forth at 
 large his reasons for supporting it. This letter was 
 republished in all the principal democratic newspapers 
 in the state of New- York; and, as it was written with 
 great ability, and the standing and character of the wri- 
 ter entitled him to much respect, it had a considerable 
 influence on the public mind. Still, however, a large 
 majority of the people of Massachusetts were warmly 
 opposed to the embargo laws, and Mr. Adams, under these 
 circumstances, thought it his duty to give back to the le- 
 gislature the power with w^hich they had invested him, 
 inasmuch as a question had arisen, subsequent to his elec- 
 tion, in which he could not, in conscience, carry into ef- 
 fect the wall of his constituents. He, therefore, on the 
 eighth of June, resigned his place in the United States 
 senate, in order to afford the legislature an opportunity of 
 choosing a representative whose political principles ac- 
 corded with the majority of that body. 
 
 The Livingstons, and a majority of the prominent re 
 publican friends of Gov. Lewis, as well as Mr. Lewis 
 himself, in connection with Col. Swartwout, M. L. Davis, 
 and other leading Burrites in New-York, came out in 
 support of the general administration, and they particulariy 
 TQanifested their zeal in behalf of Mr. Madison as the
 
 1808.] OF NEW-YORK. 267 
 
 next candidate for the presidency. In their anxiety to 
 sustain Mr. Madison, they assailed Mr. De Witt Clinton, 
 charging him with hypocrisy in professions of approbation 
 of the embargo law, and with direct hostility to the elec- 
 tion of Mr. Madison. In this they were sustained by 
 several leading newspapers in other states. A newspaper 
 printed at Washington, called the " Washington Monitor," 
 edited by Mr. Colvin, a clerk in the office of the secretary 
 of state, (Mr. Madison being then secretary,) a man of 
 talents, but extremely lax in his moral principles, and 
 irregular in his habits, enlisted, with the most asperity, in 
 this warfare. These editors, in their animadversions and 
 strictures, did not confine their attacks to De Witt Clinton, 
 but extended their denunciations to the venerable vice- 
 president and Judge Spencer. The appointments, too, 
 which were made by the general government, began to 
 assume an aspect of preference to those Burrites and Lew- 
 isites, in New- York, who were known to be personally 
 hostile to Mr. Clinton. 
 
 John Barber, the proprietor and editor of the Albany 
 Register, died on the 15th July, and the sole management 
 of that paper then devolved upon Solomon Southwick, 
 which greatly added to the influence which the personal 
 address and zeal of that gentleman had before given him, 
 in the republican party. Mr. Barber, as a correct and 
 virtuous citizen, was highly esteemed, and his death was 
 deeply lamented. 
 
 The fall elections afforded evidence of the increase of 
 federal strength in the New-England states. The state of 
 Vermont elected a federal governor, and a majority of 
 federalists in the legislature. 
 
 The New-York legislature met on the first of November, 
 for the purpose of choosing presidential electors. 
 
 Doct. Sheldon having been beaten at the election in 
 April, the federalists having obtained a majority in Mont-
 
 268 POLITICAL HISTORY [1808. 
 
 gomery county. Gen. James W. Wilkin of Orange county, 
 was chosen speaker, in opposition to Mr. Van Rensselaer, 
 the federal candidate. The result of the ballot was, for 
 Wilkin, sixty, for Van Rensselaer, forty-five. This vote 
 may be considered as an evidence of the strength of par- 
 ties in the assembly. 
 
 The governor's speech did not contain any thing which 
 particularly requires notice. He reiterated his approba- 
 tion of the general administration, and again urged a sup- 
 port of its measures. 
 
 A considerable portion of the democratic party, were 
 for giving the vote of the state to George Clinton for the 
 office of president; others insisted that such a step would 
 be unwise, if not positively wrong; that it would exhibit 
 division in the ranks of the republicans in the nation j 
 would excite jealousy and unkind feelings among the re- 
 publican friends of Mr. Madison, and ultimately impair 
 the just influence of the republicans of this state with their 
 brethren in other states; while a vote for Mr. Clinton 
 would be of no possible use to him, as it was morally 
 certain Mr. Madison would be elected. It was, it would 
 seem, finally agreed that the electors should be chosen 
 without reference to their opinions on this question, leav- 
 ing it to them to cast their votes either for Mr. Madison 
 or George Clinton, as they might think expedient. 
 
 Ambrose Spencer and Henry Huntington headed the 
 electoral ticket which was nominated and elected. Even- 
 tually six of the electors of this state, voted for George 
 Clinton for president, and the residue for Mr. Madison. 
 
 The result of the presidential vote in the nation for 
 president, was, for James Madison, one hundred and 
 twenty-two votes; Charles C. Pinckney, forty-eight j 
 George Clinton, six. For vice-president, George Clinton 
 received one hundred and thirteen votes; Rufus King,
 
 1808.] OF NEW-YORK, 269 
 
 forty-eight; John Langdon, nine;* James Madison, three;t 
 James Monroe, three. f 
 
 The legislature, after choosing electors, adjourned, 
 without attempting to transact any other business of im- 
 portance. 
 
 From the moment when it was known that Gov. Tomp- 
 kins had been elected, the Lewisites and Burrites had 
 prosecuted a very vigorous personal opposition to Mr. 
 Clinton. The dissatisfaction of the vice-president with 
 the nomination of Mr. Madison for the office of president; 
 the inclination manifested by many of Mr. Clinton's friends 
 in this state, to support Mr. Geo. Clinton, in opposition 
 to the caucus nomination; and the disapprobation of the 
 embargo laws, early manifested by Mr. Clinton, and in- 
 deed by the vice-president,! gave color to that opinion. 
 But their most effectual means of recruiting their force 
 and increasing their strength, was from the disappointed 
 office seekers. Every man who failed in getting an ap- 
 pointment for which he was an applicant, was instructed 
 to charge his defeat to Mr. Clinton, and as the applicant 
 for office is always the last man to impute his ill success 
 to his own unfitness, this advice was generally followed, 
 while the persons who were so fortunate as to obtain ap- 
 pointments, were taught that they owed their success to 
 Gov. Tompkins. 
 
 Tompkins himself professed to have nothing to do with 
 
 • The votes of New-Hampshire. 
 
 t The votes of New-York. 
 
 I la the winter of 1803, Mr. Charles R. Webster published, in the Albany Ga- 
 2ette, a statement of an interview between him and Wm. Dunning, a democratic 
 senator from the middle district, substantially alleging that he, (Dunning,) had 
 received a letter from the vice-president disapproving of the embargo. To this, 
 Mr. Dunning interposed an evasive denial; but he declined stating what the con- 
 versation was, as he insisted that it was confidential. He says Mr. Webster did 
 not see the vice-president's letter, but he does not publish the letter, or pretend 
 to state what it contained. From the statement it is fair to infer that the vice- 
 president did, in a letter to Mr. Dunning, express himself unfavorable to the em- 
 bargo laws.
 
 270 POLITICAL HISTORY [1808. 
 
 this personal warfare; indeed, he claimed to be the per- 
 sonal as well as political friend of Mr. Clinton; but the 
 circumstance that Mr. Mangle Minthorne, the father-in-law 
 of the governor, and a wealthy citizen of New-York, was 
 a leader in these attacks, and generally chairman of the 
 meetings of the Martling men, as Mr. Clinton's opponents 
 were called, induced considerable suspicion that Mr. Tomp- 
 kins secretly encouraged these assaults, which now evi- 
 dently appeared to be the result of a regular system, or 
 plot, which had for its object the political prostration of 
 Mr. Clinton. 
 
 A little before the winter session of the legislature, a 
 public meeting of the friends of the national administration 
 was notified to be held in the city of New-York. In 
 order to create jealousy in the minds of the republican 
 members of the legislature, then about to convene, and to 
 impair the influence of Mr. Clinton among them, the fol- 
 lowing article appeared in a paper which was the organ 
 of Mr. Clinton's opponents in New-York, called the Pub- 
 lic Advertiser: — 
 
 « A CAUTION AGAINST SURPRISE." 
 
 " An abominable intrigue is said to be in contemplation 
 to place Mr. De Witt Clinton in the chair of the intended 
 republican meeting. 
 
 " A measure so obnoxious to the republicans would de- 
 stroy the harmony of the meeting. If De Witt Clinton 
 should be offered, he will be opposed and rejected with 
 disdain. 
 
 " There can be no possible objection to Mr. Clinton's 
 supporting the general government, provided he has re- 
 nounced his errors: but he must inspire more confidence 
 before he can expect to attain the honorable station of a 
 republican chairman. 
 
 " A more uniform character ought to be selected. Be- 
 fore Mr. Clinton is received, he must unequivocally
 
 1809.] OF NEW-YORK. 271 
 
 renounce his connection with Cheetham, Masters, Mum- 
 ford and Van Cortlandt.* 
 
 " It is hoped there is not a member of the general 
 committee that will, for a moment, think of a measure 
 which would be decisively opposed, and viewed as an 
 insult to the public understanding. 
 
 " Let it be remembered that Mr. Clinton officiated as 
 the chairman of a general meeting which censured the 
 conduct of James Cheetham; that his consenting to serve, 
 appears to have been a mere cover, for since that period 
 he has been as intimate with Cheetham as he ever was. 
 
 " Republican proceedings should be open, frank and 
 dignified. The people cannot be deceived by the little 
 tricks and stratagems of petit politicians. Beware of 
 intrigues." 
 
 I find the above extract copied into the Register of the 
 24th January, 1809. The Register characterises the arti- 
 cle in the Advertiser as a base libel. It says that the 
 Advertiser, when the article was penned, knew that it was 
 impossible that Mr. Clinton could be chairman of the 
 meeting referred to, because it was publicly known that 
 he was to leave New-York for Albany, in order to take his 
 seat in the senate, before the day appointed for the meet- 
 ing in New-York. 
 
 The adjourned legislature met on the 27th of January. 
 
 Four days after the session commenced, (Jan. 31,) Mr. 
 Clinton, probably partly with a view to disprove the 
 allegations of the Martling men that he was opposed to 
 the republican party in the nation, brought into the senate 
 a series of resolutions, approving of the general adminis- 
 tration, and pledging the state for its support. 
 
 These resolutions, upon their introduction, were sup- 
 ported by Mr. Clinton by an elaborate and able speech. 
 
 • Messrs. Mumford, Masters and Van Cortland, were members of congress who 
 voted against (he embargo, and also protesters against the nommation of Madisoo.
 
 272 POLITICAL HISTORY [1909. 
 
 He reviewed the controversy between this country and 
 the European belligerents, and he showed that America 
 could not, consistent with her independence and dignity 
 as a nation, any longer submit to a violation of our neu- 
 tral rights. He traced the causes of the difficulties to the 
 mal-conduct of Great Britain, and he insisted that the 
 embargo and non-intercourse laws were the safest and 
 most proper measures to which, under the circumstances, 
 the government could resort. He condemned the violent 
 opposition of Massachusetts and the other eastern states, 
 to the embargo lawsj he deprecated the measures which 
 the federalists in that quarter were pursuing, as tending 
 to a division of the union; and it was on this occasion, 
 that he made, as applicable to the governing principle of 
 the eastern federalists, his celebrated quotation from Mil- 
 ton — 
 
 " Better to reign in HeU, than serve in Heafen." 
 
 In the assembly, counter resolutions condemnatory of 
 the embargo and of the whole restrictive system, were, 
 about the same time, introduced by the federalists. 
 
 In that body, the federalists had not only become 
 respectable as to numbers, but they had several men 
 deservedly distinguished for their talents. Abraham 
 Van Vechten was a member from the county of Alba- 
 ny. The great talents and high standing of Mr. Van 
 Vechten are too well known to require any description, 
 and the same remark is applicable to Daniel Cady, a 
 member from Montgomery county, who is still living. 
 The latter gentleman has devoted an unusually long pro- 
 fessional life to the practice of law, and has acquired a 
 reputation, as a lawyer, of inestimable value. He never 
 suffered political pursuits for one moment to divert him 
 from the industrious and faithful discharge of his profes- 
 sional duties. 
 
 Mr. Jacob Rutsen Van Rensselaer, from the county of
 
 1809.1 OF NEW-YOKK. 273 
 
 Columbia, was also a member of the same assembly. Mr. 
 Van Rensselaer was not so distinguished in his profession, 
 (he was bred a lawyer,) as the other two gentlemen, but 
 he was a man of talents, and a bold, active, and most 
 zealous politician. Under the lead of these gentlemen, a 
 furious war was carried on against the political majority 
 in the state, and against the general administration. On 
 the other hand, the republican side of the question was 
 well and ably sustained, in the assembly, by Nathan San- 
 ford, afterwards chancellor, Roger Skinner, afterwards 
 United States judge, Obadiah German, D. L. Van Ant- 
 werp, and others. 
 
 The resolutions condemnatory of the embargo, and the 
 measures of the administration generally, were eventually 
 rejected, and those introduced by Mr. Clinton were adopted 
 by both houses: in the senate, without a division, and in 
 the assembly by a vote of sixty-one to forty-one. 
 
 A council of appointment was chosen on the 30th of 
 January. The senators elected, were Jonathan Ward of 
 the southern district, James G. Graham of the middle, 
 Isaac Kellogg of the eastern, and Alexander Rhaeof the 
 western. No important appointments were made this 
 year. 
 
 Solomon Southwick was made sheriff of the city and 
 county of Albany. At that time Mr. Southwick's popu- 
 larity and influence were sufficient to command almost any 
 office within the gift of the republican party. 
 
 The voluntary suspension, by the act of the government, 
 of the exportation of the surplus produce of the country, 
 by the embargo and non-intercourse laws, annoyed and 
 disturbed the ship owner; for his capital, invested in ships, 
 was rapidly wasting by the decay and rotting of his ships 
 in port, without affording him one cent of profit; the im- 
 porting merchant was arrested in his business, because the 
 annihilation of the exporting business deprived him of all 
 
 18
 
 274 POLITICAL HISTORY [1809. 
 
 means of remittance; and the farmer felt grievously the 
 effects of the restrictive system in the failure of any de- 
 mand for his productions, and in the very great reduction 
 in the price of every article, which could be sold at all, in 
 market. 
 
 The eastern states boldly took the ground that an em- 
 bargo, for an unlimited period of time, veas unconstitu- 
 tional; inasmuch as the constitution merely authorised 
 congress to regulate commerce, but an indefinite embargo 
 v^ras an annihilation of it. 
 
 In addition to all these causes of complaint against the 
 embargo system, there was another, which disgusted some 
 of its original friends. Such was the extent of the Ameri- 
 can coasts, and so numerous were our ports, that it was 
 impossible to enforce the law. Honest men obeyed it, 
 and suffered by it; but the knave evaded it, and pocketed 
 large profits as a reward for his temerity in violating the 
 laws of his country. It was said, and perhaps justly 
 said, that a legislator was bound to know whether a law 
 could, or could not, be executed ; that he merited the 
 condemnation of his constituents, when he enacted a law 
 which the event proved could not be executed ; and that 
 his failing to foresee the event was an evidence of his in- 
 capacity to legislate. 
 
 But no mere argument will produce an effect on the 
 people like actual, palpable pecuniary loss. The mer- 
 chant who fails in business, and the farmer, the pYice of 
 whose wheat, or other article, sinks on his hands to one- 
 half the former price, are extremely apt to charge on the 
 men who manage the affairs of the government their 
 unwelcome reverses of fortune. They readily conclude 
 tliat a change of men can scarcely make things worse, and 
 may make them better. 
 
 Had the federalists confined their opposition to the 
 measures adopted by government to repel the aggressions
 
 1S09.] OF NEW- YORK. 275 
 
 of the European belligerents on our commerce: that is to 
 say, the embargo and non-intercourse lawsj it seems to 
 me they must have carried a majority of the American 
 people; but, unfortunately for their success, they continu- 
 ally insisted that we had little or no cause of complaint 
 against Great Britain, and that France was the principal 
 aggressor. If, then, they contended, America must have 
 a war, it ought to be a war with the French, and not the 
 British. 
 
 This, was a revival of the old coctest of 1798, and of 
 course, roused into action the democratic feeling which 
 operated so intensely on the minds of men during that 
 period. Nay, more, it was calling out the remnant of 
 revolutionary feeling which then existed. Our mothers 
 had taught us in our cradles that the British were our en- 
 emies. It was difficult for the most adroit politician to 
 teach us a different and adverse lesson. 
 
 Still, there were many republicans so disgusted with 
 the restrictive measures, that they abandoned their party. 
 Some respectable Lewisites and Burrites could not be 
 induced again to act with a party, who, in their judgment, 
 had, without any cause, opposed the election of their fa- 
 vorite gubernatorial candidates; and there were, no doubt, 
 many other disappointed applicants for office, who, from 
 resentment, or from having lost all hope of participating 
 in the spoils with the ruling party, sought a change, with 
 the certainty that no change could make their situation 
 worse, but that a revolution of parties might better their 
 condition. 
 
 The republican party were by no means inactive. Pub- 
 lic meetings were held, and the most vigorous efforts were 
 made to sustain the national and state administrations. 
 Legislative addresses, of both parties, were drawn and 
 published, and circulated in every part of the state, but 
 the election finally resulted in the triumph of the federal
 
 276 POLITICAL HISTORY [1809. 
 
 party — the first triumph -whichj as a party, they had 
 achieved, since the year 1799. 
 
 In the assembly the federalists obtained a majority, and 
 in the eastern and western districts federal senators were 
 elected. Israel Carle was elected from the southern, 
 Samuel Haight and Johannus Bruyn from the middle, 
 Daniel Parris and John Stearns from the eastern, and Jo- 
 nas Piatt, Seth Phelps and Amos Hall from the western 
 districts. 
 
 The result of the vote was as follows: — 
 
 Districts. Fed. Blaj. 
 
 Eastern, 534 
 
 Western, 391 
 
 Districts. Rep. Maj. 
 
 Southern, 840 
 
 Middle, 816 
 
 1656 925 
 
 From this statement it appears that the republican ma- 
 jority of freeholders, in the state, was, but seven hundred 
 and thirty-one. 
 
 Gen. Obadiah German was, during the session of 1809, 
 elected senator of the United States, as the successor of 
 Doct. Mitchell. His election was not anticipated. John 
 Tayler, and several other prominent republicans, were spo- 
 ken of as candidates, but the western part of the state 
 claimed that the United States senator should be taken 
 from that quarter, and Gen. German had deservedly ac- 
 quired much influence in the legislature, having been for 
 a considerable time a member. Although an uneducated 
 man, he was distinguished for strong and vigorous intel- 
 lectual powers; while his frank and independent course, 
 as a legislator, secured to him the friendship and respect 
 of his fellow members. Mr. Clinton was said to have 
 been friendly to his nomination and election.
 
 1809.1 OF NEW-YORK. JHl 
 
 CHAPTER XIV. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1809, TO MAY 1, 1810. 
 
 The chief of the French government had stipulated that 
 whenever the British government should rescind their 
 orders in council, as respected the American trade, he 
 would revoke his Berlin and Milan decrees; and in the 
 month of April, Mr. Erskine, the English minister at 
 Washington, had entered into a treaty with the American 
 government, that the orders in council should be repealed 
 on the tenth day of June then next. 
 
 The president immediately issued a proclamation set- 
 ing forth the substance of the treaty, and announcing that 
 the embargo and other restrictive statutes would be re- 
 pealed, according to a proviso contained in those acts, on 
 the same tenth day of June. 
 
 This proclamation was received with great joy all over 
 America; but the republican party, especially, hailed the 
 news with triumph, claiming it as a demonstration of the 
 efficacy of the embargo laws, which the federalists, as co- 
 ercive measures, had so bitterly and unsuccessfully de- 
 nounced. The republicans, with great confidence, ascribed 
 this happy (supposed) termination of our foreign disputes 
 to the firmness and wisdom of the national administration. 
 But the news did not arrive in time to have much effect on 
 the April election. It came to the polls in the town where I 
 then resided and now reside, which is but fifty miles from 
 Albany, on the second day of the election, directed to me 
 in a hand bill form. I instantly made it known, but the 
 federalists denied its truth, and charged it as a sheer elec- 
 tioneering trick. The same course was taken by the fede- 
 ralists at most other polls, in the sta^e where the news ar-
 
 278 POLITICAL HISTORY [1809. 
 
 rived before the election terminated. Many federalists 
 "were undoubtedly sincere in their belief that the procla- 
 mation was forged, for considerable sums of money were 
 lost by bets upon its genuineness. 
 
 The tenth of June was celebrated in most of the cities 
 and counties in the state, as a day of triumph of the re- 
 publican party; but that triumph was of but short dura- 
 tion, for the British government disavowed the authority 
 of Mr. Erskine to enter into such an arrangement, and 
 peremptorily refused to carry into eifect the stipulations 
 of their minister, by a repeal or even the slightest modifi- 
 cation of the orders in council. 
 
 This disavowal was received by the American govern- 
 ment and the republican party in general, with deep in- 
 dignation* and they charged, in no measured terms, the 
 British cabinet with a palpable breach of public and 
 pledged faith. The federalists too, were much mortified 
 and chagrined, for they had all along apologised for every 
 act of Great Britain, but in this instance their ingenuity 
 was severely taxed to invent an excuse for the conduct of 
 Great Britain. They finally settled down upon the plan 
 of charging the president with enteringinto an engagement 
 with Mr. Erskine with a full knowledge that he had no 
 power to make it, and they therefore agreed that the pre- 
 sident and not the British government was culpable. 
 
 The federalists, in order to carry on the war with more 
 vigor, induced Mr. Harry Croswell, a gentleman of talents 
 and great power as a political writer, who had printed and 
 conducted the " Balance" at Hudson for many years, 
 and who we have seen was indicted for a libel on Mr. 
 Jefferson, to remove to Albany and there issue a party 
 paper entitled the " Balance and New-York Journal." 
 
 In the city of New-York, Mr. Cheetham, in the Ameri- 
 can Citizen, continuing to oppose the embargo, that paper 
 declined, and in fact ceased to be recognized as a reoubli-
 
 1809.] OF NEW-YORK. 279 
 
 can paper. To supply its place, Mr. Charles Holt, who 
 had been indicted for sedition in Connecticut under the ad- 
 ministration of Mr. Adams, established a Clintonian repub- 
 lican paper called the Columbian, in the city of New- 
 York. 
 
 Newspapers are to political parties in this country what 
 working tools are to the operative mechanic. I do. not 
 speak this intending any want of respect for party editors. 
 As a class of citizens they are respectable, and many of 
 them possess talents of high order. I merely state the. 
 fact, as an excuse for occupying the time of the reader in 
 this history of parties, in occasional notices of newspapers 
 and their editors. 
 
 A governor was to be elected in April, 1810, and the 
 federalists took an early position in the field. On the 5th 
 of January, a large and respectable meeting was held in 
 Albany, of which Abraham Van Vechten was chairman, 
 and at which Jonas Piatt was nominated for governor. 
 Mr. Piatt was a lawyer, highly respectable for talents, 
 and great purity of character. He was a pioneer in the 
 country west of Albany, for although Whitesborough, his 
 place of residence, is now quite in the interior, and rather 
 easterly of the centre of population in the state, in 1790, 
 or about that time, when Gen. Piatt established himself 
 there, it was a frontier settlement. He had, therefore, 
 grown up and grown great with the great west. Proba- 
 bly the hope of obtaining a strong vote in the old western 
 district, which until the last election had been considered 
 the stronghold of republicanism, was one reason for the 
 selection of a candidate residing in that district, and the 
 unexpected success of Mr. Piatt, in his election as senator, 
 was proof of his personal popularity, and indicated him 
 as the most suitable candidate residing in that quarter, for 
 the office of governor
 
 280 POLITICAL HISTORY [1810. 
 
 Nicholas Fish was afterwards nominated as the federal 
 candidate for lieutenant governor. 
 
 The legislature met on the 30th of January. Gen. 
 William North, of Duansburgh, was the federal candidate 
 for speaker, and chosen over William Livingston, the 
 democratic candidate, by a vote of fifty-seven to forty- 
 three, showing a federal majority in the assembly of four- 
 teen. 
 
 The governor in his speech reviewed the controversy 
 of the United States with the belligerents of Europe, 
 pointed out the injuries which this country had sustained 
 by a violation of its neutral rights, and justified the course 
 pursued by the general administration. He spoke favora- 
 bly of the success of the experiment then being made by 
 domestic manufacturies, and he recommended legislative 
 encouragement of the companies engaged in them. He 
 urged the attention of the legislature to the common 
 shool fund, and he concluded by recommending harmony 
 and unanimity of action. 
 
 When parties in a legislative body are nearly equally 
 divided, a recommendation of unity and harmony is em- 
 phatically " words, words, words," and nothing else. 
 
 The assembly forthwith proceeded to the choice of a 
 council of appointment, and Israel Carl of the southern, 
 Robert Williams of the middle, Daniel Parris of the east- 
 ern, and Amos Hall of the western districts were elected. 
 Mr. Parris and Gen. Hall, were federalists, but Mr. Wil- 
 liams was elected to the senate as a republican. There 
 was not at that time a single federalist in the senate from 
 either the southern or middle districts. Hence the ma- 
 jority in the assembly were compelled to choose senators, 
 for members of the council from those districts, who 
 were elected as republicans. Mr. Carl was frank and 
 decided, and possessed a character for sincerity and firm- 
 ness which excluded all suspicion that he would swerve
 
 1810.1 OP NEW-YORK 281 
 
 from an honorable republican, course. Not so with Mr. 
 Williams. He had been wavering in his politics, and 
 had alternately been a Burrite, Lewisite and Clinto- 
 nian. He was, in fact, suspected to be a political huck- 
 ster,his subsequent conduct proved him to be such. He 
 had, however, carefully concealed his intentions from the 
 political friends with whom he professed to act, so much 
 so, that after his election many republicans had full confi- 
 dence that he would be true to their interest; but upon 
 the first meeting of the council, on the second day of 
 February, all doubts were removed, and Mr. Williams 
 fully exhibited the political character which he meant there- 
 after to assume. At that first meeting, the attorney general, 
 secretary of state, recorder of Albany, mayor, recorder, 
 district attorney and surrogate of New-York, were re- 
 moved, and Abraham Van Vechten was appointed attor- 
 ney general J Daniel Hale, secretary of state j Theodore 
 V. W. Graham, recorder of Albany; Jacob RadclifF, 
 mayor of "New-York; J. O. Hoffman, recorder; C. D. 
 Colden, district attorney, and John W. Mulligan, surro- 
 gate of New- York. The surrogate of Dutchess county, 
 James Talmadge, was removed, and Thomas J. Oakley, the 
 son-in-law of Mr. Williams, but a young lawyer of high- 
 ly respectable talents and character, was appointed in his 
 place. Several minor removals and appointments were 
 also made this day. 
 
 The indignation of the republicans against Williams 
 was everywhere intense, but in no part of the state was 
 that indignation nearer bursting forth into open outrage 
 than in his own district. The very friends who exerted 
 their influence, employed their time and expended their 
 money to procure his election, were those who, by his 
 casting vote, were ejected from oflicc — office upon the 
 emoluments of which some of them depended for the sup- 
 port of their families. He was stigmatized as a traitor
 
 282 POLITICAL HISTORY [1810. 
 
 and labeled as a Judas Iscariot. Who would purchase 
 short-lived power at such a price? Mr. Williams, though 
 a man of considerable activityj address and enterprise, 
 after he ceased to be a member of the council, was neglect- 
 ed by all parties, and was never afterwards heard of in 
 political life. His fate should operate as a beacon to 
 young politicians. The public are too just to condemn 
 any individual for his political opinions, provided he ex- 
 presses them frankly and supports them fairly. It is con- 
 cealment, hypocrisy and treachery, which are in politics 
 the unpardonable sin, a sin which merits and generally 
 receives a condemnation which is perpetual. 
 
 This council was purely federal, unembarrassed with 
 the scruples or timidity which crippled the action of the 
 council of which Lewis was president in 1807. It was 
 very thorough, and as a Washington newspaper editor at 
 a late day would have said, " searching'^ in its operations. 
 Clerks of counties, sheriffs, district attorneys, judges of 
 courts of common pleas, surrogates, and justices of the 
 peace, were generally made to feel its power. 
 
 The assembly very properly passed a bill re-appointing 
 Abraham G. Lansing as treasurer, in which the senate 
 concurred. 
 
 On the 5th of February, a legislative caucus of the re- 
 publican members was held, at which Tompkins and 
 Broome were nominated for re-election. The address 
 was drawn by De Witt Clinton, and signed by all the repub- 
 lican members of the legislature, and several citizens who 
 happened to be in attendance. The whole number of 
 signers of the address was one hundred and thirty-six. 
 
 The answer reported in the assembly to the governor's 
 speech, was severe, almost to indecorum. It attacked 
 with great asperity the national administration. It charged, 
 that we had more cause of war with France than Great
 
 1810.] OF NEW-YORK. 283 
 
 Britain, and that the government had not pursued an im- 
 partial course towards the belligerentSi 
 
 A substitute responsive to the governor's speech was 
 offered by Doct. Mitchell from New-York. An able and 
 widely extended debate ensued, conducted principally on 
 the federal side by Messrs. Van Vechten, Cady and 
 Grosvenor. The gentleman last mentioned, was a new 
 member from Columbia county, who, as a member of the 
 New- York legislature, and afterwards as a member of con- 
 gress, distinguished himself as one of the most splendid 
 orators of the age. His life, though brilliant, was short. 
 He died while a member of congress in 1817. 
 
 On the republican side of the house, the debate was 
 carried on principally by Doct. Mitchell, Roger Skinner 
 of Washington county, D. L. Van Antwerp of Schenec- 
 tady, and O. P. Comstock of Seneca county, a son of the 
 worthy Adam Comstock of Saratoga county. 
 
 I happened to be present and heard the speech of Doct. 
 Mitchell. His argument afforded evidence of much read- 
 ing, considerable ability, and great benevolence of heart; 
 and yet we thought it smelt of the shop, for in speaking 
 of preparations for war, and the resources of this coun- 
 try, he had occasion to state that an abundance of salt 
 petre might be found among us. This led him to give 
 the history of the discovery of the art of making gun- 
 powder, and the chemical laws which governed that pro- 
 cess, so that before the good Doctor was aware of it, he 
 appeared entirely to have forgotten the orders in council, 
 the Berlin and Milan decrees, and the federal and republi- 
 can parties, and was transferred to his chemical laboratory, 
 delivering a lecture to his students on the affinities of 
 bodies. The address, as reported by the select committee, 
 was finally carried by a vote of fifty-nine to forty-six. 
 
 In the senate, a select committee had reported an an- 
 swer to the governor's speech, responsive to it, for which
 
 284 POLITICAL HISTORY [1810. 
 
 Gen. Piatt offered a substitute, which was supported by 
 himself and Mr. Parris, with considerable ability. They 
 were answered by Mr. Clinton and Judge Tayler. The 
 course of argument pursued by Mr. Clinton and Judge 
 Tayler, tended to charge on the federalists an over wean- 
 ing attachment to Great Britain, and indeed they accused 
 them with taking sides with the British against their own 
 country. I heard Mr. Tayler's speech, and in the course 
 of it, or rather towards the close, probably in order to 
 keep alive the revolutionary prejudices against the British, 
 he gave a detailed account of their negotiations with the 
 Indians, about the time of the commencement of the war 
 of the revolution, and which resulted in an agreement be- 
 tween the parties, that the Indians should become the al- 
 lies of the British; and he thence charged the English 
 with being responsible for the depredations and murders 
 committed by the savages. Mr. Tayler then proceeded 
 to give an account of the patriotic services and great sa- 
 crifices and sufferings of Mr. Parris the father of the 
 senator, during the revolutionary war, and finally of his 
 treacherous and barbarous murder by the Indians. " And 
 now," said Mr. Tayler, " I am surprised and grieved to 
 see the son of my beloved venerated revolutionary friend 
 in this senate pleading the British cause." 
 
 Mr. Parris, who was a man of high and honorable feel- 
 ings, was much excited, and replied with great asperity 
 to Mr. Tayler. 
 
 Judge Tayler was a man of great tact and discernment, 
 and I give this part of his speech to show the kind of ar- 
 gument resorted to and the feeling called out in this poli- 
 tical contest. 
 
 The substitute of Gen. Piatt was rejected in the senate 
 by a vote of twenty-three to six. 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the 6th day of Apnij 
 without having passed any important general laws.
 
 1810.] OF NEW-YORK. 285 
 
 The annual election, as usual when a governor was to 
 be elected, was sharply contested; but the circumstances 
 under which this election was held, were calculated to 
 call into action an uncommon degree of zeal. The great 
 question as to the merits of the measures of the national 
 government, was of immense importance, and was to 
 be passed on by the people, but this was not all, nor 
 perhaps so much the immediate cause of the high excite- 
 ment, as the fact that the federalists had just got a taste 
 of the loaves and fishes, and the republicans had been 
 recently ejected. Indeed, it was a life and death ques- 
 tion with the federalists. If they could elect Gen. Piatt, 
 they could retain the power of which they had had barely 
 time to taste. If Tompkins should be elected they were 
 prostrated for an indefinite period of time. No wonder 
 then they struggled as it were for life. On the other 
 hand, the republicans had been recently ejected from office, 
 which only sharpened their appetite for power, and their 
 zeal in the contest was quickened by resentment against 
 the party who had overthrown them. Contrary to the 
 expectations of both parties, the republicans were not only 
 successful, but their success was complete. They achiev- 
 ed an entire and complete overthrow of their opponents. 
 Tompkins was re-elected by about ten thousand majority 
 The republican candidates for the senate succeeded in all 
 the four districts, and in the assembly the republicans had 
 a majority of almost two to one. The only gain of the 
 federalists in the assembly was in the city of New-York, 
 where the election was very close, six federalists and five 
 republicans having been elected from that city. 
 
 The senators elected this year from the southern dis- 
 trict, were Ebenezer White; from the middle, James W. 
 Wilkin and Morgan Lewis; from the eastern, Henry 
 Yates, Jr.; from the western, Nathan Smith, Reuben 
 Humphrey, Henry ATownsend and Philetus Swift.
 
 286 POLITICAL HISTORY. [1810. 
 
 It may perhaps, surprise the young reader to be inform- 
 ed that the name of Gov. Lewis as a candidate for the 
 legislature was on the same ticket that contained the name 
 of Gov. Tompkins, and that the same party w^hich three 
 years before opposed the election of Mr. Lewis, and sup- 
 ported his more successful rival, now advocated the elec- 
 tion of both. But such nevertheless was the fact. 
 
 Whether Gov. Lewis from his own reflection, and from 
 the persuasion of his friends, of the Livingston family, 
 had been induced to take this course from a calculation 
 that this was the best means of regaining political power, 
 or whether, although he did " hate Tompkins less, he 
 hated Clinton more," and supposed this course would af- 
 ford him the greatest certainty of eventually prostrating 
 Mr. Clinton, or whether he had taken his resolution from 
 a sense of duty and motives of patriotism, or whether he 
 "was operated upon partially by all these considerations, 
 I leave to the speculations of judicious readers. As a 
 general rule, indeed, as a uniform invariable rule, I think 
 when a man acts right, he ought to be presumed to act 
 from right motives, unless the contrary appears. 
 
 The causes of this overwhelming defeat of the federal- 
 ists may be, 
 
 First, the change by congress of the embargo for the 
 non-intercourse system. The embargo was always un- 
 popular. If it was a prudent, it nevertheless seemed to 
 the people a timid policy. By it we were compelled to 
 remain inactive w'hile the inhabitants of all other parts of 
 the globe were in motion. This state of things was not 
 suited to the feelings and genius and enterprising spirit of 
 the American people. While the embargo continued the 
 government was felt by business men as a kind of incu- 
 bus, restraining their action and paralyizing their energies, 
 but when relieved from it, although a non-intercourse was 
 substituted, men felt relieved from a weight which had
 
 1810.] OF ?JE'.v-YOR!r. 287 
 
 borne them down, and the air which they breathed seemed 
 freer. 
 
 Second, as might have been anticipated, the hostile 
 feeling against Great Britain increased. Impressions 
 made on us in our infancy were revived, by supposed or 
 real injuries received from a nation against whom we had 
 imbibed prejudices from the breasts of our mothers. 
 These feelings were rendered active, and embittered by 
 the refusal of the British to carry into effect the treaty 
 made by their accredited agent and envoy, Mr. Erskine. 
 
 To these causes may be added the influence of the pa- 
 tronage of the general government, wielded by that very 
 discreet and judicious statesman, James Madison. What- 
 ever changes might be produced in the state of New- York, 
 the most sanguine federalists did not indulge the hope of 
 electing a federal president for many years to come. Cal- 
 culating politicians therefore, could not fail of perceiving 
 that the republican side for the office-seeker was the safest 
 side. I of course, do not mention this last cause as one 
 operating on the great mass of either of the two great 
 parties, for I believe that an immense majority of both 
 were governed in their political action by a desire to sup- 
 port such men and measures as they believed would be 
 most likely to advance the prosperity, secure the indepen- 
 dence, and perpetuate the institutions of the country. 
 There is, however, in this as in all other countries, a por- 
 tion of the population who are governed by other and 
 more selfish considerations. Hence, in accounting for ma- 
 jorities, we are compelled to seek for the motives of action 
 which governed this class or portion of our population. 
 
 It is fortunate, however, that so long as the great mass 
 of both parties are honest in their intentions, there is no 
 reason to apprehend very serious detriment to the repub- 
 lic, should this unprincipled selfish portion of the commu- 
 nity throw themselves into either scale.
 
 288 POLITICAL mSTOilY [ISll. 
 
 ♦ CHAPTER XV. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1810, TO MAY 1, 1811. 
 
 The entire predominance secured to the republican 
 party, in all the branches of the state government, seemed 
 rather to increase than diminish the industry and activity 
 of the Martling men, in the personal vrar they were 
 waging, in the city of New-York, against Mr. Clinton. 
 From the spirit with which they conducted their attacks, 
 there can be little doubt but they were assured, by some 
 of the members of Mr. Madison's administration, of their 
 countenance and support. This combination against him, 
 Mr. Clinton appears, at this time, to have regarded with 
 indifference, if not with contempt. As a politician it was 
 one of his defects, more fully afterwards evinced in his 
 subsequent conduct, that he was too apt to under estimate 
 the power and means of annoyance of his opponents. 
 
 During this summer, in the month of August, Lieutenant 
 Governor Broome departed this life, leaving vacant the 
 office to which he had been elected at the last annual 
 election. 
 
 The legislature met on the 29th January, 1811. Nathan 
 Sanford, of New- York, was chosen speaker of the assem- 
 bly, by a vote of sixty-four to thirty-three, against the 
 federal candidate. Stephen North, of Delaware county, 
 was elected clerk, over Mr. James Van Ingen, the federal 
 candidate. The vote on this question stood sixty-four to 
 thirty-seven. 
 
 The governor's speech was chiefly occupied by remarks 
 on the foreign affairs of this country; but he again urged 
 the protection and encouragement of domestic manuafac- 
 tures, as the only means of rendering the state and nation
 
 1811.] OF NEW- YORK. 289 
 
 truly independent, and he also again invited the attention 
 of the legislature to the common school fund. On the 
 next day after the organization of the two houses, the 
 assembly elected a council of appointment. Benjamin 
 Coe, of the southern; James W. Wilkin, of the middle; 
 John McLean, of the eastern; and Philetus Swift, of the 
 western districts, were chosen. This council, at the first 
 time of their meeting, which was on the first day of Feb- 
 ruary, undid almost every important thing which had been 
 done by the preceding council. 
 
 Mr. Hildreth was re-appointed attorney general; Mr. 
 Jenkins secretary of state; Mr. Clinton was made mayor 
 of New- York; and John Van Ness Yates, who had been 
 removed to make a place for Mr. Graham, was restored 
 to the office of recorder of Albany. The federalists who 
 were last year appointed to office in the city of New-York, 
 were all removed, and the former incumbents restored to 
 the offices they had respectively occupied. 
 
 This council, in the course of their operations, produced 
 an entire change of officers throughout the state, from the 
 highest to the lowest, at any rate in all those cases where 
 their immediate predecessors had made appointments. 
 But in truth, the public mind had become so accustomed 
 to see men ejected from office on account of their opinions, 
 that such changes ceased to be matter of surprise, or to 
 produce any excitement. I cannot now refrain from 
 noticing one little act of the council which, even in these 
 times, seems to me quite contemptible. They removed 
 Gerrit Y. Lansing, a young gentleman of great respecta- 
 bility, and who, since, for a number of years, represented 
 the county of Albany in the congress of the United States, 
 from the petty office of master in chancery, probably for 
 no other ostensible reason than that he had been chosen 
 clerk of the assembly during the administration of Gov. 
 
 Lewis. 
 
 19
 
 290 POt,lTlCAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 On the 14th February, the health of Mr. Sanford was 
 so much impaired that he was compelled to resign his 
 office of speaker, and Willam Ross, of Orange county, was 
 chosen to fill his place. 
 
 The charter of the United States Bank expired this 
 year, and an attempt was made to re-charter it, A bill 
 for that purpose, passed the house of representatives, after 
 a long and interesting debate; but it was rejected in the 
 senate by the casting vote of the vice-president, George 
 Clinton. He assigned briefly the reason of his vote, which 
 was, that inasmuch as the power to create corporations 
 was not expressly granted to congress, it was reserved, 
 and the chartering of a bank was therefore unconstitutional. 
 " In the course of a long life, said the venerable man, " I 
 have found that government is not to be strengthened by 
 an assumption of doubtful powers; but by a wise and en- 
 ergetic execution of those powers which are incontestible." 
 
 Whether his vote was right or wrong, is a question I do 
 not propose to discuss, but I cannot refrain from declaring 
 that the sentiment, with which he concluded his remarks, 
 is perfectly just, and ought to be deeply impressed on the 
 mind of every statesman.* 
 
 The bill incorporating the Mechanics and Farmers 
 Bank of the city of Albany, was passed, ostensibly for the 
 benefit and accommodation of the mechanics and middling 
 interest of that city. Accordingly, the president of the 
 institution, and a majority of the directors, were, by the 
 original charter, required to be practical mechanics.! Mr. 
 
 * The above was written in 1840. Since that time, this part of Vice-Presiden* 
 Clinton's remarks have been often quoted in the nowspapers, and, I am informed, 
 that Mr. Allen, who edits the "Madisonian," a Washington paper, has asserted 
 that a gentleman, then a member of the United Slates senate, was the author of 
 the sentence. It maybe so; but if so, the fact ought to be proved before it receives 
 general credence. It would require strong evidence to convince me that George 
 Clinton borrowed the words or ideas of any man. If the allegation-be not true, 
 this attempt to rob the mighty dead deserves the indignation and contempt of every 
 honorable man. 
 
 t By an act passed March 21, 1836, the charter was altered, and the stockhold-
 
 1811.] OF NEW- YORK. 291 
 
 Southwick was the first president. This gentleman was 
 now in the zenith of his power and prosperity. He con- 
 trolled the Albany Register, which at that time, possessed 
 a most commanding influence over the democratic New- 
 York public. He was prepossessing in his appearance 
 and generous in his nature, and was all but worshipped 
 by the republican members of the legislature. He was 
 printer to the state, and the state patronage that year, by 
 means of the insolvent notices growing out of a law 
 passed during the session of 1811, was throwing into his 
 coffers gold in unmeasured quantities,and now the influence 
 and power of a popular bank was placed in his hands. 
 We shall see how soon all these advantages, and all his 
 flattering prospects and high hopes vanished, and " left 
 not a wreck behind." 
 
 The legislature also passed an act, in the early part of 
 the session, for the election of a lieutenant governor, in 
 lieu of the deceased Lieut. Gov. Broome. Shortly after 
 the passage of this act, and on the 14th March, at a legis- 
 lative republican caucus, at which Wm. W. Gilbert was 
 chairman, and Jasper Hopper secretary, De Witt Clinton 
 was nominated to be supported for the successor of Mr. 
 Broome, as the report of the proceedings of the meeting, 
 contained in the Register, states, hy a large majority. An 
 address was issued on the occasion, signed by seventy- 
 three republican members. 
 
 What were the motives which induced Mr. Clinton to 
 desire or accept this nomination 1 He was mayor of the 
 great city of New-York, from which, he no doubt, at that 
 time, derived emoluments equal to fouteen thousand dol- 
 lars. To accept the office of lieutenant governor ^ under 
 Daniel D. Tompkins as goveryior^ was, in name at least, 
 
 •T8 were authorized to elect any of their members directors, and the directort 
 can lawfully elect such persoa for president as they may think proper, irrespect- 
 ive of his profession or occupation.
 
 292 POLITICAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 and in the eye of distant spectators, admitting himself to 
 be of far less political consequence than Mr. Tompkins — 
 an admission, it is to be presumed, he was by no means 
 ready to make. Besides, the station of lieutenant gover- 
 nor did not, ex-qfficioy confer on him any political power. 
 
 But it is probable that Mr. Clinton believed that his 
 presence at Albany, during the session of the legislature, 
 and a personal intercourse with the members, was abso- 
 lutely necessary in order to enable him to retain his as- 
 cendancy with the governing party. This object might 
 have been better accomplished by his continuance in the 
 senate as a member of that body. In this capacity he 
 could, with propriety, lead off on all the great and most 
 popular measures of the party, and, at his option, take 
 part in the discussions, and by the publication of his 
 speeches, always have an opportunity of presenting his 
 views to the public, without the mortification of continu- 
 ally presenting himself, officially at least, as an inferior to 
 Mr. Tompkins. He, therefore, must have preferred a seat 
 in the senate to the office of lieutenant governor. 
 
 If, then, we conclude that Mr. Clinton believed, and 
 perhaps correctly believed, that his personal attendance 
 at Albany was absolutely necessary, to enable him to 
 defeat the machinations of his enemies, and retain his 
 influence in the state, and that, for that purpose, a seat in 
 the senate was more desirable than the office of lieutenant 
 governor, the inference is most manifest that he would 
 have sought a re-election as senator, had he not have be- 
 come convinced that he could not be nominated and sup- 
 ported by the republicans of the southern district. That 
 such was, in truth, the state of feeling among the majority 
 of the republicans of that district, is evident from the de- 
 velopments which were made immediately after Mr. 
 Clinton's nomination at Albany. 
 
 No sooner did the news of Mr. Clinton's nomination
 
 1811.] OF NEW- YORK. 293 
 
 reach New-York, than the Martling men put themselves 
 in motion with great spirit and energy. A meeting was 
 forthwith got up, in Martling's long room, at a public 
 house fronting the Park, called Tammany Hall, which 
 was claimed as the democratic head quarters for the city 
 of New-York. Mr. Teunis Wortman, who was the pro- 
 tegee of Mr. Clinton during the struggle with Col. Burr, 
 was one of the most busy spirits in gathering and exciting 
 the opposition on this occasion. At this meeting, Mangle 
 Minthorne, the father-in-law of Governor Tompkins, pre- 
 sided, and John Bingham was secretary. They adopted 
 a preamble which set forth that they believed Mr. Clinton 
 was cherishing interests distinct and separate from the 
 general interest of the republican party, and " determined 
 to establish in his person a pernicious family aristocracyj 
 that devotion to his person had been, in a great measure, 
 made the exclusive test of merit, and the only passport to 
 promotion;''^ that the meeting had strong reasons to be- 
 lieve he opposed the election of Mr. Madison to the pre- 
 sidency of the United States; and that they could no 
 longer consider him a member of the republican party. 
 The meeting then proceeded to nominate Col. Marinus 
 Willet as the republican candidate for lieutenant governor, 
 and appointed Dr. Saml. L. Mitchell, Teunis Wortman, 
 Matthew L. Davis, John Ferguson, and others, a commit- 
 tee to promote the election of their candidate. Col. Wil- 
 let had been an officer of great merit during the revolu- 
 tionary war, and in private life he was regarded as an 
 amiable and meritorious citizen. In his politics, however, 
 he had been wavering. He was inclined to support the 
 Burr faction, and was, it will be recollected, a partizan of 
 Lewis, and was appointed mayor of New-York, on the 
 removal of De Witt Clinton, by the same council who had 
 given so much offence to the republican party. It is not 
 a little singular that this meeting, whose object was to
 
 294 POLITICAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 defeat a regular state caucus nominationjin their preamble, 
 avow their approbation of the practice of, and their deter- 
 mination to support, caucus nominations. 
 
 Mr. Nathan Sanford was an open and avowed adherent 
 to the Martling men, and w^as subsequently nominated, 
 through their influence, to be supported as the successor 
 of Mr. Clinton, as senator from the southern district. Mr. 
 Sanford, at that time, held, under Mr. Madison, the office 
 of United States district attorney of New.York — an office 
 ■which produced him annually, on an average, more than 
 thirty thousand dollars. Mr. Sanford was a prudent man. 
 Would he have publicly identified himself wuth the Mart- 
 ling men had he not been well assured that the proceed- 
 ings of those men were approved by Mr. Madison 1 
 
 A counter meeting was, about this time, held by the 
 republican Clintonians in New-York, at the Union Hotel, 
 at which Arthur Smith was chairman, and Hector Craig 
 secretary, the object of which was to pass resolutions 
 approving of the nomination of Mr. Clinton; but the 
 Martling men rushed in upon them, and the meeting was 
 broken up in confusion. 
 
 The federalists nominated and supported Nicholas Fish 
 as their candidate for lieutenant governor. 
 
 Notwithstanding the vigorous efforts made by the Mart- 
 ling men, among whom were many gentlemen of great 
 weight of character and influence, to detach from Mr. 
 Clinton the support of his republican friends, such was the 
 respect for his talents, and confidence in his integrity, 
 entertained by the republicans of the country, that little 
 impression was made upon them. 
 
 During this year the mode by which the republican 
 party selected their candidates for the senate was changed. 
 Heretofore the republican members of the assembly, from 
 each senatorial district, met in caucus, and by a majority 
 of votes designated the candidate. This mode of nomina-
 
 1811.] or NEW-YOKK. 295 
 
 tion was found to be very justly objectionable. The 
 voice of those republicans who happened to reside in 
 counties represented by federalists was not heard, at any 
 rate they had no means of causing their influence to be 
 felt in the selection ofpersonsfor whom they were to vote 
 for the important office of a senator; and the long resi- 
 dence of the members of assembly, from a given district, 
 at Albany, and continued and frequent association together, 
 seemed calculated to lead to cabal and intrigue in the 
 selection of such persons, as candidates for the senate, 
 more suited to the gratification of the individual views and 
 interests of the members, than acceptable to the great 
 body of the democratic party. Instead, therefore, of this 
 mode of nomination, delegates were hereafter chosen by a 
 county meeting of delegates, who were themselves chosen 
 by that portion of the people in the respective towns, who 
 were republicans, at their primary meetings. 
 
 The election, in April, does not seem to have been very 
 warmly contested in any other part of the state but the 
 city of New-York. In that city and county, Mr. Clinton 
 received but five hundred and ninety, and Col. Willet six 
 hundred and seventy-eight, while the federal candidate, 
 Mr. Fish, received two thousand and forty-four votes: 
 being nearly two to one of the aggregate vote cast for 
 Clinton and Willet. The result of this election showed 
 very clearly the little strength that remained to Mr. Clin- 
 ton among the New-York republicans, and it also proves 
 that so anxious were the Martling men to defeat Mr. C. 
 that a majority of them actually voted for the federal 
 candidate, Mr. Fish. By this vote they exhibited this 
 most palpable absurdity — 
 
 They opposed the election of Mr. Clinton because they 
 alleged he was secretly aiding the federal interest, and to 
 carry out this opposition they voted for a federalist ! The 
 federalists carried their assembly ticket in New- York by
 
 296 POLITICAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 a majority of more than fourteen hundred. Their success 
 was unquestionably owing to the collisions among the 
 republicans. Indeed, it is not improbable that many of 
 the Clintonians voted the federal assembly ticket, as the 
 persons put in nomination by the democratic party for the 
 assembly, were all, or nearly all of them, the most bitter 
 and uncompromising enemies of Mr. Clinton. 
 
 Among the federal gentlemen elected, were Samuel 
 Jones, jun., afterwards chancellor, now chief justice of 
 the superior court of the city, and Peter W. Radcliff. 
 
 The general result of the state election was favorable to 
 the democratic party. Of the members of the assembly 
 elected, seventy-three were republicans, and thirty-nine 
 were federalists. 
 
 The following persons, all republicans, were elected to 
 the senate. Nathan Sanford, from the southern} William 
 Taber and Erastus Root, from the middlej John Tayler, 
 Rugglcs Hubbard, Ketchel Bishop and Elisha Arnold, 
 from the eastern; and Casper M. Rouse, from the western 
 districts.
 
 1811.] OF NEW-YORK. 297 
 
 CHAPTER XVI. 
 
 fROM MAY 1, 1811, TO MAY 1, 1812. 
 
 The political year on which we now enter, was one in 
 which two important projects were formed, and in the at- 
 tempt to execute which, great alterations were produced 
 in the condition of political parties, and in the personal 
 standing and influence of several distinguished individuals 
 in the state of New-York. The one was the support of 
 De Witt Clinton in opposition to Mr. Madison for the 
 presidency, and the other the chartering of the Bank of 
 America, with a capital of six millions of dollars. 
 
 The difficulties between America and Great Britain in- 
 stead of having been compromised had gone on for years 
 increasing. In addition to the war made by that power 
 upon our neutral commerce, it claimed the right of search- 
 ing our merchant vesselsj and if sailors or other persons 
 were found there, who were British subjects, of impress- 
 ing them and compelling them to serve in the British 
 navy. 
 
 This practice constituted a subaltern officer of the Bri- 
 tish Navy, the sole judge of who was and who was not 
 an American citizen. It was not only vexatious but de- 
 rogatory to our national flag and national honor. 
 
 To these outrages upon our commercial and personal 
 rights, Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison had opposed em- 
 bargo and non-intercourse laws, and many very learned 
 and able arguments, going to show that according to 
 Vattel and other approved writers on the law of nations, 
 we were right and the British were wrong. 
 
 The course Mr. Madison pursued was deemed too dila- 
 tory and inefficient by many of the most ardent democrats.
 
 298 POLITICAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 They thought the character and honor of the nation 
 demanded a more decided and energetic action on the 
 part of the national government. Some of Mr. Madi- 
 son's "warmest friends from the south and west became 
 extremely impatient and restive; and even Mr. Clay 
 was said to have threatened to abandon him unless he 
 would resort to more vigorous and warlike measures. 
 Mr. Clinton's friends in this state had great confidence 
 in his talents, and especially in his energy of character. 
 It was, probably, more for this than any other reason, that 
 some of them expressed a wish to see him elevated to the 
 executive chair of the Union. Mr. Clinton no doubt, more 
 readily listened to these suggestions in consequence of the 
 personal hostility that Mr. Madison had, as he believed, 
 shown towards him. Whatever the motive may have been, 
 I have no manner of doubt, that Mr. Clinton, as early as 
 the summer of 1811, had determined upon taking the 
 field for the presidential office at the next term. 
 
 On this occasion, as on many others, Mr. Clinton af- 
 forded evidence of a lamentable defect in his character as 
 a politician. That defect was this: a neglect to cast about 
 for means for the accomplishment of his end. His objects 
 ■were always magnificent, his ends were always such as 
 evinced an elevated and lofty mind, but he did not seem 
 to be aware of the necessity of providing ways and means 
 to accomplish those ends. 
 
 How was he to be made president? Was it by the re- 
 publican party? If so, according to the existing common 
 law of the party, he must have a nomination by a con- 
 gressional caucus. Could he obtain that nomination ? 
 He does not appear to have made any serious effort to do 
 so. Indeed the attempt itself would have been fool-har- 
 diness. Mr. Madison, a man of talents, of pure morals, 
 himself being on the spot, wielding the patronage of the 
 nation, could any reasonable man think of detaching a
 
 1811.] OF NEW-YORK. 299 
 
 majority of his political friends, so decidedly from him 
 as to declare open war upon him by refusing to give him 
 a second nomination ? 
 
 Could Clinton hope to succeed against the admitted 
 views of the whole south, and against a regular republican 
 caucus nomination, without bringing to his aid the support 
 of the whole federal partyl If he could obtain that sup- 
 port, had he not the best possible reason to apprehend 
 that nearly all his republican friends would abandon him'? 
 It might happen, as in truth it did happen, that a consi- 
 derable portion of his political friends in this state, from 
 personal respect for him, and confidence in him, would ad- 
 here to him; but did it not occur to him, that he himself 
 had denounced the leaders of the federalists as men of 
 such vaulting ambition that they had rather " reign in hell, 
 than serve in heaven," and that this denunciation had been 
 rung in the ears of every freeman in the United States? 
 When the great mass of the republicans in the nation saw 
 him acting in concert with a party he had thus denounced, 
 had he not reason to believe they would withdraw from 
 him their support, and treat him as an enemy? It is 
 hardly possible but that these considerations must have 
 forced themselves into his mind. It is, however, too easy 
 for a man to persuade himself that what he ardently wishes 
 should be, will be. 
 
 It is not improbable to me that the ardor of his ambi- 
 tion hurried him into a determination to engage in this 
 contest without any regular or fixed scheme of action. 
 
 The other project to which I allude, was the plan of 
 establishing a great bank in the city of New-York. 
 
 The refusal to re-charter the Bank of the United States; 
 had thrown back into the hands of the stockholders, a 
 large amount of uninvested cash capital; and by this time 
 it began to be perceived that the city of New- York and 
 not Philadelphia, was destined to be the great commercial
 
 300 POLITICAL HISTORY [1811. 
 
 emporium of North America. This opinion led enter- 
 prising and speculating men, as well as many capitalists, 
 to project the establishment of a great moneyed institution 
 in New-York, with a capital of six millions of dollars. 
 An association for the purpose of procuring a charter for 
 such a bank was soon formed, and they early commenced 
 their operations. They knew that the republican mem- 
 bers of the legislature would foresee that the majority of the 
 stock, and the consequent control of this gigantic institu- 
 tion, would fall into the hands of their political oppo- 
 nents; and they must have anticipated the jealousy and 
 fearful apprehensions which would be entertained by all 
 the other banks of the state, of the power of a company 
 which was to wield so immense and formidable a capital. 
 The projectors believed, and correctly believed, that 
 leading federal politicians would support their application, 
 for the same reason that they anticipated opposition from 
 the republican party. They knew that intelligent men of 
 both parties were fully aware of the truth of the position 
 that money is power. They therefore assumed, and the 
 eventjustified the assumption, that they should have the 
 support of the federal members of the legislature. It 
 was for this reason that their principal attention was 
 directed to the republican members elect. To secure 
 them, or a portion of them, in favor of their project, they 
 early enlisted as their agent David Thomas, a gentleman 
 who had been long a member of congress, a zealous re- 
 publican from the year 1798, whom we have seen at that 
 time an efficient member of the assembly, and who lately 
 had been turned out of the office of state treasurer, by 
 the united action of the federalists and Lewisites, in 
 consequence, it was said, of his adherence to the republi- 
 can party. Could such a man be suspected of a want of 
 fidelity to the cause of republicanism? Besides, Gen. 
 Thomas was a silent, cautious man, artful, sagacious, and
 
 1811.] OF NEW- YORK. 301 
 
 possessed of a deep knowledge of men. Gen. Thomas, 
 during the summer of 1811, found it convenient to make 
 an extensive tour through the south-western part of the 
 state, and as he was universally known to be a leading re- 
 publican, he was naturally brought in contact with the re- 
 publican members elected to the next legislature, in nearly 
 every county through which he passed. Some of his com- 
 munications with them will be seen in the disclosures of 
 Casper M. Rouse, which will be detailed in another place. 
 The other prominent agent residing in the interior of the 
 state, whom the company selected and employed, was Solo- 
 mon SouTHwicK. He, as has been before remarked, control- 
 led the paper at the seat of government, which, if not the 
 dictator, was the accredited organ of the democratic party 
 in the state. Though not the silent, cautious, plotting man 
 that Gen. Thomas was, he was, as I have before remarked, 
 exceedingly fascinating in his address, ardent in his pur- 
 suits, and almost irresistible in his persuasive powers. 
 He too, was known to be the devoted and confidential 
 friend of De Witt Clinton. These, with other subordi- 
 nate agents, were the men on whom the company relied 
 to bring to their aid a sufficient portion of the republican 
 party to render their application successful. 
 
 I have omitted to mention that on the 8th day of April, 
 1811, the legislature passed an act appointing Gov. Mor- 
 ris, Stephen Van Rensselaer, De Witt Clinton, William 
 North, Simeon De Witt, Thomas Eddy, Peter B. Porter, 
 Robert R. Livingston, and Robert Fulton, commissioners 
 for taking into consideration all matters relating to inland 
 navigation. These commissioners were authorized to 
 make application to congress, or any state or territory, and 
 request them to co-operate with New- York in the project 
 of improving the navigation between the tide waters of 
 Hudson's river and the great western lakes, to accept of 
 donations from individuals or companies for the promotion
 
 302 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 of the object in view, and to ascertain whether loans 
 could be effected on advantageous terms upon the credit 
 of the state. This was the commencement of the canal 
 policy in New-York. It is evident, from running one's 
 eye over the names of the commissioners, that it was not 
 a party measure. The bill was passed by the combined 
 efforts of Mr. Clinton and Gen. Piatt in the senate, and 
 by the support of enlightened and liberal men of both 
 parties in the assembly. 
 
 In pursuance of the authority contained in the law, 
 Mr. Clinton and Mr. Morris, in December, 1811, visit- 
 ed Washington, and endeavored to obtain from the 
 United States a grant of land in aid of the prosecution of 
 the scheme. In this application they were wholly unsuc- 
 cessful. Congress declined to act at all in the matter. 
 
 The opponents of Mr. Clinton charged this journey as 
 having been undertaken by him for electioneering pur- 
 poses, and the Martling men scouted the idea of a canal 
 from Albany as so visionary and absurd that no rational 
 man for one moment, could seriously entertain it. A pro- 
 position at this day, to construct a rail road from the 
 earth to the moon, could not be treated with more derision 
 than the Martling men treated the canal project. They 
 charged Mr. Clinton with pretending to favor the scheme 
 for no other purpose than to make of it a hobby (a 
 ridiculous one, they said,) on which to ride into power. 
 
 The legislature assembled on the 28lh of January, and 
 Alexander Sheldon, the old republican speaker, was 
 again chosen to that office, and Samuel North, clerk. 
 
 A principal part of the governors speech was occupied 
 in depicting the danger arising from a redundant paper 
 currency. He protested against any considerable increase 
 of the number, or the capital of the banks, evidently 
 with a view to prepare the minds of the members to re- 
 sist the application for a charter to the Bank of Ame-
 
 1812.] OF NEW- YORK. 303 
 
 rica. " It is questionable," said the governor, " wheth- 
 er they" (banks,) " have not already been multiplied 
 to an alarming extent." It is worthy of remark that the 
 governor in his speech, wholly abstains from any refer- 
 ence to the scheme of internal improvements, or to the 
 proceeedings of the commissioners in relation to that im- 
 portant subject. The address of the governor occupies 
 three printed columns in a newspaper, and he deems it 
 necessary to apologize for its " unusual length^ 
 
 If I may venture to express an opinion, I will say, that 
 in my judgment the speeches of Gov. Tompkins are gene- 
 rally extremely well written, and give evidence of highly 
 respectable talents. as a writer. Indeed, I think that both 
 his friends and enemies have not done him justice in giv- 
 ing him credit for as much and as high a grade of talents 
 as he actually possessed. But I am wandering from 
 my subject. I referred to the apology of the governor for 
 the great length of his speech, for the purpose of re- 
 marking that I humbly conceive that a capital error has 
 crept into the executive communications of this and seve- 
 ral other states. The duty of the governor is clearly and 
 briefly stated in the fourth section of the third article of the 
 present constitution. " He shall communicate, by message 
 to the legislature, the condition of the state, and recom- 
 mend such matters to them as he shall judge expedient." 
 It appears to me, he should simply state facts necessary to 
 be made known to the representatives of the people, with- 
 out comment, and recommend measures merely by laying 
 down propositions without an attempt to prove by argu- 
 ment the correctness of such propositions. His friends 
 in the legislature ought to be able to comment on his facts 
 and to set forth and establish by argument, the fitness of 
 the measures which he recommends^ instead of this, our 
 governors have acquired the habit of, I was going to say, 
 declaiming at great length, on the facts they state, and of
 
 3(H POLITICAL HISTOEY [1S12. 
 
 going into a train of reasoning to support every position 
 they take in relation to the measures they recommend. 
 In this way our governors will shortly become authors, 
 and write books instead of messages. Is there not some- 
 thing disrespectful to the legislature when a governor elects 
 to occupy their time in animadversions upon, or inferences 
 from the facts he communicates, or in arguments, the ob- 
 jects of which are to prove the fitness of the measures he 
 recommends? Would not a stranger be led to conclude that 
 he thought the persons whom he addressed incapable of 
 judging of the truth and merits of his propositions, unless 
 he should enlighten them by a course of reasoning? It 
 is still worse, it is an insult, to occupy their time in lec- 
 turing them like school boys in relation to the principles 
 of our government and on the subject of the natural 
 rights of men. Mr. De Witt Clinton was the first govern- 
 or who sinned in this respect; and his apology was, that 
 during nearly all the time he was governor, a majority of 
 the legislature was against him, and he had no other means 
 of presenting to the people his principles of action, and 
 the reasons upon which his opinions were founded. This, 
 although it might afford for him some excuse, after all, 
 was rather a sorry apology to his legislative friends who 
 were in the minority. 
 
 On the second day of February, the assembly chose for 
 a council of appointment, William W. Gilbert, of the 
 southern; Johannus Bruyn, of the middle; Henry Yates, 
 jun., of the eastern; and Francis A. Bloodgood, of the 
 western districts. 
 
 This council was decidedly Clintonian; but the party 
 decrees having been carried into effect by the preceding 
 coimcil, little remained to be done by this. Such appoint- 
 ments, however, as were made, were made in accordance 
 with the wishes and views of Mr. Clinton. 
 
 Although the republican party held a pretty strong
 
 1812.] OF NEW- YORK. 305 
 
 majority In the assemblyj there were few men among 
 them who possessed much talent as speakers. 
 
 John W. Taylor, then a young man, and who, for the 
 first time, made his appearance in public life, as a member 
 of assembly, since known as a distinguished member of 
 congress, and speaker of the house of representatives of 
 the United States, was the only republican member of 
 much talent as a debater, or tact in legislation; but as this 
 was his first session, inexperience prevented him from 
 possessing the latter qualification to any degree of perfec- 
 tion: although, he afterwards proved himself, and is now 
 acknowledged to be, a man exceedingly sagacious, and 
 profoundly versed in the ways of men. 
 
 Mr. William Ross, a democratic member from the 
 county of Orange, spoke often, but with little effect. Mr. 
 Ross, though an honest and kind hearted man, was a vain 
 man. He was, beyond question, sincerely and warmly 
 attached to the republican party, but his vanity and want 
 of real talent, rendered him rather a cause of amusement 
 than a terror to his opponents. Mr. Van Vechten, from 
 Albany, and Mr. Jones, of New-York, stood at the head 
 of the federal phalanx in the assembly. 
 
 On the 5 th of February, a bill passed the assembly for 
 the appointment of David Thomas as treasurer, in lieu of 
 Mr. Lansing, by a majority of eight votes: there being 
 only fifty votes for the bill, and forty-two against it. 
 This vote shows that it was not a party vote; for there 
 were, as has been stated, seventy-three republican, and 
 thirty-nine federal members elected. The last legislature 
 was, in both branches, republican, and yet Mr. Lansing 
 was re-appointed treasurer. How came Thomas now to 
 be appointed 1 Was not his appointment pressed by 
 Southwick and other bank agents and members, in order 
 to give more weight to the exertions it was intended he 
 should make in favor of chartering the Bank of America 1 
 
 20
 
 * 
 
 306 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 Thisj too, may have been foreseen by some of the more 
 wary opponents of that measure, and to this, perhaps, 
 was owing the fact that instead of receiving seventy-three 
 votes in the assembly, he actually received but fifty. The 
 bill passed the senate by a vote of nineteen to five, and 
 became a law on the 8th of February.* 
 
 Early in the session the applicants for the six million 
 bank introduced their petition into the assembly. They 
 offered the extravagant bonus of six hundred thousand 
 dollars; to be paid in the following manner, and for the 
 following purposes: — 
 
 Four hundred thousand dollars to the common- school 
 fund; one hundred thousand dollars to the literature fund; 
 & 1 hundred thousand dollars to be paid into the treasury 
 at the end of twenty years, provided no other bank should, 
 in that time, be chartered by the state. 
 
 The sum of one million of dollars was also to be loaned 
 to the state, at five per cent interest, to be laid out in 
 constructing canals; and one million of dollars was to be 
 loaned to farmers, I suppose, at six per cent. 
 
 Mr. Southwick, and the other managers, had early em- 
 ployed a great number of sub-agents, some of whom were 
 officers of the house of assembly, but most of them were 
 low and worthless fellows, who were to carry messages, 
 and listen to what was said by the members, at their rooms 
 and other places, and report at head quarters. Among 
 
 * About this time, there being two vacancies in the board of regents of the Uni- 
 niversity, the legislature proceeded to supply such vacancies. Joseph C- Yates, 
 and Solomon Southwick, were the caucus republican candidates. Judges Spencer 
 and Taylerhad exerted all their influence to prevent the nomination of Southwick, 
 but without success; a circumstance, which, considering the great influence of 
 those gentlemen, very clearly demonstrates the almost irresistible influence, at 
 that time, of Solomon Southwick. 
 
 Judge Yates and Mr. Southwick were elected, against Smith Thompson and 
 Stephen Van Rensselaer. Such is the madness of party, and the unreasonableness 
 of individual ambition. 
 
 It is deeply to be lamented that party interest, and individual political ambition, 
 should intrude into the calm retreats of science, and the quiet walks of literature.
 
 1812.] OF NEW-YORK. 307 
 
 other agents thus employed, was an Irishman by the name 
 of John Martin, who, from being an itinerant preacher of 
 the gospel, had, for a year or two before, devoted himself 
 to the labor of making political converts. So numerous 
 were these sub-agents, (who, by the bye, were generally 
 supplied with handbills containing the printed proposals 
 of the banking company,) that not only the doors of the 
 two houses, but the rooms of members, were besieged by 
 them. 
 
 Judge Spencer, Judge Tayler, Governor Tompkins and 
 other leading and efficient republicans, declared open war 
 against the bank, its agents and supporters. Unfortu- 
 nately, Spencer and Tayler, who took the lead in these 
 denunciations, were known to be interested in the existing 
 banks. Judge Tayler being president of the State Bank, 
 and Judge Spencer being supposed to be largely interested 
 in the same bank, as well as in the Manhattan Bank of 
 the city of New-York. The bank applicants, therefore, 
 charged them, with some degree of plausibility, with 
 being influenced more by selfish views and private interest, 
 than by a regard for the public weal. 
 
 Thomas and Southwick, and many other of the bank 
 applicants, were loud in their praises of De Witt Clinton, 
 and declared themselves the advocates of his election to 
 the presidency. Although Mr. Clinton announced that 
 he was against the bank, he was very careful to protest 
 against making a support or opposition to it a test of po- 
 litical merit, or political correctness. In assuming this 
 position, it will be seen that it was adverse to the ground 
 he had taken with respect to those who favored the incor- 
 poration of the Merchants Bank. But consistency is not 
 a distinguishing characteristic of politicians. Mr. Clinton 
 frankly told Judge Spencer that, although he should give 
 his vote, if required to vote, against the chartering of the 
 American Banking Company, he should, on no account^
 
 308 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 be drawn Into a quarrel with the supporters of that mea- 
 sure. This determination led to coldness between these 
 two gentlemen, who were brothers-in-law, and who had, 
 for the long period of fourteen years, (since 1798,) been, 
 politically, cordially united, and personally, ardent friends. 
 A short time afterwards, as we shall see, this coldness 
 produced bitter personal hostility. 
 
 Mr. Southwick, in order to justify Mr. Clinton in the 
 ground he had taken, not to allow the support of the 
 bank to be made a political question, and to quiet the 
 tender consciences of his republican friends, who were 
 inclined to support the bank, on the 28th February came 
 out with an article in the Register, in which he argued, 
 that the question of granting a charter to a banking com- 
 pany could not be of a political nature, and concluded by 
 saying that, " He who supports or opposes a bank upon 
 the grounds of federalism or republicanism, is either a 
 deceiver or deceived, and will not be listened to by any 
 man of sense or experience." How different was his 
 language in relation to the Merchants Bank ! 
 
 The enacting clause of the bill for chartering the Bank 
 of America, passed the assembly by a vote of fifty-two to 
 forty-six. After the question was taken on the first 
 clause, some alarming disclosures were made, of attempts 
 by the applicants to bribe members of both houses; but I 
 propose giving a more detailed account of those proceed- 
 ings, in the senate as well as in the assembly, in another 
 place. At present, I will merely state the fact, that it 
 was rendered most evident that attempts had been made 
 by the agents of the company, to corrupt the members of 
 the legislature; and yet, that after these facts had been 
 proved, the bank party, in the assembly, increased, as it 
 also did in the case of the Merchants Bank; for, on the 
 final passage of the bill, in the assembly, the vote was 
 fifty-eight to thirty-nine.
 
 1812.] OF KEW-YORK. 309 
 
 The bill was sent to the senate, and when that house 
 was in committee of the whole on it a motion was 
 made to reject it, but the motion failed of success, 
 the vote being fifteen to thirteen. Mr. E. P. Livingston 
 was in the chair, who was known to be in favor of the 
 bill. This trial of strength rendered it certain that the 
 bill would pass the senate, and become a law; whereupon, 
 on the 27th March, the governor sent a message to the 
 two houses proroguing the legislature until the 21st of 
 May. 
 
 The cause of the prorogation assigned by the governor, 
 was, that sufficient proof had been furnished to show that 
 the bank applicants had used, or attempted to use, corrupt 
 means to procure a charter. 
 
 When the message was read in the assembly a scene of 
 confusion and uproar ensued, and, for a few moments, 
 outrage and violence. Under the constitution of 1777, 
 the governor possessed the power of prorogation, but it 
 had been considered as a remnant of royal prerogative, 
 unsuitable to the genius of our government; and I am not 
 aware that, in time of peace, it had ever before been ex- 
 ercised. But if, as was believed, and is still believed by 
 many intelligent, unprejudiced men, a bill was about to 
 be forced through the legislature by palpably corrupt 
 means, it seems to me any constitutional measure to arrest 
 its progress was justifiable. 
 
 The bank advocates in the legislature, had systemati- 
 cally prevented any action on nearly all the important 
 business before them. Holding a majority, they seemed 
 determined that nothing of consequence should be done 
 until their favorite measure should be adopted. The more 
 pressing the necessity of legislation, on any given sub- 
 ject, the more carefully did they watch, and strenuously 
 oppose, final action on it. Of two hundred and forty-two 
 bills, ultimately passed during that session, the greater
 
 310 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 part of which were then on their table, they had passed 
 but thirty-nine when they were prorogued. 
 
 The friends of the bank resorted to another contrivance. 
 Nearly all of them professed to be in favor of a nomina- 
 tion of Mr. Clinton for president, by a legislative republi- 
 can caucus; but they, on one pretence and another, refused 
 to go into caucus on that subject until after the question 
 of chartering the bank should be disposed of. This was 
 excessively annoying to Mr. Clinton; for the members 
 of congress had also, for another cause, put off, to an unu- 
 sually late period, their caucus, which was to be held for the 
 same purpose. A large portion of them, with Mr. Clay 
 at their head, had refused to support Mr. Madison, or go 
 into a caucus, until he should send a message to congress 
 recommending a declaration of war against Great Britain. 
 This, he, for a long time, hesitated to do, and indeed did 
 not do, until June following. Mr. Clinton was, for reasons 
 which must be obvious, extremely anxious that his nomi- 
 nation, if made at all by the legislature of New-York, 
 should be made before a congressional nomination of Mr. 
 Madison should be announced. But the bank men, 
 although professing to be exceedingly anxious for Mr. 
 C.'s success, peremptorily refused to move in the matter 
 until they had procured a charter for their bank. Ought 
 not Mr. Clinton instantly to have cast off such friends 1 
 
 The bank men, and many other of Mr. Clinton's friends, 
 say, that Gov. Tompkins had, at that time, fixed his eye 
 on the presidency; that he apprehended the success of 
 Mr. C. would be fatal to his hopes in that respect; and 
 that, to prevent the nomination of Clinton by a New-York 
 legislative caucus, before a congressional caucus for the 
 nomination of Mr. Madison could be held, was the true 
 reason and controlling cause of his venturing on so bold a 
 measure as the prorogation. This, however, is matter of 
 conjecture.
 
 1812.] OF NEW-YORK. 311 
 
 Before the members left Albany, thirty-nine republicans 
 signed and published an address to their constituents, ap- 
 proving of the prorogation, and twenty-eight democratic 
 members issued a solemn protest against that measure. 
 
 'The Albany Register also, came out in open and bitter 
 denunciations against Gov. Tompkins, Judge Spencer, 
 Judge Tayler, Secretary Jenkins, and all who supported 
 them. 
 
 In this broken and disturbed state and condition of the 
 republican party the April elections came on. The result 
 was, a small majority of federalists were returned to the 
 assembly, but not so great but that there would, in the 
 next legislature, be a republican majority upon a joint 
 ballot of the two houses. 
 
 The federalists carried the southern and eastern districts. 
 In the southern district two republican tickets were sup- 
 ported, each claiming to be the real Simon Pures. The 
 Clintonian republicans supported William Freeman and 
 John Garretson; and the Martling men held up John 
 Bingham and Robert Moore. To show the relative 
 strength, at that time, in the southern district, of the two 
 sections of the democratic party, I give the result of the 
 canvass — 
 
 William Freeman received three thousand and twenty- 
 seven votes; John Garretson two thousand nine hundred 
 and fifty-seven; John Bingham one thousand seven hun- 
 dred and six; and Robert Moore one thousand six hundred 
 and twenty. 
 
 The senators elected from the southern district, were 
 Peter W. Radcliff and Elbert H. Jones; middle, Martin 
 Van Buren ; eastern, Gerrit Wendell; western, Francis 
 A. Bloodgood, Archibald S. Clarke, Russel Atwater and 
 Henry Hrger. 
 
 Mr. Hager was from the county of Schoharie; but, 
 according to usage, the candidate ought to have been taken
 
 312 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 from the county of Otsego; and a republican convention 
 of the latter county had recommended, to the district con- 
 vention, Elijah H. Metcalf, Esq., a worthy and popular 
 citizen, who was then a member of the assembly. But 
 Mr. Metcalf had voted for the bank, and the district con- 
 vention, for that reason, refused to nominate him.* 
 
 On the 20th of April, the venerable vice-president, 
 George Clinton, died at Washington, aged seventy-three 
 years, and thus terminated a long and laborious life, the 
 greater part of which had been devoted to the service of 
 his country. He commenced his public life as a member 
 of the colonial assembly, and, during the stormy period 
 which preceded the American Revolution, he sustained 
 with unshaken firmness the rights of the people. During 
 the whole of the revolutionary war he stood at the head 
 of the government of the state, and was commander-in- 
 chief of the militia. After the close of that war we have 
 briefly sketched his history until he became the second 
 officer in the government of the United States. Every 
 act of his, and every thing which remains of him, affords 
 evidence that he w^as a man of strong and vigorous intel- 
 lect, of great decision of character, and that he was a good 
 judge of men, and possessed a profound knowledge of the 
 human heart. 
 
 Either before, or during the recess of the legislature, a 
 singular project was formed, to defeat the passage of the 
 bill to incorporate the stockholders of the Bank of Ame- 
 rica. On the question of approving the bill, in the 
 council of revision, it was supposed that body would vote 
 in the following manner: — 
 
 * About the time of the prorogation of the lef,.slature, a newspaper was estab- 
 lished by Judge Spencer, and his immediate friends, in the city of Albany, for the 
 express purpose of counteracting the impressions intended to be made by Mr. 
 Southwickjby means of the Albany Register. This paper was called the Albany 
 Republican, and was printed by one Brown. From that circumstance it acquired 
 the name of "TAe Broum Rppublican." It expired soon after the election.
 
 1812.] OF NEW- YORK. 3 13 
 
 For the bill — Lansing, Kent, Thompson and Van Ness. 
 Against the bill — The governor, Spencer and Yates. 
 
 If, therefore, two members could be added to the coun- 
 cil, who were against the bill, it would not become a law, 
 unless passed by two-thirds of both houses: of which, 
 there could be no reasonable apprehension, or expectation. 
 
 Shortly after the prorogation, a petition was drawn and 
 circulated, addressed to the council of appointment, pray- 
 ing for the appointment of two additional judges of the 
 supreme court. This petition, after setting forth some 
 reasons for the measure, states as follows: — " We," say 
 the petitioners, " owe it to candor to say that a powerful 
 motive which urges us to request the immediate appoint- 
 ment of two judges, is, that they would arrest and prevent 
 the passage of a bill before the legislature, entitled " An 
 Act to incorporate the Bank of America," without waiting 
 for the sanction of the legislature, who can scarcely be 
 supposed to approve a measure to defeat a bill passed by 
 themselves." It will be recollected, that under the old 
 constitution, the council of appointment could create as 
 many judges of the supreme court as they thought properj 
 but the additional judges, thus appointed, could receive no 
 pay without an act of the legislature. The petition from 
 which I have quoted, was accompanied by a printed circu- 
 lar, signed by Stephen Phelps — (Bates 1) Eli Hill and 
 John C. Spencer, in which they stated that the petition 
 " was not intended for general circulation^ hut was to he 
 presented to influential repuhlica7is only.'' 
 
 Whether this petition was ever presented to the council 
 I am not advised. I cannot imagine a state of things 
 which would afford a justification, or even a reasonable 
 excuse, for such a flagrant abuse of power. That the 
 project was seriously contemplated, I have not a shadow 
 of doubtj for William Ross, of Newburgh, told me he was 
 to have been appointed one of the judges, had the scheme
 
 314 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 been carried into effect. The extracts from the petition 
 and circular, were made by me, from a copy of those docu- 
 ments published in the Albany Register in 1812. 
 
 The legislature again met on the 21st of May, and the 
 senate immediately resumed the consideration of the bill 
 to incorporate the stockholders of the Bank of America. 
 The opposition to its passage, was ably conducted, and 
 long continued. Among the most zealous and talented 
 opponents of the bill, may be ranked Gen. Erastus Root, 
 of Delaware county, from the middle district, and Gov. 
 Lewis may be considered as its leading and most efficient 
 advocate. 
 
 The bill finally passed by the following vote: — 
 
 Affirmative — Arnold, Bishop, Haight, Hall, Hopkins, 
 Humphries, Lewis, Livingston, Martin, Parris, Phelps, 
 Piatt, Rich, Smally, Smith, Stearns and Taber — seventeen 
 Negative — Bloodgood, Carle,CoejGilbert, Hubbard, Root, 
 Rouse, Sanford, Tayler, Townsend, White, Wilkin and 
 Yates — thirteen. 
 
 All the federal senators, and, I believe, all the federal 
 members of the assembly, except Mr. Lorillard of New- 
 York, voted for the charter. 
 
 I have no doubt that corrupt means were used to induce 
 members to vote for this bank; and, on the other hand, I 
 have no doubt that many, I hope a majority, of those who 
 finally did vote for it, honestly believed that the bill had 
 merits, and that the public interest demanded its passage. 
 A question, however, presents itself, of considerable im- 
 portance to a conscientious man; and it is this: — Grant 
 that the bill, in the abstract, had merits; that had the ap- 
 plication come directly from the stockholders, without 
 the interference of agents, or any improper conduct on the 
 part of the applicants, the public interest demanded its 
 passage; but concede further, that corrupt means had been 
 used to induce a part of the members to support the bill.
 
 1812.] OF NEW- YORK. 315 
 
 who, erroneously, but sincerely believed it ought not to 
 be passed: under such circumstances, ought that portion 
 of the members, who honestly believed the passage of the 
 bill advantageous to the public, to have voted for it ? 
 
 Immediately after the question in relation to the Bank 
 of America was disposed of, and on the 28th of May, a 
 meeting of the republican members of the legislature was 
 held, at which Gen. James W. Wilkin was chairman, and 
 Alexander Sheldon, speaker of the assembly, was secreta- 
 ry, when Mr. Clinton was nominated as the candidate to 
 be supported for the next president by the republicans of 
 the state of New-York; and his support was recommended 
 to the republican party of the union. A committee of 
 seventeen gentlemen was appointed to use their efforts to 
 carry into effect the objects of the meeting. 
 
 Some democratic members from the southern and mid- 
 dle districts, among whom were Gov. Lewis and Nathan 
 Sanford, refused to attend this caucus. These gentlemen 
 professed to be in principle opposed to Mr. Clinton, while 
 others from the interior and western, and eastern parts of 
 the state, although personal friends of Mr. C, and sin- 
 cerely desirous of seeing him elected president, doubted 
 the expediency of nominating him for that office; because 
 such nomination might, in their judgment, divide and dis- 
 tract the republican party, and would eventually prove 
 injurious to Mr. Clinton himself. I have been informed 
 by gentlemen who were present on that occasion, and 
 who were friends of Mr. Clinton, that so many of 
 the members doubted the expediency of a nomination, that 
 it would not have been made had not Mr. Van Cortland 
 and other members of congress arrived from Washington, 
 urging, and bringing letters from Gideon Granger, post- 
 master general, also urging the immediate nomination of 
 Mr. Clinton. Judge Spencer and Judge Tayler still held 
 back, but finally were induced to attend, rather as specta-
 
 316 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 tors, a meeting to deliberate on the propriety of holding 
 a caucus for the purpose of nominating. At that meet- 
 ing Gen. Root made a long and able speech against the 
 proposed measure. He showed that it could not be suc- 
 cessful. That as a republican candidate, Mr. Clinton 
 could not, and as the federal candidate he ought not, to 
 succeed. That the issue of the contest would be ruinous 
 to the political prospects of Mr. Clinton. Gen. Root 
 spoke of the character and talents of Mr. Clinton in terms 
 of high commendation; that the hopes of New-York 
 were in a great degree centered upon him, that his nomi- 
 nation would blight those hopes, and he concluded a most 
 eloquent harangue by exclaiming, " Spare, O spare that 
 great man !" A majority of the members, among whom 
 was that shrewd and cautious politician, John W. Taylor, 
 notwithstanding the opposition, determined to proceed 
 and bring Mr. Clinton into the field. Judge Spencer and 
 Judge Tayler and a majority of the republicans, except 
 ing Mr. Lewis and the Martling men from New-York, 
 and I believe Gen. Root, finally acquiesced in the nomi- 
 nation^ at any rate it was understood they would take no 
 steps to oppose it; and I perceive that Judge Tayler was 
 made one of the committee of seventeen. And here I 
 cannot help remarking, that Mr. Southwick, in the Re- 
 gister, was continually charging Gov. Tompkins, Judge 
 Spencer, Judge Tayler, and the secretary of state, Mr. 
 Jenkins, with decided and active hostility to Mr. Clin- 
 ton, while the New-York Columbian, the paper which 
 seemed to be the accredited organ of Mr. Clinton in that 
 city, claimed these gentlemen as the friends and support- 
 ers of Mr. C. 
 
 Nothing could have been more impolitic than the con- 
 duct of Mr. Southwick, in this respect. He undoubtedly 
 must have been acting from feelings of private resent-
 
 1812.] OF NEW- YORK. 317 
 
 ment towards Gov. Tompkins, Judge Spencer and the 
 others. 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the 20th of June, and on 
 the same day congress declared war against Great Britain. 
 In the house of representatives the vote in favor of the 
 bill declaring war, was seventy-nine to forty-nine. Very 
 few of the republican representatives from New-York 
 voted for the measure. They opposed it, not because, in 
 their judgment, the nation had not sufficient cause of war, 
 but because we were unprepared for the commencement 
 of hostilities. Most of the republican members from 
 New-York who voted against the war were Clintonians. 
 In the senate, Mr. German, who, by general consent, was 
 understood to speak the sentiments of Mr. Clinton, made 
 a speech and voted against the war. 
 
 The declaration of war by congress, soon became al- 
 most the sole matter in controversy between the political 
 parties which existed in the nation. But the party which 
 opposed the war, in point of fact, consisted of two parties. 
 The old federal party opposed the war, on the ground that 
 we had no sufficient cause of war with Great Britain, or 
 if we had, we had still greater cause for war with France; 
 and that if we had commenced hostilities against the lat- 
 ter, the cause of our difficulties with the former would 
 have been removed. Another class of citizens opposed 
 the war, because they believed it declared prematurely, 
 and before the nation was prepared to assume a belligerent 
 attitude. 
 
 A very large majority of the old republican party ap- 
 proved of the war, and the time of declaring it. 
 
 At the September court of oyer and terminer, held in 
 the county of Chenango, Gen. David Thomas having been 
 arrested on a warrant issued by Judge Spencer, was in- 
 dicted by a grand jury of Chenango county, for an attempt 
 to bribe Casper M. RcusC; a senator from that county, to
 
 318 POLITICAL HISTOKTf [1812. 
 
 give his vote for the incorporation of the Bank of Ame- 
 rica. Judge Van Ness presided on this occasion, and 
 Thomas was acquitted by the jury. 
 
 During the same month Solomon Southwick was indicted 
 and tried in the county of Montgomery, before Chief 
 Justice Kent, for an attempt to bribe Alexander Sheldon, 
 the speaker of the assembly, and found not guilty. 
 
 I may have occasion to state the substance of the proofs 
 offered to sustain the charges against these gentlemen. 
 At present I will only remark, that the proofs in the case 
 of Thomas as well as Southwick, were very strong, I had 
 almost said conclusive; but that it appeared that both 
 Rouse and Sheldon entertained the propositions made 
 to them, concealed the affront, and for a considerable 
 time, at least several months, treated the men who they 
 alleged had attempted to corrupt them, as associates and 
 friends; and that Doct. Sheldon had voted for Southwick 
 for a regent of the university, long after the attempt to 
 bribe, and long before he made the complaint. By the 
 skill and address of the council who defended Gen. 
 Thomas and Mr. Southwick, the traverse jury seemed to 
 have been made to believe that their business was rather 
 to pass upon the merits of the complainants, than to pro- 
 nounce on the innocence or guilt of the accused. It did 
 not seem to have occurred to them that both Rouse and 
 Sheldon might be bad men, and yet that Thomas and 
 Southwick might have violated the statute by an attempt 
 to bribe them. 
 
 My excuse for mentioning these two cases is, that at 
 the time, the prosecutions were considered to be of a poli- 
 tical character, and because Gen. Thomas and Mr. South- 
 wick were considered prominent friends of Mr. Clinton, 
 and the charges against them tended to injure the cause 
 of Mr. Clinton. 
 
 In September an attempt was made by some repub-
 
 1812.] OF NEW-rORK. 319' 
 
 licans of the union to induce Mr. Clinton to withdraw 
 from the presidential canvass. With this view. Gen. 
 King, then of that part of Massachusetts called the pro- 
 vince of Maine, now the state of Maine, and half broth- 
 er to the late Rufus King, a man of considerable standing 
 in the republican party, visited Albany, and had an inter- 
 view with Judge Spencer and Judge Tayler, whom he no 
 doubt considered as the friends of Mr. Clinton; in which 
 he stated that as he believed the republicans of the union, 
 and especially of the eastern states, entertained a high re- 
 spect for the talents and charater of Mr. Clinton, he 
 unquestionably stood the first man in the republican ranks 
 at the north; that at a proper time they would gladly yield 
 him their support for the presidency, that at the next 
 election he might be cordially sustained for the office of 
 vice-president; but that the war having been declared 
 under Mr. Madison's administration, the election of Mr. 
 Clinton in opposition to him, would be regarded at home, 
 and especially abroad, as an evidence that the American 
 people were opposed to the war, — an attitude he was sure 
 the majority of the people were unwilling to assume, — be- 
 sides which, the support of Mr. Clinton by any consider- 
 able portion of the republican party, (and without such 
 support it was evident he could not be elected,) would 
 inevitably break in pieces and destroy that party, and give 
 the federalists the ascendency. 
 
 Influenced by these representations and views, Judge 
 Spencer and Mr. Tayler, wrote a letter to Mr. Richard 
 Riker, a prominent member of the Clintonian committee, 
 introducing Gen. King to him, in which they recommend- 
 ed an arrangement which would avoid a competition be- 
 tween Mr. Clinton and Mr. Madison, and they concluded 
 by expressslng an opinion that " no event would exalt 
 Mr. Clinton higher than a surrender of his pretensions to 
 the presidential chair."
 
 320 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 To this letter Mr. Riker replied on the 7th October, 
 that Mr. Clinton would not withdraw from being a candi- 
 date, that he had been made such by the people, and they 
 had a right to his name. He adds, that the suggestions 
 of Gen. King, that Massachusetts will support Mr. Clin- 
 ton at the end of four years, cannot be listened to for 
 a moment; and that bargains between politicians are in- 
 consistent w^th the purity and dignity of republicanism 
 This correspondence Mr. Riker caused to be published. 
 
 It is very evident that Messrs. Spencer and Tayler did 
 not intend their letter for publication. Nor can I perceive 
 in it any evidence of unfriendly feelings towards Mr. Clin- 
 ton. The publication of it by Mr. Clinton's New- York 
 friends must have been with a view to the manufacture of 
 political capital. Of the expediency or propriety of the 
 act, different men will now, as they did then, form diflfer- 
 ent opinions. 
 
 The legislature met on the 2d of November for the pur- 
 pose of choosing electors. The candidates for the speak- 
 er's chair, were Jacob Rutsen Van Rensselaer of Colum- 
 bia county, on the federal side, and William Ross, on the 
 republican. Mr. Ross received forty-six votes, Mr. Hunt- 
 ington one, and Mr. Van Rensselaer fifty-eight, who of 
 course was elected. This vote showed a federal majority 
 of thirteen in the assembly. Mr. James Van Ingen was 
 elected clerk. 
 
 No sooner had the legislature convened, than it was 
 ascertained that about twenty republican members of the 
 assembly would not consent to vote for Clintonian electors. 
 This little band was headed by Gen. Root. Mr. Martin 
 Van Buren, from the middle district, made his appear- 
 ance in public life for the first time at this session. He 
 had no agency in the nomination of Mr. Clinton by the 
 legislative caucus on the 28th of May, for he was not a 
 member of the legislature then in existence. What his
 
 1812.] OF NEW-YORK. 321 
 
 private opinion of the expediency of that nomination 
 was, I do not know; but he had been trained up to the 
 doctrine, that on all mere personal questions it was the 
 duty of a politician to go according to the will of the 
 majority of his political friends, when that will was fairly 
 expressed. On the question of the support of Mr. Clin- 
 ton for the presidency, Mr. Van Buren considered that 
 the republican party had spoken at the legislative caucus 
 in May. The will of the party, as then expressed, he 
 deemed it his duty to aid in carrying into effect. 
 
 The parties in the legislature, as to numbers, stood as 
 follows : — in the senate there were nine federalists, four 
 Madisonian and nineteen Clintonian republicans; in the 
 assembly there were fifty-eight federalists, twenty-two 
 Madisonian, and twenty-nine Clintonian republicans. 
 The federalists could and did nominate federal electors in 
 the assembly, and the republicans nominated Clintonian 
 electors in the senate. This state of things, it will be 
 seen, would compel the Madisonians on joint ballot to vote 
 either for Clintonian or federal electors, or not vote at all. 
 In the sequel they adopted the latter course. 
 
 Notwithstanding this curious state of things, Mr. Van 
 Buren, on his arrival at Albany, found Mr. Clinton and 
 his friends entirely destitute of any plan of operations. 
 The talents, address and activity of Mr. Van Buren soon 
 placed him at the head of the republican friends of Mr. 
 Clinton in the senate, and in fact in the legislature. A 
 caucus of republican members was held for the purpose of 
 selecting candidates for electors, but such was the obsti- 
 nacy of the Madisonians that no ticket could be agreed 
 on which they would support. They insisted that a por- 
 tion of the electors should be run who would vote for 
 Mr. Madison, and to this the Clintonians would not con- 
 sent. Eventually a Clintonian ticket was agreed upon, 
 at the head of which Judge Yates was placed. That ticket 
 
 21
 
 322 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 was nominated in the senate. In the assembly the vote 
 stood for federal electors fifty-eight, Clintonian twenty- 
 nine, and Madisonian twenty-two. Of course the federal 
 ticket was nominated. Upon joint ballot the Clintonian 
 ticket received seventy-four votes, the federal forty-five, 
 and there were twenty-eight blank votes. The Madisonians 
 cast the blank votes. Of course a part of the federalists 
 voted the Clintonian ticket, which gave it a majority of 
 all the votes, and the Clintonian electors were therefore 
 declared duly chosen. 
 
 The governor's speech was principally confined to de- 
 tails of the incidents of ihe war then raging on the north- 
 ern and western frontier of the state, and the answer to 
 it by the assembly, was rather courteous than otherwise, 
 but pretty clearly indicating the grounds assumed by the 
 federal party during the war. 
 
 Upon the canvass of the presidential votes at Washing 
 ton, it appeared that Mr. Madison had received one hun- 
 dred and twenty-eight votes, and Mr. Clinton eighty-nine. 
 The states which voted for Mr. Clinton were New-York, 
 New-Jersey, Delaware, all the New-England states except 
 Vermont, and Maryland, gave him five votes. He did 
 not receive a single vote south of the Potomac.
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 
 BANKS. 
 
 323 
 
 Unfortunately the chartering of banks has had a 
 considerable influence on political parties, and their action, 
 m the state of New-York. For this reason the history of 
 political parties among us would be quite imperfectj with- 
 out at the same time presenting some view of the pro- 
 ceedings of the legislature on the various applications 
 which, from time to time, were made for charters by 
 banking companies. And, on many accounts, I have 
 thought it would be more acceptable to the reader to sub- 
 mit a brief statement of these proceedings, detached, as far 
 as it can be, from other political operations. 
 
 The first banking association formed in this state was 
 in the year 1784, when a joint stock company in the city 
 of New-York was organized. The articles of co-partner- 
 ship were drawn by Gen. Hamilton, and the capital 
 invested was five hundred thousand dollars. (2 Ham. 219.) 
 
 Under these articles, or constitution, as they were called, 
 the company commenced and continued banking opera- 
 tions, till March 21, 1791, when it was chartered, under 
 the name of the Bank of New-York, which company is 
 now in existence. The articles of association bore date 
 February 26, 1784. It will therefore be perceived, that 
 more than seven years elapsed, after they commenced 
 banking business, before the legislature granted them a 
 charter, and that the state government had been in opera- 
 tion about fourteen years before any bank charter was 
 granted. 
 
 The fact was, the community were smarting under the 
 losses sustained by the continental paper money system,
 
 324 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 The legislature of New- York were therefore unwilling, 
 by any act of theirs, to countenance the issue of paper, as 
 mo7t,ey^ by any association whatever. Hence no charter 
 could be obtained for the only banking company in the 
 state, until after that company had been in operation for 
 more than seven years. " A memorial," says Mr. John 
 C. Hamilton, (2 Ham. 340,) " to incorporate the bank of 
 which the constitution had been framed by Hamilton, was 
 presented to the legislature early in 1784, but so prevalent 
 was the jealousy oi moneyed influence that it was compelled 
 to conduct its affairs during six years without coporate 
 immunities. The cry arose that banks were combinations 
 of the rich against the poor," &c. These " corporate 
 immunities," of which Mr. Hamilton speaks, were the 
 privilege of sueing in their corporate names, and an ex- 
 emption of liability of the individual stockholders for a 
 greater sum than the amount of stock held by them. No 
 sane man then dreamed of granting to these companies 
 the exclusive right of issuing and circulating their notes 
 as cash. 
 
 In 1792 the Bank of Albany was chartered, with a 
 capital of two hundred and forty thousand dollarsj and in 
 1793 the Bank of Columbia, located at Hudson, where it 
 was proposed to open a foreign trade and to establish the 
 whale fishery business, by a company from Rhode Island, 
 was chartered, with a capital of one hundred and sixty 
 thousand dollars. The Bank of New- York had a capital 
 of a million of dollars. So far, the question of charter- 
 ing banks had been kept entirely clear of party conside- 
 rations. It was a mere question whether the convenience 
 of the community, and the exigencies of commerce, de- 
 manded these institutions; and, until the year 1799, the 
 sum of one million and six hundred thousand dollars only, 
 was employed for banking purposes. 
 
 From the election of John Adams to the presidency, in
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 325 
 
 1796 party excitement had prodigiously increased, and at 
 no point in the Union was party heat more intense than 
 in the city of New- York: especially from 1798 to 1800. 
 The stock and direction of the Bank of New-York was in 
 the hands of federalists. It had, no doubt, fallen into 
 their hands, not in consequence of any political mancBu- 
 vring, but by the natural course of trade and traffic among 
 the citizens. Col. Burr, and some of his political friends, 
 believed that the power of that bank was used to patron- 
 ise and encourage business men who were federalists, and 
 to cramp and embarrass those who held republican princi- 
 ples. Hence the origination of a plan to incorporate an 
 additional bank in the city. But this project could not be 
 carried into effect by the consent of the legislature, inas- 
 much as a majority of both houses of the legislature were 
 federal J and even the republican part of the members 
 were so jealous of the corrupt influence of moneyed institu- 
 tions that few of them would consent to charter a bank in 
 a city which already was furnished with one institution. 
 The result, therefore, was a conclusion that the real object 
 of the scheme must be concealed: that is, the legislature 
 must be blindfolded, and, in that condition, must be indu- 
 ced to do that which they would not do with their eyes 
 open. In other words, it was deliberately contrived to 
 cheat the legislature out of a charter; and the following 
 was the scheme contrived: — The yellow fever had then 
 recently made dreadful ravages in the city. That event, 
 with other circumstances, called the attention of the pub- 
 lic to the necessity of a plentiful supply of the city of 
 New-York with pure and wholesoihe waterj and the le- 
 gislature were, with great plausibility, invoked to charter, 
 on the most liberal terms, a company who professed their 
 willingness to undertake so useful an enterprise. As it 
 was uncertain what amount of capital might be required 
 to effect the contemplated object, and with a view to avoid
 
 326 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 any chance of failure on account of a deficiency of capital, 
 the company requested to be authorized to raise two mil- 
 lions of dollarsj but as it was possible, and indeed proba- 
 ble, that the construction of the water works would not 
 absorb the whole of that sum, they asked for a provision 
 that the " surplus capital might be employed in any way 
 not inconsistent with the laws and constitution of the 
 United States, or of the state of New-York." This request 
 seemed to be but reasonable, and yet, under the authority 
 of these few words, one of the most powerful and formida- 
 ble moneyed monopolies has grown up that ever existed 
 in this state. It is certain that an immense majority of 
 the legislature did not entertain the least suspicion that 
 this charter contained a grant of banking powers, 
 
 Mr. Davis, {in 1 Burr^ 413,) says, " that it has been 
 said that the charter was obtained by trick and manage- 
 ment, and that, if suspicion had been entertained by any 
 of the federal members. Col. Burr could not have got the 
 bill through the legislature." Now, I do not contend but 
 that some of the federal members may have known that 
 the real object of the bill was to create a bank; but might 
 not those same federal members have had secured to them 
 an interest which w'ould make it profitable to them to have 
 the bill become a law % Was not human nature the same 
 then as it was in 1805, and in 1812, when the Merchants 
 Bank and the Bank of America were chartered % But 
 will Mr. Davis pretend — will any man pretend — that, if 
 a majority of the members had been apprised of the real 
 object of the bill, it would have passed 1 Certainly not; 
 and Mr. Davis virtually admits it. But Mr. Davis justi- 
 fies, and claims triumphantly to have justified, Col. Burr, 
 by affirming that he did not misrepresent or misstate to 
 any member the object he had in view. Indeed ! Col. 
 Burr did not positively utter a falsehood, and, therefore, 
 he was not guilty of fraud and trick. By the moral, as
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 327 
 
 "well as municipal law, I had supposed that the suppres- 
 sion of truth, in cases of this sort, rendered the actor 
 equally culpable as would the affirmation of a falsehood. 
 Col. Burr was a member of the legislature, and had so- 
 lemnly sworn to perform his duty as such member. The 
 bill was hurried through both houses, at the heel of the 
 Session, and, in the senate, was reported complete by a 
 select committee, and was never referred to the committee 
 of the whole of that house. True, Mr, Davis says that 
 Col. Burr stated the object of the bill to one federal sena- 
 tor from the western district, who, I infer, was Mr. Tho- 
 mas Morris. 
 
 The attention of the council of revision, to the clause 
 under which banking powers were claimed, was called by 
 the ohief justice, to whom the bill was referred. But, 
 ft-om an extract from their minutes, which will be found 
 in 1 Burr, 415, it is very evident that it did not seem to 
 the members of that body that in passing that bill they 
 were chartering a bank which was to exist as long as the 
 government lasted. From the words used by the chief 
 justice, who objected to the bill in consequence of the 
 clause in question, he appeared to be apprehensive that 
 the company would employ their capital in trade, &c. 
 The idea of banking, it is most evident, never came into 
 his head. A majority of the council, of which the pure 
 minded John Jay was then president, passed the bill, not- 
 withstanding the objections of the chief justice. 
 
 Would John Jay have passed a bill chartering a bank, 
 which he must have known had passed the two houses 
 without their knowledge that it contained such a grant ? 
 I do not believe it. It will not be forgotten that the po- 
 litical power created by chartering this institution was 
 eventually used for the prostration of Col. Burr himself, 
 and his immediate friends. Was it not retributive jus- 
 tice ?
 
 32S POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 The next bank chartered, which partook of a party 
 character, was the New- York State Bank, at Albany. 
 
 The applicants for a charter for this institution alleged 
 that the bank of Albany was owned by federalists, and 
 that its power was wielded in such manner as to be op- 
 pressive to those business men who belonged to the repub- 
 lican party. They further alleged that the public conve- 
 nience, and the interest of trade and commerce, demanded 
 another bank at the seat of government. So far, all was 
 fair on the part of the applicants. They were open and 
 frank in declaring the object of their application, and the 
 reasons on which it was founded. But, as proof of the 
 monopolizing and greedy spirit of men, a part of whose 
 business it was to drive bank charters through the legisla- 
 ture, truth compels me to state that this republican com- 
 pany had connected with their application a most gigantic 
 scheme of speculation, if not of peculation. They peti- 
 tioned the legislature that, in the same act by which the 
 bank was to be chartered, an exclusive grant might be 
 made to them, or a lease might be given them, of the salt 
 springs in the state for a long time, say sixty yearsj the 
 company stipulating that salt should always be in readi- 
 ness, and for sale at the salt works in Salina, at a price 
 not exceeding Jive shillings per bushel; and also that they 
 would pay the state three thousand dollars a year rent, for 
 the first ten years; three thousand and five hundred dol- 
 lars for the second ten years; and four thousand dollars 
 annually thereafter. | At that time the value of the salt 
 springs was not generally known in the state, and the 
 public were equally ignorant of the expense of manufactu- 
 ring salt, as is evident from the offer made to put the 
 maximum price at five shillings for the same quantity of 
 salt which, it has since been ascertained, can be manufac- 
 tured for six cents. 
 
 Elkanah Watson, a man who has since been pretty well 
 X Sec Note I.
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 329 
 
 known in the state, was the most efficient agent of this 
 company, and there is still extant, and will be found 
 among the curious documents preserved by Doct. Beck, 
 in the Academy at Albany, a printed scheme, drawn by E. 
 Watson, of the mode to be pursued in order so to drill the 
 legislature as to induce them to pass this law. No doubt 
 he, and some others, knew well the value to the state 
 of the salt springs. The petition was signed by John 
 Tayler, Elisha Jenkins, Thomas Tillotson, Ambrose Spen- 
 cer and others, and was presented to the senate and refer- 
 red to Mr. L'Homedieu and two other senators, who 
 reported a bill granting the prayer of the petitioners, in- 
 cluding the exclusive right to the salt springs ! Some of 
 the western members, who foresaw the exorbitant mono- 
 poly which a lease of the salt works for a long term of 
 years would confer on the company, made an outcry about 
 it, and the company prudently consented to strike out that 
 provision in the bill. After this clause was stricken out 
 one would have supposed that the company would have 
 been sure of success by resting upon the merits of the 
 bill. But the company, before their petition was present- 
 ed, had agreed on a dividend of stock among themselves, 
 and reserved a surplus to be distributed among the mem- 
 bers of the legislature. It appears from the affidavit of 
 Luther Rich, a member from the county of Otsego, and 
 several other affidavits, that assurances were given that 
 those members who voted for the bill should have stock, 
 with a further assurance that the stock would be above 
 par. This was the commencement of that corrupt prac- 
 tice.* I have taken the above account principally from 
 
 • William A. Clark, of Orange county, who, in 1803, was a member of assembly, 
 gave me a different account of the manner in which the stock of the State Bank 
 ■was distributed. He stated that the applicants founded their claim to a charter 
 upon the ground that it should be a republican bank; and with a view, as wpn 
 pretended, to insure it that character, they agreed that each republican member 
 Bliould be entitled to subscribe for a given number of shares, and that this privi-
 
 330 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 a statement signed by Doct. Samuel Stringer and James 
 Van Ingen, as chairman and secretary of a public meeting 
 held in Albany, in the spring of the year 1803. It was, 
 it is true, a party meeting, but as Doct. Stringer and Mr. 
 Van Ingen are known to have been highly respectable 
 men, I cannot belicA^e they would venture to publish any 
 facts, affecting the conduct and character of their neigh- 
 bors, which they did not know existed. [See Note T.] 
 
 It has been already stated that before the State Bank 
 was chartered, a joint stock company had been formed in 
 the city of New-York for the purpose of banking, upon 
 principles similar to the association of the company which 
 commenced the New-York Bank in the year 1784, and 
 that a like company had also been formed in Albany, by 
 the name of the " Mercantile Company." These compa- 
 nies applied for a charter at the same time with the com- 
 pany which composed the State Bank. They alleged that 
 the friends of the latter institution had agreed to support 
 their application; but the State Bank by some means got 
 ahead of the other applications, and when that company 
 had obtained their charter, some of its supporters fell off, 
 and the bills to charter the Merchant's Bank of New- 
 York, and Mercantile Company of Albany, failed of be- 
 coming laws. These companies therefore charged the 
 friends of the State Bank with bad faith. 
 
 lege was secured to every republican member, whether he voted for or against the 
 bank. But this does not varjr the corrupting tendency of the proposals of the ap- 
 plicants. Admit that such was the fact, and, at the same time, admit, what un- 
 doubtedly is true, that it was well known that the shares would sell in market 
 above par, and it required but an indifferent share of common sense for any mem- 
 ber to perceive that he would fail in realizing any benefit from the stock unless 
 the bank was chartered ; which, again, could not be done unless a majority of the 
 members voted for it. 
 
 A story was put in circulation about Judge Peck, (then a member of the assem- 
 bly,) which has rather too much the appearance of fiction to be entitled to credit, 
 although many, even at this day, believe it. It is said he subscribed for rather an 
 unusual number of shares — and being an influential member it is not improbable 
 that he did so, if he subscribed at all— that he did not choose to subscribe his real 
 name, and therefore adopted for his signature, Jedediah Bushi'l, iastead of Jede- 
 ftahPcck. [See Note S.]
 
 OP NEW-YORK. 331 
 
 At the succeeding session, on the 11th of April, 1804, 
 instead of incorporating these joint stock companies, the 
 legislature passed the celebrated restraining law, by which 
 all unincorporated companies, under severe penalties, were 
 prohibited from banking, and by which these companies, 
 although they had invested their money as they lawfully 
 might do, under the existing laws, were compelled to 
 wind up their concerns. 
 
 I cannot on this occasion refrain from remarking, that 
 even at that time bank paper was the medium through 
 which business transactions were principally conducted, 
 and the precious metals had ceased to be the circulating 
 medium in the state. The banks, therefore, in point of 
 fact, exercised the power of coining, what for all practical 
 purposes was the money of the people. 
 
 The aggregate of capital then actually invested in char 
 tared banks in the state, exclusive of the capital of the 
 Manhattan Company, did not at that period, amount to 
 two millions of dollars, and including the whole nominal 
 capital of the Manhattan Company, did not exceed four 
 millions. 
 
 Suppose there had been but one company, and this four 
 millionsjwhich probably in fact did not exceed two millions, 
 had been held by such company, and waving any restric- 
 tions contained in the United States constitution, it had 
 been proposed to grant this company the exclusive right 
 of issuing or coining money, who would not have been 
 alarmed at such a proposition 1 Such in effect was the 
 restraining law. 
 
 It may, it is true, be necessary for special and peculiar 
 reasons to grant exclusive privileges to an individual, or to 
 a limited number of individuals, but inasmuch as these 
 grants infringe upon the equal rights of all, they ought not 
 to be tolerated except for reasons the most cogent. Be- 
 cause every grant of exclusive rights is the taking pre-
 
 332 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 cisely as much from the quantum of rights, to the enjoy- 
 ment of which the whole community is entitled, as is thus 
 exclusively granted. This position may be illustrated by 
 supposing the whole community to consist of one hundred 
 persons, and that they jointly own one thousand dollars, 
 if then, you grant to an individual, exclusively, one hun- 
 dred dollars of the joint funds belonging to the hundred 
 associates, there will remain but nine hundred dollars of the 
 aggregate funds of the association. 
 
 At the session in 1805, the company composing the 
 Merchants Bank, applied for a charter. The application 
 was based on the ground that more banking capital was re- 
 quired to facilitate commercial and other business in New- 
 York, and that having invested their capital for banking 
 purposes, when by law they had a right so to use it, and 
 having incurred considerable expense in the prosecution 
 of their objects, they claimed from the justice of the le- 
 gislature either an act of incorporation or the privilege of 
 using their money in the manner they were by law author- 
 rised to do when they incurred those expenditures. These 
 grounds would seem to entitle them to some relief. But 
 the leading representatives in New-York, among whom 
 De Witt Clinton was the most efficient, (some of whom 
 being largely interested in, and directors of, the Manhattan 
 Company,) and also, several of the most influential re- 
 publicans of Albany, at the head of whom were John 
 Tayler and Judge Spencer, and who, by the bye, were 
 deeply interested in the State Bank, warmly opposed this 
 application. They did not ostensibly oppose it because 
 the increase of banks would diminish the profits of exist- 
 ing institutions, but because they alleged that the public 
 interest did not require an additional bank in the city of 
 New-Yorkj and because, as they asserted, the granting of 
 the application would be injurious to the republican party. 
 Hence, their papers, the American Citizen, and Albany
 
 OF NEW-YORK. • 333 
 
 Register, were made to announce that the applicants were 
 ** federalists and tories," and urge that as a reason why 
 the republican members ought not to listen to the appli- 
 cation. 
 
 The applicants finding they were resisted for reasons 
 exclusively of a party character, which assuredly was 
 wrong, resorted to measures still more unjustifiable than 
 those taken by their opponents, to secure the granting of 
 their charter. Isaac Kibbe, a Burrite of some distinction, 
 was appointed their agent. Through him, and through 
 Ebenezer Purdy of the senate, it afterwards appeared that 
 corrupt offers had been made to members of the legisla- 
 ture if they would vote for incorporating the Merchants 
 Bank. The few federal members who then belonged to 
 the senate, voted for it. With them, Messrs. Purdy, 
 Savage, Hogeboom, Burt and other republican members 
 voted, so as to make up the number of fifteen ayes 
 There were twelve noes. 
 
 When the bill came into the assembly, it was taken in 
 charge principally by William W. Van Ness, then a federal 
 member from the county of Columbia. After some proceed- 
 ings upon it were had in that body, and after a question had 
 been taken on the first clause in the bill, which was adopted 
 by a majority of votes, a complaint was made, that the com- 
 pany had, by their agents, attempted to bribe some of the 
 members of both houses; and a committee was appointed 
 to inquire into the truth of the charge, consisting of Gil- 
 bert of New-York; Livingston, German, Mclntyre, Ar- 
 cularius, Sylvester and Lush. On the motion of one of 
 the federal members, the committee, after considerable 
 debate were instructed to inquire if any corrupt means had 
 been used by these and other applicants for bank charters, 
 by which it was no doubt intended to inquire into the 
 means used by the State Bank to obtain its charter; but
 
 334 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 it does not appear that this branch of the inquiry was 
 undertaken by the committee. 
 
 Upon investigation it appeared that the applicants had 
 offered John Ballard, Gurdon Huntington and Peter Belts, 
 members of the legislature, if they would vote for the 
 bank, the right of subscribing for a given number of 
 shares, with a guarantee that those shares should be 
 purchased of them at an advance of twenty-five per cent. 
 It also appeared that Purdy had offered the right to 
 Stephen Thorn, a senator, to subscribe for thirty shares, 
 and promised to advance him five pounds in cash for each 
 share, and also that he had assailed Obadiah German, an 
 influential member of the assembly, with great importu- 
 nity, promising to him fifty shares, with a guaranty 
 that if he chose to sell them, he should make in 
 clear profit one thousand dollars. These facts appeared 
 from the depositions of Ballard, Huntington, Betts, Thorn 
 and German. But notwithstanding these palpable proofs 
 of attempts at corruption, and the almost irresistible in- 
 ference that some of the members who voted for the bank 
 bad been tampered with, and refused to disclose the cor- 
 rupt offers which had been made to them, and which they 
 had accepted, the vote in favor of the bill on its final 
 passage in the assembly, was stronger than the vote on its 
 enacting clause. Of the proceedings in the council of 
 revision I have already given an account. 
 
 Cheetham, in the American Citizen, had charged the 
 senate with corruption in the passage of the law incorpo- 
 rating the Merchants Bank, and the senate, on motion of 
 Mr. Van Vechten, instructed the attorney general to pro- 
 secute him for the libel. Subsequently the attorney 
 general, Mr. Woodworth, in obedience to the resolution, 
 caused the alleged libel to be submitted to a grand jury 
 of New-York, but they refused to find a bill This aflfords
 
 OF NEW- YORK. 335 
 
 pretty decisive evidence of what public opinion was in 
 that city. 
 
 During the proceedings in the legislature upon the bill 
 in question, much accrimony among the members was ex- 
 cited. So heated did Judge Taylor and Judge Purdy 
 become, that the former committed a personal assault upon 
 the latter, by knocking him down as he was passing 
 from the senate chamber, and almost within the bar of the 
 senate. What effect these collisions had on political par- 
 ties I have noticed in another place. [See JVote B.] 
 
 No other applications for bank charters were made, 
 which were seriously pressed until the year 1812, when 
 the Bank of America was incorporated. I have hereto- 
 fore alluded to the disgusting scenes, which, in the pro- 
 gress of that application were exhibited. From the affi- 
 davits of Silas Holmes, Nathaniel Cobb, Bennett Bicknell, 
 A. C. Comstock and Isaac Ogden, all members of the le- 
 gislature, which will be found at large on the journals of 
 the house of assembly for 1812, it is evident that the 
 most shameless attempts were made to corrupt the mem- 
 bers, and there is too much reason to believe that in 
 some instances, those attempts were successful. One is 
 pained and sickened at the evidence these depositions 
 afford of the degeneracy of human nature. John Mar- 
 tin, the preacher whom I have mentioned as a sub-agent 
 of the bank, was convicted of attempting to bribe mem- 
 bers of the legislature, contrary to the statute of 1806, 
 and sentenced to confinement in the state prison. I have 
 before alluded to the trial of Mr. Southwick, for an at- 
 tempt to bribe Mr. Speaker Sheldon, and I shall not now 
 take up the time of the reader by relating the particulars 
 which were disclosed in relation to the disgraceful trans- 
 actions connected with the incorporation of this insti- 
 tution j but shall merely as a specimen of the mode of man- 
 agement by the bank agents, give a summary of the testi-
 
 336 POLITICAL HISTOETf 
 
 mony of Casper M. Rouse, a senator elected from the 
 county of Chenango on the Clintonian ticket in April, 
 1811, against Gen. Thomas. I have before stated that 
 Gen. Thomas, as the agent of the bank applicants, in the 
 fall of 1811, went on a mission through the southern and 
 ■western counties. Mr. Rouse says, that Gen. Thomas, in 
 the latter part of October, or first of November, came to 
 Norwich where he resided, and sought and obtained a 
 private interview with him. Gen. Thomas commenced 
 by saying that a scheme of the Lewisites and Martling 
 men, (a party to whom he knew Mr. Rouse was opposed,) 
 had been formed for procuring a charter to another 
 bank in New-York; and that an application would also be 
 made to charter the Bank of America. That if that bank 
 was incorporated. Rouse should have ten shares in it. 
 Rouse then stated that he had not a favorable opinion of 
 banks, and besides he had no money to invest in bank 
 stock. To which Gen. Thomas replied, that if he did not 
 wish to keep the stock he would pledge his honor that he, 
 (R.) should realize one thousand dollars clear profits from 
 the shares. It does not appear that Mr. Rouse gave the 
 General any definitive answer, and Thomas left him 
 with a request that he would call on Mr. Southwick as 
 soon as he sould arrive in Albany, when he went there 
 to take his seat as a member of the senate. I seems 
 Rouse did not call on Southwick, nor did he vote for the 
 bank, but about the middle of March, when the bank 
 agents became alarmed for fear of an explosion, Mr. John 
 Van Ness Yates, on Sunday, called on Mr. Rouse, and 
 requested him to call and see Gen. Thomas. He did so, 
 when he, the General, asked him if he had divulged the 
 conversation which took place at Norwich, and Rouse an- 
 swered that he had not. Thomas earnestly requested him 
 not to do so, and told him, that although he had or should 
 vote against the bank, he should have his one thousand
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 337 
 
 dollars. It is hardly possible to suppose that this state- 
 ment, verified by the oath of senator Rouse, was in sub- 
 stance false. What possible motive could he have had 
 for committing so foul a perjury 1 If the story of Rouse 
 was substantially true, can there be a doubt of the guilt 
 of Gen. Thomas? 
 
 It is proper, however, to add, in justice to the memory 
 of Mr. Thomas, that Rouse voted for him as treasurer in 
 February, in preference to Mr. Lansing, and that Gen. 
 Thomas published an affidavit voluntarily made by him 
 contradicting the material facts sworn to by Mr. Rouse. 
 
 No other very serious collisions arose upon the char- 
 tering of banks under the old constitution. The odium 
 attached to all those implicated in the corrupt means used 
 to promote the incorporation of the Bank of America, 
 was so great and so lasting that no attempts of the kind 
 were made for a long while afterwards^ and the iniquitous 
 proceedings of former legislatures in relation to granting 
 charters to moneyed institutions, had been so disgraceful 
 to the state, and were so fresh in the recollection of the 
 members of the convention of 1821, as, beyond all ques- 
 tion, induced them, with a view to the prevention of these 
 practices, to insert the clause in the present constitution 
 which renders necessary the assent of two-thirds of 
 both houses of the legislature in order to incorporate a 
 moneyed institution. The intention of the convention 
 was good, but the clause failed to accomplish the object 
 intended. Witness the proceedings in passing the law to 
 incorporate the Chemical Bank, and other institutions, in 
 1825. The only effect of the restrictive clause in the 
 constitution has been to increase the evil, by rendering 
 necessary a more extended system of corruption, in some 
 form, than was before indispensable. 
 
 Since the disclosures of 1825, no direct evidence of cor- 
 ruption, as a means of procuring bank charters, has been 
 
 22
 
 338 POLITICAL HISTORY 
 
 furnished — but that power of the legislature, guarded as 
 it has been by the restraining law, has in latter years been 
 exercised for rewarding the services of political partisans; 
 a practice, which, when viewed in all its consequences, 
 is more dangerous than that pursued by the applicants for 
 the Bank of America. In the one case, the applicants 
 corrupted those to whom the people had delegated power; 
 in the other, the very source of power is intended to be 
 corrupted — in the one, the legislature were corrupted by 
 the applicants; in the other, the legislature corrupted the 
 people. 
 
 I will dismiss this subject after submitting one or two 
 remarks. 
 
 In my judgment, at the time the Manhattan Bank was 
 chartered, an additional bank was required in the city of 
 New-York; and further, I believe that the applications to 
 incorporate the State Bank, the Merchants Bank, and the 
 Bank of America, were meritorious, and ought, standing 
 on their own merits, to have been granted, and that the 
 error consisted in permitting those interested in banks to 
 make a political question of a matter not properly such, 
 with a view to subserve their own individual interests. * 
 
 That if banking is properly regulated, as it is under 
 the safety fund law the multiplication of banks to any 
 reasonable extent, can have no other effect than that of 
 diminishing the profits of existing banks, and even if 
 banks are multiplied so as to render money invested in 
 them unproductive, no serious evil can ensue; for the stock- 
 holders can, beyond a doubt, at any time pay back to each 
 one his share of the capital, and on payment of the lia- 
 bilities, invest their money in some more profitable busi- 
 ness. 
 
 That the question arising on the chartering of a bank, 
 therefore is not political, but is a question affecting princi- 
 pally the stockholders of existing banks, and those who 
 * See ^fote U.
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 339 
 
 v/ish to become stockholders; and that, therefore, the real 
 question is, or rather was before the passage of the free 
 banking law, between monopolists and those who desire 
 to become monopolizers.* 
 
 That such a heartless controversy should repeatedly 
 have convulsed and broken up great political parties, that 
 it should in its progress have blasted the prospects and 
 destroyed the usefulness of so many talented, and in other 
 respects worthy citizens, and finally, that it should have 
 marred the character for purity of our state legislature, 
 and fixed an indelible and enduring stain upon the repu- 
 tation of the empire state, is deeply to be deplored. 
 
 • The question lespecting chartering a national bank inTolves other and Tory 
 diflerent considerations.
 
 340 POLITICAL HISTORY [1812. 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1812, TO MAY 1, 1813. 
 
 Shortly after the peace of 1783, a society was formed 
 in the city of New- York, known by the name of the Tam- 
 many Society. It was probably, originally instituted with 
 a view of organizing an association antagonist to the Cin- 
 cinnati Society. That society was said to be monarchical 
 or rather aristocratical in its tendency, and, when first 
 formed, and before its constitution was amended, on the 
 suggestion of General Washington and other original 
 members, it certainly did tend to the establishment of an 
 hereditary order, something like an order of nobility. 
 The Tammany Society originally seems to have had in 
 view the preservation of our democratic institutions, as far 
 as possible, from contamination by the adoption of any of 
 the aristocratic principles which were connected with the 
 governments of the old world. 
 
 A sketch of the prominent features, and of the history 
 of the Tammany Association, has been kindly furnished 
 me by an old and highly respectable citizen of New-York, 
 the Hon. Judah Hammond, which, without having obtained 
 his express permission, I take leave to insert: — 
 
 " Tammany Society, or Columbian Order, was founded 
 by William Mooney, an upholsterer residing in the city 
 of New-York, some time in the administration of President 
 Washington. The institution takes its name from the 
 celebrated Indian Chief Tammany, whose attachment to 
 liberty was greater than his love of life. It has a Grand 
 Sachem and thirteen sachems, in imitation of the president 
 and governors of the states, at the time it was founded; a 
 secretary, a sagamore, the master of ceremonies, and a
 
 1812.] OF KEw-yoRK. 341 
 
 wiskinkie, the door-keeper j a grand council, of which 
 the grand sachem and the other sachems are members. 
 The father of the council is the presiding officerj the 
 scribe records the proceedings of the council. The laws 
 mention the council fire, the calumet, or pipe of peace, 
 and the tomahawk, which they bury when the pipe is 
 smoked. It dates from two eras, the discovery of America 
 by Columbus, and the founding of the institution. It di- 
 vides the year into seasons, as the season of snow, the 
 the season of blossoms, the season of fruits. The twelfth 
 day of May is kept as its anniversary. 
 
 " William Mooney was one of those who, at that early 
 day, regarded the powers of the general government as 
 dangerous to the independence of the state governments, 
 and to the common liberties of the people. His object 
 was to fill the country with institutions designed, and men 
 determined, to preserve the just balance of power. His 
 purpose was patriotic and purely republican. The con- 
 stitution provided by his care, contained, among other 
 things, a solemn asseveration, which every member at his 
 initiation was required to repeat and subscribe, that he 
 would sustain the state institutions, and resist a consolida- 
 tion of power in the general government. Tammany was, 
 at first, so popular, that most persons of merit became 
 members; and so numerous were they that its anniversary 
 was regarded as a holiday. 
 
 " At that time there was no party politics mixed up in 
 its proceedings. But when President Washington, in the 
 latter part of his administration, rebuked " self created 
 societies," from an apprehension that their ultimate ten- 
 dency would be hostile to the public tranquility, the mem- 
 bers of Tammany supposed their institution to be included 
 in the reproof; and they almost all forsook it. The foun- 
 der, William Mooney, and a few others, continued stead- 
 last. At one anniversary they were reduced so low that
 
 342 POLITICAL HISTORY 1812. 
 
 but three persons attended its festival. From this tirae it 
 became a political institution, and took ground with Tho- 
 mas Jefferson. The writer of this article joined it about 
 the year eighteen hundred and three. At the time of his 
 initiation the regular meetings were ordinarily attended 
 by about ten or fifteen members. The institution gradu- 
 ally increased in numbers, and made a great rally about 
 the year eighteen hundred and twelve, in support of presi- 
 dent Madison's administration, and to secure his re-elec- 
 tion in that year. Five hundred new members were initi- 
 ated in one year, and there was a great return of old 
 members who had been lax in their attendance. About 
 the year eighteen hundred and fourteen I ceased to be 
 an attending member, and consequently lost sight of its 
 internal polity, and know not what intestine changes 
 have passed upon its ancient lineaments, further than 
 these are discernible in its public policy." 
 
 The leaders of the party in the city of New-York, 
 which I have described under the denomination of Mart- 
 ling men, were generally members of this society. Thus 
 organized, they were enabled to act with prodigious effect 
 upon the democratic party in the city. By their efforts, 
 and by the course taken by Mr. Clinton, which was some- 
 times, to say the least, indiscreet, before the year 1813 an 
 immense majority of the republicans of New-York became 
 decidedly opposed to him; and the united influence of the 
 democracy of that great city, it will readily be perceived, 
 was calculated to have a considerable influence upon the 
 republican party in the state. 
 
 The Tammany or Martling party were extremely ap- 
 prehensive, that Mr. Clinton's standing among the repub- 
 lican members of the legislature from the country, was 
 still such, as would enable him to induce a majority of 
 them to consent to his re-nomination as lieutenant gover- 
 nor. Under these impressions, early in January they got
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 343 
 
 up a meeting in the city, at which they recommended a 
 state convention for the purpose of nominating a governor 
 and lieutenant governor. Of this meeting, Jonathan 
 Thompson, afterwards collector of the port, was chairman, 
 and John L. Broome, son of the late lieutenant governor, 
 was secretary. 
 
 About this time a new paper, which was understood to 
 be the organ of the Tammany party, was established in 
 New-York, under the name of the National Advocate. 
 Henry Wheaton, then recently from Rhode Island, and 
 since well known as a man of distinguished talents, was 
 its editor. 
 
 The legislature met at Albany on the 12th of January, 
 and on the same day chose a council of appointment. 
 The gentlemen elected, were Peter W. Radcliflf from the 
 southern, James W.Wilkin from the middle, John Stearns 
 from the eastern, and Jonas Piatt from the western dis- 
 tricts. All of these gentlemen were federalists, except 
 Gen. Wilkin, who was elected because there was no fede- 
 ralist in the senate from the middle district. 
 
 As the term of service of Gen. John Smith, in the sen- 
 ate of the United States, would expire on the 4th March, 
 it became necessary for the legislature to appoint a suc- 
 cessor. 
 
 It has been stated that there was a federal majority in 
 the assembly, but that in the senate the republican major- 
 ity was greater than the federal majority in the assembly. 
 It was, therefore, fair to presume that a republican senator 
 on a joint ballot would be chosen; but the event disap- 
 pointed that reasonable anticipation. Mr. Rufus King 
 was nominated by the assembly by a vote of fift)''-five to 
 forty-four, and Mr. James W. Wilkin, a senator from Or- 
 ange county, was chosen by the senate. Upon a joint 
 ballot Mr. King had sixty-eight votes and Gen. Wilkin 
 sixty-one. There were thrpe blank votes. What was
 
 344 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 the cause of this result 1 By the Tammany party it was 
 charged to Mr. Clinton. They alleged that this was the 
 consideration for which the federalists, in November,were 
 induced to give the Clintonians the presidential electors. 
 On the other hand, the republicans who had supported 
 Mr. Clinton insisted, that it was the result of a bargain 
 made by Gen. Thomas and Mr. Southwick, by which they 
 agreed, that if the federalists, as a body, would vote for 
 the incorporation of a bank, they would secure to the fed- 
 eral party the election of the next senator; and there is a 
 fact within my knowledge which induces me to believe 
 that the latter supposition is the more probable. 
 
 In the year 1817, when Mr. Clinton was a candidate 
 for nomination for the office of governor, by the republi- 
 can members of the legislature, this charge was brought 
 against him. Gen. Wilkin was then a member of con- 
 gress and at Washington. I was there also. Mr. Clinton 
 addressed to me a letter stating that a report was in circu- 
 lation charging him and his friends with having, in pursu- 
 ance of a previous agreement, combined to defeat the elec- 
 tion of Gen. Wilkin to the senate of the United States, 
 and requesting me to call on him and obtain his contra- 
 diction of it. I did so; and Gen. Wilkin addressed to me 
 a letter, which I forwarded to Mr. Clinton, and which is 
 probably now among his papers, in which Gen. W. de- 
 clared his utter disbelief in any foundation for the report. 
 He was convinced, he said, that his election was defeated 
 by the influence and votes of the friends of the bank.* 
 Besides, it would have been so vile an act of treachery in 
 Mr. Clinton to sacrifice so constant and steady a friend as 
 Mr. Wilkin, and the man who had been president of the 
 legislative caucus which nominated him for the presidency, 
 
 • As an act of justice to Mr. King, it is proper to state that no individual of any 
 partjr ever suspected that he was a party to, or had knowledge of, any negotia> 
 tion either with the Clintonians or the bank men.
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 345 
 
 that so heinous a charge ought not to be sustained or tole- 
 rated without strong and positive proof. I am, however, 
 inclined to believe that the knowing ones in the republican 
 party had made some discoveries by which they had rea- 
 son to believe that the chances of success in the election 
 of a republican senator, was, to say the least, very dubi- 
 ous. The office was a desirable one to men of the first 
 talents and standing in the statej and Gen. Wilkin, though 
 a perfectly amiable and very upright man, had not that 
 high standing and powerful influence in the party which 
 several other republicans in the state had; and, it seems 
 to me, that had they been sure that a republican senator 
 would have been elected, a sharper competition for the 
 office would have been exhibited, and probably some other 
 person would have been nominated. 
 
 In August, 1812, the attorney general, M. B. Hildreth, 
 died, and Thomas Addis Emmett, the celebrated Irish ad- 
 vocate, was appointed his successor. The misfortunes, 
 persecution and sufferings of that great and good man in 
 his native country, the purity of character and exalted 
 virtue he evinced, and the splendid triumph he deserved 
 and obtained in his adopted country, are well known; but 
 his wonderful powers of mind, his transcendent talents, 
 and his unrivalled eloquence as an advocate, will not be 
 known to posterity, because all those who heard him and 
 felt the powers of his mighty intellect, (and none but such 
 can form an adequate idea of his merits and superiority 
 over all other men,) will soon follow him to the tomb. 
 Mr. Emmett did not seek the office. The state adminis- 
 tration invited him to accept it, and I apprehend the espe- 
 cial reason of their doing so was that they might avail 
 themselves of his talents on the trial of Thomas and 
 Southwick. 
 
 The last act of the council which was chosen in the year 
 I812,was their best act. On the 14th January , they appoint-
 
 346 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 ed Gideon Hawley, Esq. under the law passed by the last 
 legislature for the better organization of schools, superin- 
 tendent of common schools. Mr. Hawley was then a 
 young lawyer resident in Albany, of habits indefatigably 
 industrious, modest and retiring, but possessing great be- 
 nevolence of heart, vigorous intellectual powers, and high 
 literary attainments. For the paltry salary of three hun- 
 dred dollars a year, he perfected a system for the manage- 
 ment of the school fundj the organization of every neigh- 
 borhood in this great state into school districts; for a fair 
 and equal distribution of the bounty of the state into every 
 district; and he devised a plan of operations by which 
 this vast machinery could be moved and managed by a 
 single individual. The state have never rewarded him for 
 his labors, but posterity will, it is believed, do justice to 
 his merits, his services and his character. If the man who 
 invents the means of improving the working of inani- 
 mate machinery, in controlling its power, or in chang- 
 ing the face of the globe by artificial water commu- 
 nications, be, as he truly is, entitled to the gratitude of his 
 fellow beings, what meed of praise does that individual 
 deserve who efficiently aids in pouring a flood of light on 
 the human intellect, and adding indefinitely to the mass 
 of mind 1 
 
 The federal council met for the first time on the 
 the eighth day of February. A difference of views among 
 the then federal members, was disclosed in the first ap- 
 pointment which was made. Gen. Piatt moved the re- 
 appointment of De Witt Clinton as mayor of New-York, 
 and to this appointment Mr. RadclifF objected. A majo- 
 rity however, voted in favor of the appointment, and it 
 was effected, but Mr. RadclifF caused his dissent to be en- 
 tered on the minutes of the council. The particular cause 
 of Mr. RadcliflTs dissent was, that in 1810, his brother, 
 Jacob RadclifF, (formerly a judge of the supreme court,)
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YOKK. 347 
 
 had by the Robert Williams council been made mayor in 
 place of Mr. Clinton, and in the succeeding year had been 
 compelled to give place to Mr. Clinton. The dissent there- 
 fore, of Mr. Radcliffmay have been caused more by fraternal 
 affection than the amor patrice. But what could induce 
 Gen. Piatt to have taken a course on this single appoint- 
 ment, which he must have foreseen would produce a 
 state of feeling, that would embarrass their proceedings at 
 that critical juncture of the fortunes of the federal party, 
 through the remainder of the time in which that council 
 would exist 1 
 
 Mr. Piatt, who at this time may be regarded as the 
 most influential man in the federal party, was a lawyer 
 who had been in extensive practice, and though his talents 
 were not brilliant, they were of a character highly respec- 
 table; his morals were perfectly pure; though he possessed 
 a deep and intense tone of feeling, and a high sense of 
 personal honor, he had acquired, apparently, an entire 
 control over his passions; his quiet and calm deportment 
 indicated a contemplative and considerate mind, not lia- 
 ble to be hurried into the adoption of ill-adjusted plans, or 
 to determinations which might lead to actions indiscreet 
 or ill advised. His address was unobtrusive, modest and 
 conciliatory. He had a high regard to courtesy and pro- 
 priety, as well in respect to political conduct as in the 
 private and social concerns of life. He and other leaders 
 of the federal party in New- York, had within a few 
 months past, recommended to their political friends in the 
 other states of the union to support Mr. Clinton for the 
 first office in the nation. Since that support had been 
 given in pursuance of such recommendation, no man could 
 pretend that Mr. Clinton had done anything to lessen him 
 in the estimation of the federalists. In what light then 
 would Gen. Piatt and his friends in this state appear to 
 their friends abroad, and to the American public in gene-
 
 348 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 ral, were they to refuse to re-appoint, and were they, in 
 effect, to remove from the comparatively petty office of 
 mayoralty of New-York, (an office, the duties of which it 
 is universally admitted Mr. Clinton had discharged with 
 great ability and to the entire satisfaction of the citizens,) 
 a man whom they had so recently recommended as fitted 
 for the office of president of the United States *? 
 
 This consideration alone, must have had a powerful ef- 
 fect on the mind of Gen. Piatt; while it seems not at all 
 to have reached the sensibilities of his colleague of the 
 southern district. But there were other considerations, 
 which, no doubt, bore with great force on the minds of 
 Mr. Piatt and Mr. Stearns. 
 
 From the course of conduct of Gov. Tompkins, Judge 
 Spencer and Mr. Tayler, towards Mr. Clinton, for the 
 year past, they had reason to anticipate what eventually 
 took place, that he would oppose the re-election of Gov. 
 Tompkins. Is it not probable that they had direct as- 
 surances to that effect? They no doubt mistook and over- 
 rated the influence of Mr. Clinton among his republican 
 friends. In aid of that delusion, they already learned 
 that some of his most prominent friends, as the Van 
 Cortlands, Gen. German, and sundry other distinguished 
 men were in advance of Mr. Clinton in denouncing Gov. 
 Tompkins, Judge Spencer, &c., but they did not know, 
 or if they knew, they did not properly appreciate the 
 principles which had influened the rank and file men of 
 the republican party who had supported Mr. Clinton for 
 the presidency. Of the principles which governed this 
 by far the most numerous class of Mr. Clinton's re- 
 publican friends, I shall have occasion to speak in another 
 place. 
 
 For the reasons which I have assigned. Gen. Piatt 
 would not consent to gratify the ardent desires of Mr. 
 Radcliff, by the appointment of his brother as mayor of
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 349 
 
 New- York, to the exclusion of Mr. Clinton. Mr. Rad- 
 clifF took honor to himself for being a federalist of the 
 old school, one of the leading maxims of that school be- 
 ing, to wage a perpetual war against every man who had 
 appeared in the ranks against them, however effectually 
 his political views and principles might have changed. 
 A most reasonable and sagacious policy for the govern- 
 ment of a party in the minority, who are struggling to 
 regain power. Mr. Radcliff, by his conduct in this coun- 
 cil, lost the confidence of his political friends, which he 
 never afterwards regained. 
 
 The council met again on the 13th of February, when 
 Mr. Piatt moved that Thomas Addis Emmett be removed 
 from the office of attorney general. On this question Mr. 
 Radcliff refused to vote, but Mr. Stearns voting for the 
 resolution, although Mr. Wilkin and the Governor voted 
 against it, it was declared carried; no doubt on the ground, 
 that by the constitution the governor had a casting vote 
 only, and that here could be no tie, two members of the 
 council voting for and only one against the motion. As 
 Mr. Radcliff refused to vote he was regarded as absent. 
 
 It was now evident that Mr. Radcliff was determined 
 to embarrass the proceedings of the council, for Mr. Em- 
 mett was one of the most ardent friends of Mr. Clinton; 
 and if Mr. R.. as a federalist of the old school, was war- 
 ring against Clintonians, why should he refuse to vote 
 on the question of Mr. Emmett's removal 1 The 'office 
 of attorney general having become vacant by the removal 
 of Mr. Emmett, Mr. Van Vechten was appointed in his 
 place. 
 
 It is probable that Mr. Piatt found that his federal 
 friends would not be satisfied, if the council continued the 
 Clintonians in office. They also held to the maxim long 
 afterwards announced, that " to the victors belong the 
 spoils;" for I perceive that the Clintonians in New-
 
 350 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 York, who filled some of the most lucrative offices in the 
 city, were nearly all removed and federalists appointed in 
 their places. Among these were Gerrit Gilbert, son of 
 Senator Gilbert, who was removed from the office of clerk 
 of the city and county, and P. C. Van Wyck, from the 
 office of recorder. Mr. Piatt moved for the displacing of 
 Mr. Van Wyck, and his motion was adopted by the votes 
 of the three federal councillors. He then nominated J. 
 O. Hoffman for a successor. Mr. Radcliff nominated Ca- 
 leb S. Riggs, ?>. federalist of the old school ^ but Mr. Hoff- 
 man was appointed by the votes of Piatt, Stearns and 
 Wilkin. Mr. Radcliff moved the removal of Sylvanus 
 Miller from the office of surrogate, and the appointment 
 of Peter Hawes in his place. Mr. Piatt objected to the 
 form of the motion as embracing too much. The ques- 
 tion was put and negatived by the votes of Piatt, Stearns 
 and Wilkin. It is more than probable that the cause of 
 Mr. Radcliff's opposition to Mr. Hoffman, was that he 
 was known to be favorable to the re-appointment of Mr. 
 Clinton. 
 
 The removal of republicans and the appointment of 
 federalists, including little as well as great offices, by this 
 council, was general throughout the state. 
 
 The Bank of America applied to be relieved from pay- 
 ment of the bonus, the payment of which was by the act 
 of incorporation, made a condition upon which their char- 
 ter was granted. They alleged that it was impossible to 
 get their stock taken if the bank was to be charged with 
 such heavy payments, and they also asked a large reduc- 
 tion of their capital. With respect to the reduction of 
 their capital the legislature granted their request, and they 
 remitted the whole of the bonus with the exception of 
 one hundred thousand dollars, which was to be paid to 
 the common school fund. 
 
 A strenuous opposition was made to this application by
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 351 
 
 the former opponents of the bank; and it was charged in 
 private circles and in sonae of the public papers, that the 
 bank had again resorted to corrupt means to accomplish 
 its object. Whether these allegations had any foundation 
 in truth, we have at this day no means of knowing, as no 
 depositions were taken. 
 
 On the 28th of January of this year, Robert R. Living- 
 ston, late chancellor, died, in the sixty-sixth year of his 
 age. His life had been active and useful, and in politics, 
 he long occupied a large space in the public mind. I 
 have before spoken of his talents and address. Whatever 
 were his merits as a judge, or a politician, and they were 
 by no means inconsiderable, his less brilliant efforts in 
 improving the breed of sheep in his native country, and 
 the liberal encouragement which by his wealth and influ- 
 ence he afforded Mr. Fulton in his discoveries of the 
 means of applying steam power to navigation, will do 
 more to perpetuate his name and fame, as a benefactor to 
 his country, than his address and skill as a political leader, 
 or his splendid display of eloquence while a member of 
 that grand council which adopted the federal constitution. 
 By his death the Livingston family were emphatically 
 deprived of their head; and since that event, and the re- 
 moval of Edward Livingston from the state, and the 
 appointment and acceptance of Brockholst Livingston, of 
 the office of associate judge of the United States, and af- 
 terwards his death, the influence of that family, as such, 
 can hardly have been felt in the political operations of 
 parties in the state. 
 
 Charles Z. Piatt, a federalist, was, by a law of the two 
 houses, created treasurer, in lieu of Gen. Thomas. This 
 act was passed on the 10th day of February. 
 
 Very sharp collisions began to be exhibited between the 
 two houses of the legislature, on all questions of legisla- 
 tion which related to the prosecution of the war against
 
 352 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 Great Britain. The state presented a frontier which was 
 eminently exposed to the attacks of the enemy, on its 
 southern, northern and western borders. This rendered 
 the duties and reponsibilities of the governor uncommonly 
 laborious, and very great; and he was by no means want- 
 ing in his efforts to discharge those duties faithfully and 
 efficiently. The democratic majority in the senate, mani- 
 fested every disposition to aid him by all constitutional 
 means, while the federal majority in the assembly wished 
 not to go farther in support of a war which many of them 
 professed to believe unjust, and all of them believed pre- 
 maturely declared and badly conducted, than was demand- 
 ed of them by a strict construction of the constitution and 
 laws of the United States. 
 
 The militia, which had been called out by the governor, 
 the last autumn, under the command of Gen. Van Rensse- 
 laer, had returned dissatisfied with the service, and with the 
 arrangements made by the government for their manage- 
 ment and support. They were also disgusted with the ill 
 judged and unsuccessful attack on the British soldiery at 
 Queenstown. The federalists availed themselves of this, 
 and all other unsuccessful efforts to carry on the war; and 
 their movements in the assembly tended rather to excite 
 than quiet discontent. 
 
 The national government, soon after the commencement 
 of the war, became embarrassed for the want of funds to 
 carry it on; or rather, they found it difficult, if not impos- 
 sible, to collect the revenue in that kind of money, or 
 negotiate their stock for that sort of currency which, con- 
 stitutionally speaking, might be called money. The 
 United States Bank had ceased to exist, and there was, 
 therefore, no national paper currency. Great Britain then 
 controlled, as now she continues to control, the money 
 market of the world; and she being our enemy, specie 
 could not be obtained from abroad, nor, in fact, could for-
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 353 
 
 eign loans, in the then state of Europe, have beeneffectec?, 
 had the effort been made to do so. The national govern 
 ment, therefore, had no other means of defraying its ex- 
 penses than by borrowing money of the banks chartered 
 by the different states, on the credit of its stock, and by 
 issuing, for circulation, its own notes called treasury notes. 
 But the banks of Boston, and indeed the whole of New- 
 England, were mainly under the control of federalists, 
 and they refused to loan a single dollar to the government, 
 or to do any act which might give credit or currency to 
 treasury notes. Of course the national treasury was .sup- 
 plied by loans from the state banks south and west of 
 New-England, and the disbursements made in the paper 
 of the banks last mentioned. It was evident that one of 
 two results must be produced by these operations: either 
 all the specie in the United States would flow into the 
 vaults of the New-England banks, or the banks of the 
 states, other than those of New-England, must suspend 
 specie payments; and the latter course was adopted. 
 The consequence was, that the bank paper in this, and in 
 all the states south and west of it, forthwith began to 
 depreciate. The paper of the New-York banks was the 
 nearest in value to specie, but the further you advanced 
 south or west from New- York, the greater, generally 
 speaking, was the depreciation. 
 
 In this state of things, a resolution, purporting to be 
 joint, passed the senate, that the state should loan to the 
 nation five hundred thousand dollars, the better to enable 
 it to sustain its credit and make its necessary disburse- 
 ments. This measure was advocated with great power 
 and effect by Mr. Van Buren, Gen. Root and Gov. Lewis; 
 but when the resolution v/as sent to the assembly it was 
 there met by the zealous, and finely successful, opposition 
 of Attorney General Van Vechten, Elisha Williams, an 
 able and eloquent lawyer from Columbia county, and Mr. 
 
 23
 
 354 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 Daniel Cady of Montgomery . In that house the republican 
 party were defective in speaking talent. Mr. Ross, it is 
 true, spoke often, but his arguments failed in producing 
 much effect when put in competition with such giants as 
 Elisha Williams and his compeers. The burden of resist- 
 ing the federal majority fell principally upon John W. 
 Taylor, of Saratoga, who, though not a brilliant man, was 
 a man of excellent good sense, and a wary and cautious 
 debater. 
 
 On the fourth day of February a legislative caucus was 
 held by the republican members, for the purpose of nomi- 
 nating a governor and lieutenant governor. According 
 to the Albany Register only forty-eight members attended 
 on this occasion. What was the reason that no greater 
 number was present does not appear. It may be, that 
 some members declined to attend in consequence of the 
 resolutions of the Tammany men in favor of a state con- 
 vention. As respected the candidate for governor the 
 meeting were unanimous, but there was a diflference of 
 opinion as to who should be supported for lieutenant gov- 
 ernor. A portion of the members still adhered to Mr. 
 Clinton, and were for re-nominating him. Judge Spencer 
 had, for some time, openly denounced him, and both he, 
 and his friend. Col. Jenkins, wxre exceedingly active in 
 opposing Mr. C.'s re-nomination. 
 
 There can be little doubt, that the confidential and secret, 
 if not the open and avowed, influence of Gov. Tompkins, 
 was exerted against Mr. Clinton. Whether Mr. Van 
 Buren took an active part either way, I am not advised; 
 and, from the circumstance of his not being assailed in the 
 Albany Register, I am inclined to believe, that, at any 
 rate, he did not take a very active part against Mr. Clin- 
 ton. The result finally was, that Mr. Clinton received 
 but sixteen votes, while John Taylor received thirty-two 
 votes, and was declared duly nominated. Mr. Van Buren
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YOKK. 355 
 
 drew the address issued by the republican members on 
 this occasion. It has been often referred to by his friends, 
 and so full an account has been given of it by his biogra- 
 pher, (Holland,) that little need be said of it here. I 
 ought however, perhaps to add, that the address contained 
 a lucid and able review of the controversy between Ame- 
 rica and Great Britain. It sustained, with strong force of 
 argument, the course which had been pursued by the na- 
 tional government, and appealed, with great pathos and 
 eloquence, to the patriotism of the people. 
 
 Mr. Van Buren has been blamed for his support of Mr. 
 Clinton, as inconsistent with the zealous support he yielded 
 to the war, and to the re-election of Mr. Tompkins; and, 
 as is usual in such cases, both Clintonians and Madisoni- 
 ans have cast imputations upon him, but, in my judgment, 
 wholly without cause. 
 
 A large majority, if not all the members of the New- 
 York legislative caucus, which nominated Mr. Clinton for 
 the presidency, were ardent in support of the war mea- 
 sures pursued by the national government, and many of 
 them were dissatisfied with the sluggish movements and 
 inertness of Mr. Madison. I presume one reason why 
 they preferred Mr. Clinton to Mr. Madison, was, because 
 they believed the former would pursue the war against 
 Great Britain with more efficiency and more energy than 
 the latter, but they had not the most distant idea of sepa- 
 rating themselves from the great republican party in the 
 state or nation. At any rate, I know this to have been 
 the feelings of Mr. Clinton's republican friends in the coun- 
 try. I can have no doubt that Mr. Van Buren entertained 
 similar impressions. Besides, he was not a member of the 
 legislature which nominated Mr. Clinton. He only saw 
 in the result of that caucus an expression of the wishes of 
 the republican party on a given question. Was he wrong 
 in attempting, in good faith, to carry those wishes into
 
 356 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 effect 1 Why, then, should the minority of the republi- 
 cans, who thought Mr. Madison ought to be supported, 
 condemn Mr. V. B. for the course he took ? Was it not 
 his duty, and had he not the same right to follow the 
 honest dictates of his own judgment as they had, especially 
 where he had evidence that his own views were in accord- 
 ance with those of the republican party in the state, as 
 declared by their representatives? 
 
 Mr. Clinton, and his immediate friends, had still less 
 reason to complain of Mr. Van Buren for supporting 
 Tompkins. The presidential question was disposed of. 
 A new question was presented, and that was, whether, in 
 accordance with the wishes of those who had elected him, 
 he would support the republican candidate for governor, 
 or whether, contrary to the principles he had professed 
 from his boyhood, he would support a federal candidate 
 for governor, simply because Mr. Clinton did not choose 
 to support the candidate of the republican party 1 No 
 man possessing common honesty, and a particle of self 
 respect, could, without feelings of resentment, hear such a 
 question even agitated in his presence. Conceding that 
 Mr. Van Buren was, in principle, attached to the republi- 
 can party, his conduct was not only politically, but mor- 
 ally justifiable. Indeed, it could not have been other 
 than it was, without a palpable violation of principle and 
 of duty. 
 
 On the 11th of February the federal members of the 
 iCgislature, together with many respectable citizens, held 
 a caucus at Albany, of which Judge Egbert Bensonwas 
 chairman, and Daniel Parris was secretary; at which Ste- 
 phen Van Rennselaer was nominated for governor, and 
 George Huntington, of Oneida county, for lieutenant go- 
 vernor. 
 
 The private characters of these gentlemen were, in all 
 respects, perfectly unexceptionable, and high hopes were
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YORK. 357 
 
 entertained by the federalists of success.* A circumstance 
 which added considerably to these hopes, was, that an 
 address was issued signed by Philip Van Cortland, Oba- 
 diah German, and thirty-nine other distinguished friends of 
 Mr. Clinton, who claimed to be members of the republican 
 party. The address attacked, with severity, the conduct 
 of the general administration; reviewed the presidential 
 contest; and protested against the support of Tompkins 
 and Taylor, alleging, that they were the mere partizans 
 and tools of the cabinet at Washington. It was extremely 
 well written, and from its style and matter, was, with 
 great probability, ascribed to the pen of Mr. Clinton. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the general 
 election in April was very severely contested; but, con- 
 trary to the expectation of calculating men of both parties, 
 and to the bitter mortification of the federalists, Tompkins 
 and Taylor were elected, and the republican senatorial 
 ticket succeeded in three, out of the four districts. 
 
 Jonathan Dayton was elected to the senate from the 
 southern, Lucas ElmendorfF and Samuel C. Ver Bryck 
 from the middle, James Cochran and Samuel Stewart from 
 the eastern, and Farrand Stranahan, Henry Bloom and 
 Pearley Keyes from the western districts. 
 
 * In consequence of the last census, a new apportionment of representatives in 
 congress was made, and, therefore, a new division of the state into congressional 
 districts should have been made by the legislature, at their winter session in 1812; 
 but the prorogation prevented the passage of such an act before the April election. 
 For this reason the election of members to the house of representatives did not 
 talte place until after the November session, when the proper law was passed, and 
 an election ordered in December following. At that election, out of thirty repre- 
 sentatives, the federalists elected two-thirds. The result of this appeal to the 
 people, as was alleged, on the war question, afforded great triumph to the oppo- 
 nents of Mr. Madison's administration, and increased the already sanguine hopes 
 of the federalists, of success at the general state election inApril. 
 
 The venerable Egbert Benson was chosen from the second district, which inclu- 
 ded the city of New- York. He was far advanced in life, but the residue of the 
 federal members were most of them comparatively young men. Hence they were 
 called "Judge Bemon't hoys," being nineteen in number. The appellation was 
 the more ludicrous because the judge was a bachelor.
 
 358 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 The result of the vote was as follows: — 
 
 Southern District, Rep. Maj 593 
 
 Middle " " " 1452 
 
 Western " " " 3274 
 
 5319 
 Eastern District, Fed. Maj 1713 
 
 Rep. Maj. in the State, 3606 
 
 But, notwithstanding this success in the senatorial dis- 
 tricts, and in the election of governor, the federalists 
 obtained a majority in the assembly, in consequence of 
 the election of federal members, by a small majority, from 
 the city of New-York. 
 
 The very decided part taken by Mr. Southwick, in the 
 Albany Register, against the election of Gov. Tompkins, 
 and indeed against the republican party in the state and 
 nation, induced the establishment, during the summer of 
 1813, of the Albany Argus, under the charge of Jesse 
 Buel, Esq., who had formerly printed the Plebian, in the 
 county of Ulster. Mr. Buel, though not a brilliant, was 
 a very discreet and judicious man, and the Albany Argus 
 soon became the organ of the republican party at the seat 
 of government. 
 
 Upon the pressing recommendation of Judge Spencer 
 and Gov. Tompkins, and other friends to the national 
 administration. Gen. John Armstrong had, in the autumn 
 of 1812, been appointed secretary of the department of 
 war, and he now began to be talked of as the most suitable 
 man to succeed Mr. Madison in the presidency. Judge 
 Spencer, who had always been, and to this day continues 
 to be, his devoted friend and admirer, was loud in his 
 praise, and openly spoke of him as a candidate. 
 
 In the autumn of this year Mr. Curtinius was removed 
 from the office of marshal of New- York, and Gen. Smith,
 
 1813.] OF NEW-YOEK. 359 
 
 United States senator, appointed in his place. Mr. 
 Schenck was also removed from the office of surveyor of 
 the port of New-York, and Mr. Haff was appointed his 
 successor. These removals were made upon the pressing 
 recommendation of Judge Spencer, as was alleged, for 
 no other cause than that the incumbents were the political 
 and personal friends of Mr. Clinton.
 
 360 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 CHAPTER XIX. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1813, TO MAY 1, 1814. 
 
 Governor Tompkins had by this time obtained a strcng 
 hold on the feelings of the citizens of this state. He had 
 avoided so far as he could, a direct collision with the 
 friends of Mr. Clinton. Although Clinton being a man 
 of that temperament and character of mind, that whenever 
 he discovered that a person professing to be his political 
 friend, declined entering into all his views, forthwith broke 
 off all political intercourse with him; (which perhaps was 
 a fault,) and therefore, by this time, was open in his de- 
 nunciations of Gov. Tompkins, still the governor contrived 
 to retain the friendship of many Clintonians. This re- 
 sult was the more easily produced, because Judge Spencer, 
 always open in his hostility, always ardent and sometimes 
 bitter in his political controversies, was waging a most 
 furious war against Mr. Clinton, and all his supporters; 
 and in consequence thereof, was much more the subject 
 of attack in the Clintonian newspapers and public and 
 street conversation, than the governor. Tompkins was by 
 no means displeased with this state of things. He had 
 already cast an eye upon the presidency, and the late de- 
 feat of Mr. Clinton, had in the opinion of Mr. Tomp- 
 kins, rendered him Hors du combat. Him, therefore, he 
 could no longer regard as a rival, but Gen. Armstrong, 
 if the next president was to be taken from New-York, was 
 a formidable one. The governor knew that the strength 
 of Armstrong in this state depended greatly on the in- 
 fluence of Judge Spencer, with the republican party here. 
 It was then obviously the interest of Gov. Tompkins to 
 weaken as far as he could the influence of Spencer. It
 
 1813.] OF NEW- YORK. 361 
 
 is, therefore, highly probable that he viewed the increase 
 of personal unkind feeling towards Judge Spencer with 
 more complacence than regret. 
 
 Not many days ago, in a conversation with an old and 
 experienced politician, an exceedingly judicious man and 
 one who has looked profoundly into the human heart, 
 who for more than twenty ;)ears was a member of the 
 United States house of representatives, and was repeated- 
 ly elected speaker of that body, (John W. Taylor,) in 
 relation to Gov. Tompkins, he remarked that he never 
 knew a man who had fixed his hopes upon the presidency 
 who would not sacrifice all personal considerations, and 
 all pre-existing friendships to attain his object. 
 
 Another cause of the popularity of Gov. Tompkins 
 was, that there was no circumstance which could be 
 brought to the view of the people by which their 
 jealousy of him could be excited. He was not a rich 
 man, nor had he any powerful connexions. He was the 
 son of a practical farmer of Westchester county, and his 
 favorite title with the people was the " Farmer's Boy." 
 To other advantages he added a most fascinating address. 
 Professor Renwick, in his life of Clinton, (page 66,) 
 says; — " Tompkins with no remarkable native powers of 
 mind, and but little acquirement even, as a lawyer, pos- 
 sessed in a most eminent degree, the art of ingratiating 
 himself with the people. He had the faculty, which is 
 invaluable to him who seeks for popular honors, of never 
 forgetting the name or face of any person Avith whom he 
 once conversed; of becoming acquainted and appearing 
 to take interest in the concerns of their families;, and of 
 securing, by his affability and amiable address, the good 
 opinion of the female sex, who, although possessed of no 
 vote, often exercise a powerful indirect influence." 
 
 I may be allowed to say, although I had little personal 
 acquaintance with Gov. Tompkins, that in my judgment,
 
 362 POLITICAL HISTORY [1813. 
 
 the professor underrates his talents. I think, the skill and 
 tact with which he moulded the minds of men to his own 
 purposes, and the prudence with which he for a long time 
 conducted himself at the head of a state containing such 
 strangepolitical materials as did the state of New-York, du- 
 ring that period, are of themselves, evidence of much more 
 than ordinary mental powers; and although he was taken 
 from the bar and the bench when he was too young to have 
 become a profound and learned lawyer, yet I have never 
 heard that the opinions which he delivered while he was a 
 judge of the supreme court were considered unworthy of 
 the reputation for learning and talents which a judge of that 
 high tribunal ought to possess. Of the evidence of talent 
 which his communications to the legislature afford, while 
 he was governor, I have heretofore spoken. What Mr. 
 Renwick says of him in respect to his peculiar faculty of 
 never forgetting the name or face of a person with whom 
 he had ever conversed, is literally true; and I could relate 
 several instances within my own knowledge, some of which 
 are almost unaccountable in confirmation of its verity. 
 This faculty, although rare, is of great use to the man who 
 holds an eminent station in a popular government. It is 
 said that Scylla, the Dictator, personally knew every citi- 
 zen of Rome, and that he could call them all by name. 
 This extraordinary quality of mind may have been of as 
 much use to him in contested elections as was the splen- 
 dor of his military achievements in Asia. 
 
 The extraordinary and almost miraculous success of 
 Gov. Tompkins at the election of 1813, after the strong 
 demonstrations of a federal majority in the congressional 
 elections in December preceding, and in the face of the 
 opposition of Mr. Clinton and some of his most power- 
 ful friends, while it afforded evidence of his popularity 
 added to it. In war success is said to sanctify crimes, in 
 politics it converts errors into catholic doctrines.
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 363 
 
 There was anotner circumstance which added greatly to 
 the popularity and standing of Tompkins. The whole 
 five New-England states had become federal, and New- 
 Jersey, if not already, seemed hastening to become so. The 
 federalism of the eastern states was of the most ultra kind. 
 It was apprehended that they were determined either to 
 change the administration, or to secede from the union, 
 and form a separate peace with Great Britain. This, 
 however, they would hardly have the temerity to do, if 
 New-York continued to support the national administra- 
 tion. But if New-York joined them, or even became 
 opposed to the further prosecution of the war, the finan- 
 cial affairs of the nation would become so straightened and 
 embarrassed, as would have compelled either a change of 
 the administration, or the submission of the United States 
 to a disgraceful peace; and, in the event last referred to, 
 the administration would, of course, be prostrated. No 
 wonder then, that the eyes of republicans throughout the 
 nation should have been fixed with deep and painful anxi- 
 ety on the election of governor in New- York. The suc- 
 cess of the democratic party was hailed by the democrats 
 abroad, and especially by Mr. Madison and his cabinet, 
 with unspeakable joy and exultation. That success was 
 imputed, and perhaps justly imputed, to the personal 
 popularity of Tompkins, and his universal popularity 
 abroad increased his popular standing at home. 
 
 The legislature convened on the 25th January. James 
 Emott, a respectable lawyer from Dutchess county, was 
 the federal candidate for speaker, and William Ross was 
 the candidate of the republican party. Mr. Emott received 
 fifty-eight votes, and Mr. Ross forty-eight, shewing a 
 federal majority often m the assembly. 
 
 The governor's speech was chiefly confined to a detail 
 of the events of the war. In the course of his speech, he 
 alluded to the law of congress laying a direct tax, the
 
 364 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 portion of which to be raised in the state of New- York, 
 was four hundred and thirty thousand one hundred and 
 forty-one dollars and sixty-two cents. This act provided, 
 that if any state preferred a voluntary assumption and 
 payment of its portion, and paid the same into the national 
 treasury by the 20th of February, a deduction of fifteen 
 per cent should be made, and if thus assumed and paid by 
 the 1st of May then a deduction of ten per cent should be 
 made. The Bank of America, and some other banks, 
 were pledged to loan the state, when called on for that 
 purpose, moneys to a much larger amount than the quota 
 of the state of the direct tax; and the governor recom- 
 mended that the state should assume the payment of its 
 portion of the tax, and pay the same by a loan from those 
 banks, to be re-imbursed by a tax, to be levied and col- 
 lected in the ordinary way, by the state. The speech 
 was referred to Messrs. D. B. Ogden, Bleecker and Ross. 
 Late in the preceding autumn the British had made an 
 incursion on the Niagara frontier, and had burnt a consid- 
 erable part of the village of Buffalo. On the first day of 
 the session, and as soon as the house was organized, on 
 the motion of Mr. Jacob R. Van Rensselaer, a federal 
 member, the assembly passed a resolution, purporting to 
 be joint, for loaning to the sufferers, in consequence of 
 this attack, fifty thousand dollars. Mr. Ross made an 
 ineffectual effort to postpone the consideration of the reso- 
 lution. The motion for a postponement was negatived 
 by a party vote. As the federalists were constantly being 
 charged with opposition to the war, &c., their unusual 
 early movement in this matter must have been with a view 
 of affording evidence to the inhabitants of the frontier, of 
 their sympathy for those who were suffering in conse- 
 quence of the depredations of the enemy, and with the 
 further intent of being before hand with the senate in 
 support of a measure which, it was presumed, would be
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 365 
 
 popular, especially in the western district. In the resolu- 
 tion, the commissioners for distributing the money were 
 named. They, of course, were federalists. When the 
 proposition was acted on in the senate, it was amended by 
 striking out the names of the federal commissioners, and 
 inserting, in their place, the names of republicans. With 
 this amendment the assembly non-concurred. A collision 
 in this way occurred between the two houses, and for some 
 time it seemed doubtful whether the sufferers would not 
 be deprived of the bounty of the state, merely because the 
 two parties could not agree on the appointment of agents 
 to distribute it. Such a contest was discreditable to both 
 parties. 
 
 The assembly also, on the first day of their meeting, 
 elected a council of appointment. Unfortunately for the 
 federalists there were no federalists in the senate from 
 both the middle and western districts, the term of service 
 of Messrs. Plattj Hall and Phelps, having expired; and 
 the federalists finally selected Mr. Henry A. Townsend, 
 of Steuben county, as their councillor. 
 
 Mr. Townsend was elected, in 1810, as a republican, 
 and it does not appear that he had, at any time, professed 
 a change of principles; but he was a friend of Mr. Clin- 
 ton, and his support of that gentleman, together with his 
 vote for incorporating the Bank of America, had brought 
 him in collision with Judge Spencer and other zealous 
 politicians. These were, probably, the circumstances 
 which led to his selection. 
 
 The result of the vote, for members of the council, was 
 as follows: — Elbert H. Jones, fifty-six; Morgan Lewis, 
 fifty-six; Samuel Stewart, fifty-six; Henry A. Townsend, 
 fifty-seven; Nathan Sanford, forty-nine; Lucas ElmendorfF, 
 forty-eight; Henry Yates, jun., forty-eight; and Farrand 
 Stranahan, forty-eight. 
 
 Before the expiration of the term of service of the
 
 366 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 council chosen In 1813, the office of chancellor became 
 vacant, by Mr. Lansing's being ineligible in consequence 
 of his age. Chief Justice Kent was therefore appointed 
 chancellor, and Smith Thompson succeeded him as chief 
 justice. 
 
 On the 3d February, Elisha Jenkins was removed from 
 the office of secretary of state, and Jacob Rutsen Van 
 Rensselaer, the late speaker, appointed in his place. 
 What produced this long delay in displacing Mr. Jenkins 
 I cannot state, unless it was that the office was intended 
 for Mr. Van Rensselaer, and that the discharge of its du- 
 ties was deemed incompatible with a satisfactory per- 
 formance of the labors which are necessarily cast upon 
 the speaker. 
 
 The only question of importance, which the council of 
 1814 were called on to decide, was that of the appoint- 
 ment of a judge of the supreme court, which was rendered 
 necessary to supply the vacancy produced by the elevation 
 of Chief Justice Kent to the office of chancellor, the 
 greater part of the offices in the state being held by per- 
 sons who belonged to the party which held the majority in 
 the assembly. 
 
 Gen. Piatt was the candidate most favored by a large 
 majority of the federalists. The object of Mr. Lewis, 
 who now claimed to be most purely and exclusively a 
 republican, seems to have been to prevent Mr. Piatt's 
 appointment. Mr. Townsend w^as considered, and per- 
 haps correctly so, as the representative of Mr. Clinton, 
 and as speaking his wishes in the council. At any rate, 
 the public held Mr. Clinton responsible for every act done 
 by Mr. Townsend. Gov. Tompkins acted in concert and 
 harmony with Mr. Lewis: a singular alteration since 1807, 
 when Gen. Piatt was supporting Mr. Lewis against Mr. 
 Tompkins. Mr. Clinton was accused of bargaining with 
 the federalists to procure Gen. Piatt to be appointed a
 
 1S14.] OF NEW- YORK. 367 
 
 judge of the supreme court; in consideration of which, it 
 was said, the federalists had stipulated that Mr. Clinton 
 should be continued in the mayoralty of New- York. 
 With a view to strengthen this suspicion, and with the 
 further view to detach from Mr. Clinton the greatest pos- 
 sible number of his supporters, and possibly with some 
 hope that the appointment of Mr. Piatt might be prevent- 
 ed, Mr. Lewis nominated Richard Riker, of New-York, 
 for a judge of the supreme court. To show the embar- 
 rassment this nomination must have occasioned to Mr. 
 Townsend, as the friend of Mr. Clinton, it is only neces- 
 sary to recollect that Mr, Riker was the second of Mr. 
 Clinton in the Swartwout duelj that he had ever since 
 continued to be his personal and political friend, in all the 
 Avars with the Burrites, Lewisites and Tammany men that 
 subsequently occurred in the city of New-York; and that, 
 as we have seen, he was at the head of the committee to 
 promote the election of Mr. Clinton to the presidency. 
 But, if it would seem inconsistent for Mr. Townsend, as 
 the friend of Mr. Clinton, to vote against the appointment 
 of Riker, it was equally inconsistent and unnatural for 
 Mr. Lewis to nominate him; for Riker had been steadily 
 and violently opposed to Lewis, and Lewis to him, from 
 the year 1805, to the year 1814; and yet Lewis did nomi- 
 nate Riker, and Townsend did vote against that nomina- 
 tion. Misery, it is said, makes a man acquainted with 
 strange bed fellows, and so does party politics. As re- 
 spects the fitness of Riker for the office of judge, when 
 compared to Piatt, I imagine all will agree that Piatt was 
 the most suitable and fit man. Mr. Piatt was appointed, 
 and Mr. Riker, ever after, ceased to be a friend to Mr. 
 Clinton. 
 
 Party heat never was higher, in the legislature, than 
 during this session. The strong republican majority in 
 the senate, and the zeal of that majority to aid in the vigo-
 
 368 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 rous prosecution of the war, induced that body to propose 
 a variety of measures, in accordance with their views, 
 which, when presented to the assembly, were generally 
 resisted, and by the majority rejected. The republican 
 party in the assembly, though still in the minority, had 
 received a great accession of moral power by the last elec- 
 tion. John Savage, late chief justice, from Washington 
 county, Samuel Young, the late canal commissioner, from 
 Saratoga county, Aaron Hackley from Herkimer county, 
 and William C. Bouck, late a canal commissioner, from 
 Schoharie county, together with several others, were all 
 new members, all young men of great promise, and all 
 possessed of talents of a high order. 
 
 The federalists, as a party, from the time of John Adams, 
 had always professed themselves the friends of a navy, 
 and they complained of Mr. Jefferson for his neglect in 
 not encourageing, supporting and adding to that arm of 
 the national defence. Hence, when a naval victory was 
 achieved over the British, or a naval defeat on our side 
 occurred, they, in one case, were most forward to express 
 their exultation, and, in the other, their regret, while they 
 manifested very little sensibility at any disaster to the 
 American forces engaged in the land service. 
 
 As a specimen of the party action of that day, I think 
 proper to state the proceedings which took place in the 
 assembly, in relation to several naval actions which had 
 then lately taken place. 
 
 A federal member from the city of New-York, Mr. 
 Charles King, on the 28th of January, offered the follow- 
 ing resolutions: — 
 
 " Resolvedj That although we cannot approve of the 
 disastrous and destructive war in which we are engaged, 
 the house of assembly of the people of the state of New- 
 York feel great satisfaction in expressing their admiration 
 of the conduct of Com. Perry, and his gallant associates,
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 369 
 
 m their action with the British squadron upon Lake Erie, 
 on the 11th Sept. last, and the high sense they entertain 
 of the gallantry of Lieut. Burroughs, of the United States 
 brig Enterprize, who died after conquering a vessel of 
 equal force belonging to the enemy. 
 
 " That they deeply lament the fall of captains Lawrence 
 and Allen, by which their country is deprived of the ser- 
 vice of two officers who had already so highly entitled 
 themselves to its admiration and gratitude — 
 
 " That, in the opinion of this house, the conduct of our 
 naval commanders and seamen during this ruinous war, 
 ought to satisfy every reflecting mind that our commercial 
 rights are to be defended and maintained by a navy, and 
 not by embargoes and commercial restrictions." 
 
 Mr. Savage, with a view of rendering the resolutions 
 acceptable to the whole house, offered a substitute for the 
 first resolution, in which the words " although we cannot 
 approve of the disastrous and destructive war in which we 
 are engaged^'' were omitted; but the substitute was reject- 
 ed by a party vote. The second resolution was passed 
 by an unanimous vote. When the third resolution was 
 under consideration, Mr. Young moved to strike out the 
 "Word " ruinous," and that part of it which condemned the 
 embargo and restrictive measures. This amendment was 
 also rejected by the same vote, and the resolutions, as 
 offered by Mr. King, were adopted. 
 
 The answer of the senate to the governor's speech was 
 drawn by Mr. Van Buren, and is an admirable production. 
 The senators assured the governor of their readiness to 
 co-operate with him in all proper measures to defend the 
 country, and to preserve its honor and independence. 
 They conclude their address with the expression of the 
 following just and patriotic sentiment: — 
 
 " That on questions of general policy, or the fitness of 
 individuals for particular stations, we shall ever be ex- 
 
 24
 
 370 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 empted from differences of opinion, is not to be expected. 
 Divisions like those are inseparable from the blessings of 
 our free constitution; and although sometimes carried to 
 an excess which all good men must deplore, they are, not- 
 withstanding, generally productive of much national good. 
 But to suppose that a people jealous of their rights, and 
 proud of their national character, would, on a question of 
 resisting the aggressions of an open enemy — aggressions 
 which have polluted our soil, and which threaten the sub- 
 version of those inestimable political institutions which 
 have been consecrated to freedom by the blood and suffer- 
 ings of their fathers — that on a question of such vital 
 interest, so well calculated to excite all the patriotism, to 
 arouse all the spirit, and to call into action all the ener- 
 gies of the nation, they would waste their strength in use- 
 less collisions with each other, would be a reflection upon 
 their discernment and their character which they can never 
 merit." 
 
 The answer of the assembly was indecorously severe 
 and bitter against the governor, and against the war. It, 
 nevertheless, passed in that body by a vote of fifty-five to 
 forty-one. 
 
 The senate passed a bill, in pursuance of the recommen- 
 dation of the governor, for the assumption by the state of 
 its quota of the direct tax; but the bill was, on motion of 
 Mr. Hyde, rejected in the assembly, fifty-five members 
 voting in the affirmative, on that motion. The bill, when 
 it was received from the senate, was referred to a select 
 committee, who in their report, stated sundry objections 
 to its passage, and concluded by saying, "Judging of the 
 future by the past, your committee beg leave to express 
 their firm conviction, that instead of wasting the resources 
 of the state by granting them to the general government, 
 it is the solemn and imperious duty of the legislature, to
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 371 
 
 seek the reimbursement of the expenses already incurred 
 by this state on account of the war." 
 
 On the 31st January, Mr. Van Buren brought into the 
 senate a bill for the repeal of the restraining law, and, on 
 the same day, Mr. John B. Coles, a federal member, 
 brought a like bill into the assembly, showing on this, as 
 on all other occasions, that the questions relating to banks 
 and banking privileges, were not of a political nature, ex- 
 cept when artificially made so by those interested in banks; 
 and that they are merely questions between the holders of 
 exclusive franchises, and the community. The bill failed 
 of becoming a law. 
 
 It will readily be imagined that, during this session, 
 frequent collisions occurred between the two houses. 
 The views of the federalists and republicans, on all ques- 
 tions of legislation which related to the prosecution of the 
 war, (and there were several such,) were so adverse, that 
 hardly any measures were proposed by the one which 
 were not resisted, or attempted to be modified, by the 
 other. This led to frequent conference^ In these con- 
 ferences the views of the assembly were generally sus- 
 tained by the splendid talents of David B. Ogden, Samuel 
 Jones, Jun., Charles King, and Jacob Rutsen Van Rensse- 
 laer, while the management of conferences, on the part of 
 the senate, was commonly entrusted to Martin Vc^n Buren, 
 Erastus Root and Nalhan Sanford. Mr. Sanford seldom 
 took much part in the discussion; the battle, on the part 
 of the senate, was commonly fought by Gen. Root and 
 Mr. Van Buren. 
 
 The former had been long trained in the business of 
 legislation. Though a little uncouth in his manner, and 
 rough, and, I fear, sometimes rude in his expressions, his 
 wit was keen, and his sarcasms severe and biting. He 
 seized with great force and effect upon the prominent 
 points, and especially those points most likely to make an
 
 372 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 impression on the popular ear, and pressed them with a 
 power almost irresistible. His illustrations were exceed- 
 ingly clear and well chosen, and his attacks upon his op- 
 ponents were severe almost to ferocity. From the year 
 1798, down to that period, he had been almost continually 
 a member either of the state or national legislature^ and 
 possessing, as he did, a most retentive memory, he was 
 perfectly at home on all matters relating to the history of 
 the action of both governments, and the operations of both 
 the great political parties. He had much parliamentary 
 tact, and although, as I have remarked, he was harsh 
 in his manner, and reckless in his expressions, he was a 
 man of correct literary taste, and, though severe to his op- 
 ponentsof highly cultivated intellect. " He was a scholar, 
 and a good and ripe one." Mr. Van Buren, on the other 
 hand, was clear and logical in his reasoning, though 
 sometimes sophistical, and his manner and matter was deco- 
 rous towards his opponents. No man knew better than 
 he, how to avail himself most effectually of any defect in 
 the arguments of his opponents. His biographer, Mr. 
 Holland, {Van Burenh Life. p. 103,) when speaking of 
 the part which Mr. Van Buren took in these discussions, 
 says, " In these conferences the measures in dispute were 
 publicly discussed, and the discussion embraced the gene- 
 ral policy of the administration and the expediency of the 
 war. The exciting nature of the questions thus debated, 
 the solemnity of the occasion, the discussions being con- 
 ducted in the presence of the two houses, and the brilliant 
 talents of the parties to the controversy, drew vast audi- 
 ences, and presented a field for the display of eloquence, 
 unsurpassed, in dignity and interest, by the assemblies of 
 ancient Greece. Mr. Van Buren was always the leading 
 speaker on the part of the senate; and by the vigor of his 
 logic, his acuteness and dexterity in debate, and the patri- 
 otic spirit of his sentiments, commanded great applause."
 
 1814.] OF NEW- YORK. 373 
 
 Although this biography was written, it is presumed, with 
 a view to produce effect at a presidential election, when 
 Mr. Van Buren was a candidate, I consider the author's 
 statement, in the above extract, as literally correctj and, 
 therefore, I do not hesitate to copy it into a work, which, 
 whatever may be its other defects, I hope, will not smack 
 of political or personal partiality. 
 
 During this session a law was passed granting to Union 
 College the very liberal sum of two hundred thousand 
 dollars, in addition to former grants. This sum was to be 
 raised by lotteries. It was urged that this mode of raising 
 money was immoral, but probably those whose conscien- 
 ces were the most tender on that subject would have voted 
 against a grant, or at any rate, so large a grant of money 
 to Union College, if the money had been raised by any 
 other means. At that time, lotteries were tolerated, and 
 would have been granted, if not for that, for some other 
 purposes. The same bill also provided for small dona- 
 tions to Columbia College, to Hamilton College, to an 
 African Church, to the Historical Society, to the College 
 of Physicians and Surgeons of the western district, and to 
 the Medical College of New-York. The donations to so 
 many institutions, in various parts of the state, probably 
 was the means of forming an interest which secured the 
 passage of the bill. The Rev. Dr. Nott, the president of 
 Union College, was, I have no doubt, the individual who 
 devised this grand scheme for the liberal and permanent 
 endowment of the institution over which he presided. 
 Certainly it is owing to his indefatigable exertions, and 
 matchless skill and address, that a majority in favor of the 
 bill was obtained in both houses. His ingenuity in ex- 
 plaining away and warding off objections; his skill in 
 combining different and apparently conflicting interests; 
 and, abovt all, his profound knowledge of the human 
 heart, and that discernment which enabled him, as it were,
 
 374 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 intuitively to discover the peculiar propensity and character 
 of the mind of each individual whom he addressed, to- 
 gether with his tact in adopting that mode of address best 
 suited to eachj rendered him almost irresistible, and, I be- 
 lieve, ultimately secured the success of the great measure 
 which he advocated. 
 
 The law for the better establishment of common 
 schools, was re-modelled and improved by a new bill 
 drawn by Mr. Hawley, which passed both houses on the 
 15th April. By this law, most of the provisions contain- 
 ed in the statute of 1812 were re-enacted; but they were 
 arranged in better order, and some new regulations were 
 introduced, the most important of w^hich, was, that the 
 tr. stees of a school district, by consent of a majority of 
 the legal voters in such district, might exonerate all such 
 poor persons from paying for the tuition of their children, 
 as they should deem proper, and collect the sum, so re- 
 mitted, from those inhabitants whom they adjudged able 
 to pay school taxes. 
 
 It is gratifying to perceive that the members of this le- 
 gislature, although so nearly equally divided into two 
 parties, and so highly excited on political questions, cor- 
 dially united to advance the cause of science and popular 
 education. 
 
 There were, during this session, applications by sixteen 
 associations, for bank charters. The times afforded a fine 
 harvest for bankers. They could issue their own notes 
 as money, without being compelled to pay them. Such 
 was the peculiar attitude of the national administration, 
 in relation to the New-England states, and such was the 
 financial condition of the country, that the suspension of 
 specie payments by the bankers was considered an evi- 
 dence of patriotism. What banker would not be a pa- 
 triot, if he could lend his notes as cash, and, by a refusal 
 to pay them, acquire the character of one 1 Some of
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 375 
 
 these applications were successful in the assembly, but all 
 failed in the senate. At the very time when so great a 
 rage for bank charters prevailed, and found so much favor 
 in the assembly, Mr. Cole's bill, authorizing any associa- 
 tion to bank under certain restrictions, was rejected, in 
 that house, by the strong vote of sixty-six to twenty-four. 
 Another proof that the real question to be decided, on an 
 application for the incorporation of a bank, is between the 
 monopolizers and those who desire to become such. 
 
 On the 5th of February a meeting of a few citizens, 
 claiming to be Cllntonians, but really the personal friends 
 of Solomon Southwick, was held in Albany, of which 
 Sebastian Visscher was chairman, and Samuel A. Foote 
 was secretary; at which Mr. Southwick was nominated a 
 candidate for the senate from the eastern district. 
 
 Mr. Southwick, notwithstanding his immense receipts 
 as state printer, and what he was supposed to have received 
 for acting as agent for the Bank of America,* was now 
 pretty well known to be greatly insolvent. As a politi- 
 cian, he was also bankrupt. A few only of old election- 
 eering hacks, broken down men in fame and fortune, of 
 the democratic party, adhered to him. Mr. Foote was, it 
 is true, a promising young man; but he was, at that time, 
 scarcely twenty-one years old. He had had no political 
 experience, nor did he then know the estimation in which 
 Mr. Southwick was generally held, otherwise, it is pre- 
 fjumed, he would not have appeared as an officer of that 
 meeting. The federalists held a majority, as they believed, 
 in the eastern district, and they, of course, did not wish to 
 be troubled with Mr. Southwick. 
 
 To guard against the consequence, and make up for the 
 loss of the few republicans who might vote for Southwick, 
 
 * About this, there is much donbt. Mr. S. aUeged, that instead of receiving 
 money from that institution, be had lost by it, because he bad paid from his own 
 pocket large sums m procuring the charter, which the bank had refused to reim- 
 burse
 
 376 POLITICAL HISTORTt [1814. 
 
 the republican party, in the district, nominated Guert Van 
 Schoonhoven, a gentleman who had always belonged to 
 the federal party, but who gave some indications of a dis- 
 position to support the war. 
 
 In the sequel, it appeared that Mr. Van Schoonhoven 
 received more federal than Mr. Southwick did republican 
 votesj for, of the two senators then to be elected from the 
 eastern district, Mr. Geo. Tibbits, one of the regular fede- 
 ral candidates, was elected, while Mr. Southwick was 
 beaten by Mr. Van Schoonhoven. 
 
 I The election in April terminated almost universally, in 
 this state, in favor of the republican party. The city of 
 New-York elected republican members of the assembly, 
 and several other counties changed from federal to demo- 
 cratic, so that there was a considerable democratic major- 
 ity in that branch of the legislature. The change in the 
 election of members of congress was equally great, twenty 
 of the members elect being republican. 
 
 The senators chosen at this election, were Darius Crosby 
 from the southern district, Moses I. Cantine and William 
 Ross from the middle, George Tibbits and Guert Van 
 Schoonhoven from the eastern, and Philetus Swift, Chaun- 
 cey Loomis, Bennet Bicknell and John I. Pendergast from 
 the western; all of them republicans, except Mr. Tibbits.
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YOKK. 377 
 
 CHAPTER XX. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1814, TO MAY 1, 1816. 
 
 In the month of August, a small squadron of British 
 vessels of war, containing some land forces, sailed up the 
 Chesapeake and effected a landing of their troops, who 
 marched into the interior with a view of capturing the 
 city of Washington. Some slight resistance was made 
 at Bladensburgh, within about five miles of the capitol,but 
 the attack was not anticipated, no regular troops were in 
 the neighborhood, and a few regiments of raw militia, 
 suddenly collected from the District of Columbia and its 
 vicinity, constituted mainly the American force, which 
 was soon put to flight. The British troops after this skir- 
 mish, marched into the city of Washington, destroyed 
 some of the public stores at the navy yard, set fire to the 
 president's house, and blew up the capitol. The next 
 morning, however, they retreated, and with all convenient 
 dispatch the troops were re-embarked. This outrage 
 produced considerable feeling even in the minds of 
 the federalists. Meetings of all parties were held in 
 New-York, and in several other places in the state, at 
 which resolutions were adopted to support the govern- 
 ment in repelling invasion, and indicating that there ought 
 to be a suspension of all mere party controversies until 
 the foreign enemy should be driven from our borders. 
 
 The citizens of the city of New- York, greatly alarmed 
 for the safety of that city, organized themselves into mili- 
 tary corps and volunteered to attend at regular hours for 
 the purpose of drilling. 
 
 Mr. Clinton as mayor, by his public addresses and by his 
 influence with the city corporation, did much to keep alive
 
 378 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 a spirit of patriotism, and to aid the national government 
 with funds to sustain its sinking credit. 
 
 Money was required. The banks would not loan their 
 bills without better security than the stock or treasury 
 notes of the United States. It was, however, understood 
 that if treasury notes were deposited, endorsed by Gov. 
 Tompkins, they would advance some four or five hundred 
 thousand dollars to be expended in erecting fortifications 
 for the defence of the port of New-York. Mr. Rufus 
 King, on being informed of this, called upon the governor 
 and stated to him that the time had arrived when it was 
 the duty of every man to put his all at the requisition of 
 the government and that he himself was ready to do this. 
 Mr. Tompkins replied, he should be obliged to act on his 
 own responsibility and should be ruined. " Then," said 
 Mr. King, " ruin yourself if it becomes necessary to save 
 the country, and I pledge you my honor that I will sup- 
 port you in whatever you do." These sentiments are the 
 more honorable to Mr. King, when we consider that he 
 was then the prominent leader of the opponents of Mr. 
 Madison. 
 
 Gov. Tompkins endorsed the notes and the money was 
 advanced by the banks.* 
 
 Upon the capture of Washington, Gen. Armstrong re- 
 signed his office as secretary of war. 
 
 The citizens of the district of Columbia were clamor- 
 ous against Gen. Armstrong, and charged the disgrace and 
 injury they had received from the invasion of the British, 
 to his mismanagement and neglect. I am utterly incom- 
 petent to criticise the conduct of military men, and if this 
 were not so, it does not come within the scope of these 
 sketches, to attempt such criticism. I will merely state 
 that Gen. Armstrong and the few friends who adhered to 
 him, took quite a different view of his conduct. I re- 
 
 * See correspondence between Tompkins and Mclntyre.
 
 1814.] OF , NEW- YORK. 379 
 
 mark further, that Mr. Monroe was then secretary of state, 
 and a rival candidate with Armstrong for the presidency; 
 that as I have before observed, Gov. Tompkins was also 
 a candidate for the same station, and that it was most 
 clearly the interest, first of Mr. Madison, to fix on some 
 Scape goat, on whose shoulders to saddle this disgrace; 
 secondly, of Mr. Monroe to cast from the cabinet a man 
 whose pretensions were directly at war with his own, and 
 thirdly, of Gov. Tompkins to get rid of a formidable 
 rival from his own state. What effect the combined ac- 
 tion of these men might have upon their own political 
 friends, (for Gen. Armstrong, before this disaster happen- 
 ed, was sufficiently odious to the federalists,) may readily 
 be imagined. Gen. Armstrong did not make the least 
 effort to avert the fate that seemed to await him. He re- 
 tired in sullen silence from the administration to his resi- 
 dence at Red Hook, and has never since intermeddled with 
 state or national politics, except by occasional confidential 
 communications to his old and constant friend Judge 
 Spencer, and one or two others. 
 
 It is rumored that he has employed himself in writing 
 the history of the late war. If that rumor is true, and 
 should his work be published, it will be read with great 
 avidity. That his means of accurately knowing what 
 actually took place during the war, are equal if not supe- 
 rior to any other person; that he possesses a mighty intel- 
 lect, all will admit; and if his history shall not be too 
 much tinged with a gloomy, jealous and vindictive spirit, 
 it will beyond question be invaluable.* 
 
 In consequence of the exposed condition of the coun- 
 try, and the danger of invasion at several points by the 
 enemy, the governor, by proclamation, convened an extra 
 session of the legislature. They met on the 26th Septem- 
 ber, and Samuel Young, of whom I shall have often occa- 
 
 * I have since learned this work had been published v/hen the above was wrilien
 
 380 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 sion hereafter to speak, was chosen speaker of the assem- 
 bly, and Aaron Clark, clerk. 
 
 The speech of the governor related almost exclusively 
 to the war and the suggestion of measures for its vigorous 
 prosecution. The speech was cordially approved by both 
 branches of the legislature. 
 
 The republican majority in the two houses did not re- 
 main idle a single moment. They did not content themselves 
 with words, but had recourse to the most vigorous action to 
 put the state in an attitude of defence against the enemy, 
 and to aid the war measures of the general government. 
 
 They first passsed an act to raise the pay of the militia, 
 while in the service of the United States, over the com- 
 pensation allowed by the general government, so that a 
 subaltern should receive fifteen dollars per month, a musi- 
 cian or corporal fourteen dollars, and a private thirteen dol- 
 lars per month. This provision extended as well to those 
 who had served since March 13, 1814, as those who 
 should be called into service. The payment was to be 
 made from the state treasury. 
 
 They next passed an act to encourage privateering, by 
 authorising associations for that purpose. The passage 
 of this act was resisted by the federalists in the legislature, 
 and by the federal members of the council of revision. 
 
 Chancellor Kent interposed a series of objections in the 
 form of a protest evincing great learning and ability, 
 against the act, as inconsistent with the genius of our con- 
 stitution, and at war with the principles of civilization 
 and the spirit of the age. But a majority of the council ap- 
 proved and passed the bill. The publication of this pro- 
 test called out Col. Young, the speaker of the assembly, 
 who in several numbers, published in the Albany Argus, 
 under the signature of Juris Consul tus, defended with great 
 talent and ingenuity, the proceedings of the legislature. 
 The ability displayed in these essays, first made Mr. Young
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 381 
 
 known to the state as a man of distinguished talents. 
 They were answered by the chancellor, and the contro- 
 versy was afterwards pursued by Mr. Van Buren, who 
 wrote under the signature of Amicus Juris Consultus. The 
 dissertations elicited by this controversy, both from Chan- 
 cellor Kent Col. Young, and Mr. Van Buren, are well 
 worthy of preservation, as splendid displays of learning 
 and talent, and as elegant specimens of correct logical 
 reasoning. 
 
 The same legislature, within a few days after the pas- 
 sage of the last mentioned law, passed a bill to authorise 
 the raising of troops for the defence of the state, com- 
 monly called the classification law. By this act twelve 
 thousand men were to be enlisted by the authority of the 
 state, for the term of two years. For the purpose of en- 
 suring the raising of that number of men, the militia were 
 to be classed, and each class was to furnish its man. If 
 a volunteer from the class could not be obtained, then an 
 assessment was to be made upon the members of the class 
 in proportion to the property held by each. This bill be- 
 came a law on the 24 th October. 
 
 On the same day a law was passed for raising a corps of 
 sea fencibles for three years, consisting of twenty compa- 
 nies for the defence of the port of New-York. This 
 corps were to be ready at a moment's warning to be called 
 into actual service, in lieu of the militia. A law, also 
 was passed for raising two regiments of colored men for 
 three years, among whom slaves might be enlisted by con- 
 sent of their masters, who were to be manumitted on 
 being honorably discharged. Thus it seems that that un- 
 fortunate class of men were not deemed unworthy of 
 shedding their blood in defence of a country and a people 
 which had degraded and oppessed them. Could it have 
 been anticipated that Col. Young, who ably and zealously 
 advocated this bill, would have been found in the conven-
 
 382 POLITICAL HISTORY [1S14. 
 
 tion of 1821, supporting, and probably by his influence, 
 procuring to be inserted in the amended constitution, a 
 clause which was intended forever further to degrade this 
 down trodden race of men, to whose aid he now, in this 
 time of imminent peril, resorted 1* 
 
 Other laws were passed during this short session for re- 
 imbursing Gov. Tompkins for expenditures which he had 
 incurred, not at the time authorised by existing laws, and 
 for indemnifying him for the responsibilities he had as- 
 sumed, for appropriating fifty thousand dollars for the 
 completion of the fortifications on Staten Island, to amend 
 and render less easy of evasion, the act organizing the 
 militia, also to prevent the arrest on civil process of mili- 
 tia men while in the public service, and to prevent all im- 
 proper traffic or intercourse with the enemy. 
 
 These laws were most of them opposed by the federal 
 members of the legislature, because in some respects they 
 were alleged to infringe too much on the private rights of 
 the citizen, and because it was the duty of the national 
 government and the main object of its organization, to 
 provide for the defence of the country, and every part of 
 it against a foreign enemy. But the truth was, the gene- 
 ral government, by means of its financial embarrass- 
 ments, and other causes, had become, in a great mea- 
 sure, powerless, and if the country was to be defended 
 from the common enemy, it was apparent that defence 
 must be made principally by the states as such. 
 
 The national government by means of its patronage is 
 strong, perhaps too strong in time of peace; in war, if the 
 states choose to claim their reserved power, as the eastern 
 states then did, it is weak and inefficient. 
 
 The prompt adoption of these war measures by the le- 
 gislature, I thought then and I still think, was honorable 
 to the majority in the two houses. Among the most effi- 
 cient supporters of the measures in the senate, were Van 
 • Sec Note A. vol. 2, p. 640.
 
 IS 14.] OF NEW- YORK. 383 
 
 Buren and Root; and in the assembly, the talents, zeal and 
 imperturbable firmness of Mr. Speaker Young, were pow- 
 erful means of procuring their adoption in that body. 
 
 The legislature, before their adjournment, which took 
 place about the 25th October, passed a law removing 
 Solomon Southwick from the office of state printer, and 
 appointing Jesse Buel in his place. 
 
 A convention chosen by the legislature of some of the 
 eastern states, known as the famous Hartford Convention, 
 was about this time projected. In this measure the state of 
 Massachusetts took the lead. The legislature of that state 
 was in session during the autumn of this year, and Gov. 
 Strong had, in his message, delivered a violent philippic 
 against the war and the management of it. This messsge 
 was referred in the senate to a committee, of which Harri- 
 son Gray Otis was chairman. He made a long report, in 
 which he animadverted with great severity on the mea- 
 sures pursued by the general government, and concluded 
 as follows : — 
 
 " It is therefore, with great concern, that your commit- 
 tee are obliged to declare their conviction, that the consti- 
 tution of the United States under the administration of 
 the persons in power, has failed to secure to this common- 
 wealth, and as they believe, to the eastern section of the 
 Union, those equal rights and benefits, which were the ob- 
 jects of its formation, and which they cannot relinquish 
 without ruin to themselves and posterity. These griev- 
 ances justify and require vigorous, persevering and peace- 
 able exertions, to unite those who realize the sufferings 
 and foresee the dangers of the country, in some system of 
 measures to obtain relief, for which the ordinary mode 
 of procuring amendments to the constitution affords no 
 reasonable expectation, in season to prevent the comple- 
 tion of its ruin. The people, however, possess the means 
 of certain redress; and when their safety which is the
 
 384 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 supreme law, is in question, these means should be prompt- 
 ly applied. The framers of the constitution made provi- 
 sions to amend defects which were known to be incident 
 to every human institution; and the provision itself was not 
 less liable to be found defective upon experiment, than other 
 parts of the instrument. When this deficiency becomes ap- 
 parent, no reason can preclude the right of the whole peo- 
 ple, who were parties to it, to adopt another; and it is not a 
 presumptuous expectation, that a spirit of equity and jus- 
 tice enlightened by experience, would enable them to re- 
 concile conflicting interests,and obviate the principal causes 
 of those dissentions, which unfit government for a state of 
 peace and war, and so amend the constitution, as to give 
 vigor and duration to the union of the states. But as a 
 proposition for such a convention from a single state, 
 would probably be unsccessful, and our danger admits not 
 of delay, it is recommended by the committee, that in the 
 first instance, a conference should be invited between those 
 states, the affinity of whose interests is closest, and whose 
 habits of intercourse, from their local situation and oth- 
 er causes, are most frequent; to the end that by a com- 
 parison of their sentiments and views, some mode of de- 
 fence, suited to the circumstances and exigencies of those 
 states, and measures for accelerating the return of public 
 prosperity, may be devised; and also to enable the de- 
 legates from those states, should they deem it expedientj 
 to lay the foundation for a radical reform in the national 
 compact, by inviting to a future convention, a deputation 
 from all the states in the union. They, therefore, report 
 the following resolves — which are submitted. 
 
 H. G. OTIS, per order. 
 
 Resolved J That the calamities of war being now brought 
 
 home to this territory of the commonwealth; a portion of 
 
 it being in the occupation of the enemy, our sea coast and 
 
 rivers being invaded in several places, and in all exposed
 
 1814.] OF NEW- YORK. 385 
 
 to immediate danger; the people of Massachusetts are im- 
 pelled by the duty of self-defence, and by all the feelings 
 and attachments which bind good citizens to their coun- 
 try, to unite in the most vigorous measures for defending 
 the state and expelling the invader, and no party feelings 
 or political dissentions can ever interfere with the dis- 
 charge of this exalted duty. 
 
 Resolvedj That provision be made by law for raising 
 by voluntary enlistment, for twelve months, or during the 
 war, a number of troops not exceeding ten thousand, to 
 be organized and officered by the governor, for the defence 
 of the state. 
 
 Resolvedy That the governor be authorized to accept 
 the services of any volunteers, and to organize them as 
 part of the aforesaid troops, who shall hold themselves in 
 readiness to march at a moment's warning, to any part of 
 the commonwealth, who shall be entitled to full pay and 
 rations, when in actual service, and to a just compensation 
 short of full pay, to be provided by law, during the 
 entire term of their enlistment. 
 
 Resolved J That the governor be authorised to borrow, 
 from time to time, a sum not exceeding one million of dol- 
 lars, at an interest not exceeding six per centj and that 
 the faith of this government be pledged to provide funds 
 at the next session of this legislature at furthest, for the 
 payment of the interest on the sums borrowed. 
 
 Resolved^ That persons be appointed as delegates from 
 the legislature, to meet and confer with delegates from the 
 states of New-England or any of them, upon the subjects 
 of their public grievances and concerns, and upon the best 
 means of preserving our resources, and of defence against 
 the enemy, and to devise and suggest for adoption by 
 those respective states, such measures as they may deem 
 expedient: and also to take measures, if they shall think 
 proper, for procuring a convention of all the United 
 
 26
 
 386 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 States, in order to revise the constitution thereof, and more 
 effectually to secure the support and attachment of all the 
 people, by placing all upon the basis of fair representa- 
 tion. 
 
 Resolvedj That a circular letter from this legislature, 
 signed by the president of the senate, and the speaker of 
 the house of representatives, be addressed to the execu- 
 tive government of each of said states, to be communica- 
 ted to their legislatures, explaining the objects of the pro- 
 posed conference, inviting them to concur in sending dele- 
 gates thereto. 
 
 This report was adopted on the 12th October, as ap- 
 pears by the following extract from the minutes kept by 
 the senate of Massachusetts: — 
 
 « IN SENATE— Ocf. 12, 1814." 
 
 " Important Report. — The report of the joint committee 
 on the public defence, was again debated; and was advo- 
 cated by the Hon. Messrs, Otis, Quincy, Blake, White, 
 and others; and opposed by the Hon. Messrs. Holmes, 
 Moody, Fuller, Kilham, and others — when it was accepted, 
 twenty-two to twelve. The blanks being filled up, the 
 number of delegates from this state is to be twelve, and 
 the convention is to meet in Hartford, the 15th December 
 ensuing." 
 
 These proceedings, on their face, were of a character 
 highly alarming. The state of Massachusetts had, before 
 this time, refused to put their militia, who, according to a 
 law of congress, were called into the service of the United 
 States, under the command, or in any respect under the 
 control, of officers appointed by the national government. 
 
 With this avowed determination, the state, it will be 
 perceived by the above resolutions, determine to raise an 
 army of twelve thousand men. They next resolve to 
 raise by loan, in addition to the ordinary revenue, a mil- 
 lion of dollars, which, of course, was to be expended un-
 
 1814.] OF NEW- YORK. 387 
 
 der the direction of the state authorities; and they pro- 
 ceed further, to legalize, so far as the state could legalize, 
 a meeting of men unknown to either the state or national 
 constitutions, and to clothe them with political power. 
 They invite and earnestly urge the other disaffected states 
 to join them in this proposed congress. It is impossible 
 to view the project in any other light than as revolutionary 
 in its character. Two or three of the other New-England 
 states became parties to this plan of a convention, and 
 sent deputies to it. What the real object of this move 
 ment was, yet remains in doubt. The peace, which was 
 so soon after the meeting of the convention announced, 
 disconcerted and defeated the objects of the projectors, 
 whatever those objects were. On the one hand, it was 
 contended, that the promoters of this convention had 
 nothing more in view, in any event, than to effect, if pos- 
 sible, a reform in the administration of the government, 
 and to extort from the administration a modicum of its 
 patronage; while, on the other, it has been affirmed that 
 the original intention was treasonable; that the New- 
 England states meant to secede from the union; negotiate 
 a separate peace with Great Britain; and form an inde- 
 pendent government, perhaps, in alliance with the British. 
 Might I be permitted to offer a conjecture, I should say, 
 that, to me, it is very probable that Massachusetts, and 
 the other New-England states, assumed this menacing at- 
 titude in the expectation of coercing the general adminis- 
 tration to concede to them a portion, if not the whole, 
 of the national patronage; but with a determination, in 
 case this hope should prove ill founded, that they would 
 secede from the union, " peaceably, if they could, forcibly, 
 if they must." 
 
 How far the federalists of the state of New-York ap- 
 proved these violent proceedings at the east, is not dis-
 
 388 POLITICAL HISTORY [1814. 
 
 tinctly known. I myself, know, and could name, some 
 very distinguished federal politicians of this state, who 
 were decided in their opinions against the Hartford con- 
 vention* while there is reason to believe, that many others, 
 either secretly or openly, encouraged their eastern friends. 
 I observe, at that time, an article in the Albany Register, 
 condemning the measure; to which, an anonymous writer 
 in the Albany Gazette replied, justifying it. One thing 
 is very evident, that the federalists of New-York, as a 
 partyj never sanctioned the Hartford Convention. 
 
 One movement of the federal members of the legisla- 
 ture, during the short extra session, deserves attention, 
 because it took place about the time, or rather a few days 
 before, the scheme of the Hartford Convention was devel- 
 oped by Mr. Otis, in the Massachusetts legislature. On 
 the 27th day of September a committee of the federal 
 members of the legislature issued the following circular, 
 which I have copied from Mr. William Colman's New- 
 York Evening Post, a leading federal paper, so much so, 
 that Mr. Colman was called Field Marshal Colman: — 
 
 " Albany, September 27, 1814. 
 
 " Sir — The legislature convened at this place yesterday, 
 and commenced their proceedings in the true Jacobinic 
 spirit of proscription. It is therefore evident, that concili- 
 ation is out of the question with our political opponents. 
 We understand that the majority in the two houses have 
 several violent and extensive projects in contemplation. 
 Hence, it is desirable, that the federalists, throughout the 
 state, should have a perfect understanding about the course 
 which the party are to pursue. To effect this, it is pro- 
 posed to have a meeting of delegates from different coun- 
 ties, in this city, on the fifth day of October next, to con- 
 sult and decide on that subject. 
 
 • Abraham Vak V«cht«k and Daribl Cadt.
 
 1814.] OF NEW-YORK. 389 
 
 " Permit us to request you to confer with our friends in 
 your county, and to make arrangements to send a delega- 
 tion to the proposed meeting. 
 
 We are, with great respect, 
 
 Your obedient servants, 
 James Emott, Henry Livingston, 
 
 Abr. Van Vechten, Theodore Sill, 
 Saml. M. Lockwood, J. R. Van Rensselaer,^ 
 Daniel Hale, William A. Duer, 
 
 George Tibbits, Samuel Stewart, 
 
 Peter Jay Munro, Gerrit Wendell, 
 
 Committee/' 
 
 Why this state convention 1 No governor was to be 
 chosen for the space of nearly two years, and no election, 
 of any kind, was to be held for more than six months 
 thereafter. It is difficult to account for this call, without 
 supposing that one object of a state convention was, to 
 take into consideration the conduct of the eastern federal- 
 ists. I am not, however, aware that a convention was 
 held, in pursuance of the request of the legislative com- 
 mittee; at any rate, I am quite confident no such conven- 
 tion was publicly held. If I am correct in this, the fair 
 inference is, that the project of the Hartford Convention 
 was not generally favorably received by the federalists of 
 New-York. [JVote C] 
 
 The intelligence of the laws passed by the New-York 
 legislature, in aid of the war and of the general govern- 
 ment, at the session in September and October, was re- 
 reived at Washington, by Mr. Madison and his cabinet, 
 with great joy, and the most intense gratification. 
 
 The extremely depressed condition of the national trea- 
 sury, had rendered the United States unable to recruit 
 their armies, which were daily diminishing by the expira- 
 tion of the terras of enlistment, deaths, and desertions.
 
 390 POLITICAL HISTORY [1^14. 
 
 The British government, now relieved from all its Euro- 
 pean enemies, would exert its whole tremendous power 
 against America single handed, and the determined and 
 powerful opposition of the eastern states to the govern- 
 ment, unquestionably added to the alarm of the adminis- 
 tration. New-York held a most important position. 
 Had she have joined her moral and political influence 
 with New-England, it does seem to me, the national go- 
 vernment must have come to a stand, and that this must 
 have been seen and felt by the cool and calculating Mr. 
 Madison. Under these painful apprehensions, the news 
 from New-York was particularly consoling and cheering. 
 I was going to say, it fell upon the ear of the cabinet like 
 a reprieve to a man condemned to die. 
 
 Gov. Tompkins was considered the individual, to whom, 
 above all others, the administration was most deeply in- 
 debted. Mr. Monroe was now acting secretary of war, 
 as well as secretary of state. Mr. Madison proposed to 
 Gov. Tompkins that Monroe should vacate the ofl^ce of 
 secretary of state, and that he, (Mr. T.) should be placed 
 at the head of that department. Ever since the alteration 
 of the United States constitution, in the mode of choosing 
 the president and vice-president, the secretary of state 
 was considered heir apparent to the presidential chair, 
 and, at any rate, v/as the known and admitted favorite of 
 the president for the time being. This offer, then, Mr. 
 Tompkins considered, and considering established usages, 
 perhaps had a right to consider, as a commitment, on the 
 part of the administration, to support him for the next 
 president. Gov. Tompkins, however, declined accepting 
 the office, alleging as a reason, that he could render more 
 service to the nation as governor of New-York, than as 
 secretary of state of the United States. The popularity 
 and influence of Gov. Tompkins may be said now to have 
 been at its zenith. In New-York he was all but idolized
 
 1814. OP NEW-YORK. 391 
 
 by a formidable and well organized political party, who 
 held strong majorities in both branches of the legislature; 
 abroad he was esteemed and respected, and at Washington 
 the national cabinet had virtually declared him their can- 
 didate for the next national executive vacancy. He was, 
 in New-York, not only the dispenser of the state patron- 
 age, but, in the loose and irregular way of transacting 
 business between the state and national governments which 
 then prevailed, most of the treasury notes and other secu- 
 rities of the United States passed through the hands of the 
 governor, and payments, on the part of the state and na- 
 tion, were many times made through him, and occasionally 
 by him; so that he was also the dispenser of pecuniary 
 gratifications. He was auditor, receiver, and paymaster. 
 All good things, politically speaking, seemed to come 
 from the governor as their source. 
 
 Mr. Madison, in the latter part of this year, thought 
 proper to remove Gideon Granger from the office of post- 
 master general, and to supply his place by the appoint- 
 ment of R. J. Meigs, of Ohio. Mr. Granger had held the 
 office for twelve years, and had done much towards im- 
 proving and perfecting that important department; but 
 report states that some personal differences existed be- 
 tween Mr. Madison and Mr. Granger, while the former 
 was secretary of state, which were never forgotten by 
 him, and that he expelled Mr. G, from the post-office 
 ostensibly because he had been a Clintonian, but really on 
 account of an old grudge. The immediate cause of the 
 removal, was the appointment, by Granger, of Doct. Lieb 
 post-master of Philadelphia. 
 
 The new post-master general, shortly after his appoint- 
 ment, removed George W. Mancius from the office of 
 post-master at Albany, and appointed Peter P. Dox. 
 Mr. Mancius was an old Albanian, beloved by all, not- 
 withstanding he was nominally a federalist. His removal
 
 392 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 produced a strong sensation unfavorable to the post-mas- 
 ter general. 
 
 The legislature met on the 31st day of January, 1815, 
 and on the next day chose a council of appointment, con- 
 sisting of Jonathan Dayton from the southern, Lucas El- 
 mendorfF from the middle, Ruggles Hubbard from the 
 eastern, and Farrand Stranahan from the western districts. 
 This council very promptly proceeded to remove all, or 
 nearly all, the federal incumbents from offices held subject 
 to the pleasure of the council. 
 
 Mr. Van Vechten was, of course, removed from the of- 
 fice of attorney general, and Mr. Van Buren was appointed 
 nis successor. This appointment was made by the casting 
 vote of the governor. Mr. Elmendorff and Mr. Dayton 
 voted for Mr. Van Buren, and Messrs. Stranahan and 
 Hubbard for Mr. John Woodworth. The circumstance is 
 too trifling to deserve notice, except as an evidence of a 
 jealous feeling which then began to exist between Judge 
 Spencer and Mr. Van Buren. I do not impute the vote 
 of Hubbard to the influence of Judge Spencer. Mr. H. 
 was from Troy, and Judge Wooodworth had many and 
 powerful friends in that place, and in Mr. Hubbard's dis- 
 trict. This accounts well enough for the vote of Mr. 
 Hubbard. But Stranahan had no personal partialities nor 
 any influential friends, in his district, in favor of Wood- 
 worth; on the contrary, they were for Van Buren. The 
 truth is, Stranahan, at that period of his political life, was 
 much, if not entirely, devoted to the views of Judge 
 Spencer. I apprehend that Judge Spencer perceived that 
 Mr. Van Buren was acquiring a greater influence in the 
 state than the judge desired he should possess, and, there- 
 fore, persuaded Mr. Stranahan to endeavor to defeat his 
 appointment. From this period, down to 1817, when 
 Mr. Clinton was nominated for governor, Mr. Van Buren 
 and Judge Spencer, though both of them acting with the
 
 1815.] OF NEW- YORK. 393 
 
 republican party, and in good faith too, were very much 
 inclined to thwart the individual views of each other. 
 
 On some of the first days in February, Nathan Sanford 
 was chosen senator of the United States, to fill the seat 
 rendered vacant by thp expiration of the term of service 
 of Gen. German. The moment Gen. Armstrong resigned 
 the war department it was given out, (and I believe the 
 giving out came from Judge Spencer,) that the ex-secreta- 
 ry must be elected to the United States senate. Mr. 
 Spencer was no doubt anxious for this result, but it was 
 soon found the current in the legislature against Arm- 
 strong was quite too strong to be arrested. Gov. Tomp- 
 kins, though extremely adroit in avoiding the taking any 
 part openly in the controversies which occurred among 
 his political friends, could not, on this occasion, remain 
 idle. Beyond all question, both he and Van Buren, must 
 have taken a very active part to put at rest, at all events, 
 the claims of Gen. Armstrong.* 
 
 On the 12th of February the news arrived in Albany 
 that a treaty of peace between Great Britain and the Uni 
 ted States, had been signed at Ghent, on the 24th day of 
 December. It is unnecessary to say that the intelligence of 
 
 * After it was found that Gen. Armstrong could not be elected, Judge Spencer 
 himself was announced as a candidate'; but the current in favor of Mr. Sanford, 
 which had been produced by Gov. Tompkins and Mr. Van Buren, could not be re- 
 sisted. 
 
 Previous to the assemblage of the caucus to nominate a senator, it was well 
 ascertained that a majority were in favor of Sanford. When the caucus convened 
 Mr. Van Buren stated that he did not believe Judge Spencer would consent to be 
 a candidate. This statement was probably made with a view to induce the 
 friends of the Judge to withdraw his name, Mr. V. B, believing that they must 
 have known there was a majority against him. 
 
 The friends of the Judge, however, insisted that he would serve as a senator, if 
 elected, and moved that a committee be appointed to call on him and request his 
 response to the question, whether he was, or was not, a candidate. This motion, 
 although opposed by Mr. Van Buren, was carried, and a committee raised accord- 
 ingly, who reported that the Judge declined to be a candidate, " because he would 
 not put himself in competition with so young a mon as Mr. Sanford." 
 
 It is not improbable that the committee advised Judge Spencer of what tbey 
 believed would be the result of a contest between him and Sanford.
 
 394 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 this event produced the most lively sensations of joy, 
 among all classes in the community, excepting only those 
 contractors and office holders who were making great 
 gains by the war, and perhaps we ought to except, now 
 and then, a cold, calculating, selfish politician of the fede- 
 ral stamp, whose party zeal absorbed his love of country, 
 and who believed that the administration must have been 
 broken down had the war continued, and who felt that the 
 news of peace had destroyed all the prospects of the party 
 with which he was associated. It is, however, undoubt- 
 edly true, that a large majority of both parties most sin- 
 cerely rejoiced when the news of the great event arrived. 
 
 To add to the exultation and general joy, about this 
 time information was received of the splendid victory of 
 New-Orleans, obtained on the eighth of January, by the 
 American troops under the command of Gen. Jackson. 
 
 For more than a quarter of a century past, our states- 
 men and orators have boasted of our success in the late 
 war J and the heroism and bravery of our soldiers and sea- 
 menj the patriotism of our citizens; and the strength and 
 energy of our government, as demonstrated by that war. 
 The glory achieved by the nation, during this contest, has 
 been extolled at the hustings, eulogised in the halls of 
 legislation, and celebrated in song. This may be all right; 
 it is, in fact, rightj for, in truth, great fortitude and spirit 
 was evinced, both by our seamen and soldiers, and very 
 decisive evidence was furnished of the attachment of the 
 great mass of the people to the government of their own 
 choice, and of their determination to support and defend 
 the liberty and independence of the nation. Still, the 
 honest and candid historian, acting with good faith towards 
 posterity, is bound to state, that at the time when peace 
 was announced in this country, it was in a condition alarm- 
 ingly perilous. The treasury was empty, and the credit 
 of the national government was quite exhausted. I will
 
 1815.] OF NEW-YORK. 395 
 
 not say it could not command a dollar of real money, but 
 I will say it could not, with all its means and its power, 
 without the most ruinous sacrifice, get the control of a 
 million, or even half a million, of the only money known 
 to the constitutionj which is gold and silver. The army 
 of the United States, though liberally supplied with offi- 
 cers, had not, at that time, in its ranks more than eight 
 thousand privates, enlisted for five years, or during the 
 war, and the government possessed no means of recruiting 
 its ranks; and, as I have said before, the whole naval and 
 military power of Great Britain was ready to be put in 
 requisition for the prostration of this country. To add to 
 all these difficulties, the cloud which for two years had 
 been gathering in the east, was now ready to burst. I 
 will, nevertheless, add, that I have not a shadow of doubt 
 that had the war continued, notwithstanding these difficul- 
 ties and embarrassments, the whole country, and all par- 
 ties in it, would have eventually roused and repelled the 
 invader. But the news of peace came, and with it all 
 danger vanished. 
 
 The 22nd of February, Washington's birth-day, was 
 designated as a day for rejoicing and festivity. I was in 
 Albany on that day and evening, and I could not but ob- 
 serve, that notwithstanding the prevalent hilarity, politi- 
 cians were anxiously looking ahead for future advance 
 ment. Among the various pageantry exhibited, were 
 several transparencies, with inscriptions suited to the occa- 
 sion; but at the Eagle Tavern I noticed a splendid trans- 
 parency exhibiting in large capitals the names of Tomp- 
 kins and Crawford. The indication intended was most 
 obvious. 
 
 The war having thus happily terminated, the party in 
 power felt more at liberty to distribute the patronage in 
 such away as to gratify their own individual views. Ja- 
 cob Rutsen Van Rensselaer wasremoved from the office of
 
 396 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 secretary of state, and Gen. Peter B. Porter was appointed 
 in his place. Gen. Porter had honorably distinguished him- 
 self in the army on the Niagara frontier during the war, 
 and was besides justly esteemed as a man of the first order 
 of intellect. It does not appear that he solicited the ap- 
 pointment. Indeed his business required his personal at- 
 tention at Black Rock, where he resided, and besides, he 
 was in the spring of 1814, elected to congress. He was, 
 I understand, proposed by Gov. Tompkins, and a majority 
 of the council of appointment without diflEiculty consent- 
 ed to his appointment. As Tompkins was a candidate for 
 the presidency, and knew that Gen. Porter would be an 
 influential member of the next congress, he probably felt 
 desirous to afford him this evidence of his courtesy. Col. 
 Jenkins, the late secretary, who, it is presumed, was a 
 candidate possessing what is called claims, was the devo- 
 ted friend of Judge Spencer, who made no secret of his 
 opposition to the governor's pretensions to the presiden- 
 tial office. By proposing so respectable a name as Gen. 
 Porter's, Gov. Tompkins without an open controversy 
 with Spencer or Jenkins disposed of the claims of the lat- 
 ter, who was fain to acquiesce in the miserable scheme 
 to which Gov. Tompkins and the council consented, of re- 
 moving the venerable Philip Van Rensselaer, brother of 
 the Patroon, from the mayoralty of Albany, and of receiv- 
 ing the appointment in lieu of that of Secretary of State. 
 There was one question which somewhat embarrassed 
 the council, and produced considerable public excitement j 
 and this was the appointment of a mayor of New- York. 
 De Witt Clinton was the incumbent. He had discharged 
 the duties of the office ably and faithfully. Whether pes- 
 tilence* or war prevailed, he was constantly at his post. 
 The Tammany party in New-York, which then really con- 
 stituted the republican party of that city pressed his re- 
 
 • The yellow fever prevailed twice in New-York, while Mr. Clinton was mayor.
 
 ISl5.] OF NEW- YORK. 397 
 
 moval. Judge Spencer was indefatigable in his exertions 
 to effect the same object, and of course Mr. Stranahan 
 was for it, and so was Mr. Dayton, who came from the 
 hotbed of Martlingism. Mr. Hubbard was at the last 
 presidential election a zealous Clintonian, and went on a 
 mission to Vermont with a view to obtain the vote of that 
 state for his favorite candidate. He was still friendly to 
 Mr. Clinton, and desired his re-appointment, Mr. El- 
 mendorfF, if influenced by any individual, was probably 
 more guided by Mr. Van Buren than any other. Van 
 Buren did not desire to take an active part on either side of 
 this question, and Mr. Elmendorff, for that or some other 
 reason, for some time, hesitated about committing him- 
 self on the question.* Tompkins dreaded giving the 
 casting vote. He did not wish to offend the republican 
 friends of Mr. Clinton, and he dared not encounter the 
 resentment of the New-York Tammanies. For these rea- 
 sons the appointment of mayor of New-York was for a 
 considerable time delayed. 
 
 During the year 1814, a writer of considerable talents 
 had appeared in a New-York paper, assuming the name of 
 Ahimaleck Coody^ a mechanic of that place. The writer 
 was a federalist, and addressed himself principally to the 
 party to which he belonged. He endeavored to show the 
 impropriety of opposing the war, and urged them to come 
 forward manfully in defence of their country. He also, 
 as I am told, for I have not for many years seen his num- 
 bers, attacked De Wilt Clinton with great severity. This 
 was a sure passport to the favors of St. Tammany. It 
 was soon ascertained that this writer was Mr. Gulian C. 
 Verplanck, a gentleman who has since distinguished him- 
 self for his talents and usefulness, both in the national 
 and state legislature. He also holds a high rank as a man 
 of respectable literary attainments. Abimaleck Coody 
 
 * I state this from report. It may be incorrect.
 
 398 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 was answered by a writer under the signature of " A Tra- 
 veller," with great point and severity. This was said to 
 be the production of Mr. Clinton. He charges Mr. Ver- 
 planck's hostility to Clinton, as having grown out of a 
 charge given by Mr. C. while mayor of New- York, on an 
 occasion when Verplanck was indicted for a riot in 
 Columbia College, and the " Traveller's" main object seems 
 to have been to ridicule Mr. Verplanck's claim to literary 
 merit; but towards the conclusion, he says that, "He" 
 (Coody, alias Verplanck,) " has become the head of a 
 political sect called the Coodies, of hybrid nature, com- 
 posed of the combined spawn of federalism and Jacobin- 
 ism, and generated in the venomous passions of disappoint- 
 ment and revenge, without any definite character; neither 
 fish nor flesh, nor bird nor beast, but a nondescript made 
 up of 
 
 "All monstrous, all prodigious things." 
 
 Mr. Verplanck was joined by several others, few it is 
 true, in number, but highly respectable for talents and 
 standing, among whom were Judge RadclifF, who had been 
 appointed mayor by the federalists in 1810; and Mr. 
 Maxwell, since district attorney of New- York. This lit- 
 tle party were taken into very close communion by Judge 
 Spencer, and he was understood to be in favor of Judge 
 Radcliff for mayor. It is not improbable that this good 
 understanding commenced when Peter W. Radcliflf was 
 in the council of 1813. It really does seem that that lit- 
 tle association was, in a great degree, governed by hostili- 
 ty to De Witt Clinton, for there were scarcely enough of 
 them to occupy the places which would be rendered va- 
 cant by the expulsion of the Clintonian office holders in the 
 city; and it does not appear that they ever acted with 
 the republican p.rty from that time to the present, except 
 when it was necessary to do so in order personally to op- 
 pose De Witt Clinton. The result of the next election,
 
 1815.] OF NEW-YORK. 399 
 
 (April, 1815,) proved that they made no impression on the 
 federal party in New-York, for from being democratic in 
 1814, the city changed to federalism in 1815. The Goodies, 
 in common with all the other opponents of Mr. Clinton, 
 pressed his removal, and they insisted on the appointment 
 of Judge RadclifF. The Tammany society seemed to pre- 
 fer the appointment of their Grand Sachem, Mr. John Fer- 
 guson. In the end, Mr. ElmendorfF was induced to give 
 up his scruples about removing Mr. Clinton; and an ar- 
 rangement was made, by which Mr. Ferguson was ap- 
 pointed mayor, under an understanding that he was soon 
 to be provided with an office by the general government, 
 (surveyor of the port,) when Mr. RadclifF was to receive 
 the office of mayor. Mr. Clinton was displaced, and the 
 above arrangement was fully carried into eifect.* 
 
 The situation of Mr. Clinton was now deplorable, and 
 his prospects were painfully gloomy. To all appearance 
 his political expectations were entirely blasted. He was 
 
 * I cannot conclude my remarks on this council without mentioning one of their 
 acts which was peculiarly reprehensible. Mr. Ruggles Hubbard, who, it will be 
 recollected, was a senator from the eastern district, was a lawyer residing in Rens- 
 selaer county. He was irregular in his habits, la.x in his moral principles, and im- 
 provident in his expenditures. This man, in preference to many other worthy and 
 respectable old citizens of New- York, was appointed sherifTof the city and coun- 
 ty of New-York. An office worth ten thousand dollars a year, which eminently 
 required a man intimately acquainted with the citizens and their circumstances, 
 and one not only responsible in a pecuniary point of view, but of correct busi- 
 ness habits, and punctilious in all his dealings, was given by the council to a 
 member of their own body, of irregular habits, insolvent in his circumstances, 
 and a stranger to the city. It was a mere exertion of arbitrary power, an insult 
 and outrage on the city of New-York, which ought to have disgraced the most 
 despotic tyrant in the eastern world. How the city of New-York could have been 
 Induced to submit peaceably to this most inexcusable act, is a miracle. That Mr 
 Hubbard was wholly unworthy of this office, even had he been a citizen of New- 
 York, apiiears from the ridiculous attempt, subsequently made by him to get pos- 
 session of Amelia Island, and his miserable death there. 
 
 It is due to Ruggles Hubbard to say, that although he was lax in his moral prin- 
 ciples and reckless in his habits, he was an exceedingly pleasant companionable 
 man, good natured and kind in his disposition, and humane and generous to a 
 fault. He left many worthy and respectable connexions in the part of the state 
 ■where he resided. His fellow members of the council deserve, I was going to say, 
 more of the maledictions of the public than ought to be bestowed upon him.
 
 400 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 no longer in fellowship with the republican'party. There 
 was no reasonable ground to believe that the federalists 
 would regain an ascendency either in the state or nation, 
 and if they should, there was little probability that they 
 would betow on him any marks of distinction or favor. 
 From youth up he had devoted himself to politics, and 
 had never followed any business or profession. He had 
 a large family dependent on him for education and sup- 
 port, and although he was neither a speculator nor pro- 
 fuse in his expenses, by reason of responsibilities he had 
 improvidently assumed for others, and a want of system 
 in his domestic economy, he was insolvent for many thou- 
 sands of dollars. But he was a man of great firmness 
 and moral courage. He did not abandon himself to des- 
 pondency, nor did he yield to childish resentment. He 
 continued his social intercourse, and maintained his digni- 
 ty of deportment. He betook himself to literary pursuits, 
 and soon distinguished himself by his dissertations and 
 addresses, as a man of science and considerable literary 
 attainments; and he pursued with ardor his scheme of in- 
 ducing the state to open a communication by a canal be- 
 tween the great lakes and the tide waters of the Hudson. 
 
 Mr. Clinton was descended from the Irish. From that 
 and other circumstances, he was during his whole life, the 
 favorite of the great mass of Irish adopted citizens. Af- 
 ter his removal from the mayoralty, he was addressed by 
 Thomas Addis Emmett and Doct. McNivin, in behalf of 
 the Irish citizens in a manner creditable to them, and 
 honorable to him. '*We prefer," say they, " the mo- 
 ment of your retreat from office, for the expression of 
 our deep sense of your manifold and important services to 
 the public." 
 
 Mr. Clinton's reply gives stronger evidence of intense 
 feelings than any of his productions.
 
 1815.J OF NEW-YOKK. 401 
 
 Little business of interest was transacted in the legis- 
 lature during the remaining part of this session. 
 
 Gerrit L. Dox was chosen treasurer in lieu of Mr. Piatt. 
 
 The result of the election in April was somewhat different 
 from that which was expected probably by either party. 
 The city of New-York elected federal members to the as- 
 sembly. Of the one hundred and twenty-six which com- 
 posed that house, according to the certificate of the re- 
 turning officers, sixty-three were federalists and sixty- 
 three republicans. 
 
 In the senate, Jacob Barker was elected from the south- 
 ern district^ Peter R. Livingston and Isaac Ogden from the 
 middle, Abraham Van Vechten, David Allen, Henry I. 
 Frey and Ralph Hascal from the eastern; and Henry 
 Seymour and Stephen Bates from the western dictrict. All 
 the districts were democratic except the eastern. 
 
 £6
 
 402 POLITICAL HISTOKY [1815. 
 
 CHAPTER XXI. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1815, TO MAY 1, 1816. 
 
 The peace, as I have before in substance stated, entirely 
 prostrated the hopes of the federalists, as a party; and I 
 am not aware that, either in this or any other state in the 
 union, saving a feeble effort made in the spring of 1816, 
 in New-York, to elect Mr. King for governor, they have 
 made any serious effort, under the name of federalists, 
 since the termination of the war. 
 
 The issue which was made between the republican and 
 federal parties, on the war question, was unfortunate, and, 
 on the part of the federalists, ill judged and impolitic. I 
 say ill judged and impolitic, because, I trust, all candid, 
 fair minded republicans will admit that the great mass of 
 the federalists were sincerely attached to the civil institu- 
 tions and independence of the country; that they honestly 
 believed the war was unadvisedly declared and badly con- 
 ducted; and that the administration of Mr. Madison was 
 weak and inefficient, and tended to produce, and was pro- 
 ducing, serious injuries to the nation. It seems to me 
 then, that after the constitutional authorities of the coun- 
 try had declared war, althougn the federalists may have 
 supposed that war to have been injudiciously and prema- 
 turely declared, and even although they might have be- 
 lieved that by a proper course of negotiation, on the part 
 of the American government, it might have been avoided, 
 yet, inasmuch as a state of war with a powerful nation 
 actually existed, they ought by their influence, in and out 
 of the legislative halls, to have exerted themselves in fa- 
 vor of the vigorous prosecution of the war, and they 
 should have manifested their wish that the government
 
 1815.] OF NEw-iroRK. 403 
 
 might be furnished with the necessary means of men and 
 of money, to bring that war to a termination upon princi- 
 ples advantageous and honorable to the nation. 
 
 The conduct of the federalists was, in many respects, 
 the reverse of this. From the question, whether the war 
 was well or ill conducted by the government, or whether 
 it was prematurely declared, they allowed themselves to 
 be drawn into a controversy respecting the cause of the 
 war, and whether the American government were not 
 equally culpable with the British. In their zeal to con- 
 demn our own administration, they were led, first to apolo- 
 gize for, and finally to justify, the conduct of the common 
 enemy. As the federalists affirmed that the war was pre- 
 maturely declared, and that the administration was incom- 
 petent to conduct it, any ill success in prosecuting it they 
 seemed to suppose, would be proof of the truth of their 
 allegations. Hence, sometimes the federal press exulted, 
 or rather manifested symptoms of gratification at the 
 news of a defeat of the American troops. At the public 
 meetings of the federalists, and indeed in their social in 
 tercourse, on like occasions, they gave similar indications. 
 The true cause of such exultation and joy was, not that 
 the British arms were successful, but that the administra- 
 tion, by means of the disaster, was disgraced. But the 
 opponents of the federalists were able to produce an im 
 pression among the people that it was not the hostility of 
 the federalists to the administration, but their partiality to 
 a foreign government, which induced them to apologize 
 for, and sometimes justify, the British. The conduct of 
 over zealous federalists tended to give color and sustain 
 the allegations of their opponents. 
 
 It has always seemed to me, that if the federalists had, 
 in good faith, supported war measures, and confined their 
 opposition to the reckless expenditure of the public mo- 
 ney, and the manner in which the war was conducted,
 
 401 POLITICAL HISTORY [1&15. 
 
 they would have carried the hearts of a majority of the 
 American people with them, and broken down the admin- 
 istration. 
 
 It cannot fail to be unfortunate for parties, in a repub- 
 lic, to be founded on a difference of opinion as regards 
 the merits or demerits of a foreign power; and the fate of 
 the federalists, as a party, which seems to have been in- 
 duced by appearing to take the side of a foreign govern- 
 ment, will, in that respect, it is hoped, have a salutary ef- 
 fect on all parties hereafter. And it is worthy of remark, 
 that although, since the peace with England, our govern- 
 ment has had serious difficulties with other nations, and 
 we have constantly had highly excited parties in our 
 midst, no party has taken the side of any of the foreign 
 governments with whom we have differed. Indeed, I 
 have sometimes apprehended, that our party leaders are 
 too much afraid of the charge of foreign influence or for- 
 eign partialities. 
 
 The American government may err in its treatment of 
 another government, and when you become sensible that 
 it does so it is your right as a freeman, and you are bound 
 as an honest man, to condemn the course pursued by your 
 own governmentj not with a view to aid a foreign power, 
 but for the purpose of reforming your own government. 
 The federalists being in this hopeless condition, as a 
 party, felt very indifferent about the presidential candi- 
 dates. It is, however, natural to suppose, that they hoped 
 the republican party would divide on that question. The 
 president had then been taken from the state of Virginia 
 for twenty-four out of the twenty-eight years during 
 which the United States government had existed. This 
 apparent partiality for the citizens of that state, had been 
 long severely denounced by the federalists of the northern 
 and middle states, and it had recently been harped upon 
 by the papers, claiming to be republican, which supported
 
 1815.] OF NEW- YORK. 405 
 
 Mr. Clinton. It was now the interest of Gov. Tompkins, 
 and other competitors with Mr. Monroe for the presidency, 
 to countenance and give effect, among the republicans, to 
 the prejudices which had been excited against what was 
 called the Virginia dynasty. Judge Spencer and Gen. 
 Armstrong were in favor of Mr. Crawford, but the great 
 mass of the republican party in the state were for Gov. 
 Tompkins. 
 
 Immediately after the peace was concluded, Mr. Madi- 
 son began to give tokens that Mr. Monroe was to be the 
 executive candidate. Whether an understanding existed 
 at the time of the election of Mr. Madison, that Mr. Mon- 
 roe, who at first exhibited some symptoms of oppugnation, 
 should be his successor, or whether he was operated upon 
 by the pressure of his Virginia friends; or from personal 
 friendship, and from an opinion that Mr. Monroe was 
 really the fittest and most suitable man, or, whatever the 
 cause may have been, it is certain that when danger from 
 a foreign enemy and domestic disturbance disappeared, 
 Mr. Madison, contrary to his intentions when he tendered 
 to Mr. Tompkins the office of secretary of state, did aban- 
 don his claims, and sustain those of Mr. Monroe. 
 
 As soon as it was known in New-York that Mr. Mon- 
 roe was the executive candidate for the succession, a small 
 party was got up who favored his pretensions, and among 
 them were men who had been the confidential friends of 
 Gov. Tompkins, and had participated largely in the boun- 
 ties he had distributed. 
 
 There are good reasons to believe that the national ad- 
 ministration, under the control of the Virginia dynasty, 
 had, for a long time, entertained some jealousy of the 
 leading and most influencial republicans in the state of 
 New-York. The great and rapidly increasing numerical 
 weight of this state might have increased that jealousy. 
 Hence, the policy at Washington was to prevent any one
 
 406 POLITICAL HISTO&Y [1815. 
 
 man from getting, or rather from retaining, an ascendancy 
 with the republican party in the state. Hence, we find 
 that the minor section of that party were always the spe- 
 cial favorites of the administration, from the time of the 
 existence of the Burr faction down to the period of which 
 I am writing. Accordingly, William P. Van Ness, the 
 second of Burr in the duel with Hamilton, the avowed 
 author of Aristides, and the uncompromising enemy of 
 De Witt Clinton, was made a judge of the United States 
 court. Hence, also, the early attacks upon that gentle- 
 man, in the Richmond Enquirer, and, in 1808, when Mr. 
 Clinton was supporting the embargo and other measures 
 of the general government, in the senate of New-York, 
 the attacks upon him by the Washington Monitor, a paper 
 edited by Mr. Colvin, a clerk in the office of Mr. Madison, 
 and other republican papers directly under his controlj 
 and hence, the Martling men and Lewisites in New- York, 
 after they denounced Mr. Clinton, and while they were, 
 as respected the great republican party in the state, liter- 
 ally a faction, were the peculiar favorites of the adminis- 
 tration, and the special objects of its bounty. This policy 
 of the general government had been sanctioned and se- 
 cretly encouraged by governor Tompkins, but it was now 
 his turn to encounter the same policy exerted towards 
 himself. 
 
 In illustration of this remark it is my duty to state, that 
 Solomon Southwick, who had for years abused the national 
 administration and the Virginia dynasty; who had boiste- 
 rously opposed, in 1812, the election of Mr. Madison; 
 and who had most bitterly attacked Gov. Tompkins, Judge 
 Spencer, and other distinguished republicans of New- 
 York, was now a successful applicant for an appointment 
 by the general government. 
 
 It is true, that after the news of peace, in the winter of 
 1815, he came out, in the Albany Register, in favor of the
 
 1815.] OF NEW-YORK. 407 
 
 republican party, and of the conduct of Mr. Tompkins, as 
 governor; but those who recollected his severe and con- 
 tinued animadversions in that paper, for three years prece- 
 dmg, found it extremely difficult to accord implicit credit 
 to his sincerity. 
 
 The office of post-master, at Albany, had become va- 
 cant by the death of Peter P. Dox, in the fall of 1815, 
 and Mr, Southwick was an applicant for that appointment. 
 It is true he was recommended by a respectable meeting, 
 principally of republicans, in Albany, at which George 
 Merchant was chairman, and Charles E. Dudley secretary^ 
 but it was well understood that the meeting was got up 
 principally through the influence of the creditors of Mr. 
 Southwick, in the hope, if he should be appointed to a 
 lucrative office, that peradventure they might realize a 
 portion, or the whole, of the debts he owed them, 
 
 Mr. Southwick was in favor of Mr. Monroe for presi- 
 dent, and he was eventually appointed post-master at Al- 
 bany. 
 
 At this time the selection of the presidential candidate 
 was made by a caucus of republican members of congress. 
 This was then the common law of the democratic party. 
 The fourteenth congress convened on the first Monday in 
 December. As I happened to be a member of that con- 
 gress I can speak with some confidence in relation to the 
 manoeuvrings which occurred, prior to the congressional 
 caucus. When the members from this state arrived in 
 Washington, it was found that nearly, if not quite, all the 
 republicans, (and they were the only persons who claimed 
 the right to interfpre in the selection of a presidential can- 
 didate,) were for Gov. Tompkins, if it should be found 
 that there was a reasonable prospect of procuring his 
 nomination; but it was soon ascertained that it could not 
 be effected. The New-England states were all represented 
 by federalists, with the exception of three republican
 
 408 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 members from that part of Massachusetts which now con- 
 stitutes the state of Maine. The majority of the republi- 
 can members were from the south, and these were all op- 
 posed to the nomination of Tompkins. Their ostensible 
 objection was, that he had never been in the service of the 
 nation, and therefore, their constituents knew little or 
 nothing of him. It was in vain that w^e urged his merits 
 as governor of New-York, during the late war.* " I have 
 no doubt," said a member from North Carolina to me, 
 *' that Mr. Tompkins is a good governor. We, also, have 
 a good governor in North Carolina, but we do not, on that 
 account, expect you to support him for the office of presi- 
 dent." It was difficult to answer this objection, although 
 the only reason vs^hy Gov. Tompkins had not been in the 
 service of the nation, was his refusal to accept the office 
 of secretary of state, solely for the reason that he could 
 render more service to the nation as governor than he 
 could as secretary of state. 
 
 I regret to say, that those who manifested an inclination 
 to support, in caucus. Gov. Tompkins, may be designated 
 by geographical lines. His friends were to be found in 
 New-York, New-Jersey, some in Pennsylvania, some in 
 Kentucky, some in Ohio, and some in Maryland; but not 
 a single supporter of Tompkins could be found south of 
 the Potomac. What was, w^hat is, notwithstanding what 
 has lately taken place, the inference to be drawn, by the 
 northern aspirants to the national executive chair, from 
 this fact 1 Of those republican members from Massachu- 
 setts, two were for Mr. Monroe, and one, (Col. Conner, a 
 talented and enterprising man, who, although elected from 
 Maine, was an actual resident of Albany, he having mar- 
 ried the daughter of Isaac Denniston, Esq.,) was for 
 Tompkins. It soon became evident that Tompkins could 
 not be nominated; but, before this was ascertained, at any 
 rate by those of us who were strangers, a meeting was held 
 
 • Mr. Lewis Williams.
 
 1815.] OF NEW-YORK. 409 
 
 by the New- York delegation, to ascertain each others' 
 views and to endeavor to agree on ulterior measures. 
 
 My object, and, I believe, the object of a majority of 
 the delegates, was, in case we should become satisfied that 
 the project of nominating Gov. Tompkins was hopeless, 
 then to endeavor to procure as nearly an united vote of 
 the state as possible, for William H, Crawford, at that 
 time secretary of war. 
 
 The old members, as for instance. Gen. Porter, John 
 W. Taylor, and Mr. Irving of New-York, were extremely 
 wary and cautious. It was soon ascertained that few of 
 us had hopes of succeeding with Tompkins, and Gen. 
 Porter made some suggestions respecting the chance of 
 success by holding him up as a candidate in opposition to 
 the caucus nomination; and, although neither he nor any 
 one else entertained any serious view of taking such a 
 course, he appeared desirous to direct the attention of the 
 delegates from the true question, which was, in case 
 Tompkins was given up, between Crawford and Monroe. 
 Some one finally observed, that the latter was the impor- 
 tant, and in reality, the only question to be decided. The 
 meeting was, notwithstanding, as appeared to me, much 
 by means of the influence of Gen. Porter, John W. Tay- 
 lor and Enos T. Throop, broken up without any expres- 
 sion of opinion as between Monroe and Crawford. I 
 knew, and those gentlemen at the time knew, that more 
 than four to one of the delegates were for Crawford. Mr. 
 Porter, although the fact was not then generally known, 
 was in favor of Monroe, and he was unwilling it should 
 be at that juncture publicly known how large a majority 
 of the New-York delegation was for Crawford, being ap- 
 prehensive of its effects en the members of congress from 
 other states. Gen. Porter was, not long after, appointed 
 commissicner, under the British treaty, to run the boLn-
 
 410 POLITICAL HISTORY [1815. 
 
 dary line between the United States and the province of 
 Canada. 
 
 William H. Crawford was a self-made man. He was a 
 native of Virginia, and, by his parentage, belonged rather 
 to a plebian than an aristocratic stock. In early life he 
 emigrated to Georgia, where he soon distinguished himself 
 in the practice of his profession, which was that of the 
 law. He rose rapidly in the estimation of the citizens of 
 his adopted state, and very soon was elected one of the 
 representatives of that state, in the senate of the United 
 States. He was chosen as a supporter of the national ad- 
 ministration, but, during the years 1811, and part of 1812, 
 he became dissatisfied with what he deemed the indecisive 
 course of Mr. Madison, with respect to the difficulties be- 
 tween this country and Great Britain. It has been said, 
 and probably with truth, that Mr. Madison was at all 
 times averse to a war with the British, and that he was 
 ultimately forced, by the importunity of his friends and 
 the almost unanimous expression of the opinion of his 
 party, to recommend a declaration of war. But, be that 
 as it may, his messages were certainly of an equivocal 
 character, and so drawn as to bear different constructions. 
 Mr. Crawford, in a speech in the senate, complained of 
 this. He said, " The messages are like the responses of 
 the Delphic oracle," (I quote from memory,) " if you 
 are for war the messages are for war, if you are for 
 peace they are peace messages." Mr. Crawford, how- 
 ever, was soon after removed from the senate, by an 
 appointment as American minister at Paris. It was said 
 that one reason why Mr. Madison selected Mr. Crawford, 
 was, that he apprehended opposition from him, and he 
 was very desirous, at that crisis, to prevent any division 
 amons: his southern democratic friends. Mr. Crawford 
 acquitted himself creditably at the court of France, and, 
 in 1815, was recalled to preside over the war department.
 
 1815.] OF NEW- YORK. 411 
 
 He was possessed of a vigorous intellect, strictly honest 
 and honorable in his political conduct, sternly indepen- 
 dent, and of great decision of character. On the other 
 hand, Mr. Monroe, though he had been long in public 
 life, a considerable part of which consisted in the execu- 
 tion of diplomatic agencies, was, speaking of him as a 
 candidate for the presidency, not distinguished for vigor 
 of intellect, or for decision of character, independence of 
 action, or indeed, for any extraordinary public services. 
 He made no pretensions to distinction as a writer, or elo- 
 quence as a public speaker. He seems to have owed his 
 success in life to great caution, prudence, and deliberation 
 in every thing which he said or did. 
 
 With these views of the merits of Mr. Monroe and Mr. 
 Crawford, in connection with the fact that the chief ma- 
 gistracy of the nation had been so long held by citizens of 
 Virginia, and considering Gov. Tompkins out of the 
 question, a large majority of the New-York delegation 
 was rather ardent in support of Mr. Crawford. Gov. 
 Tompkins thought unkindly of their course. He thought 
 they had too readily consented to give him up, although 
 it was well known that Judge Spencer, whose opinion at 
 that time had great influence with the members, decidedly 
 preferred Crawford to Tompkins; yet, had there been the 
 least prospect of his nommation, I have no doubt they 
 would, in good faith, have supported him to the last. 
 Mr. Clinton was for Mr. Monroe. This fact I know : — 
 Mr. Van Buren took no decided part in the matter.* In 
 
 • Mr. Van Buren was at Washington in the early part of the session of con- 
 gress. I asked him whom we ought to support for president ? He replied, with ap- 
 parent indifference, " We say Tompkins, of course," and then turned the conver- 
 sation to some other subject. This conversation took place in presence of James 
 Birdsal, a member from Chenango county, who, after Mr. V. B. withdrew, re- 
 marked upon his coldness of manner. 
 
 After the New-York legislature had been for some time in session, in (he winter 
 of 1816, (February 14,) a legislative caucus was held, at which it was resolved, 
 that the democratic members of congress from the state of New-York be instructed
 
 412 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 connection with the New-York delegation, the members 
 from New- Jersey, part of the Pensylvania delegation. Col. 
 Conner fr.om Massachusetts, part of the members from 
 Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and North Carolina, and the 
 whole of the Georgia delegation, were for Mr. Crawford. 
 When congress first assembled, as between Crawford and 
 Monroe, I have not a particle of doubt, that a majority 
 of the republican members were for the former. But the 
 caucus was put off from time to time, until the session 
 was considerably advanced, and such was the influence of 
 the administration on its own friends, or from other causes 
 unknown to me, when the grand caucus was held, Mr. 
 Crawford received fifty-four votes, and Mr. Monroe sixty- 
 five, who was therefore nominated for president. Gov. 
 Tompkins was nominated for vice-president. Of the 
 members from New-York, I believe, that Messrs. Irving, 
 Throop and Birdseye, were the only ones who voted for 
 Monroe. Mr. Taylor was believed to have voted for him, 
 but he has since told me he did not. Gen. Porter had 
 resigned his seat, having received the appointment I have 
 mentioned. Mr. Clay was for Mr. Monroe. [JSToie £,] 
 
 The day appointed by law for the meeting of the New- 
 York legislature,was Tuesday the 30th of January. On that 
 day quite a sufficient number of the members elect were in 
 Albany, but as several of them did not arrive that day, and 
 as there were more federalists than republicans absent, the 
 former did not attend the first day, and there being no 
 quorum, the republican members who were in attendance, 
 adjourned until the day following. On Wednesday, one 
 
 to support Gov. Tompkins for president. This resolution could hardly have been 
 passed, considering tho known zeal of Judge Spencer for Mr. Crawford, had not 
 Mr. Van Buren earnestly supported it. But, at that late day, so sagacious a poli- 
 tician as Mr. Van Buren must have perceived that if the New- York delegation, 
 instead of supporting Crawford, should support Tompkins, the nomination of 
 Monroe would be rendered certain, and, of course, both Crawford and Tompkins 
 would be defeated. If, at Albany, Mr. Van Buren was ardent in the support of 
 Tompkins, at Washington, to say the least, he was philosphically calm and cool
 
 1816.] OF NEW-YORK. 413 
 
 hundred and twenty members appeared, when Daniel 
 Cruger of Steuben county was chosen speaker, against J. 
 R. Van Rensselaer, by a majority of one vote, and Aaron 
 Clark was elected clerk by a vote of sixty-two to fifty- 
 nine. There was one blank vote cast. Showing that 
 there was then in attendance one hundred and twenty- 
 three members, for as there was no tie the speaker did not 
 vote. The seats of the remaining three members were 
 vacant by reason of sickness or death. 
 
 Mr. William A. Duer, a federal member from Dutchess, 
 immediately on the election of Speaker, presented the pe- 
 tion of Henry Fellows of Ontario county, claiming a right 
 to a seat in the house as a member elected from Ontario 
 county, in the place of Peter Allen, to whom the petition- 
 er alleged a certificate had been improperly granted by 
 the clerk of that county. 
 
 The case contained in the document presented by Mr. 
 Duer was, as afterwards by the unanimous report of the 
 committee on elections, in substance as follows: — 
 
 Henry Fellows was one of the federal candidates for a 
 member of the assembly from the county of Ontario, at 
 the last annual election, and Peter Allen was the candi- 
 date of the republican party, at the same election, and re- 
 ceived a greater number of votes than any of the repub- 
 lican candidates. Among the votes given to Mr. Fellows 
 were forty-nine votes from the town of Pennington, which 
 votes were printed ballots, with the name of Henry Fel- 
 lows thereon. These votes, when added to the residue of 
 the votes given him in the county, amounted to three thou- 
 sand seven hundred and twenty-five. Mr. Allen received 
 three thousand six hundred and ninety-five votes only, 
 which would have given Fellows a majority of thirty. 
 The inspectors of election for the town of Pennington 
 filed a copy of their certificate of the canvass, with the 
 town clerk, and in that certificate the name of Henry Fel-
 
 414 POLITICAL HISTORY [1861. 
 
 lows was written at full length, but in the duplicate sent 
 by the inspectors to the county clerk, Mr. F.'s name was 
 written " Hen. Fellows." The county clerk rejected these 
 forty-nine votes which gave Allen nineteen majority, and 
 therefore he certified that Allen was duly elected. It was 
 by virtue of a certificate given under these circumstances, 
 that Mr. Allen claimed his seat. 
 
 It will be perceived, that as there actually were but one 
 hundred and twenty-three members, while Allen retained 
 his seat the republicans had sixty-two members and 
 the federalists sixty-one, the moment Fellows should 
 obtain the seat of Allen, then the federalists would have 
 sixty-two members, and the republicans including the 
 speaker, would have but sixty-one. The great strug- 
 gle on the part of the federalists, was to have this 
 question decided before the council of appointment was 
 chosen, while the republicans were anxious to put it off 
 until they could secure this spoil distributing machine^ 
 both parties knowing that eventually the seat must be given 
 to Mr. Fellows. 
 
 It is a curious fact, and strongly illustrative of the im- 
 portant duty which devolves on every elector at the polls, 
 that this state of things was produced by one vote in the 
 the ballot-box, given in the county of Otsego. There 
 were two classes of candidates voted for in that county at 
 the preceding election; and out of five members to be 
 chosen only one federalist was elected, and that one was 
 Doct. William Campbell, the late surveyor general. Upon 
 canvassing the votes, it was found that Doct, Campbell, 
 being a popular as well as a very worthy man, ran higher 
 than any of the other federal candidates, and received one 
 vote more than the lowest republican candidate. Thus if 
 the inspectors of Pennington, and clerk of Ontario coun- 
 ty had done their duty, one vote in the ballot box would 
 have controlled the whole patronage of the great state of
 
 1816.] OF NEW-YORK. 415 
 
 New- York for the ensuing year. Are the important con- 
 sequences which may result from one vote duly consider- 
 ed at our popular elections? — I fear not. 
 
 Upon the presentation of this petition, Mr. John H. 
 Beech of Cayuga, a republican member, moved that the 
 reading of the petition and documents be postponed until 
 to-morrow. Mr. Duer objected that the motion was not 
 in order. The speaker decided that the motion was in 
 order. Mr. Thomas J. Oakley, another member from 
 Dutchess, appealed from the decision of the speaker. 
 On the decision of this question, the ayes and noes were 
 called for, and the clerk was proceeding to call the names 
 of the members, when Mr. Duer made a motion that the 
 name of Peter Allen be omitted in calling the roll, on the 
 ground that he was collaterally interested in the question. 
 The speaker decided that this last motion of Mr. Duer 
 was not in order, from which decision an appeal was 
 taken. The ayes and noes were called on this new ques- 
 tion of order and it was objected that Peter Allen had not 
 a right to vote on this question of order, the speaker de- 
 cided he had such rightj from which last decision there 
 was an appeal. The house then adjourned. 
 
 It is easy to perceive, that in this way there could be no 
 end to the contest, for every time a new question arose, an 
 appeal from the decision of the speaker was taken, as to 
 the right of Peter Allen to vote, and a new question 
 was presented as to his right to vote upon the question, 
 which a moment before was itself the new question. 
 
 On Thursday morning both parties seemed inclined to 
 a truce, or rather a suspension of hostilities long enough 
 for time to breathe a little. They therefore proceeded 
 organize the house by the appointment of a doorkeeper, 
 sergeant-at-arms, &c. and they sent messages to the go- 
 vernor and senate, informing them that the house was or- 
 ganized. The governor returned for answer, that he would
 
 416 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 meet the two houses at the assembly chamber on the next 
 day, and then the house adjourned. 
 
 On Friday, the 2nd of February, the governor deliver- 
 ed his speech, after which the house adjourned until Sa- 
 turday morning. 
 
 On that morning the contest was again renewed. 
 
 Col. Leavenworth, from Delaware county, a gentleman 
 who distinguished himself as an officer in the late war, 
 offered a resolution, that the " house will immediately 
 proceed to nominate and appoint a council of appoint- 
 ment." 
 
 When this resolution was offered, Mr. Lynch offered a 
 resolution that the resolution to choose a council of ap 
 pointment be postponed until after a decision of the 
 right of Peter Allen to a seat in the house. The speaker 
 decided that Mr. Lynch's motion was not in order, and his 
 decision was confirmed by the house. 
 
 Mr. Oakley then moved to amend the resolution offered 
 by Col. Leavenworth, by striking out the word " immediate- 
 ly" and inserting " on Wednesday next, and that in the 
 mean time the house would consider the right of Peter 
 Allen to his seat." On this question the ayes and noes 
 were ordered; and thereupon Mr. Jay made a motion that 
 Peter Allen be excluded from voting on the amendment 
 offered by Mr. Oakley. The speaker decided that Mr. 
 Jay's motion was not in order, and Mr. Jay appealed. 
 Before deciding the question on this appeal, the house ad 
 journed till Monday. 
 
 On Monday, which was the sixth day of the session, the 
 house met, and forthwith the contest was renewed. Mr. 
 Duer moved that Peter Allen should not be allowed to 
 vote on the appeal of Mr. Oakley. The speaker decided 
 that Mr. D.'s motion was not in order, and from that deci- 
 sion he appealed. The ayes and noes being taken, the re- 
 sult was sixty-one votes against the decision of the speak-
 
 1816.] OF NEW-YORK. 417 
 
 er, and sixty-one votes including the vote of Mr. Allen, 
 for sustaining it. The speaker of course voted in favor 
 of his own decision, and declared the appeal to be lost. 
 
 The question in various forms was presented of the 
 right of Peter Allen to vote on a question affecting his 
 right to a seat, and on his right to vote on questions affect- 
 ing his right to vote on those questions, and always ended 
 with the same results. Peter Allen did vote, and by such 
 vote the house was equally divided, in all which cases the 
 decision of the question was of course made by the casting 
 vote of the speaker. 
 
 Eventually the resolution of Col. Leavenworth, to pro- 
 ceed immediately to the choice of a council of appoint 
 ment, was adopted by the casting vote of the speaker. 
 The house then, before any adjournment, proceeded to elect 
 a council of appointment. The result was as follows: — 
 Darius Crosby, sixty-three ; William Ross, sixty-onej 
 Parley Keyes, sixty-one; Archibald S. Clark, sixty-twoj. 
 Samuel Verbryck, forty-sevenj Abraham Van Vechten, 
 sixty-one; Gerrit Wendell, sixty-one; Henry Seymour, 
 sixty-one. 
 
 Two of the four first mentioned gentlemen were elected 
 (Mr. Ross and Mr. Keyes,) by the casting vote of the 
 speaker, and the vote of Peter Allen. 
 
 On the next day after the council of appointment was 
 chosen, the committee of elections reported, on the peti- 
 tion of Mr. Fellows, the facts I have stated, and unani- 
 mously recommended the adoption of a resolution that Pe- 
 ter Allen was not entitled to a seat in that house, and that 
 such seat of right belonged to Henry Fellows. 
 
 On the question of agreeing to the report, the ayes 
 and noes were called, and one hundred and fifteen mem- 
 bers voted in the affirmative, and one only, (Mr. Ganson 
 of Genesee) in the negative. 
 
 27
 
 418 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 Since all interest in these proceedings have si.bsidedj I 
 trust very few men can be found who will justify the pro- 
 ceedings of the republican part of this house of as- 
 sembly. 
 
 As to the right of Mr. Allen to a seat there could not be 
 two opinions. It was a palpable case of error in the re- 
 turning officer. The Clerk of Ontario county must have 
 been stupid, to a degree approaching to idiocy, or he must 
 have acted corruptly and fraudulently; and this view of 
 his conduct must have been taken by every man of common 
 sense in the assembly. 
 
 Again, Allen had a direct interest in retaining a seat in 
 the house, and no member can vote on a question in which 
 he is interested, and yet Peter Allen was allowed to vote 
 on questions distinctly affecting his continuance in that 
 house as a member. 
 
 The result is that the council of appointment, chosen 
 by the vote of Peter Allen, had no moral right to exercise 
 the functions of their office, procured by a species of le- 
 gislative pettifogging and barefaced trickery. 
 
 The council of appointment which had been created 
 after this severe contest, had very little to do. Few of- 
 fices were or became vacant, and the incumbents were all, 
 or nearly all, the political friends of the council. Gen. 
 Porter resigned the office of secretary of state, and Robert 
 Tillotson, a very worthy and accomplished man, the son 
 of the late secretary Doct. Tillotson, was appointed in 
 his place. 
 
 Some gentlemen of the republican party, then in Alba- 
 ny, gave Allen a dinner, which I believe was all he ever 
 received for the shameful prostitution of himself for party 
 purposes. 
 
 The governor's speech was principally occupied in re- 
 marks relating to the war. He did not submit any spe- 
 cial recommendations on any subject of importance. In
 
 1S16.] OF NEW-YORK. 419 
 
 relation to the contemplated Erie canal, ■whlchnow began 
 to excite universal attention, he merely said, 
 
 " It will rest with the legislature, whether the prospect 
 of connecting the waters of the Hudson with those of the 
 Western Lakes and of Champlain, is not sufficiently im- 
 portant to demand the appropriation of some part of the re- 
 venues of the state to its accomplishment, without impo- 
 sing too great a burthen upon our constituents. The first 
 route being an object common with the states of the west, 
 we may rely on their zealous co-operation in any judicious 
 plan that can perfect the water communication in that di- 
 rection. As it relates to the connecting the waters of the 
 Hudson with those of Lake Champlain, we may with 
 equal confidence, count on the same spirited exertions of 
 the patriotic and enterprising state of Vermont." 
 
 From the above extract, jt will be perceived that he was 
 far from being willing to commit himself in favor of the 
 measure. His words are measured with great care. In- 
 deed, his allusion to the " imposing too great a burden 
 on our (their) constituents," seems to me evidently thrown 
 in for the purpose of creating alarm. 
 
 After the controversy in relation to Allen, no serious 
 collisions took place between the federal and republican 
 parties, during the remainder of the session, but the 
 foundation for very fierce and lasting animosities between 
 different sections of the democratic party was shortly af- 
 terwards laid, or rather a foundation for such collisions 
 having previously been laid, the consequences of such 
 collisions began now to be exhibited. 
 
 We have seen Judge Spencer, whose towering influence 
 in the democratic party had long been felt throughout the 
 state, and especially in the legislature, — an influence,which 
 in public estimation, received an immense increase by the 
 prostration of De Witt Clinton, — recently, and no doubt 
 unexpectedly to him, as well as most of the lookers
 
 420 POLITICAL HISTORY [1916. 
 
 on, defeated, in his favorite views in relation to an 
 United States senator, and perhaps we may add in relation 
 to the appointment of an attorney general. The deceased 
 Mr. Hildreth, who, while the democratic party had the 
 power of controlling that appointment, held that office 
 until his death, considered, and perhaps truly, that he re- 
 ceived the appointment through the influence of his friend, 
 the judge; and it could not have been a very pleasing re- 
 flection to Mr. Spencer, that the office, "was now possessed 
 by a man who obtained it not only without his aid, but 
 against his wishes. The incumbent of that office in con- 
 nexion with Gov. Tompkins, had had the address to 
 thwart his most cherished hopes of placing a man, in 
 whom, above all others, he confided, in the senate of the 
 United States; and what, perhaps, was still more painful, 
 the contest in relation to the matter had aflbrded a demon- 
 stration that he could he beaten. 
 
 So great is the change in the working of our system of 
 government, since the abolition of the council of appoint- 
 ment, and the election by the people of most of those of- 
 ficers who were created by that branch of the executive 
 government, that if it be not now, it will hereafter be al- 
 most unaccountable how an individual, not officially con- 
 nected with either the legislative or executive department 
 of government, could have acquired, and for so long a 
 time, held so much influence as Judge Spencer did in the 
 state. I will endeavor to explain it. 
 
 My readers will bear in mind, that all officers, including 
 sheriffs, clerks of counties and justices of the peace, were 
 appointed by the council at Albany. The appointment 
 of justices conferred a more effectual means on the central 
 power, of influencing the mass of community, than all the 
 other patronage within the gift of the government. The 
 control over these officers carried the influence of the cen- 
 tral power into every town and even the most obscure
 
 1816.] OF NEW- YORK. 421 
 
 neighborhood in the state. A judge of the supreme 
 court takes up his residence in Albany j under the old cir- 
 cuit system his official duties, in the course of three or four 
 years, carried him into every county in the state, and pre- 
 sented him in an attitude most favorable to the people of 
 the respective counties. Four times a year many of the 
 lawyers, from various parts of the state, were required to 
 attend the supreme court at bar. Would it be difficult 
 for a judge to form an intimate and friendly acquaintance 
 with some citizen of each county, perhaps a lawyer, with 
 whom he could communicate, especially when such law- 
 yer ascertained that by this intercourse he could, through 
 the influence of the judge, procure appointments for his 
 friends, and in that way increase his influence and impor- 
 tance at home. The people, say for instance, of Orange 
 county, find that the recommendations to office, if given 
 by JVTr. B., are sure to be successful. If two men, (C. and 
 D.,) of the town of Warwick are candidates for the office 
 of justice of the peace, and Mr. B. writes to the judge in 
 behalf of C, and he is appointed in preference to D., Mr 
 B.,by such operations in several other towns in the county, 
 will soon be found to be an influential man in the county 
 of Orangej and when members of assembly or a member 
 of congress are to be nominated, by a county caucus, 
 whose advice is so likely to be followed as Mr. B.'s ? 
 On the other hand, B. knows that his power depends upon 
 sustaining the influence and power of his patron at the 
 seat of government. Hence, he will endeavor that the 
 assemblymen and senators, when they arrive at Albany, 
 shall listen to, and follow the advice of the man through 
 whom he derives a considerable portion of his consequence. 
 It cannot fail of being perceived that the tendency of this 
 process is to increase the political power of B. in the 
 county of Orange, while that very increase adds to the 
 power of the judge stationed at the capitol. Now we will
 
 422 POLITICAL HISTORY [IS 1 6. 
 
 suppose a judge of the supreme court to possess some 
 such confidential friend, in all, or nearly all, the principal 
 counties in the state, producing the same results as I have 
 supposed to have been produced in the county of Orange. 
 Will not these petty regents in the dififerent counties 
 create in their patron a grand regent at the capitol 1 By 
 some such means. Judge Spencer acquired and possessed 
 great power in creating yearly the appointing power, and 
 the ability to create generally carries with it the ability to 
 control the thing created. Judge Spencer was, and is 
 truly, a great man, but he was not only fond of power but 
 fond of exercising it. He was industrious, bold, enterpri- 
 sing and persevering. To these qualities it may be added, 
 that he was a man of a commanding intellect, and one of 
 the ablest judges, if not the ablest judge, in the United 
 States. A high and enviable reputation as a jurist was 
 accorded to him, as well by opponents as friends, and 
 from his judicial station he could not be removed, let par- 
 ties change and fluctuate as they might. 
 
 The political power of Judge Spencer was at its zenith 
 from 1813 to 1815. In 1816 the popularity of Gov. 
 Tompkins, and the talents, smooth and fascinating address, 
 and management of Martin Van Buren, and their constant 
 intercourse with the members of the legislature, enabled 
 them to gain an influence in that body which the Judge 
 became apprehensive would curtail, if not prostrate, his 
 own, and he therefore deemed it desirable to call in some 
 further aid. There was no man who could balance and 
 neutralize the influence of Tompkins and Van Buren so 
 effectually as De Witt Clinton, could he be restored to the 
 confidence of the ruling party. But could he be restored ? 
 
 Judge Spencer had taken a most active and efficient 
 part in destroying that confidence. In saying this, I do 
 not mean to say that many parts of the political conduct of 
 Mr. Clinton had not merited the animadversions of Judge
 
 1816.] OF NEW-YOHK. 423 
 
 Spencer, or any other honest man attached to the republi- 
 can interest. But, could Judge Spencer, who had been 
 unreserved in his denunciations to his republican friends, 
 go to those very friends and urge the restoration to their 
 confidence and support the man he had denounced 1 and, 
 if he could bring himself to attempt it, could he hope for 
 success in the attempt 1 Would not his own words be 
 retorted upon him 1 A less enterprising, a less daring 
 mind than Judge Spencer's, would surely have been de- 
 terred from such an undertaking. But he did, neverthe- 
 less, undertake it, and what is more wonderful, his efforts 
 were successful. I must not be understood as intending 
 to represent, or even insinuate, that Judge Spencer, on 
 this or any other occasion, yielded his assent to any mea- 
 sure, or the support of any man, when he believed, or 
 suspected, that such assent would prejudice substantially 
 the great interests of the public. Far from it. On the 
 contrary, I believe him to have been honest and patriotic 
 in his views; but I believe he looked on these matters as 
 mere personal questions, and thought he had a right to 
 pursue a course calculated to adrance his own views and 
 interest, when that interest was not incompatible with the 
 public good. 
 
 Unfortunately for Mr. Clinton, most of his republican 
 friends, who at this time adhered to him, rather injured 
 than aided him. With the exception of T. A. Emmett, 
 who really could not be said to be a party politician, 
 and S. Miller of whom I have before spoken, and P. 
 C. Van Wyck, who was a man of fine talents,* Mr. 
 Clinton's New-York supporters were generally men of 
 broken down fortunes, and appeared to do little else than 
 laud the man they had selected for their patron. Several 
 of the lobby agents for the Bank of America, and 
 some of the republican members of the N. Y. legisla- 
 
 * A few words contained in the first edition are here omitted, as they have been 
 supposed to imply an imputation against Mr. Van Wyck, not intended by the author
 
 424 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 ture, who aided in chartering that institution, claimed to 
 be the especial friends of Mr. Clinton. Some of them, 
 no doubt, finding that they had lost their standing and 
 reputation, professed the most ardent regard for Mr. Clin- 
 ton, in the hope that their unpopularity would be imputed 
 to the support of an unsuccessful political leader, rather 
 than to their own misconduct. All these men were loud 
 in their praises of Mr. Clinton, especially in his presence; 
 and unluckily, in common with many other great men, he 
 was rather too well pleased to hear his own praises 
 chaunted, without much scrutiny into the characters or 
 merits of the pipers. In the re-union with him, contem- 
 plated by Judge Spencer, the latter, therefore, had every- 
 thing to lose and but little to gain, while Mr. Clinton, 
 politically, had really nothing to lose and every thing to 
 gain. 
 
 A circumstance occurred shortly before the meeting of 
 the legislature, that put Mr. Clinton directly in communi- 
 cation with its members. A great and highly respectable 
 meeting of the citizens of New- York was held, at which 
 William Bayard presided, and John Pintard was secretary, 
 when spirited resolutions were adopted in favor of con- 
 structing the Erie and Champlain canals, and an able me- 
 morial to the legislature was drawn up by Mr. Clinton, in 
 the name of the meeting. As the agent of this meeting, 
 and as canal commissioner, the presence of Mr. Clinton, at 
 Albany, became necessary, and the discharge of his duties 
 brought him frequently in contact with the members of 
 the legislature. It is not my intention to enter into a de- 
 tail of the agency which Mr. Clinton had in procuring the 
 adoption of our splendid system of internal improvements, 
 nor of the action of political men in relation to that mea- 
 sure, further than the measure itself shall seem to affect 
 the standing and influence of politicians, and the action of 
 parties.
 
 181G.] OF NEW-YORK. 425 
 
 Professor Renwick, in his biography of Clinton, and 
 other writers who have favored us with the history of the 
 rise and progress of the canal policy, will, of course, be 
 consulted by those who are desirous of obtaining an accu- 
 rate and correct knowledge of that interesting and impor- 
 tant branch of the history of the state of New-York. 
 
 On the 7th of February a highly respectable meeting of 
 gentlemen of both political parties was held in Albany, of 
 which Chancellor Lansing was chairman, and the comp- 
 troller, Archibald Mclntyre, was secretary, for the purpose 
 of memorializing the legislature in behalf of constructing 
 the canal. 
 
 This meeting and its proceedings had an effect, not 
 only to give an impetus to the canal policy, but to give 
 weight to the communications of Mr. Clinton in his inter- 
 course with the members, and to diminish that apprehen- 
 sion, which small politicians sometimes entertain, of con- 
 tamination by any intercourse with a person who is politi- 
 cally put in Coventry by the party to which they belong. 
 
 The federalists, before the adjournment of the legisla- 
 ture, nominated Rufus King for governor, and George 
 Tibbits, of Troy, for lieutenant governor. 
 
 On the other hand, the democratic party held a legisla- 
 tive caucus on the 20th of February, at which Governor 
 Tompkins and Lt. Gov. Taylor were nominated for a re- 
 election. 
 
 A law was passed by this legislature, entitled, "An Act 
 to provide for the improvement of the internal navigation 
 of this state." By this statute the laws passed on this 
 subject, in 1811 and 1812, were repealed, and Stephen 
 Van Rensselaer, De Witt Clinton, Samuel Young, Joseph 
 Ellicott and Myron Holley, were appointed canal commis- 
 sioners. Mr. Van Rensselaer was selected in consequence 
 of his great wealth and high character for integrity, and 
 disinterested zeal for the welfare and prosperity of the
 
 426 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 state; Mr. Clinton, on account of the intimate acquaint- 
 ance he had acquired with all matters relating to the sub- 
 ject, his admitted zeal for the improvement, and his great 
 talents. Mr. Young was highly esteemed for his talents 
 and integrity. He was the friend of Gov. Tompkins, and 
 had been supposed to be in doubt as to the expediency of 
 the undertaking. His appointment may have been in 
 part caused by a desire of the supporters of the canal poli- 
 cy to avail themselves of his influence with his immediate 
 political friends, and to divest the board of commissioners 
 of any party character. Joseph Ellicott was the agent 
 of the great Holland Land Company, residing at Batavia; 
 of course a zealous friend to the canal, and a man of 
 wealth and influence; and Myron Holley was that year a 
 member of the Assembly from Ontario county; a man of 
 respectable literary attainments, personally much esteemed, 
 and ardent in his support of the canal policy. These 
 commissioners were, by this act, formed into a regular 
 board, and required to cause all necessary surveys and 
 estimates to be made, to receive grants and donations, and 
 to report the result of their doings to the next legislature. 
 The republican party this year, was, on the score of 
 talent, when compared with the federalists, indifferently 
 represented. Mr. Young, although he had been speaker 
 of the last assembly, was not returned as a member from 
 Saratoga. A combination had been formed against him, 
 which defeated his nomination by the republican conven- 
 tion held in that county; and although, I believe, he was 
 voted for by a portion of the electors, he did not obtain a 
 plurality of votes; and this schism among the republicans 
 of Saratoga occasioned the election of one federal member, 
 (Mr. Hamilton,) although the county was democratic by 
 a considerable majority. Mr. John H. Beach from Cayu- 
 ga, Col. Leavenworth from Delaware, and Mr Cruger, the 
 speakfer, were almost the only members who took much
 
 1816.] OF NEW- YORK. 427 
 
 part in the debates. They were men respectable for their 
 standing in society, and two of them held a middling rank 
 at the bar as lawyers^ but they were inexperienced as le- 
 gislators, and lacked confidence in their own powers, when 
 drawn into competition with the federal leaders in the 
 assembly. Doct. G. H. Barstow from Tioga, was, that 
 winter, for the first time, a member of a legislative body. 
 He was a clear headed, sagacious man, of a discriminating 
 mind, but he was diffident and, at that time, wholly un- 
 used to public extemporary speaking. 
 
 On the other hand, the federalists were represented by 
 Peter A. Jay, a son of the late governor, one of the first 
 lawyers of the city of New-York, of fine native intellec- 
 tual powers and of an highly cultivated mind; William 
 A. Duer from Dutchess, now known as an able and ac- 
 complished writer, who afterwards held the office of judge 
 of the third circuit, and now presides over Columbia Col- 
 lege with distinguished ability; and Thomas J.Oakley ,who, 
 although a new member of the legislature of New-York, 
 had been for some time before a member of congress, and 
 held a standing in that body highly respectable. For my 
 part, I consider Thomas J. Oakley one of the most talented 
 men which the state of New- York has produced. His 
 intellectual powers were strong and vigorous, and he was 
 capable of immense mental labor. Always cool and cal- 
 culating, in the highest heat of debate he possessed a most 
 perfect self control, and never permitted his feelings to 
 get the better of hisjudgment. As a clear, ingenious and 
 logical, though sometimes sophistical reasoner, he has 
 appeared to me unrivalled in our legislative halls at Alba- 
 ny. He is not an orator. He fails of being so from 
 his want of ardor of feeling, and his utter lack of imagi- 
 native powers. His coolness, his caution, his forecast, 
 and his perfect self command, peculiarly fit him for a 
 party leader in a legislative assembly. In congress he
 
 428 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 diflfered from the over zealous eastern federalists. He 
 wishedj at least, to manifest an ^apparent disposition to 
 furnish supplies to government for carrying on the "war, 
 and to confine his opposition to the manner in which the 
 war was carried on. Mr. Clopton, an old and sagacious 
 politician of Virginia, who was a member of congress 
 from the adoption of the constitution until his death, told 
 me, in 1816, that had the federal members of congress, 
 during the war, put themselves exclusively under the 
 management of Oakley, and implicitly followed his lead, 
 in his judgment, the administration would have been 
 prostrated. 
 
 Of Jacob Rutsen Van Rensselaer I have already spoken, 
 as a man of respectable talents, adroit as a debater, and 
 bold, decided and active as a political partizan. James 
 Vanderpoel, a respectable lawyer from Columbia county, 
 and subsequently judge of the third circuit, and James 
 Lynch from Oneida county, now a judge of one of the 
 New-York courts, were also members of the assembly 
 during this session, and contributed by their talents and 
 influence to sustain the federal side of the question in that 
 house. 
 
 Before giving the result of the election, it may be pro- 
 per to state, that a new organization had been made rela- 
 tive to the division of the state into senatorial districts; by 
 which, among other alterations, the counties of Albany, 
 Otsego, Schoharie and Chenango, had been annexed to, 
 and made a part of the middle district. 
 
 The election resulted, as had been anticipated, in favor 
 of the republican party. The city of New-York elected 
 republican members of assembly, and, in the state, more 
 than two-thirds of the members elect, of that body, be- 
 longed to the same class of politicians. All the senato- 
 rial districts, except the eastern, were democratic; and 
 Tompkins and Taylor were re-elected by a large majority.
 
 1816.] OP NEW- YORK. 429 
 
 The senators elected from the southern district, were 
 John D. Ditmis and Walter Bowne. Middle — Martin 
 Van Buren, John Noyes and Peter Swart. Western— 
 Ephraim Hart, John Knox and William M»llory.
 
 430 POLITICAL HISTORY [1816. 
 
 CHAPTER XXll 
 
 FROM IVUY 1, 1816, TO MAY 1, 1817. 
 
 Before the close of the 29th session of the legislature, 
 a personal interview had taken place between Mr. Clinton 
 and Judge Spencer, and a reconciliation had been eflfected. 
 There were other besides political reasons which led to 
 this. Mrs. Spencer was the sister of De Witt Clinton; 
 and it could not but be painful to her that such a state of 
 feeling should exist between her husband and brother, as 
 prevented even their speaking to each other. She was a 
 perfectly amiable woman, and the judge properly apprecia- 
 ted her merits. He therefore did not fail of being desi- 
 rous to remove this cause of her uneasiness and anxiety. 
 
 On the 8th of July, the council of appointment again 
 met in New-York, and removed John Van Ness Yates 
 from the office of Recorder of Albany, and appoint- 
 ed Philip S. Parker in his place. This removal was 
 said to have been effected by a very pressing letter of 
 Judge Spencer, addressed to Mr. Ross, one of the mem- 
 bers of the council. Mr. Parker was a nephew and rather a 
 favorite of Judge Spencer. Mr. Yates was a man of great 
 versatility of talent, social, companionable, and on free and 
 eesy terms with all classes of citizens; and he had many 
 friends, especially among what was called the lower order 
 of community; but he was somewhat irregular in his habits 
 and lax in his morals. He had been for a long time record- 
 er. The alleged cause of his removal, was that he had been 
 an agent for the applicants for a charter of the Bank of Ame- 
 rica, and a Clintonian. With respect to the aid he gave to 
 the bank applicants,the charge seemed rather stale; and as to 
 Lis having been a Clintonian, the time had arrived when it
 
 1817.] OF NEW- YORK. 431 
 
 did not seem quite consistent for Judge Spencer to allege 
 that as a sufficient cause of his removal from office. It was 
 also saidj that his ill-health prevented him from being 
 able properly to discharge his official duties. The office, 
 however, was not an important one, and his removal from 
 it would hardly excuse this notice, was it not that less 
 than two years afterwards it became the cause of serious 
 political embarrassment, which will be stated in its proper 
 place. 
 
 As Gov. Tompkins had been nominated, and accepted 
 the nomination, for the office of vice-president, it was an- 
 ticipated that the office of governor of this state would 
 become vacant on the fourth of March, then next; and 
 very active measures were taken by the friends of Mr. 
 Clinton during this summer to procure his nomination by 
 the republican party for the office of governor, when it 
 should become vacant. The friends of the canal were 
 generally in his favor, and this brought nearly the whole 
 of the great west to his support. Mr. Van Buren, al- 
 though he was opposed to Mr. Clinton, seems not at this 
 time to have felt much apprehension. 
 
 The legislature met on the 5th of November, for the 
 purpose of choosing presidential electors. David Woods 
 cf Washington county, was chosen speaker. He receiv- 
 ed eighty-four votes, while the federal candidate, James 
 Emott of Dutchess county, received but thirty-three. 
 
 The governor's speech contains nothing remarkable. 
 He did not utter a single word on the subject which at 
 that time engrossed more of public attention than any 
 other, — which was the construction of the grand canal. 
 
 His silence on so important a matter seems to me whol- 
 ly inexcusable. The constitution commanded him " to 
 recommend such matters to the legislature, as should ap- 
 pear to him to concern the good government, )velfare and 
 prosperity of the state." He knew that the masrni-
 
 432 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 ficent scheme of opening a navigable communication be ■ 
 tween the tide waters of Hudson's river, and the great 
 lakes, deeply agitated the public mind; and that it would 
 become the duty of that legislature to decide that great 
 and momentous question. Was it not his duty, as the 
 governor of the state, to have officially advised them of 
 his opinion on the matter? If he was in favor of it he 
 should have so declared himself; if against it, he should 
 have warned them not to adventure on the measure. There 
 was a timidity, (may I not say a littleness?) in thus eva- 
 ding the question, unsuitable to the character of an able, 
 honest and independent statesman. 
 
 Electors were chosen favorable to the election of Mon- 
 roe and Tompkins. The ticket was headed by Henry 
 Rutgers of New-York, and Samuel Chipman of one of the 
 western counties, as state electors. It does not tell well for 
 our institutions, when I affirm, what I verily believe to be 
 true, that ninety-nine out of one hundred of the citizens 
 of this state would have preferred some other man for 
 president to James Monroe. But it is nevertheless true, 
 that it is many times excusable, and sometimes one's duty, 
 to vote for men who are not our first choice; upon the 
 principle of submitting to a lesser, for the purpose of 
 avoiding a greater evil. The legislature adjourned to the 
 21st of January, then next. 
 
 On the 28th of January, 1817, the governor sent a mes- 
 sage to the legislature recommending the entire abolition 
 of slavery in the state of New- York, to take place on the 
 fourth day of July, 1827. By an act passed some years 
 before, all persons born of parents who were slaves after 
 July, 1799, were to be free; males at twenty-eight and 
 females at twenty-five years of age. The present legisla- 
 ture adopted the recommendation of the governor. This 
 great measure in behalf of human rights, which was to 
 obliterate forever the black and foul stain of slavery from
 
 1817.] OF NEW-YORK. 433 
 
 the escutcheon of our own favored state, was produced by 
 the energetic action of Cadwallader D. Colden, Peter A, 
 Jay, William Jay, Daniel D. Tompkins and other dis- 
 tinguished philanthropists, chiefly residing in the city of 
 New-York. The Society of Friends, who never slumber 
 when the principles of benevolence and a just regard to 
 equal rights call for their action, were zealously engaged in 
 this great enterprise. Gov. Tompkins deserves to be, and 
 his memory will be embalmed in the bosom of every hu- 
 man being who loves and reveres the munificient and mer- 
 ciful Father of the Universe, and duly appreciates the 
 equal rights of man for the efficient part he took in be- 
 half of the crushed slave. If in reference to internal im 
 proveraents, his action was that of a calculating and wily 
 politician, in the cause of humanity he was bold, energetic 
 and decisive. Here, he did not stop to calculate. Here, 
 governed by the humane and generous feelings which 
 were inherent in his nature, (for I believe constitutionally 
 he possessed a kind and generous heart,) he did not hesi- 
 tate to assume responsibilities, and obey the dictates of 
 justice and the impulse of humanity. I can forgive him 
 for his conduct in relation to the canal, but I could never 
 forgive myself were I for a moment to forget to be grate- 
 ful to him for this great and godlike act. 
 
 When the legislature convened, it was found that a 
 strong and considerably powerful portion of the republi- 
 can members were for nominating Mr. Clinton for govern- 
 or, when that office should become vacant by the election 
 of Gov. Tompkins to the vice-presidency. Among the 
 most active were Mr. Hart and Mr. Ross of the senate, 
 and Mr. Speaker Woods and G. W. Barstow of the as- 
 sembly. Still, such were the remaining prejudices against 
 Mr. Clinton, founded on his conduct during the presiden- 
 tial canvass with Mr. Madison, and more especially upon 
 nis action during the contest for the election of governor 
 
 28
 
 434 POLITICAL HISTORY [1317. 
 
 in 1813j aided and kept alive as these prejudices were, by 
 the address and efforts of Gov. Tompkins and Mr. Van 
 Buren, that it was doubtful whether a majority for him in 
 the legislature could be obtained. But Mr. Clinton had 
 an immensely powerful ally who was not a member of the 
 legislature, and that ally was Ambrose Spencer. He was 
 truly a host within himself. 
 
 The members most efficient in opposing the nomination 
 of Mr. Clinton, were Van Buren, P. R. Livingston and 
 Bowne of the senate, and the representatives in the as- 
 sembly from the city of New-York, and generally, the 
 members from the southern district. 
 
 Three distinct schemes were considered by Mr. Van Bu- 
 ren, and those acting with him, to defeat the project of 
 making Mr. Clinton governor. 
 
 First. It was proposed, inasmuch as neither the consti- 
 tution of this state nor of the United States, had expressly 
 declared that it was incompatible for a vice-president of 
 the United States to hold that office and at the same time 
 hold the office of governor, that Gov. Tompkins should 
 hold both offices. This expedient was soon rejected and 
 probably by Mr. Tompkins himself. It is not to be presum- 
 ed that so wary a politician, then in the prime of life, would 
 venture to encounter the clamor, which he must have fore- 
 seen, the attempt to execute such a plan would excite; and 
 what was worse, such clamor would be well founded; for 
 although, the holding of the two offices was not expressly 
 unconstitutional, yet it was most evident that it was palpa- 
 bly inconsistent with the spirit of the two governments 
 and that the anticipated clamor would be founded on the 
 immutable principles of right. 
 
 Second. The twentieth article of the constitution pro- 
 vides, that " in case of the impeachment of the governor, 
 or his removal from the office by death, resignation or ab- 
 sence from the state, the lieutenant governor shall exer-
 
 1817.] OF NEW- YORK. 435 
 
 cise all the power and authority appertaining to the office 
 of governor until another be chosen, or until the governor 
 absent or imp^ched shall return or be acquitted." Un- 
 der this clause in the old constitution it was proposed to 
 claim that the lieutenant governor would constitutionally 
 be governor until the regular gubernatorial election, which 
 would not take place until the year 1819. But to this the 
 friends of Mr. Clinton replied, that this clause merely in- 
 tended that in case of the death, resignation, &c., of the 
 governor, the lieutenant governor should execute the power 
 of a governor, only until the next succeeding annual state 
 election; and in support of this construction, they referred 
 to the seventeenth article of the constitution, which or- 
 dains " that the supreme executive power and authority of 
 this state shall be vested in a governor, and that statedly, 
 once in every three years, and as often as the seat of go- 
 vernme7it shall become vacant, a wise and discreet free- 
 holder shall be chosen." 
 
 After some reflection it would seem that Mr. Van Bu- 
 ren did not choose to hazard the reputation of his party, 
 and his own reputation as a lawyer, on this ground; for 
 although, when after the resignation of Gov. Tompkins, 
 a bill was brought into the assembly to provide for the elec- 
 tion of a successor, by Mr. Ford of Jefferson county, which 
 was passed by seventy-four members voting in the affirma- 
 tive, yet there were thirty-two votes in the negative, nearly 
 if not all of whom were opponents of the nomination of 
 Mr. Clinton. In the senate, the bill did not encounter 
 a very serious opposition. Messrs. Van Buren, Livingston 
 and others, voting for it; although Messrs. Bowne, Can- 
 tine, (Van Buren's brother-in-law,) and others, voted 
 against it. 
 
 Third. The only remaining means to defeat the views 
 of the friends of Mr. Clinton, was to nominate some oth-
 
 436 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 er person for the republican candidate for governor, by 
 obtaining a majority in the legislative caucus. 
 
 Three of the members of the council elected on the 
 13th of February, of this year were decidedly in favor of 
 Mr. Clinton; that is to say, as between Mr. Van Burenand 
 Judge Spencer, they were the friends of Spencer. This 
 was a great point gained, and it seems to me Mr. Van 
 Buren and Gov. Tompkins, if they possessed the power, 
 should have prevented this. Whether they made any 
 systematic effort to do so, I am not advised. 
 
 The council consisted of Walter Bowne from the south- 
 ern, John Noyes from the middle, John I . Prendergast 
 from the eastern, and Henry Bloom from the western dis- 
 tricts. All but Mr. Bowne were for Mr. Clinton. Hence, 
 those who sought office well knew whose nomination for 
 governor it was their interest to support. 
 
 A large majority of the federal party were very anx- 
 ious for the nomination of Mr. Clinton; and in case of 
 his nomination, they did not intend any opposition. 
 Among those most active in their endeavors to produce 
 this determination of the party, were Judges Van Ness 
 and Piatt, J. R. Van Rensselaer, Elisha Williams, and 
 generally the leading federalists in the city of New- York. 
 The ardent temperament of Judge Van Ness, and some 
 other federalists would not permit them to remain neutral 
 on the question respecting the nomination then agitated 
 among the republicans. 
 
 One principle ground of attack upon Mr. Clinton, by 
 Mr. Van Buren and his friends was, that Clinton kept up 
 a secret understanding with the federalists, and was still 
 acting in concert with that party; and the zeal manifested 
 by Judge Van Ness and others, for the selection of Clin- 
 ton as the gubernatorial candidate, was managed by Mr. 
 Van Buren with great skill and adroitness, to alarm the 
 fears and excite the jealousies of the republicans. Under
 
 1817.] OF NEW-YORK. 437 
 
 these circumstances, and considering the popularity of 
 Gov. Tompkins, and the extraordinary tact, address and 
 persevering industry of Mr. Van Buren, the friends of 
 Clinton very justly entertained apprehensions that after 
 all, in a purely legislative caucus, a majority would ulti- 
 mately be found against him. 
 
 Heretofore, it had been the uniform usage of the demo- 
 cratic party to select their candidate for governor, by the 
 majority of voices declared at an assemblage of men com- 
 posed exclusively of the republican members of the legis- 
 lature. By this arrangement those republican citizens 
 who resided in counties represented by federalists, could 
 have no voice in the selection of a candidate for that im- 
 portant office. This the Clintonians complained of as 
 unreasonable and unjust. They therefore, proposed that 
 delegates should be chosen in county convention, which 
 convention should be formed of delegates chosen at the 
 primary meetings of republicans in the respective towns, 
 and that the delegates thus chosen from the counties equal 
 in number to the members of assembly from the respec- 
 tive counties, should, in a caucus to nominate a governor, 
 have the same rights and exercise the same powers as re- 
 republican members of the legislature. It was, I believe, 
 well understood, that in the greatest proportion of the 
 counties represented by federalists, a very large majority 
 of the republicans were in favor of the nomination of Mr. 
 Clinton. Besides, the Clintonians, by means of the coun- 
 cil of appointment, controlled the patronage of the state, 
 and it was not difficult for a man who understood the 
 use of that machine as well as Judge Spencer, to con- 
 trol by its influence, the action of most of the county con- 
 ventions. Hence, it was most evident that the adoption 
 of the scheme could scarcely fail to forward, and perhaps, 
 I may add, ensure the triumph of Mr. Clinton. 
 
 In accordance with these views, a republican conven-
 
 438 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 tion was first held in the county of Albany, at which John 
 J. Moak was chairmanj and Jacob Lansing secretary, on the 
 fourth of February, when it was resolved that the coun- 
 ties represented by federalists in the legislature, ought to 
 be represented in the state convention to nominate a go- 
 vernor, by republican delegates chosen by such counties; 
 and Albany being represented by federalists, John Wood- 
 worth, Elisha Jenkins, John McCarthy and Thomas Har- 
 man were appointed delegates from the county of Albany. 
 Other counties respectable for their wealth, number, and 
 influence, followed the example. 
 
 The delegates to the state convention thus chosen were 
 generally favorable to the nomination of Mr. Clintonj and 
 like the delegates from the county of Albany were com- 
 posed of republicans of high standing and character. 
 From the county of Oneida, Nathan Williams, and Henry 
 Huntington were chosen, and from the county of Ontario, 
 Gideon Granger, the late eminent and distinguished post- 
 master general was a delegate. 
 
 One difficulty which Mr. Van Buren and his friends had 
 to encounter, was to fix upon an opposing candidate to 
 Mr. Clinton in caucus. Who was the man that would 
 accept the post and combine the greatest strength, was a 
 question not easy to be judiciously decided. They 
 finally fixed on Judge Yates. He had adhered to, and 
 defended Mr. Clinton long after he had been denounced 
 by Judge Spencer. On his circuit the preceding sum- 
 mer, he had in various places urged his friends to sup- 
 port tWe nomination of Clinton. It was supposed that 
 the known friendship of Judge Yates to Mr. C. would 
 induce some of the latter to support the former; but a 
 different result was produced. Men felt indignant when 
 they were invited to support a man in opposition, who had 
 himself taken pains and been instrumental in convincing 
 them that Clinton ought to be chosen governor. A day
 
 1817.] OF NEW-YORK. 439 
 
 or two before the meeting of the state convention, Judge 
 Yates positively declined being a candidate. This pro- 
 duced some confusion in the ranks of the opposition, but 
 they finally fixed upon Gen. Peter B. Porter as their can- 
 didate. 
 
 The state convention was held at the capitol on the 
 25th March. Upon balloting for a candidate, Mr. Clin- 
 ton received eighty-five votes and Gen. Porter forty-one. 
 It was understood that sixty members and twenty-five 
 delegates voted for Mr. Clinton, and thirty- three members 
 and seven delegates for his opponent. 
 
 A few days before the fourth of March, Mr. Tompkins 
 resigned his office of governor, and the executive autho- 
 rity then devolved upon Lieutenant Governor Taylor, 
 who, I have omitted to mention, was nominated for re- 
 election. 
 
 Mr. Tayler was an uneducated man of great native sa- 
 gacity. By his shrewdness and excellent judgment, and 
 also by his correct business habits, he had in early life ac- 
 quired a large estate. He had improved his fine native 
 mind by considerable reading, and by being long in pub- 
 lic office he had acquired from association a deportment 
 and address at once dignified and agreeable. As a legis- 
 lator he was always exceedingly careful of the interest of the 
 state, and it was with great reluctance that he would con- 
 sent to an expenditure of its funds for any purpose. Per- 
 haps his error as a legislator consisted in excessive parsi- 
 mony when the state was concerned. His only fault was 
 one which is common to all men, he was naturally selfish, 
 and that propensity manifested itself not only in his pe- 
 cuniary transactions, but in the bestowment of offices, 
 which either directly or indirectly came within his control 
 or influence. This propensity increased with his age. 
 Gov. Tayler had no children, but he had adopted a child 
 who was his relative, and who afterwards became the wife
 
 440 POLITICAL HISTORY [1S17. 
 
 of Dr. Charles D. Cooper, as his daughter, and treated her 
 and her husband and their children as his own family. 
 
 No important business was done by the council while 
 Mr, Tayler was president of it, with one single exception. 
 While Mr. Bowne was absent in New-York, Mr. Robert 
 Tillotson was removed from the office of secretary of 
 state, and Dr. Charles D. Cooper was appointed in his 
 place. This removal was without reason, and indeed 
 without excuse ; For no objections were made against 
 the political principles of Mr. Tillotson. True, he had 
 opposed the nomination of Mr. Clinton, which he had an 
 undoubted right to do, and which it was his duty to do, 
 provided he supposed the republican party would thereby 
 be endangered, or that Mr. C.'s administration would not 
 be so beneficial to the state, as would be likely to be that 
 of some other person who might be selected. Not the 
 least suspicion of official misconduct was breathed against 
 him; he had held the office but a very short time, and 
 came into it not by the removal of an incumbent, but to 
 fill a vacancy produced by the resignation of Mr. Porter. 
 It was a mere exertion of power to provide a place for 
 a member of the family of the president of the council. 
 I do not make these remarks from any want of respect to 
 the merits and character of Doct. Cooper. I knew him 
 long and well, as a remarkably correct man, and as a man 
 of integrity and honor. I am equally unwilling to charge 
 Gov. Tayler with intentional error. Long habit had in- 
 duced him to believe that if a man could legally get pos- 
 session of an office for himself or friend, he ought to do so. 
 This error grew out of the form of the government itself, 
 and the manner in which public opinion had tolerated its 
 action through that singular machine, called the council of 
 appointment.* Mr. Noyes and Mr. Bloom were both il- 
 
 * Judge Spencer was guilty of the same error when he urged on the preceding 
 council the removal of Mr. J. Van Ness Yates and the appointment of his nephew.
 
 1S17.] OF NEW-yOEK. 441 
 
 literate men, and they, as well as Mr. Prendergast, were 
 entirely unaccustomed to public life, and strangers to the 
 possession or exercise of any other powers than those 
 which belong to private citizens. In a short time, they 
 knew that they should return to private life. It is 
 not uncharitable to say, that neither of them knew the 
 extent of the powers they possessed, much less did they 
 consider the serious effects which would ultimately be pro- 
 duced on society by their capricious removals and appoint- 
 ments; and yet nearly all the officers of the great state of 
 New- York were then held subject to the arbitrary will and 
 pleasure of these three men. 
 
 The bill committing the state to construct the canals, 
 became a law on the last day of the session, which 
 terminated on the 15th April. The vote in the assembly 
 stood sixty-four to thirty-six. The sixty-four members 
 who voted in the affirmative, were composed principally, 
 if not entirely of the friends of the nomination of Mr. 
 Clinton and the federalists. The thirty-six noes were 
 chiefly his opponents. 
 
 In the senate the bill passed by a vote of eighteen to 
 nine. Those who voted against the bill, with the excep- 
 tion of two, (Messrs. Noyes and Bloom, who were rather 
 Spenceronians than Clintonians,) were opponents of Mr. 
 Clinton. There were, however, five senators who were 
 zealous anti-Clintonians who voted for the bill. Perhaps 
 it is not too much to say, that this result was produced by 
 the efficient and able efforts of Mr. Van Buren, who was 
 an early friend of the measure. 
 
 I regret to feel compelled to refer to the proceedings in 
 the court of errors as an evidence, or rather as affording 
 suspicion, that party spirit may enter into that high judi- 
 cial tribunal. 
 
 A bill in chancery had been filed by the residuary 
 legatees of Walter Franklin, to set aside a sale by the
 
 442 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 executor of Franklin, of a large tract of land to John L. 
 Norton and De Witt Clinton. Chancellor Kent dismissed 
 the bill and ordered the sale confirmed. The complain- 
 ants appealed to the court for the correction of errors, 
 and it was argued in the winter of 1817. A few days be- 
 fore the adjournment of the legislature, the court of er- 
 rors pronounced their judgment affirming the decree of 
 the chancellor. Judge Piatt gave the opinion of the ma- 
 jority of the court, (14 John. Rep. 527,) in which Judges 
 Van Ness and Yates concurred, and Spencer being con- 
 nected with the respondents, gave no opinion. Chief Jus- 
 tice Thompson read an opinion in" favor of reversing the 
 decree. All this was in accordance with the regular 
 course of proceedings in that court. The questions to be 
 decided were as distinct from party or political ques- 
 tions, as any questions can be, and yet every senator who 
 voted against Mr. Clinton's nomination in caucus, voted 
 for reversing this judgment; and every one who voted for 
 Mr. Clinton in caucus, voted for him on the decision of 
 this case. 
 
 It is true, and I am glad it is true, that there were 
 questions in this case on which the intelligent and hon- 
 est might differ; but how thirty-five men should happen 
 to differ on questions upon which depended the rights 
 of a distinguished politician, exactly according to their 
 respective opinions of the merits of that individual, is 
 marvellous. I am happy to state, that Mr. Van Buren 
 having been employed as counsel by one of the parties 
 in a court below, did not vote. It is hardly possible 
 that precisely this result could have been produced, 
 unless some of the senators and judges in this case 
 were influenced by party prejudices, for or against Mr 
 Clinton.
 
 1817.] OF NEW-YORK. 443 
 
 The federalists at, and previous to the general election, 
 acted in accordance with the views they had previously 
 intimated. They held up no candidate in opposition to 
 Mr. Clinton. Indeed they went further in their courtesy 
 towards Mr. Clinton and his friends. In those counties 
 where the Clintonian republicans held a strong prepon- 
 derance, although the federal party in such counties was 
 confessedly in the majority, they made no nomination of 
 members, for the express purpose of permitting Clintonian 
 republicans to be elected. Such was the case in the re- 
 spectable county of Oneida: a county which at that 
 time was known to contain a large federal majority. The 
 federalists of Oneida stated that if the republicans would 
 nominate respectable candidates for the assembly, who 
 would support the administration of Mr. Clinton, no no- 
 mination should be made in opposition to them. The re- 
 publican party in that county did not afford them any just 
 reason to complain. Among the candidates which they 
 selected, was that excellent and venerable man, Henry 
 Huntington; Nathan Williams, who had long been a mem- 
 ber of congress, and was afterwards judge of the fifth circuit, 
 and George Brayton, a man universally esteemed and be- 
 loved. The federalists, however, were careful to place 
 some of their ablest men in the assembly to watch over 
 their interest, among whom was Mr. Oakley from Dutch- 
 ess county. 
 
 Mr. Clinton and Mr. Tayler may be said to have 
 been elected without opposition, for although the Tam- 
 many men in New-York sent tickets into every county 
 in the state, on which the name of Peter B. Porter 
 for governor was printed, no serious effort was made for 
 his election. 
 
 The senators elected this year were Jonathan Day- 
 ton and Stephen Barnum, from the southern district;
 
 444 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 Jabez D. Hammond and John Lounsbury, from the 
 middle; Roger Skinner, Samuel Young and Henry Yates, 
 from the eastern; and Isaac Wilson and Jediah Prender- 
 gast, from the western district. They were of course all 
 republicans.
 
 '^. 
 
 I® IS WTl'lT'lf CILttKf'irOH"
 
 1817.] OF NEW- YORK. 446 
 
 
 
 CHAPTER XXIII. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1817, TO MAY 1, 1818. 
 
 In 1815 we saw De Witt Clinton expelled from the 
 mayoralty of the city of New-York, denounced by the 
 republican party, in the state and nation, as utterly un- 
 worthy of confidence, as a sort of political Bohan Upas, 
 with whom the slightest intercourse would contaminate, 
 and given over by the federalists as a man upon whose 
 fortunes they could not hope to rise. Among politicians 
 " none was so poor as to do him reverence." We now, after 
 the lapse of only two years, see him selected by a majo- 
 rity of the republicans of New-York as their^rst man, and 
 unanimously elected governor of the Empire State. How 
 changing, how transitory is the fortune of political men, 
 in free as well as in despotic governments ! The extremes 
 frequently approach near each other. But an unanimous 
 election, in a representative government, is, to an ambi- 
 tious man, highly dangerous. That statesman is safest 
 who stands at the head of a well organized party, which 
 is opposed by another party nearly equal to it in numeri- 
 cal strength.* 
 
 • It was a deceitful calm ; for a large portion of the democratic party were 
 deadly hostile to the newly elected governor, and what reliance could be placed 
 on many of the leading federalists, may be gathered from the following letter, 
 written by Mr. Coleman to a confidential political friend in Philadelphia, which 
 accidentally fell into the hands of the editor of the National Advocate. I copy it 
 as republished in Mr. Coleman's own paper : — 
 
 " Extract of a letter from William Coleman, editor of the New-York Evening 
 Post, to Charles Miner, late one of the editors of the True American, dated Sep- 
 tember 28, 18IG :— 
 
 " Why do you not make a little review of Mr. Stile's pamphlet against Binns, 
 iuch a one that we may all re-publish. Generally speaicing, I feel disposed, ia 
 common with the leading federalists here, to stand perfectly still, and wait for 
 erents to happen, as Jefferson says, we know not when. Something may come 
 from the quarrels of opposite sections of the democratic factions, and I think the 
 Most we can do is occasionally lofanthe embtrt. W. COLEMAN."
 
 446 POLITICAL HISTORY [1817. 
 
 In pursuance of the law passed the last session, con- 
 tracts had been made for constructing parts of the canal, 
 and during the summer of this year that great work was 
 commenced. 
 
 Mr. Clinton convened the council of appointment in 
 August, and, on the 27th of that month, they removed 
 John L. Broome from the office of clerk of the city and 
 county of New- York, and appointed Benjamin Ferris in 
 his place. They also removed Robert McComb, son of 
 the celebrated land speculator Alexander McComb, from 
 the office of clerk of the circuit, and replaced John W. 
 Wyman in that office. 
 
 I am not aware of any other cause of these removals 
 than a political one, and I know of no political cause, 
 except that the incumbents were Tammany men. No 
 other material movements were made by the council. A 
 great pressure was made on the governor, by his old 
 friends who had been turned out of office by the council 
 of 1815, but he excused himself to them by alleging that 
 the council would not consent to any thing like a system 
 of general removals. I shall have occasion, hereafter, to 
 present my views on the policy which the governor's 
 New-York friends desired him to pursue, in relation to 
 removals and appointments. 
 
 In the autumn of this year, Gov. Clinton issued a pro- 
 clamation recommending that Thursday, the 13th Novem- 
 ber, be observed as a day of thanksgiving and prayer. I 
 mention the circumstance because Gov. Jay, during his 
 administration, issued a like proclamation, and attempted 
 to adopt the custom, which had prevailed in the New- 
 England states ever since the landing of the pilgrims on 
 the rock of Plymouth, of setting apart one day in the 
 year as a day of public thanksgiving. But, after issuing 
 one proclamation, Mr. Jay found it necessary to abandon 
 the attempt, it being represented, by his opponents, as a
 
 1818] OF NEW- YORK. 447 
 
 contrivance to enlist the religious prejudices of the com- 
 munity in his favor. The proclamation of Gov. Clinton 
 was well received, and the precedent furnished by him has 
 since been followed by all his successors. This, I think, 
 affords evidence that less apprehension of danger of a 
 connection between church and state, or religion and poli- 
 tics, existed in the public mind in 1817 than in 1795. 
 
 The legislature met on the 27th of January, 1818, and 
 David Woods, of Washington county, was re-elected 
 speaker without opposition. He received ninety-seven 
 votes. 
 
 I have now arrived at a period when I became a mem • 
 ber of the senate, and was an eye and ear witness to many 
 things which occurred. I hope I may be pardoned in the 
 statements which I shall make in relation to my own mo- 
 tives and views. I assure my readers it is not from a 
 desire to exhibit myself, or my actions, to the public, that 
 I shall indulge in this sort of detail. My apology for it 
 is, that I know what my own views and motives were, and 
 have reason to believe that others similarly situated, with 
 whom I acted, were governed by the same, or nearly the 
 same, considerations. 
 
 I had early connected myseUfwith the republican party, 
 and was strongly attached to the principles held by that 
 party. What little of official distinctions I had enjoyed, 
 had been bestowed on me by the republican party. I had 
 viewed the proceedings of the eastern federalists with ab- 
 horrence; and I heartily disapproved of the conduct of 
 the New- York federalists, during the war. 
 
 As early as the year 1808, 1 had, in the course of my 
 business, formed a personal acquaintance with Mr. Clin- 
 ton. I thought well of him as a man and as a statesman. 
 When he was a candidate for the presidency he received 
 my cordial support, because I believed that, if elected, he 
 would prosecute with greater vigor than Mr. Madison, the
 
 448 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 war against Great Britain. When the presidential con- 
 test was decided against Mr. Clinton, it, by no means, 
 diminished my zeal for the vigorous prosecution of the 
 war, or my ardor in support of the democratic party in 
 the state and nation. This, the little circle of my ac- 
 quaintance who are now in life, well know. I was dis- 
 satisfied and disgusted with the conduct of Mr. Clinton on 
 account of his opposition to the election of Gov. Tomp- 
 kins in 1813; and, for a time, I felt that he had forfeited 
 the confidence of the democratic party. After the peace, 
 and in the summer of 1815, when the principal causes of 
 the controversy between the two great parties no longer 
 existed, inasmuch as Mr. Clinton manifested a disposition 
 again to act with the democratic party, I was, I confess, 
 desirous that he should be restored to their confidence, in 
 order that the state might avail itself of his talents and 
 services, as well as from personal respect and friendship 
 for him. With these impressions, I did what I could to 
 produce a state of feeling, in the minds of those republi- 
 cans with whom I communicated, favorable to the resto- 
 ration of Mr. Clinton, and to his support as governor of 
 the state, and I felt thankful to Judge Spencer for his 
 great and successful efforW to produce the same result. 
 But it was entirely contrary to my wishes, and at war 
 with my judgment, to form any connection with the fede- 
 ralists, as a party. Not that I desired to persecute or 
 even proscribe them. I hailed the era of good feeling 
 which they announced,asadding, as well to the reputation 
 of the country, as the happiness arising from social inter- 
 course, and I hoped the time would soon arrive when the 
 state, in accordance with the feelings of the republican 
 party, could avail itself of the official services of individual 
 federalists. At the period of which I am speaking, when 
 I first became a member of the senate, I was entirely igno- 
 rant of what we call New- York politics. For Governor
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YORK. 449 
 
 Tompkins I had great respect. Mr. Van Buren, Mr. 
 Young, and Mr. Skinner, I had long known, and highly 
 esteemed. True, they had differed in opinion with me, 
 respecting the propriety of selecting Mr. Clinton as the 
 gubernatorial candidate; but what was that 1 They had 
 quite as good a right to their opinions as I had to mine, 
 and might, very probably, be right, and I wrong. It was 
 a difference of opinion about the merits of an individual, 
 not a difference of principle in relation to measures. The 
 circumstance of this trifling difference produced, in my 
 mind, no anxiety. I commenced acting with them with 
 feelings the most cordial. My determination was to give 
 Mr. Clinton a fair and honest support, in all measures 
 which my judgment did not condemn, and if, at the end 
 of his term, it should appear that his services were not 
 acceptable to the majority of the republican party, then to 
 select another man for governor; and, as he had been 
 nominated and elected in pursuance of the usages of the 
 republican party, as governor of the state, I supposed such 
 were the views of Mr. Van Buren, and those who had 
 acted with him in opposing the nomination of Mr. Clinton. 
 A very few days residence in Albany, and attendance in 
 the senate, convinced me of my error. I found, on one 
 hand, that the governor was cold, if not vindictive, to- 
 wards Mr. Van Buren and others, who had opposed his 
 elevation, and on the other, a determination to excite pre- 
 judices and jealousies against the governor, to render him 
 unpopular with the republican members of the legislature, 
 to embarrass him in the discharge of his executive duties, 
 and thwart him in his measures. 
 
 The governor, in his first speech, presented a very clear 
 and able view of the financial condition of the state; he 
 recommended several important improvements in our mu- 
 nicipal laws, among which was the abolition of the divi- 
 sion of the stale into districts, for the purpose of criminal 
 
 29
 
 450 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 prosecutions, and the appointment of an attorney for the 
 people in each district; and he advised, in lieu of this 
 system, the appointment of an attorney for the people in 
 each county. He suggested other measures of judicial 
 reform, and he eulogized the canal policy, and gave a 
 very flattering account of the progress already made in the 
 construction of the canals. The speech was well received 
 by the public and generally approved. 
 
 The members of the assembly from the city of New- 
 York were from the hot bed of Tammany Hall. All of 
 them, with the single exception of Cadwallader D. Golden, 
 were open and bitter in their denunciations of the gover- 
 nor, and the system of internal improvements, at the head 
 of which he stood, and with which he v/as identified. 
 They predicted, with confidence, the utter failure of the 
 system, and with it, the serious embarrasment and dis- 
 grace, if not the ruin of the state. They claimed that 
 the reputation of Mr. Clinton was staked on the fate 
 of this system, and they professed their willingness to 
 abide the result. The friends of Mr. Clinton did not 
 hesitate to join in the issue which they tendered. The 
 principal and most zealous members of the New-York 
 delegation, were Ogden Edwards, son of the celebrated 
 Pierpont Edwards, and now a judge of the first circuit, 
 Peter Sharpe and Michael Ulshoeffer. In their train fol- 
 lowed Isaac Pierson, Henry Meigs and Clarkson Crolius, 
 also from New-York, and, I regret to add, that Gen.Erastus 
 Root, then likewise a member from Delaware, was equally 
 bitter in his denunciations against the governor and the 
 canal policy. 
 
 I have said the New-York members emanated from 
 Tammany Hall. There was an order of the Tammany 
 Society who wore in their hats as an insignia, on certain 
 occasions, a portion of the tail of the deer. They were a 
 leading order, and from this circumstance the friends of
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YORK. 451 
 
 Mr. Clinton gave those who adopted the views of the 
 members of the Tammany Society, in relation to him, the 
 name of Bucktails; which name was eventually applied 
 to their friends and supporters in the country. Hence, 
 the party opposed to the administration of Mr. Clinton, 
 were, for a long time, called the Bucktail Party. 
 
 When the senate came together, the members of it, in 
 respect to their political views, may be divided into four 
 classes. The first, and most numerous class, were deter- 
 mined, at any rate, to get rid of Mr. Clintonj the second, 
 were equally determined to support himj the third, were 
 wavering in their opinions and views; the fourth, were 
 federalists. 
 
 The first class consisted of — Van Buren, Livingston, 
 Skinner, Young, Cantine, Bowne, Barnum, Crosby, Dit- 
 mis, Knox, Dayton, Ogden and Seymour — thirteen. The 
 second class — Bates, Hart, Hammond, Lounsbury, J. I. 
 Prendergast, Jed. Prendergast and Ross — seven. The 
 third class — Yates, Noyes, Swart, Wilson, Bicknell, Swift 
 and Mallory — seven. The fourth class — Van Vechten, 
 Tibbits, Allen, Hascal and Frey — five. 
 
 At the first glance it will be perceived, that of the 
 twenty-seven republican members of the senate, the bal- 
 ance, not only of numbers, but of talent, was decidedly in 
 favor of the Bucktails. Of the unsettled and doubtful 
 members in the third class, with the exception of Mr. 
 Yates, who was a sound minded and respectable lawyer, 
 there was not an individual who claimed much talents as 
 a legislator. In the second class there was an almost 
 equal defect of talent, and more especially of party tact 
 and address. Mr. Bates was a shrewd, sensible yankee. 
 As a county politician, he undoubtedly possessed some 
 efficiency; but his mind had never been enlarged and cul- 
 tivated by education, and he was narrow and selfish in his 
 views and principles of action. He was bitterly hostile
 
 452 POLITTCAl HISTORY [1818. 
 
 to Mr. Van Buren, for what particular cause I know not; 
 and was much governed, in his political action, by the 
 impulses of feeling, and of personal likings and dislikings. 
 Mr. Hart was an enterprising country merchant from 
 Oneida county, and had acquired a considerable estate. 
 He was ardent in his feelings, warm in his friendships, 
 and much influenced by his pecuniary interests. He was 
 an ardent supporter of the canal policy, and therefore a 
 warm friend to the governor. His prejudices against the 
 federalists were deep and bitter, and he was equally hos- 
 tile against Mr. Van Buren. He was, in my judgment, 
 quite incapable of forming any system of political action 
 on a basis broad enough to lead to the formation, or even 
 to secure the preservation of a party. His great anxiety 
 appeared to be, to guard and promote the interest of the 
 Utica Bank, in which he was a large stockholder, and to 
 provide for the completion of the Erie canal. As a party 
 man he acted without system, and sometimes apparently 
 without any rational motive.* 
 
 * As an evidence of Mr. Hart's utter want of political tact, as well an of his 
 rashness as a legislator, I give the following case : — 
 
 William L. Stoke, now, and for a long time heretofore, the distinguished and 
 able editor of the Commercial Advertiser of New-York, was then the conductor 
 of the Albany Daily Advertiser, a leading federal paper. It was known to us all, 
 that Col Stone, although a federalist, was a decided friend to Gov. Clinton, and 
 was determined, when he could do so with effect, to devote his paper to his sup- 
 port. There was, at that lime, as there had been before and has since been, many 
 persons in attendance on the legislature as agents to procure charters for bank- 
 ing and other companies. Mr. Sharpe, of New- York, and several other Bucktail 
 members, took it into their heads to deliver several severe philippics against the 
 lobby, expressing their suspicions that these agents would attempt to corrupt the 
 members of the legislature. Mr. James O. Morse, a respectable lawyer from Ot- 
 sego county, since first judge of that county, a keen, sarcastic writer, and who 
 himself occasionally visited Albany for the purpose of procuring a charter for the 
 Central Bank, wrote a communication tending to ridicule Mr. Sharpe and others, 
 on account of the apprehensions they affected to entertain of the danger of bribery 
 and corruption by the lobby. Mr. Morse, among other things, proposed, in his 
 communication, that a wall should be erected around the capitol, so strong and 
 high as to secure Mr. Sharpe and his friends from the apprehended danger of an 
 attack from the lobby. This article appeared in Col. Stone's paper. The sugges- 
 tion I have mentioned, was the most offensive part of it. 
 
 Col. Stone usually attended the Senate to report the proceedings of that body
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YOKK. 453 
 
 The two Prendergasts were brothers, and both bred 
 physicians, upright and good men, but neither of them 
 well calculated to effect much in a legislative body. Of 
 Mr. Ross I have formerly spoken. He had, for many 
 years, followed the lead of Judge Spencerj had floated 
 along with the republican party, and when all his political 
 action, in the legislature, was sustained by the power of a 
 great, and generally a triumphant party, he seemed to 
 move on smoothly; but the present was quite a new 
 scene, and he was entirely inadequate to act the part, 
 which, from his long standing in the legislature, naturally 
 devolved upon him. Mr. Lounsbury was an highly up- 
 right and worthy practical farmer, a man of sound mind 
 and good judgment, but incapable of acting with much 
 effect as a legislator or member of a party. 
 
 With regard to myself, it is scarcely necessary for me 
 to say, that my want of political experience and a knowl • 
 edge of the character and motives of the men around me; 
 my utter defect of talent in extemporary debate; and my 
 want of confidence in myself, rendered me almost, if not 
 quite, useless to the party with whom I wished to act. 
 
 Of Mr. Van Buren, who stands at the head of the cata- 
 logue of the first class, it is unnecessary to speak. He 
 
 for his own paper. Mr. Hart was pleased to consider this good natured para- 
 graph, intended to take off some of the leading Bucktails of the assembly, as a 
 contempt of the senate, and forthwith moved a resolution that William L. Stone 
 be excluded from the bar of the senate. Mr. H. soon found that such a resolution 
 would not be approved by the senate, and therefore requested that it might lay on 
 the table; but, at the instance of Col. Stone, Mr. P. R. Livingston, soon after- 
 wards, highly to his credit, called for the consideration of the resolution, and Mr 
 Stone, though he declined disclosing the name of the author of this treasonable 
 article, having assured the president of the senate that he did not intend, by its 
 publication, to treat either branch of the legislature disrespectfully, it was unani- 
 mously decided that no further proceedings should be had in the matter. 
 
 Here, was a causeless attack made upon a respectable newspaper editor; in 
 principle wrong, because its tendency was to abridge the liberty of the press, and 
 also to convert a friend into an enemy, with no other object than to gratify the 
 personal pique of the mover. Could a political party hope to sustain itself, 
 ■whose leaders were so void of any thing like policy, so inconsiderate, and so 
 reckless of consequences.
 
 454 POLITICAL HISTORY [181S. 
 
 had then been four years a leading member of the senate. 
 His splendid talents, and great political tact, are too well 
 known to require description. 
 
 Mr. Young's character is now well known, and his 
 great talents universally admitted. I may, however, be 
 allowed to say, that I think Mr. Young a perfectly honest 
 man. His defect, as a politician, is, that he is too vindic- 
 tive* in his feelings towards his opponents. He investi- 
 gates a question ably, and he arrives at his conclusions 
 logically, clearly and honestly; but then, if you still resist 
 the conclusion to which he has arrived, he is too apt to 
 pronounce, in effect, that you are either a fool or a knave, 
 and he honestly believes you are so. The reason is, that 
 he himself thinks he sees clearly, and knows he forms his 
 opinions with perfect integrity. The necessary result is, 
 that he doubts either the sincerity or the ability of the 
 man with whom he differs. He does not suspect the cer- 
 tainty of the correctness of his own judgment, so much as 
 all men ought, and he does not make allowance enough 
 for the weakness and imperfection of other men. Hence 
 Mr. Young, though an honest man and a great man, can 
 never be a popular man. 
 
 Roger Skinner was a man pleasing in his address; his 
 talents were rather of the persuasive than solid kind, and, 
 as a companion, he was quite agreeable. He was fond of 
 political management, and rather reckless as to the means 
 he employed to accomplish his ends. He was said to be 
 bitter in his feelings as a partizan. If such was the fact, 
 the evidence of it did not come within my observation. 
 I thought him naturally kind and obliging. He was, un- 
 doubtedly, very bitter in his feelings against Gov. Clinton 
 personally. To what particular cause this was owing, I 
 was never informed. Probably the governor had given 
 him offence individually. 
 
 • See Note A. vol. 2, p. 639.
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 455 
 
 Walter Bowne had formerly been a businessman, and 
 "was now a man of wealth; shrewd and sagacious as a 
 partizan, but generally courteous in his manner. He, too, 
 was extremely bitter in his hostility to the governor. To 
 me it seemed strange that a man of his general acquain- 
 tance with life, and with public men, could be so violent 
 in his animosity against any individual, merely because he 
 was opposed to his political advancement. 
 
 Peter R. Livingston came into the senate with all the 
 prejudices of his family against the Clintons. Indeed, 
 those prejudices seemed to be all concentrated in him. 
 He was a man of fine fancy and great declamatory pow- 
 ers. Few men could address a popular assembly with 
 more effect than Mr. Livingston. His usefulness, as a 
 legislator, was impaired by a lack of industry and labori- 
 ous attention to the details of business. 
 
 Moses I. Cantine, a respectable lawyer from Catskill, 
 was the brother-in-law of Mr. Van Buren. Frank, gene- 
 rous and kind in his social intercourse, no man could per- 
 sonally dislike him. Though a zealous partizan, the 
 kindness of his nature rendered him incapable of bitter- 
 ness. His talents, if not great, were at least respectable. 
 
 Henry Seymour was a country merchant from the 
 county of Onondaga. He was a well bred man, and very 
 gentlemanly in his deportment. His great native shrewd- 
 ness and sagacity had been improved and highly cultivated 
 by an association with genteel society. As a politician, 
 he was cautious and wary. His opponents charged him 
 with being Jesuitical, but of this I cannot speak from my 
 own knowledge; for he certainly never gave me any 
 proofs of a want of sincerity and candor. I do not think 
 his opposition to Gov. Clinton originated from personal 
 motives. I am inclined to believe that the apprehension 
 that Mr. Clinton's policy, if sustained, would endanger
 
 456 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 the republican party, and his attachment personally to 
 Mr. Van Buren, controlled him in his political action. 
 
 Isaac Ogden, of Delaware, was a man of strong and 
 vigorous intellect, and of great decision of character. He, 
 too, for some cause unknown to me, seemed personally 
 vindictive against the governor. 
 
 The residue of the gentlemen of the first class were 
 mere voters who always followed their file leaders. 
 
 With respect to the federalists, who constituted the 
 fourth class, I remark briefly that Messrs. Allen, Hascal 
 and Frey were upright, honest, and honorable men. They 
 were disposed to give Mr. Clinton's administration an 
 honest and honorable support, because they thought it 
 tended to advance the prosperity of the state. Mr. Allen 
 was an excellent lawyer; and a more pure and scrupulously 
 honest man than Ralph Hascal, never lived. 
 
 That Mr. George Tibbits was a man of profound sa- 
 gacity, is well known. His knowledge, acquired during 
 a long and successful life devoted to mercantile, commer- 
 cial and banking business, rendered him an useful member 
 of the senate; but his habits of traffic, which he had ac- 
 quired in business, or some other cause, rendered him 
 inclined to trade^ as a politician. He was desirous of 
 receiving a " consideration " for all his political acts. He 
 considered the prospects of the federal party to be pros- 
 trated, and he was, therefore, disposed to make the most 
 of his present position, and was quite indifferent whether 
 it was the Clintonians or Bucktails with whom he nego- 
 tiated. [See JYote A. Vol. 2. p. 541.] 
 
 Of the talents of Abraham Van Vechten I need not 
 speak. They are universally admitted to be great. Asa 
 legislator, he possessed one characteristic which proved 
 him to be a genuine descendant and true representative of 
 the Low Dutch. He had an instinctive horror at all inno- 
 vations, and at every thing which w^as new. What never
 
 1818.] OF NEW- YORK. 457 
 
 had been done, he seemed to think ought never to be done. 
 In politics he was the very impersonation of ancient fede- 
 ralism. He could not look on any man with favor, who, 
 in the good times of John Jay, was in the ranks of the 
 opposition, or who had subsequently attached himself to 
 the party which opposed that great and good man. He 
 looked upon De Witt Clinton, Ambrose Spencer, D. D. 
 Tompkins, Smith Thompson and Martin Van Buren as in 
 pari delicto, and seemed like Queen Margaret, in the play 
 of Richard the Third, to rejoice when one was destroyed 
 by the other. 
 
 I must be permitted to add, that those who knew Mr. 
 Van Vechten alleged, and I believe with truth, that with 
 all his great qualities, he was, notwithstanding, a cunning 
 man, and was occasionally addicted to intrigue; and that 
 he frequently attempted, by plotting, to circumvent rivals 
 among his own political friends, as well as to thwart the 
 views of his opponents. 
 
 Mr. Van Buren, of course, felt a deep interest in the 
 choice of the council of appointment. His object would 
 not be accomplished if men were placed in the council, a 
 majority of whom were decidedly hostile to the governor. 
 In that case the public would impute all the errors which 
 might be committed, to the council, and judge of the ex- 
 ecutive by his speeches. Nor was he willing that Mr. 
 Clinton should have a council which would accord with 
 him in all his views, and be subservient to his wishes. 
 It would, he thought, be more desirable to form a council 
 which the governor could not control, but for whose acts 
 the public would hold him responsible. In other words, 
 Mr. Van Buren wished to create a council which should 
 be nominally Clintonian, but which, at the same time, 
 should be really hostile to the governor. Partly by man- 
 agement, and partly by accident, a council, of the charac- 
 ter last described, was actually chosen.
 
 458 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 Before the legislature met, it was intimated to me that 
 it was desired that I should be a member of the council; 
 but I peremptorily declined. I knew enough then of the 
 political history of the state, to be convinced that the sta- 
 tion was one which generally incurred much odium. I 
 felt that I was ignorant of the real standing and character 
 of most of the active political men in the state, and that, 
 before attempting to occupy a position which would call 
 attention to me, it would be desirable that I should ac- 
 quire some character for usefulness as a legislator. But 
 soon after I arrived in Albany, I found that there was an 
 almost universal inclination, on the part of the governor's 
 friends, that I should be in the council; but from an inter- 
 terview between Wm. C. Bouck, a member of the assem- 
 bly from Schoharie, and myself, which I perceived was 
 caused by Mr. Van Buren, I became satisfied that he pre- 
 ferred some other senator from the middle district; al- 
 though Mr. Bouck did not even mention his name. In a 
 short time, however, I ascertained that I could not refuse 
 without offending many of my best friends, and I therefore 
 consented. 
 
 The members of the council were, at that time, desig- 
 nated by a caucus of the republican members of assembly 
 from each senatorial district. In the southern district, 
 which was represented in the assembly almost wholly 
 by Bucktails, Peter R. Livingston was nominated, I be- 
 lieve, without opposition; and in the eastern, Henry Yates, 
 who was the only professed republican Clintonian from 
 that district, was selected. 
 
 In the western district a large majority of the republi- 
 can members were sincere friends of the governor, and 
 desired that a council of appointment should be formed 
 who would pursue all reasonable measures to sustain him; 
 but, unfortunately, the two most prominent Clintonian 
 senators from that district, Mr. Bates and Mr. Hart, were
 
 1S18.] OF NEW-YORK. 459 
 
 candidates for the nomination. Both were ardent, and 
 both were extremely imprudent, and reckless of the conse- 
 quences which might result to the state administration 
 from their collisions. I speak from conjecture, but I do 
 not doubt the fact, that the friends and agents of Mr. Van 
 Buren did what they could to widen the breach, and 
 heighten the contest between Bates and Hart. 
 
 There were a few Bucktail members of assembly from 
 the western district. These gentlemen, in the caucus 
 held by the members from that district, supported Henry 
 Seymour, and some, if not all, the friends of Bates, out of 
 mere resentment against Hart and the Utica Bank, which, 
 it was said, had been busy in this affair, voted for Seymour, 
 and he was nominated. Messrs. Livingston, Yates, Sey- 
 mour, and myself, were the next day chosen, in pursuance 
 of the decrees of these sub-caucussers.* 
 
 I have reason to believe that it had been given out, by 
 some of the Bucktail leaders, that, in case Mr. Clinton 
 shDuld not be the next republican candidate, Judge Yates 
 would be selected, and that those outgivings had been 
 communicated to Mr. Henry Yates, who was a brother of 
 the judge. It is proper to add, however, that I do not 
 know the fact, and state it as conjecture merely. Be that 
 as it may, subsequent events proved that Mr. Yates be- 
 came opposed to Mr. Clinton. Before I go further, it is 
 my duty to say, and I take pleasure in saying it, that 
 Henry Yates was strictly an honest and honorable man. 
 In all my communications with him I never found him 
 guilty of the least evasion or prevarication. But, never- 
 theless, his mind may have been biased when he himself 
 was not aware of it. 
 
 * It was stated to me by the late Judge W. P.Van Ness, that the moment the 
 council was chosen, Mr. Van Buren wrote to his friend in Columbia county, the 
 following brief letter : — 
 
 "All is safe. Seymour I Seymour I Seymour!"
 
 460 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 Here, then, was a council organized, consisting of Mr. 
 Livingston, who was open and virulent in his opposition; 
 of Mr. Seymour, who was equally resolved in his hostility, 
 but wary, smooth, and apparently moderate in his action; 
 and Mr. Yates, a professed Clintonian, but, undoubtedly, 
 considerably influenced by his brother, the judge, now 
 openly in the opposition; Mr. Henry Yates unreservedly 
 declaring himself opposed to Judge Spencer, or what he 
 called the dictation of Mr. Spencer. 
 
 Immediately after the council was chosen and before its 
 first meeting, Mr. Yates stated to me that John Van 
 Ness Yates, who was his distant relative, had been un- 
 justly removed through the influence of Judge Spencer, 
 from the office of recorder of Albany; that he wished 
 forthwith to correct the error by the removal of Mr. 
 Parker, and re-appointment of Mr. Yates; that Mr. Liv- 
 ingston would vote with him on that question, but Mr- 
 Seymour would not, as he had committed himself to 
 vote against all removals except for official misconduct. 
 To this I replied, that although the office was of little 
 importance, and although I was satisfied that the removal 
 of the late incumbent was wrong, the case was peculiar, 
 and I was not prepared to act in accordance with his 
 request — that the agency Judge Spencer had had in the 
 removal of Mr. Yates, and the connection existing be- 
 tween him and Mr. Parker, would render the removal 
 of the latter a declaration of war against the Judge, 
 •vv'hich considering the very great obligations he had con- 
 ferred on Mr. Clinton and his friends, by his efficient 
 and successful efforts in procuring his nomination, would 
 be an act not only unjust, but would stamp with the 
 vilest ingratitude, the governor and all those who pro- 
 fessed to be his friends. This reply was not at all 
 satisfactory to Mr. Yates, and in various conversations 
 with me he finally intimated that unless this outrage
 
 1S18.] OF NEW- YORK. 461 
 
 was repaired, he could not lend his aid in the votes he 
 should give in the council to the friends of Mr. Clin- 
 ton. Eventually I assured Mr. Y. that although I could 
 not and would not vote for the removal of Parker-, before 
 the council was dissolved, I would aid him with my vote 
 in making some suitable provison for his friendj and 
 with this assurance he was satisfied. I mention this lit- 
 tle incident, to show by what means the current of the 
 state patronage, while it was distributed by the council 
 of appointment, was directed or changed. I was wrong. 
 I should have declined any negotiation, and disclaimed 
 all responsiblity in respect to the doings of a majority 
 of the council. That course would have relieved me 
 from much anxiety and vexation, and in the end would 
 have been better for Mr. Clinton. 
 
 I had been but a few days in the senate, before I 
 perceived that although there was a nominal majority 
 in that body favorable to the governor, the real majo- 
 rity was against him, and I could not but forsee that 
 the consequence would be, to the executive, seriously 
 embarrassing. I communicated my views to the govern- 
 or, which he affected to treat with great indifference, and 
 urged that I was mistaken in the canvass I had made. I 
 further stated to him that the preponderance of talent 
 among the republicans was decidedly unfavorable to him, 
 and that he had not a single friend there who was suita- 
 ble for the leader of a party. Shortly afterwards I had 
 reason to suspect that jealousies were taking root between 
 Mr. Van Buren and Col. Young; and I thought that 
 circumstance afforded a favorable opportunity to make 
 an effort to gain one of them; and as Col. Young was 
 identified Avith the governor in the canal policy, and as 
 canal commissioner, was his colleague, it struck me that 
 he would be the most natural ally. Senator Hart was, 
 as he assured me, in habits of familiar intercourse with
 
 462 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 Col. Y,, and I requested him to ascertain whether a 
 good and friendly communicaion could not be established 
 between the governor and Mr. Young. From Mr. Hart 
 1 soon learned that Col. Young did not object to act 
 with Mr. Clinton if he could be satisfied that the go- 
 vernor would pursue a republican course; and if some 
 trifling personal difficulties could be explained and re- 
 moved. I forthwith called on Mr. Clinton and commu- 
 nicated to him these facts, but I found him indifferent, 
 and disinclined to aid in carrying into eff'ect the pro- 
 ject I had so much at heart, and which I deemed highly 
 important. 
 
 From that moment my confidence in Gov. Clinton, as 
 a good practical politician, in a popular government, was 
 gone. I have never regained it. However noble and 
 magnificent were his ends, he failed in providing the 
 means for their accomplishment. 
 
 Not many days passed before any difficulties which 
 might have existed between Mr. Van Buren and Mr. 
 Young, were removed, and a fixed, well compacted and 
 organized majority against the governor was formed in 
 the senate. In the progress of the session, procoedings 
 were had, which exhibited that majority in such a man- 
 ner as to remove all doubt. In proof of this position, 
 t give the following case: 
 
 In the western district, at the election in April, 1817, 
 two senators were to be chosen; one to supply the place 
 of a deceased senator from that district, who in 1816 
 died, one year before the expiration of his term, and the 
 other for the term of four years. Doct. Jediah Pren- 
 dergast and Isaac Wilson were nominated, and at the time 
 of the nomination it was understood that Prendergast 
 was the candidate for the iour years term and Wilson 
 for the one year. By law, in a case like this, the can- 
 didate who had the greatest number of votes was de-
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YORK. 463 
 
 clared elected for the longest term. A dispute arose be- 
 tween those candidates, and the question was, which of 
 them was entitled to a seat for the four years. The 
 following were the undisputed facts as reported by Mr. 
 Frey, chairman of the committee of elections. 
 
 There were given at the election, for Isaac Wilson 
 fifteen thousand and nine votes. For Jediah Prendergast, 
 fourteen thousand nine hundred and eighty-five, and for 
 Jedediah Prendergast, ninety-one, and Jed. Prendergast 
 ten votes. The canvassers delivered the certificate for 
 four years, to Mr. Wilson. It was proved by the oath 
 of forty-two electors, to the satisfaction of the committee, 
 that they had voted for Jedediah Prendergast, intending 
 Jediah Prendergast. These forty-two votes, independent 
 of the remaining fifty-nine, would have given Doct. 
 Prendergast a majority of eighteen over Wilson. The 
 committee further reported that it was not alleged by Mr. 
 Wilson that there was any man in the district who bore 
 the name of Jedediah Prendergast. The committee there- 
 fore reported that Mr. Prendergast was entitled to a 
 seat for the term of four years. It would seem to me 
 that no man capable in the plainest cases of distinguish- 
 ing between right and wrong, could differ with the com- 
 mittee in the conclusions to which they arrived. But 
 there was one fact in the case which the committee did 
 not report, and that was, that Prendergast was a sup- 
 porter, and Wilson, by this time had become an oppo- 
 nent, of the governor. 
 
 Col. Young, whom I have said, and again repeat, is 
 an honest man, (but what mind is proof against the 
 bias created by political prejudice and interest,) grave- 
 ly made an argument in favor of the right of Wilson to 
 the seat for four years. He produced the &i6/c, and in 
 it found both the names of Jedediah and Jediah, and 
 thence inferred that he had sustained the position for which
 
 464 POLITICAL HISTOKY [1818. 
 
 he contended! It would have been more creditable to 
 him and his friends to have voted without arguing. 
 The four years seat w^as assigned to Mr. Wilson, by a 
 vote of thirteen to eleven. 
 
 As an act of justice to the minority, I give the names 
 of those who voted: 
 
 For Wilson — Barnum, Cantine, Crosby, Dayton, Dit- 
 mis, Knox, Livington, Ogden, Seymour, Skinner, Van 
 Buren, Yates,* Young, — thirteen. 
 
 For Prendergast — Bates, Bowne, Frey, Hammond, 
 Hascal, Lounsbury, Noyes, Ross, Swart, Tibbits, Van 
 Vechten — el even . 
 
 The two Prendergasts and Wilson did not vote. The 
 absentees were Allen, Swift, Hart, Mallory and Bicknel. 
 It will be seen, with the exception of Mr. Bowne, (an 
 exception highly honorable to him,) that it was a com- 
 plete party vote. From Mr. Van Buren and Col. Young, 
 at any rate better things ought to have been anticipated. 
 Doct. Prendergast from that day became and was a 
 zealous Bucktail! I leave it to the philosophical inquirer 
 into the action of the human mind to account for his 
 conversion. 
 
 The procedings of the council were, as may well be 
 anticipated, when the materials of which it was com- 
 posed are considered, bungling, awkward and inconsis- 
 tent. In almost all cases my individual views were 
 thwarted. Something was always proposed by one of 
 the members with whom I actedj which though perhaps, 
 not absolutely bad, was by no means so good in my 
 judgment, as might have been done. I of course yield- 
 ed, to prevent something worse. I do not recollect of 
 but one prominent appointment which I proposed, which 
 was made; and that was the appointment of C, D. Col- 
 den mayor of New-York. The members from the city 
 
 * Which way Mr. Yates leaned may be learned from this rot*.
 
 1818.1 0^ NEW-YORK 465 
 
 had recommended Col. Paulding, and he was of course 
 supported by Messrs. Livingston and Seymour. The 
 governor was in favor of Sylvanus Miller. I first pro- 
 posed Mr. Golden to Mr. Yates, who was generally in- 
 clined to cross the views of the governor, though he 
 wished to avoid the appearance of opposition, or rather he 
 declined (for he was incapable of deception,) placing 
 himself in an attitude of direct hostility to the governor. 
 The policy, or perhaps I ought to say feelings of Mr. 
 Yates, placed Gov. Clinton in the precise condition which 
 Mr. Van Buren desired. He was so situated as in the 
 view of his friends and the public, to be held responsi- 
 ble for all the appointments, many of which were not 
 hisj but submitted to by him to avoid a worse course 
 by the council. But I am wandering from my subject. 
 I informed Mr. Yates that the Governor desired the 
 appointment of Mr. Miller, upon which he readily com- 
 mitted himself in favor of Colden. I went immediately 
 into the council and nominated Colden. As I anticipa- 
 ted, either Livingston or Seymour nominated Paulding, 
 which reduced the governor to the necessity of deciding 
 between the two. He of course voted for Colden, and 
 he was appointed. 
 
 Gov. Clinton like Gov. Lewis, was extremely timid 
 in relation to the appointment of federalists. Mr. Yates 
 was also averse to the appointment of any individuals 
 belonging to that class of politicians. I give one in- 
 stance. I had accidentally become acquainted with John 
 C. Hamilton, son of the celebrated General Hamilton, 
 and the talented author of his biography now being pub- 
 lished. I ascertained that the little office of commissioner 
 of deeds would be agreeable to him, and proposed his ap- 
 pointment to that office, to the governor; as well in testi- 
 mony of respect to the memory of one of the greatest men 
 
 that ever lived in this country, as a mark of attention to a 
 
 30
 
 466 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 young man of fair character and promising taientsj and 
 it was with some difficulty that I procured this petty ap- 
 pointment, because John C. Hamilton was supposed to be 
 a federalist. 
 
 The old friends of the governor in New- York, who had 
 been ejected from office because of their attachment to 
 Clinton, such as P. C. Van Wyck, Garrit Gilbert and 
 others, who claimed that provision should be made for 
 them, were extremely pressing, in urging the removal of 
 the bucktail incumbents to make place for them. 
 
 For myself, I considered the New-York bucktails as 
 having formed an organized opposition to the state ad 
 ministration, and as political opponents to the democratic 
 party in the state, which I insisted was represented by 
 Gov. Clinton astheirchiefj and according to the common 
 law of party, as then established, I thought we had the 
 right, and that it was our duty to make war on them, as 
 a faction, who, like the Burr and Lewis faction, were op- 
 posed to the great republican party in the state. But I 
 should have preferred some other appointments than those 
 which were recommended by the governor. They con- 
 sisted of a little handful of old friends, who, from some 
 cause, it may be, without any fault of theirs, had become 
 odious to the great mass of community, whether, consist- 
 ing of federalists or democrats. I should have preferred 
 to have taken now and then a federalist of influence and 
 personal popularity, and to have christened him a demo- 
 crat, and to have gone into the ranks of the bucktails and 
 selected some of them., but precisely the men whom the 
 leaders of the faction disliked, as was done in the case of 
 Colden, who was at the time a bucktail member from 
 the city. This policy did not accord either with the 
 views of Mr. Clinton or Mr. Yates, who of course pre- 
 vailed, and the old friends of Mr. Clinton were generally 
 restored to office.
 
 1818.] OF NEW- YORK. 467 
 
 Mr. Josiah Ogclen Hoffman, who had been a distinguish- 
 ed federalistj as appears from what I have before related, 
 now claimed to be an ardent friend of Mr. Clinton, and 
 he and his friends pressed hard upon the council for the 
 removal of Richard Riker as recorder, and his appoint- 
 ment as the successor; but to this Mr. Yates positively 
 refused his consent, and the application of course failed. 
 
 A combination of republicans in Rensselaer county, 
 headed by William L. Marcy, our late governor, then re- 
 corder of Troy, was formed, who acted in concert with 
 Mr. Van Buren. An application, strongly urged, was 
 made to the council from that county for the removal of 
 such of those men as held office, and especially Mr. Mar- 
 cy. These men did not come within the description of 
 the New-York bucktails. They occupied the same poli- 
 tical attitude as Van Buren, who as yet supported regular 
 nominations, whether the persons nominated were for 
 or against Mr. Clinton. I therefore refused to con- 
 sent to the removal of Mr. Marcy, or any of his friends 
 in like manner, as I had refused to consent to the removal 
 of Mr. Van Buren from the office of attorney general. 
 At the ensuing April election, however, the county con- 
 vention, having, as I was informed, nominated Clintonian 
 republicans, Mr. Marcy and his friends got up a bucktail 
 set of candidates, and supported them at the polls of elec- 
 tion in opposition to the regular republican ticket; by 
 which means, I believe, federal members of assembly 
 were returned from that county. At the June session of 
 the council, therefore, in conformity with the principle of 
 action I had adopted, I voted for the removal of Mr. 
 Marcy and his other friends, and they were removed ac- 
 cordingly. 
 
 How inconsistent was the conduct of these men. The 
 sole ground alleged for their opposition to Mr. Clinton 
 was, that he was extending too much favor to, and there-
 
 468 POLITICAL HISTORY fl818. 
 
 by strengthening the federal party; but here they opposed 
 republican candidates when they must have known that 
 the effect of that oppostion would be to procure a federal 
 representation from the county of Rensselaer. But this in- 
 consistency was not confined to them. In several counties 
 of the state, — as for instance in the county of Chenango, 
 where General German was elected in opposition to a re- 
 gular republican nomination, by uniting with the federal- 
 ists, — the conduct of the Clintonian republicans was as in- 
 consistent with their professions as that of the Rensselaer 
 county bucktails. Indeed it cannot be denied that Mr. 
 Clinton encouraged irregular nominations. 
 
 Before the adjournment of the council, it was agreed 
 between Messrs. Yates, Livingston and Seymour, to remove 
 Doct. Cooper from the office of secretary of state. I was 
 apprised of it, and although I stated that I should vote 
 against the measure, there were, I confess, two considera- 
 tions which induced me to look upon it with indifference. 
 The one was, the improper manner in which he came into 
 the office, and the other, that it enabled me to redeem the 
 the pledge I had given to Mr. Yates to make some provi- 
 sion for J. V. N. Yates. 
 
 Mr. Livingston accordingly at the next meeting of the 
 council, in the presence of the secretary, made a violent 
 attack upon him, and upon the means by which his appoint- 
 ment was obtained, and offered a resolution for his remo- 
 val, which was carried by the votes of Messrs. Living- 
 ston, Yates and Seymour. I voted against it and the go- 
 vernor entered his protest against the measure; repel- 
 ling in a spirited manner, the animadversions made by Mr. 
 Livingston on the conduct of Gov. Tayler. After the 
 removal of Mr. Cooper, upon my nomination, John Van 
 Ness Yates was appointed. In many respects Mr. Yates 
 was peculiarly fitted for this office. He was a man of 
 fine literary taste, of ready resources of mind, possessing
 
 1818.1 OF NEW-YORK. 469 
 
 brilliant if not profound talents, and capable of doing much 
 within the shortest possible period of time.* 
 
 During this session, Mr. Edwards of New-York, brought 
 a bill into the assembly for calling a state convention for 
 considering such parts of the constitution as relate to the 
 appointment of officers. His object was to abolish the 
 council of appointment, and provide for the appointment 
 of officers in some other way. I advised the governor and 
 his friends to support this project; and to enlarge the 
 powers of the convention in such manner that they should 
 also have the right to consider the propriety of altering 
 and extending the right of suffrage. All men had be- 
 come disgusted with the appointing power, under the old 
 constitution, and so universal was the opinion that a 
 change ought to be made, that I was satisfied that the 
 council of appointment could not much longer form a 
 part of our governmental machinery. The right of suf- 
 frage, too, was more restricted in this state than in any 
 other of the northern or middle states; and I was satisfied 
 that public opinion, in a state so highly democratic, would 
 not much longer endure the restriction. I told the go- 
 vernor that the project would eventually succeed, and that 
 he had better seize upon it then, while in one branch of 
 the legislature at least, we had the power of controlling 
 and keeping w^ithin due bounds action upon the question; 
 but neither he nor his friends would listen to me. The 
 scheme was started by a New-York Bucktail, and that it- 
 self seemed good cause of opposition to it. Indeed, Gov. 
 Clinton and his friends vainly hoping that they should be 
 able to control the council of appointment, seemed anx- 
 ious for retaining it. The proposition of Mr. Edwards, 
 
 * This council cannot be charged, when cempared with other councils, with 
 illiberalil7 towards the Bucktail party. They appointed many of their open and 
 avowed opponents, among whom none was more so than General Root, and he 
 was appointed district attorney for the county of Delaware. John Savage wag 
 also appointed district attorney of the county of Washington. Note F.
 
 470 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 although supported by him with the most ardent and 
 honest zeal, and by able and unanswerable arguments, was 
 rejected in the assembly. 
 
 The term of service in the senate, of Mr. Ross and Mr. 
 Cantine from the middle district, would expire during this 
 yearj and their successors were to be chosen at the an- 
 nual election in April. There is no doubt but that at that 
 time, a large majority of the electors of that district were 
 Clintonians, but by adroit management, such arrangements 
 were made as resulted in the election of one Clintonian 
 and one Bucktail. Mr. Cantine was not a candidate for 
 re-election, but Mr. Ross and his friends were extremely 
 anxious that he should be again returned. It was con- 
 ceded by all that one of the candidates should be taken 
 from the county of Orange, where Mr. Ross resided, but 
 there was a dispute whether the other candidates should be 
 taken from the county of Otsego or the county of Greene. 
 According to the population of the respective counties, and 
 the representation each county had enjoyed in the senate, 
 Otsego, in preference to Greene, was entitled to the mem- 
 ber. The decision of this question was submitted to a 
 caucus of the members of the legislature from the middle 
 district. There would have been little difficulty in deci- 
 ding this question, had it not been known that Moses Aus- 
 tin, an avowed Bucktail, had been nominated by the re- 
 publicans of Greene, and that Arunah Metcalf, a very 
 estimable man, but who was equally well known as a 
 Clintonian, had been designated by the republicans of Ot- 
 sego county. A majority of the members from the mid- 
 dle district were Clintonians, and yet a majority of those 
 members in caucus decided, in effect, that Austin should 
 be the senatorial candidate. This decision was produced 
 in the following manner: A Mr. Strong of Orange coun- 
 ty, had been proposed by some of his friends, as the suc- 
 cessor of Mr. Ross; and although the members of assem-
 
 1818.] OF NEW- YORK. 471 
 
 bly from that county were decided Clintoniansj they were 
 from personal and local considerations very desirous, as 
 I have before stated, that Mr. Ross should be re-elected^ 
 and they feared that in case the Orange county dele- 
 gation supported the claims of Otsego; Columbia, Dela- 
 ware and Greene, (Bucktail counties,) would advocate the 
 election of Strong, and thus the expectations and wishes 
 of Mr. Ross and his friends would probably be defeated. 
 Mr. Van Buren very adroitly availed himself of their 
 fears; and eventually the members from Orange voted in 
 favor of Greene, which caused the nomination and elec- 
 tion of Mr. Ross and Mr. Austin. So that instead of 
 two Clintonians from the middle district we had but one. 
 Before the middle district convention adjourned, it was 
 resolved to appoint a committee to draft an address to the 
 electors of the district, on the subject of the approaching 
 election. Mr. Van Buren was appointed chairman of 
 that committee. Another person agreeing with him in 
 political views, and myself, were of that committee. He 
 drew an address, in which he reviewed the political con- 
 test between the two parties during the late war, and most 
 soundly abused our old political opponents. The poor 
 federalists, who were so far from being dangerous, that they 
 had no idea of opposing our candidates, be they who they 
 might, very justly might have complained of this treat- 
 ment as illiberal, if not cruel. But on the part of Mr. 
 Van Buren, the measure was politic and judicious. If the 
 Clintonian republicans refused to sign the address, then 
 it was evidence of what was charged against them, — 
 a secret understanding with the federalists, — if they signed 
 it, then the federalists might be told, that they had no 
 more to expect from one class of the republicans than 
 from another; for both had joined in the uncalled for de- 
 nunciations against them. The address eventually was 
 signed indiscriminately by all the republican members.
 
 472 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 In the summer of 1817, Mr. Solomon Southwick, or 
 rather Mr. Spencer Staflford, the owner, had transferred to 
 Mr. Israel W. Clark, the Albany Register establishment. 
 
 Mr. Clark had formerly printed, at Cooperstown, a re- 
 publican paper called " The Watch Tower." Though 
 defective in education, and as a business man not exactly 
 suited to this world, he was a man of great purity of prin- 
 ciple and an excellent heart; and he possessed a much 
 higher grade of talents than the public in general gave 
 him the credit of possessing. He thought highly of Mr. 
 Clinton, and was enthusiastic in the support of his pro- 
 jects of internal improvements. Shortly after he took 
 possession of the Register, he wTote and published in that 
 paper, a series of numbers, in which he sustained the 
 canal policy with great ability. Major Noah who then 
 edited the National Advocate, the leading Bucktail pa- 
 per, attacked these numbers with great zeal; and such 
 was the talent displayed by the author that the Major 
 charged them to the pen of De Witt Clinton himself. 
 I am thus particular, in order to do justice to a friend, 
 not correctly appreciated by the public, whose memory I 
 still cherish with cordial affection. 
 
 The Albany Argus, conducted by Judge Buel, was 
 considered rather as the organ of Judge Spencer; while 
 the Register, under the management of Clark, was con- 
 sidered, more especially as speaking the language of the 
 governor. This, and the circumstance that Clark desired 
 to obtain the state printing, and allowed himself to be 
 flattered by Southwick, who at heart was seeking the 
 prostration of Mr. Clinton, that the state patronage was 
 within his reach, produced a collision between two leading 
 journals which ought to have acted in cordial union. 
 
 Before the annual election in April, all reflecting men 
 foresaw that a permanent separation would take place 
 before the next election for governor between the republi-
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YORK. 473 
 
 cans who supported and those who were opposed to Mr. 
 Clinton. The question which produced the greatest 
 anxiety in the minds of politicians was, which party would 
 retain the greatest number of democrats, or rather, (which 
 perhaps would be more in accordance with the truth of the 
 matter,) which party should retain the name of the repub- 
 lican party. The election nevertheless was attempted to 
 be conducted in the usual way. The candidates were se- 
 lected by county and district conventions. In several 
 counties, however, one or the other section of the demo- 
 cratic party rebelled against the decrees of these conven- 
 tions, as in the case of Rensselaer and Chenango countiesj 
 but symptoms of oppugnation were most frequently mani- 
 fested by the Clintonians. The inclination of an immense 
 majority of the federal party undoubtedly was, to act 
 with those whom they deemed to be the real friends of the 
 governor. 
 
 In the western district senatorial convention, Gamaliel 
 H. Barstow, David E. Evans and Perry G. Childs, were 
 nominated. They were selected because they were 
 known to be friends of the governor. Some opposition 
 on that account was made to them at the election. Mr. 
 Childs in particular, who was personally unpopular in 
 consequence of having been rather a grasping lawyer, 
 was opposed by a respectable farmer by the name of 
 Paine. He would undoubtedly have lost his elec- 
 tion, had it not been known that Mr. Paine was in feel- 
 ing with the Bucktail party, while it was believed Mr. 
 Childs was a firm friend of the governor. We shall 
 shortly see with what fidelity Mr. Childs, as well as 
 Mr. Evans, (personally a very estimable man,) carried 
 into effect the known wishes of those who elected them. 
 
 The legislature adjourned on the 23d of April. The 
 result of the elections generally were favorable to the 
 governor.
 
 474 POLITICAL HISTORY [1818. 
 
 In the city of New-York, it is true, the Bucktail 
 assembly ticket succeeded by a majority of more than a 
 thousand, but in the state, a majority of the republican 
 members of assembly chosen were decided friends of the 
 governor. Although Mr. Austin was elected from the 
 middle district, it was very evident a majority of the elec- 
 tors in the state were in favor of Mr. Clinton, and the 
 eastern and western districts had elected senators with 
 express reference to that question. 
 
 The following are the names of the senators elected: — 
 from the southern district, Darius Crosbyj middle, Wil- 
 liam Ross and Moses Austin; eastern, George Rosecrants 
 and Levi Adams; western. Perry G. Childs, Gamaliel H. 
 Barstow and David E. Evans. 
 
 Before concluding this chapter, I must be permitted to 
 indulge in a few reflections in relation to the political po- 
 sition of Mr. Clinton; and upon the reasons why many 
 of the republicans at this early period, manifested symp- 
 toms of opposition to his administration. 
 
 Mr. Clinton had been nominated in 1817, by a majo- 
 rity of the republican party represented in convention, 
 upon the solomn assurance of Judge Spencer and his other 
 friends, that if nominated and elected, he would rigidly 
 pursue a republican course, and discontinue all connection 
 between himself and the federalists, if such connection 
 had existed. An adherence to a republican course, it was, 
 I presume, well understood, would render it his duty to 
 distribute the state patronage so far as he had an agency 
 in its distribution, as his predecessor had done, among the 
 members of the republican party only. The federalists 
 thought they were entitled to a portion of the patronage, 
 and under the administration of Mr. Clinton they no 
 doubt expected to enjoy it. 
 
 Mr. Clinton, when he commenced his administration, 
 professed his determination to support the republican par-
 
 1818.] OF NEW-YORK. 4^5 
 
 ty, but he affected to believe, that the federalists did not 
 exist as a party. He alleged that there was no difference 
 of opinion in relation to the measures, and of course there 
 could not be two parties. He was cold and distant in his 
 deportment towards Mr. Van Buren, Mr. Young, Mr. 
 Skinner, and other leading republicans who had opposed 
 his nomination; and when he spoke of them his language 
 was calculated to produce unfavorable impressions in rela- 
 tion to their political views and motives; while he was 
 known to be in habits of frequent and confidential com- 
 munication with Judge Van Ness, Judge Piatt and other 
 leading federalists. Still he was extremely unwilling to 
 appoint federalists to office. Judge Van Ness used to 
 apologize to his friends who solicited appointments, in the 
 best manner he could; and was known to have entreated 
 them to wait for a short time, and " until Mr. Clinton 
 should get fairly info the saddle.''^ 
 
 Was it unreasonable to expect that this conduct of the 
 governor and the declarations made by leading federalists 
 of the tenor of what I have quoted, would not excite the 
 jealousy of the republicans, and alarm those of them who 
 had but recently emerged from the tremendous contest 
 with that party during the late war % 
 
 But in truth the federalists as a party, were neither dis- 
 banded nor annihilated. It is true, the glitter and blaze 
 of their watch fires were not visible, but they were smoth 
 ered, — not extinguished. The " emhers''' remained and 
 there were not wanting many, who like Mr. Coleman, 
 were ready to fan them into a flame. It was, therefore, a 
 vain attempt of Mr. Clinton, when he sought to acquire 
 and retain the confidence of both parties. He should 
 either have adhered strictly to the usages and discipline 
 of the republican party, or he should have openly or pub- 
 licly declared that he disclaimed all connection with any 
 party and that his selections to office should be made
 
 476 POLITICAL HISTORY [ISIS. 
 
 from among the most talented and worthy, irrespective of 
 the political party of which they might have been mem- 
 bers. The latter course he could not take without viola- 
 ting the pledges made in his name by Judge Spencer, and 
 the former was so directly at war with his feelings that 
 had he attempted it, he was incapable of carrying it out 
 in good faith. 
 
 If Mr. Clinton had any general system of political ac- 
 tion, it was one tending to a merger or amalgamation of 
 all parties into one, or to erect out of the two existing 
 parties a third party, the object of which should be his 
 individual support. The idea of an amalgamation of parties 
 in a free state, is chimerical, and the notion that three 
 great parties can, for any considerable time exist, is ridi 
 culous.
 
 1S18.] or NEW- YORK. 477 
 
 CHAPTER XXIV. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1818, TO MAY 1, 1819. 
 
 Few events of political importance occurred during the 
 summer of this year. 
 
 There can be little doubt but that the leaders of the 
 party, of which Mr. Van Buren was the head, determined, 
 before the meeting of the legislature now chosen, to draw 
 the line distinctly between the supporters and opponents 
 of the governor. The difficulty consisted in doing this in 
 such a way as to produce a conviction that the governor's 
 friends were a minority, and a dissenting- section from the 
 republican party. 
 
 Partly by accident, and partly by good management on 
 the part of the Van Buren party, and bad management of 
 Mr. Clinton and his friends, this object was effected, or 
 claimed to have been effected. 
 
 William Thompson, a native of Saratoga county, had 
 established himself in the practice of law in the county of 
 Seneca. He was a young man of respectable talents, and 
 had once or twice represented that county in the assembly; 
 and, while a member, some personal difficulty had occurred 
 between him and Lieut. Gov. Taylor. A sharp contest 
 had also happened between him and Mr. Elisha Williams 
 of Hudson, in relation to the public buildings in Seneca 
 county — Thompson contending that they ought to be loca- 
 ted at Ovid, and Williams, that Waterloo, where he was 
 largely interested, ought to be their site. Mr. Thompson 
 was again, in April, 1818, elected to the assembly from 
 Seneca. He was a man of warm passions, and, from the 
 circumstances I have mentioned, had acquired strong pre- 
 judices against several persons of standing and influence
 
 4fTB POLITICAL HISTOR? [1818. 
 
 in the central part of the state, and among them, Gov. 
 Clinton came in for a share of his dislike. He was readily 
 fixed upon as the candidate of the Van Buren party for 
 speaker, because he was a western man; and on that ac- 
 count, as well as on account of the interest which several 
 members, who lived in the same district of country with 
 him, felt in favor of locating the court-house at Ovid, it 
 was supposed some members would vote, in caucus, for 
 him, who would not vote for Mr. Sharp, or other distin- 
 guished Bucktails resident in the southern part of the 
 state. Mr. Thompson was undoubtedly informed of this, 
 probably by his old acquaintance and friend. Col. Young, 
 before he left home; and measures were taken to procure 
 the attendance in Albany, on the evening before the ses- 
 sion, of every one who it was believed, or hoped, would, 
 in caucus, vote for Thompson. 
 
 The day appointed by law for the meeting of the legis- 
 lature, was the 5th of January. The arrangement for the 
 nomination of Mr. Thompson for speaker, was kept a pro- 
 found secret from the Clintonian republicans; and an im 
 pression prevailed among them that John Van Ness Yates, 
 who had been elected to the assembly from Albany, a man 
 supposed to be rather unsettled as to which party he would 
 attach himself, w^ould be the speaker. 
 
 Gov. Clinton and Judge Spencer desired for speaker a 
 more decided man than Mr. Yates; but presuming upon 
 their influence with the members from the country, had 
 taken no measures to fix public sentiment upon any one, 
 until the day before the legislature were to meet, when 
 they determined upon Gen. German. I cannot but con- 
 sider this determination as extremely injudicious. Mr. 
 German himself, from his native good sense, at first dis- 
 approved of it. It was a long time since he had been a 
 member of the assembly. He knew that prejudices existed 
 against him among many even of Mr. Clinton's best
 
 1818.] OF NEW- YORK. 479 
 
 friends. He wished, he' said, to take his place as a floor 
 member of the house, and he hoped, in the course of the 
 session, to regain the confidence of his old friends. But 
 this did not satisfy the governor- Possibly some of the 
 federal members who were in town, may have urged that 
 German ought to be the speaker. They, no doubt, wished 
 to widen the breach between the Clintonian and Van Bu- 
 ren republicans. What could hasten that breach more 
 effectually than the support of German for speaker ? He 
 had, while in congress, opposed the declaration of war, 
 and some of the war measures. He had signed the ad- 
 dress against the election of Tompkins, in 1813, and he, 
 at that moment, owed his election to the federalists, hav- 
 ing been chosen in opposition to a regular democratic 
 nomination. If, then, it was desirable that Mr. Clinton 
 should retain in his support a majority of the republicans, 
 nothing could have been more mal-apropos than the sup- 
 port of Mr. German. But, if it was unwise in Mr. Clin- 
 ton and Judge Spencer, to determine on him as a candi- 
 date, it was still more inexcusable to have brought him 
 forward without consultation, and without previous ar- 
 rangements with their friends in the country. Objectiona- 
 ble as Gen. German was, there can be very little doubt, 
 if proper measures had been taken a few weeks before the 
 meeting of the legislature, a majority of the republicans 
 might have been obtained who would have supported him 
 in caucus. But not the slightest effort was made by the 
 governor, or his friends at Albany, to prepare the mmds 
 of their friends in the country for such a measure. On 
 the contrary, they were wholly ignorant of the project, 
 until they arrived in Albany. 
 
 Perhaps it may be thought that I attach too much im- 
 portance to this transaction, but I am sure I do not. If 
 names and forms, on any occasion, are things, they em- 
 phatically were so at that time. I aver it as my delibe-
 
 480 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 Tate opinion, that the error committed by the Cllntonian 
 republicans, in respect to the support of Mr. German on 
 the evening of the 4th, and on the fifth day of January, 
 was the cause of their prostration and ruin as a party. 
 
 At the caucus, on the evening before the day appointed 
 for the meeting of the legislature, there were seventy-five 
 republican members present. On balloting for speaker, 
 Thompson received forty-two votes, and German thirty- 
 three. As I have before remarked, all the Bucktail 
 members were there, while from ten to fifteen Clintonians 
 had not arrived. After the result of the balloting was 
 announced, the friends of German refused to vote in favor 
 of concurring with the majority; and the next day also, 
 when the house convened, they refused to support him. 
 In this, in my judgment, they were clearly in the wrong. 
 It is useless to allege that all their friends had not arrived. 
 That they knew before they went into caucus. When 
 they consented to a caucus nomination they were pledged 
 to support that nomination, and it was a violation of 
 plighted faith and honor to refuse to do so. It was the 
 very predicament in which their opponents desired to 
 place them. The actual result was a far greater gratifica 
 tion to Van Buren and his friends than if Thompson had 
 been elected. 
 
 When the assembly met, on the morning of the 5th of 
 January, upon balloting for speaker, no one had a majority 
 of all the votes. The candidates were German, Thomp- 
 son, and Duer of Albany. On the first ballot German 
 received more votes than either of the other two candi- 
 dates. The house, after balloting four times, with nearly 
 the same result, adjourned to the next day. On the morn- 
 ing of the 6th, another ballot was taken, the result of 
 which was as follows: — German, fifty-five; Thompson, 
 thirty-eight; Duer, twenty.
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 481 
 
 No one having a majority of all the votes, Gen. Root 
 offered a resolution that William Thompson be appointed 
 speaker of that house. The following members voted in 
 favor of this resolution: — Beebe, Blakely, Clark, Cleland, 
 Conklin, Crolius, Deyo, Eldred, Ells, Fosdick, Foster, 
 Frost, Gale, Groot, J. Guion, Gurnee, Hatfield, E. Hill, 
 N. P. Hill, Hovi^ell, Howes, Humphrey, Hunter, Irving, 
 Litchfield, McCall, Morgan, Nichols, Osborn, Patterson, 
 Reynolds, Romaine, Root, Sharp, Spencer, Ulshoeffer,Wat- 
 kins, Weed, A. Wells, Williams and Youngs — forty-one. 
 
 The whole number of votes given for Mr. Thompson 
 being but forty-one, and the residue of the members pre- 
 sent voting in the negative, the resolution was rejected. 
 
 A motion was then made, that William A. Duer be de- 
 clared speaker, and the following members voted in favor 
 of this resolution: — Barker, Beebe, Beadle, Carman, Da- 
 vis, Finch, Frost, H. Guyon, Houghtaling, Huntington, 
 Ketcham, King, Kissam, Lapham, Litchfield, Livingston, 
 Oakley, Piatt, Requa, Root, Simmons, Swart, J. Thomp- 
 son, Tomlison, Van Burcn, Van Loan, Van Rensselaer, 
 Waldron, S. Warren, A. Wells and Williams — thirty-one. 
 
 All the other members voting in the negative this reso- 
 lution was lost. 
 
 After the rejection of these resolutions, one was offered 
 for the appointment of Obadiah German, and it was 
 adopted, sixty-seven members voting in the affirmative,and 
 forty-eight in the negative. On this question Mr. Duer 
 and Mr. John A. King, of Queens county, voted in the 
 negative. 
 
 The refusal of the Clintonian members of the legislature 
 to adhere to the determination of a republican legislative 
 caucus, and the eventual support, in connection with the 
 federalists, of a man holding such a political standing as 
 Gen. German at that time held, excited alarm among the 
 republicans throughout the state. Was there not good 
 
 31
 
 482 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 cause for that alarm 1 Probably ninety-nine out of a 
 hundred, of Mr. Clinton's republican friends, earnestly 
 wished to keep the democratic party, as a party, together. 
 Was there any way of effecting that object, except by the 
 enforcement of the usage, that on ques^ions about the se- 
 lections for office, the minority should yield to the majo- 
 rity 1 Here was a flagrant violation of that rule, at the 
 seat of government, in favor of a man, who, to his politi- 
 cal sins for six years past, had added yet another, by ob- 
 taining a seat in the assembly by federal votes, against a 
 candidate nominated by a regular republican county con- 
 vention. 
 
 The governor, in his speech, presented a very able view 
 of the condition and prospects of the state. He again 
 reviewed the canal policy, and reminded the legislature, 
 that by the act of April 15, 1817, the canal commissioners 
 were merely authorized to contract for making canals be- 
 tween the Mohawk and Seneca rivers, and between Lake 
 Champlain and the river Hudson at Fort Edward; and he 
 forcibly and strongly recommended authorizing, by law, 
 the commissioners to open the entire line of canal naviga- 
 tion from Lake Erie to the tide waters of the Hudson, and 
 from Fort Edward to the head of sloop navigation on the 
 North river. He recommended several other important 
 matters in relation to other great interests of the state. 
 
 After reading this, and other of the annual messages of 
 Gov. Clinton, so unobjectionable, judicious and patriotic 
 are his views, that one, lit this period, will be at loss to 
 account for the reason why any honest and upright man^ 
 who felt a due regard to the interest and honor of the 
 state, could find it in his heart to oppose him. 
 
 The term of service of Rufus King, in the United 
 States senate, was to expire on the 4th of March of this 
 year, and it was the duty of the present legislature to ap- 
 point a successor. But, before their meeting, it had been
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 483 
 
 industriously circulated among the republican Clintonians, 
 by the opponents of the governor, that he was in favor of 
 the re-election of Mr. King, and that he was induced to 
 take this course with a view to conciliate the federalists. 
 Nothing could be more untrue than this allegation. It 
 was in vain that he denied it. The very men who circu- 
 lated the report, at the same time stated, that the governor 
 publicly disclaimed such intention, but they, notwithstand- 
 ing, insisted that he was secretly in favor of the measure. 
 How was it possible to disprove a charge made and sus- 
 tained in this manner 1 If Mr. Clinton, in his conversa- 
 tion about an United States senator, spoke against the re- 
 election of Mr. King, it was precisely the course of con- 
 duct which his opponents had indicated. 
 
 On the other hand, many leading and bigoted federal- 
 ists ascertained what were the real feelings of Mr. Clinton 
 towards Mr. King, and from that moment they declared 
 war against him. Hence, the conduct and votes of Mr. 
 Duer and Mr. John A. King in relation to the election of 
 Gen. German as speaker, who, when the final question 
 was taken, refused to vote for him. Hence, Field Mar- 
 shal Coleman, in his paper, after the election, in 1820, 
 declared, that, until shortly before the election, he was 
 not only opposed to Clinton, but even preferred Tomp- 
 kins to him.* But it is not less curious than true, that 
 while Mr. Clinton was losing friends among the federal- 
 ists, because, as they charged, and probably truly, that he 
 was personally hostile to Mr. King, he was losing many 
 of his republican friends, because the Bucktails charged 
 him with a friendship and preference for the same gentle- 
 man. 
 
 The federalists in the legislature, led by Mr. Van Vech- 
 ten in the senate, and Mr. Duer and Mr. Oakley in the* 
 assembly, perceiving that the members claiming to be 
 
 * See Evening Post, May, 1820.
 
 484 POLITICAL HISTORt [1819. 
 
 democratic would disagree in the choice of senator, deter- 
 mined to support Mr. King. I am, however, aware, and 
 I ought to have mentioned, that, by this time, two parties 
 had sprung up among the federalists. A minority, led by 
 Mr. Duer in the assembly, and by Mr. Coleman and the 
 Goodies, in New- York, were determined to make war on 
 the governor, while a large majority, at the head of whom 
 stood Mr. Oakley, in the legislature, and judges Van 
 Ness and Piatt, out of it, seemed equally determined to 
 amalgamate with the Clintonian party, and support Mr. 
 Clinton's administration. Why, then, did the latter class, 
 on the question of speaker, and in the election of a sena- 
 tor, take a course so embarrassing to the governor and his 
 friends 1 Why did they not pursue that line of conduct 
 best calculated to secure to him the support of the majo- 
 rity of the republican party 1 It is often difficult, and 
 sometimes impossible, to discern the real motives of poli- 
 ticians. 
 
 Notwithstanding the dissentions which had occurred in 
 the choice of a speaker, and the violation, on the part of 
 the Clintonians, of the obligations they incurred when 
 they consented to go into a caucus, it was determined to 
 call a meeting of all the republican members of the legis- 
 lature for the purpose of nominating a senator. The 
 Clintonian members of the senate had had no agency in 
 the proceedings relative to the speakerj and several of 
 them, particularly Doct. Barstow of Tioga, Mr. Adams 
 of Lewis, and myself, were determined not to permit a 
 permanent separation of the republican party, if, by any 
 means, it could be avoided. A meeeting was therefore 
 called, in the senate chamber, to nominate a senator, and 
 due notice for that purpose given. The Clintonians had 
 fixed upon John C. Spencer, a member of the United 
 States house of representatives, for their candidate, (and, 
 in justice to him, I ought to say, this was entirely without 
 
 I
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 485 
 
 his knowledge,) while it was well understood that the 
 Bucktail candidate was Col. Young. We did not know 
 what the result might be, but were determined to support 
 any gentleman who should be nominated. 
 
 The Bucktail members of the legislature soon ascer- 
 tained, with certainty, their own strength; and there is 
 every reason to believe that they became well satisfied 
 that a majority of the republicans in the two houses were 
 for Mr, Spencer. I say this, because there was good rea- 
 son to believe, from their conduct in the caucus which 
 was held, that they had determined before they came 
 there, to break up the meeting without any nomination. 
 The evidence evinced by their conduct at the caucus, of 
 this determination, is strengthened by the fact that neither 
 Mr. Van Buren nor Col. Young attended. The absence 
 of Mr. Van Buren might be accounted for by the extreme 
 illness of his wife, but Col. Young had no such excuse. 
 
 After the meeting was organized, some gentleman, op- 
 posed to the governor, addressed the meeting by animad- 
 verting with great severity on his character and conduct, 
 and concluded by reproaching the Clintonians for not 
 adhering to the caucus nomination of speaker. Among 
 others. Gen. German replied, and defended the political 
 character of the governor, and the conduct of his friends. 
 He was followed by a violent personal attack by Mr. 
 Peter R. Livingston. It appeared to be his object to in^ 
 duce a personal quarrel between himself and Mr. German. 
 Gen. German was neither slow to answer, nor backward 
 in retorting personal abuse. This kind of altercation 
 could not be endured by a large majority of the meeting, 
 and it finally was dissolved without even an attempt to 
 transact any business, on the motion of Mr. John T. Ir- 
 ving, a member from New-York. I own I was glad when 
 the meeting broke up, and, I believe, I seconded the mo- 
 tion of Mr. Irving; but I was wrong. It afterwards, as I
 
 486 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 thinkj pretty clearly appeared that the Clintonlans were 
 in the majority. They, therefore, should have refused to 
 adjourn. They should have insisted on making a nomi- 
 nation, and if their opponents refused to support it, then 
 they might, with great plausibility, have denounced them 
 as a faction. 
 
 This was the last time the Clintonians and Bucktails 
 attempted to caucus together as political friends. 
 
 A few evenings afterwards the Clintonians held a meet- 
 ing by themselves, and unanimously nominated John C. 
 Spencer. 
 
 On the day fixed by law for the election of senator, no 
 nomination could be made. The federalists voted for Mr. 
 King, the Bucktails for Mr. Young, and the Clintonians for 
 Mr. Spencer. In the assembly Mr. Spencer received fifty- 
 four votes, Mr. Young forty-four, and Mr. King thirty - 
 four. Some of the members, w^ho, on the resolution, 
 voted for Col. Young, when the resolution was lost, voted 
 for Mr. King. The whole number of republican votes, in 
 both houses, for Col. Young, were fifty-seven, while 
 those given to Mr. Spencer were sixty-four; showing 
 evidently, at that time, a republican majority in the legis- 
 lature in favor of Mr. Clinton; but the preponderance of 
 talent was decidedly with the Bucktails. 
 
 Ezekiel Bacon, late comptroller of the United States 
 treasury, a Clintonian member from Oneida county, was a 
 man of considerable talent, but the strenoth and vigor of 
 his mind had been greatly impaired by a nervous disease. 
 Gen. German, as I have somewhere before remarked, 
 when he came into public life, was an uneducated man, 
 but possessed, by nature, a strong and powerful intellect, 
 which was now improved by long experience in legisla- 
 tion. These gentleman had to encounter and repel the 
 attacks of S. B. Romaine, UlshoefFer, J. T. Irving and 
 Sharpe, together with the galling fire of Gen. Root. Mr.
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 487 
 
 Duer was gathering the materials for the- party of " high 
 minded federalists," and omitted no opportunity of assail- 
 ing the character and administration of the governor. 
 Oakley, at the head of the largest portion of federalists, 
 assumed to take an independent course, and to maintain 
 an armed neutrality, but it was well understood that he, 
 and his party, intended eventually to indentify themselves 
 with the Clintonians. Doct. Barstow, of the senate, was 
 shrewd and sagacious, but quite unable to cope with such 
 giants as Van Buren and Young. Henry Yates, who, it 
 will be remembered, held the casting vote in the council 
 of 1818, no longer claimed to be a supporter of Mr. Clin- 
 ton, but acted openly and decidedly with the Bucktails. 
 If he was before, as I thought I had reason to suspect, 
 inclined to identify himself with that party, the conduct 
 of the Clintonians in the choice of a speaker, furnished 
 him with a plausible excuse for effectuating his intention. 
 The Clintonian and Bucktail republicans were now 
 known as two distinct parties^ and the last mentioned 
 party received an accession of strength, in the senate, 
 which was not anticipated by the Clintonians. Not long 
 after the meeting of the legislature, Mr. Childs and Mr. 
 Evans began to manifest symptoms of dissatisfaction with 
 the party which had elected them, and soon after the sepa- 
 ration of which I have spoken, publicly took ground with 
 the adverse party. In this, I think they were wrong; for, 
 although I am not a believer in the doctrine of instruc- 
 tions, to the extent it is held in Virginia and some other 
 states in the union, I do think, that if a man is elected by 
 a political party, because he professes to be a member of 
 that party, if, after his election, he changes his opinions, 
 as it is possible he may conscientiously do, he ought, in 
 such case, to give back the power which has been commit- 
 ted to him by his constituents, and afford thein an oppor- 
 tunity to re-elect him, if they also have changed their
 
 488 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 opinions; and if they have not changed them, to allow 
 them the opportunity of choosing a representative who 
 will carry into effect their wishes. 
 
 During the pending session of the legislature, with the 
 exception of Messrs. Van Buren, Young and Skinner of 
 the senate, nearly, if not all those who opposed themselves 
 to Mr. Clinton, founded their opposition to him upon an 
 avowed opposition to the system of internal improvements 
 which he advocated. This attitude was taken by the re- 
 presentation from the southern district in the senate and 
 assembly, and by Gen. Root and others in various other 
 parts of the state. The National Advocate, the leading 
 Bucktail paper in the state, had boldly staked the fate of 
 the party on the trial of that issue. But, during this ses- 
 sion, a change in this respect took place. Mr. Buel, un- 
 der an assurance from the majority in the senate, that he 
 should be retained as state printer, came out in the Argus 
 against the governor, and that paper now became the offi- 
 cial Van Buren paper. It was said, likewise, that a cau- 
 cus was held, of the republican members opposed to Gov. 
 Clinton, at which it was determined to support the pro- 
 jected internal improvements. Whether such a determi- 
 nation was formally made in caucus, I am unable to sayj 
 but it is certain, that a sudden and most important change, 
 about this time, did take place in the action of the Buck- 
 tail party, with respect to the canal, and that that change 
 was almost universal. Mr. Sharpe of the assembly, and 
 two or three of the southern senators, were too stubborn 
 to surrender immediately, and Gen. Root occasionally 
 exercised his wit upon the projectors and supporters of 
 the canals; but after this, as a partj/j they made no oppo- 
 sition to this great work. It is not improbable that some 
 were induced to take this course from the consideration 
 that, so long as they continued their opposition to the ca- 
 nal, the whole west would be against them. But it is
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 489 
 
 wrong to suspect a man of doing, from selfish and bad 
 motives, a good act. 
 
 After the opposition to Mr. Clinton's views, in respect 
 to internal improvements, was given up, there remained 
 no measures about which the two sections of the republi- 
 can party differed. Here then, were two parties, bitter 
 and virulent against each other, who cordially agreed on 
 all questions of principle, and measures affecting the inter- 
 est of the state, and who mutually concurred in their sup- 
 port of the men who administered the general govern- 
 ment. Might not Mr. Clinton, justly complain that while 
 the measures proposed by him w^ere approved, he was 
 himself the object of a most bitter hostility? Did his 
 opponents object to his integrity or capacity 1 No man 
 pretended to question the purity of his private character, 
 all admitted that he possessed talents of the highest or- 
 der. In one respect, however, to use a legal phrase, Mr. 
 Clinton was estopped from making' such complaint. The 
 same Mr. Clinton had assailed and finally prostrated Gov. 
 Lewis on the same ground, and with the same weapons 
 which were now used against himself. If the chalice 
 which Mr. Van Buren now presented to him was poisoned, 
 it was the same which Mr. Clinton had commended to 
 
 Mr. Lewis. 
 
 There were two prominent grounds of attack on Gov. 
 
 Clinton. The one was, that he claimed that he was in 
 himself the party^ ihat he challenged the admiration and 
 almost adoration of his friends, and that the only decisive 
 evidence of political merit among his supporters was per- 
 sonal devotion to him. It must be confessed that there 
 were some grounds for this charge. Mr. Clinton from his 
 boyhood, had been the child of power, and either directly 
 or indirectly the distributer of patronage. At an early 
 age he was secretary of Gov. George Clinton, and during 
 the time he was such secretary, and after the political
 
 490 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819, 
 
 revolution in 1801, when the elder Clinton was restored 
 to the executive chair, what more efficient means had the 
 applicants for office to reach the heart of the venerable 
 governor than through the agency and influence of a favor- 
 ite nephewl After George Clinton had left the state, and 
 after the overthrow of Lewis, and until the year 1814, 
 De Witt Clinton was looked up to as almost the sovereign 
 dispenser of governmental patronage. It would be strange 
 if after such a training, the force of habit alone had not 
 rendered him attached to adulation. Office seekers, and 
 especially many of his old friends in New-York, soon per- 
 ceived that eulogiums on De Witt Clinton furnished 
 the most effectual means of defeating rivals for place and 
 emolument. These praises which really sounded like adu- 
 lation, were not suited to the taste of stern republicans 
 and independent freemen. 
 
 The other ground of accusation was that the governor 
 was improperly but secretly united with the old federal 
 party. This charge was feebly sustained by proof, but 
 from the manner in which it was made, I have before hinted 
 it was difficult, if not impossible to disprove it; and when 
 we consider that the federal party, at that time, declared 
 themselves disbanded in the state and nation; that Mr. 
 Clinton had as yet,appointed very few federalists to office, — 
 probably fewer than Governor Tompkins would have done 
 had he continued in the government, and less in proportion 
 than Mr. Monroe in the administration of the general 
 government had appointed, the Bucktails in the meantime, 
 claiming to be the exclusive friends of his administration, — 
 no good reason can now suggest itself to any mind why 
 this charge should have injuriously affected Mr. Clinton. 
 But in truth it did effect him most seriously. It drew 
 from his support a large portion of those who are gener- 
 ally called the rank and file men. The charge was con- 
 tmually being made, and was not and could not be dis-
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 491 
 
 proved; and in their minds it was confirmed by the fact 
 that a portion of the federalists affected to be, and pro- 
 bably really were, the friends and supporters of the 
 governor. 
 
 On the other hand, the praises which were continually 
 in the mouths of some of Mr. Clinton's partizans, and 
 chaunted in many of the Clintonian newspapers, disgusted 
 and detatched from the support of the state administration 
 many high minded and honorable, but perhaps rather too 
 sensitive men. By the one ground of attack the governor 
 was loosing men of elevated and cultivated minds; by the 
 other, the predilection and favor of that part of the repub- 
 licans who looked too much at the surface of things, and 
 formed their opinions rather from their suspicions and 
 apprehensions of what might be, than on evidence of 
 what actually was. 
 
 Amidst these collisions and violent struggles, which were 
 little better than a mere contest for office and its emolu- 
 ments between citizens, it affords me pleasure to state that 
 the common school system received great improvement 
 from a very able report made by Mr. Hawley, the superin- 
 tendent, and from the able and zealous support with which 
 his recommendations were sustained by Gen. Root in the 
 assembly. So great was the confidence of all men in 
 Mr. Hawley, (a confidence richly merited,) that during 
 the discussion of the bill in the assembly, Mr. H. was re- 
 quired to take a seat with the members and occasionally 
 make verbal explanations of the objects he had in view, 
 in several of the details of his bill. The plan proposed 
 by the bill which became a law,was very judicious, and with 
 the alteration recommended for two successive years by 
 Mr. Spencer, of the appointment of county superinten- 
 dents, which was adopted by the legislature of 1841, con- 
 stitutes substantially our present common school system; 
 a system which is as nearly perfect as one can be, and at
 
 492 POLITICAL HISTORY [IS 19. 
 
 the same time be in accordance with the genius of our 
 civil institutions, and with the the existing state of so- 
 ciety. 
 
 When the bill authorizing the commissioners to contract 
 for the construction of the whole line of the canals, was be- 
 fore the senate, several of the Clintonian senators opposed 
 itj or rather they preferred limiting the commissioners to 
 particular sections, in order that a demonstration could be 
 furnished of the practicability of the work, and of the 
 actual expenses which would be required in order to com- 
 plete it. We (for I was one of the number,) were friends 
 of the work, but we believed that public confidence would 
 be better preserved by this cautious course than by invest- 
 ing the commissioners at once, and before any demonstra- 
 tion had been afforded of the practicability of the scheme, 
 with the power to incur a debt in the name of the state, 
 of from five to ten millions of dollars. This was repre- 
 sented by the Albany Argus, and subsequently in a pam- 
 phlet written by B. F. Butler, Esq. as opposition to the 
 canal J and further, that as they were pleased to call Mr. 
 Barstow, Mr. Ross, and myself, confidential friends of 
 Mr. Clinton, they attempted an inference that he himself 
 was not at heart desirous of a speedy completion of the 
 work. 
 
 The following extracts from the Albany Argus and Re- 
 gister of April, 1819, will enable the reader to arrive at 
 a correct conclusion as respects these proceedings: 
 From the Albany Argus. 
 
 " The Canal Law. — Taking the printed bill for our 
 data, we made two material mistakes in our last, in noti- 
 cing this subject. The law authorizes and empowers the 
 commissioners to proceed to open a canal communication 
 between the Seneca river and Lake Erie, betweed Utica 
 and the Hudson river, and between Fort Edward and the 
 navigable waters of the Hudson. It authorizes an annual
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 493 
 
 loan of six hundred thousand dollars including the loan 
 authorized by a former law. 
 
 When the bill was under discussion in the senate, Mr. 
 Hammond made a motion to strike out of the second sec- 
 tion so much as authorizes the commencement of the east- 
 ern and western sections of the Erie Canal; which motion 
 was negatived, twelve to sixteen, as follows: 
 
 For striking out — Messrs. Austin, Barnum, Barstow, 
 Bowne, Dayton, Ditmis, Hammond, Livingston, Louns- 
 bury, Noyes, Ross, Swart — twelve. 
 
 Against striking out — Messrs. Adams, Allen, Bates, 
 Childs, Evans, Frey, Hart, Knox, Mallery, Rosekrants, 
 Seymour, Skinner, Van Buren, Wilson, Yates, Young — 
 sixteen. 
 
 Mr. Ross then moved to strike out so much as author- 
 izes the commencement of the section between Seneca 
 river and Lake Erie; which was also negatived — eighteen 
 to nine. 
 
 Mr. Hammond then made a motion to strike out so 
 much as authorizes the commencement of the section 
 between Utica and the Hudson river; which was negatived, 
 eleven to seventeen, as follows: 
 
 Ayes — Messrs. Allen, Adams, Austin, Barnum, Bar- 
 stow, Bowne, Dayton, Frey, Hammond, Noyes, Swart — 
 eleven. 
 
 Nays — Messrs. Bates, Childs, Ditmis, Evans, Hart, 
 Knox, Livingston, Lounsbury, Mallery, Rosekrants, Ross, 
 Seymour, Skinner, Van Buren, Wilson, Yates, Young — 
 seventeen. 
 
 It will appear evident from this sketch of proceedings, 
 that the canal question was neither advocated nor op- 
 posed in the senate on political grounds; and that some 
 of Mr. Clinton's warmest political friends were the most 
 hostile to the principles of the bill."
 
 494 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 From the Albany Register. 
 
 " The bill mentioned in the article we have extracted 
 from the Argus of Tuesday last, authorizes the canal 
 commissioners to contract for the making of the whole 
 line of the western canal. 
 
 When Mr. Hammond made the motion to strike out of 
 the second section so much as authorizes the immediate 
 commencement of the eastern and western sections of the 
 Erie Canal, he stated that he was decidedly in favor of 
 prosecuting the great work of connecting the waters of 
 Lake Erie with the Hudson river by a canal; that he had 
 not a shadow of doubt but that this great object would 
 be ultimately accomplished; that he had full confidence 
 in the estimates made by the canal commissioners, and 
 that he was willing as one of the members of the legisla- 
 ture to furnish the means of accomplishing this splendid 
 undertaking. But, he said, that if it was really intended to 
 complete the work, it was important that public confi- 
 dence in its practicability should be preserved. What was 
 the best means of preserving that confidence? Canals, it 
 is true, are common in Europe, but they are novel in 
 America. The people wish a demonstration of the prac- 
 ticability and utility of the proposed canals. He was 
 therefore of opinion that the completion of the whole 
 projected system of internal improvements would be best 
 ensured by confining our expenditures to the northern ca- 
 nal and middle section of the western canal, until the 
 northern canal and middle section of the western should 
 be completed and in actual operation. With this view he 
 would cheerfully vote to authorize the commissioners to 
 borrow any sum they should say was requisite to accom- 
 plish those objects. 
 
 If the northern canal and middle section of the western 
 canal were completed, and the state in the receipt of the 
 revenue produced by the tolls from those sections, could
 
 1819.1 OF NEW-YORK. 495 
 
 any man of common sense entertain a doubt but that the 
 eastern and western sections of the Erie canal would be 
 finished? He thought not, and therefore made his motion 
 to strike out. 
 
 Mr. Ross stated that he should vote for striking out, for 
 similar reasons, at the same time declaring his determina- 
 tion to persevere until the whole system of internal im- 
 provement should be carried into effect and completed. 
 
 Our readers will perceive that the insinuation of op- 
 position to the canal, contained in the concluding para- 
 graph, which we have extracted from our neighbor Buel, 
 is^not only incorrect but manifestly unjust as respects Mr. 
 Ross and Mr. Hammond, and such of their political 
 friends as voted with them." 
 
 The governor, in his speech at the commencement of 
 the session, was silent on the subject of a convention to 
 amend the constitution; but Gen. Root, on the eighth of 
 February, offered a resolution in the assembly for the call 
 of a convention with unlimited powers to revise, alter, or 
 modify the constitution. 
 
 This resolution called forth an extended and very able 
 debate. Mr. Root of course supported it with his usual 
 ability, and he was seconded by Mr. Bacon from Oneida 
 county, in a very able argument. On the other hand, 
 the federalists generally, together with Mr. Yates, who 
 made a very handsome argument, opposed the resolu 
 tion. As yet, therefore, there was no decisive indications 
 that the call of a convention would present a question 
 which would be decided upon party principles. 
 
 The resolution was eventually rejected. 
 
 During the summer of 1818, Joseph Elicott had re- 
 signed his office of canal commissioner, and the governor 
 had, in pursuance of the authority vested in him by law, 
 as the vacancy happened in the recess of the legislature, 
 appointed senator Hart in the place of Mr. Ellicott. This
 
 496 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 appointment was exceedingly judicious; for Mr. Hart, 
 whatever his defects as a legislator may have been, was a 
 very correct business man. It became necessary for the 
 legislature before the session expired, to pass upon this 
 appointment, as the appointment of Hart would expire 
 on the adjournment of the legislature. 
 
 Mr. Hart being naturally a man of ardent feelings, and 
 having formerly entertained strong prejudices against the 
 federal party, and withal being a very indiscreet man in 
 his conversation, was personally disliked by the federal 
 members of the legislature. The Bucktails had fixed upon 
 Henry Seymour, who, although more bitter in his feel- 
 ings towards the governor, than most of the other 
 members of his party, was gentlemanly and courteous in 
 his manners, and as a member of society, highly esteemed 
 by gentlemen of all parties. 
 
 The moment I heard who the opponent of Mr. Hart 
 was, I was alarmed, as I considered Hart's success very 
 doubtful. I immediately mentioned my apprehensions to 
 Gov. Clinton, who laughed at my fears. As I considered 
 the appointment of great importance in a political point 
 of view; I called upon Mr. Hart and advised him to make 
 a thorough canvass of the members of both houses, and 
 not permit the election to come on until he had obtained 
 a pledge from a majority of the members that they would 
 vote for him; and I told him, I thought he was in real 
 danger of being beaten. He was so sure of his success 
 that he was angry with me for my suspicion, as it implied 
 an unfavorable opinion of his popularity. Finding that 
 the two men most interested were indifferent, I gave my- 
 self no further trouble about the matter. The Bucktails 
 set on foot, a quiet but very efficient system of election- 
 eering, mainly, as I believe, with the federalists. I could 
 detail some of their operations, but I apprehend it would 
 fatigue, more than it would amuse the reader.
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 497 
 
 Mr. Seymour was nominated in the senate, and Mr. 
 Hart in the assembly. Upon joint ballot Mr. Seymour 
 was chosen by a majority of one vote. The aggregate 
 number at that time in the two houses, of Clintonians and 
 and federalists, exceeded ninety, while the Bucktails at most 
 could not count to exceed fifty-seven. Of course fifteen 
 or twenty Clintonians or federalists, must on joint ballot, 
 have voted for Mr. Seymour. 
 
 The result of the contest between Seymour and Hart 
 was more seriously unfortunate, and proved more fatally 
 injurious to the Clintonian party than many of them at 
 that time apprehended. It gave the Bucktails a majority 
 in the board of acting commissioners, and thus threw into 
 their hands a vast amount of patronage ; a patronage 
 which was felt along the whole line of country from Al 
 bany to Lakes Champlain and Erie. Thus the political 
 influence which grew out of the great and splendid work 
 which Mr. Clinton had labored so much and so successful 
 ly to cause to be undertaken by the state, was henceforth 
 and until the day of his death used to annoy and to pros- 
 trate him. 
 
 Mr. Buel, in announcing this result in the Argus, said: 
 *'A majority of the canal commissioners are now politi- 
 cally opposed to the governor, and it will not he necessary 
 for a person who wishes to obtain employment on the ca- 
 nal as agent ^ contractor ^ or otherwise^ to avow hhnself a 
 Clintonian. Did Judge Buel, by this negative allegation, 
 intend that an affirmative allegation was to be inferred; to 
 wit, that in future it would be necessary for a person de- 
 siring to become a contractor, &c., to avow himself an 
 anti-Clintonian 1 I hope not; and yet probably some 
 who wished to become agents, &c., might have so under- 
 stood him. 
 
 The appointment of Chief Justice Thompson secretary 
 
 of the navy, produced another vacancy on the bench of 
 
 32
 
 498 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 the supreme court. Judge Spencer was, of course, ap- 
 pointed chief justice, but the selection of a junior judge 
 from the bar presented a question of great delicacy and 
 difficulty. The federalists recommended, and pressed 
 with great zeal, Samuel Jones, son of the late comptroller, 
 a learned lawyer and eminent for his virtues as a citizen, 
 who has since held the office of chancellor of the state, 
 and is now chief justice of the superior court of the city 
 of New-York. 
 
 On the other hand, John Woodworth, who had for 
 several years been attorney general, and who was a zeal- 
 ous republican friend of the governor, was pressed upon 
 the council as personally unexceptionable and as politically 
 less objectionable than Jones. Mr. Van Buren was also 
 mentioned as well qualified for the officej but I am not 
 aware that, with his own consent, he was spoken of as a 
 candidate for any appointment by that council. As be- 
 tween Mr. Woodworth and Mr. Jones, a question was 
 presented which produced considerable discussion and 
 excitement, in consequence of which the final action of 
 the council was long delayed. 
 
 About this time a project was formed in relation to the 
 supreme court, which, had it been adopted, would have 
 removed the difficulty under which the council labored on 
 this occasion. 
 
 From the great increase of the state, in commerce and 
 population, and the consequent increase of litigation, the 
 supreme court had already become overloaded with busi- 
 ness. The calendar of term causes began to increase upon 
 them; and as they were obliged to try in the respective 
 counties, all the issues joined in the supreme court and 
 some other courts, the increase of the number of counties, 
 as well as the increase of litigation, added greatly to their 
 labors when not holding a court in bank. Besides, their 
 presence as members of the court of errors, and of the
 
 ISVo.] OF NEW- YORK. 499 
 
 council of revision, required their attendance at Albany 
 during the session of the legislature. It was most evident 
 that five men must sink under this accumulation of labor. 
 Suitors began to complain of delays, while the judges 
 were performing as much labor as mortal men could en- 
 dure. More force, more mm, were evidently necessary 
 to do the work which, by law, was assigned to the su- 
 preme court. It was therefore proposed by one of the 
 Clintonian members of the senate, that, besides filling the 
 vacancy occasioned by the resignation of Judge Thompson, 
 two more judges should be appointed; but that it should 
 not be required that more than five judges should sit du- 
 ring term. It was suggested that two of the members of 
 the court, while the others were sitting in bank, might be 
 employed in holding circuits; and it was proposed that the 
 three new judges should consist of Woodworth, Jones and 
 Van Buren. I am not authorised to say that Mr. Van 
 Buren would have accepted the appointment, but I have 
 some reason to believe he would have done so. He ap- 
 peared to be tired of the eternal political struggles to 
 which he seemed doomed, and such, in truth, he told me 
 was the fact. The probability is, that if at that moment 
 the office of judge had been tendered to him, he would 
 have gladly retired from political contests, and employed 
 the great powers of his mind in the discharge of his offi- 
 cial duties, and would have confined his ambition to the 
 acquisition of distinction and fame as a jurist. 
 
 Had this scheme been adopted, (if one may be allowed 
 to speculate on probabilities,) it is reasonable to conjec- 
 ture, that the then existing judicial system would not have 
 been broken up; that Mr. Clinton would have been sus- 
 tained; and that probably Mr. Van Buren never would 
 have been president of the United States. It must be con- 
 fessed, that one object of the proposer of this plan, was to 
 get Mr. Van Buren out of the legislature, and detach him
 
 600 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 from the active management of the party of which he was 
 the life and soul. 
 
 The project failed of obtaining the approbation of the 
 governor and his friendsj and, strange to say, the judges 
 of the supreme court were, I was told, unanimously oppo- 
 sed to it. Why should they have been so 1 The plan, if 
 adopted, would render their duties less onerous; their 
 salaries would not have been diminished. The appoint- 
 ment of Mr. Jones would have increased the confidence in 
 the court, of the great federal party; the appointment of 
 Van Buren would have had the same effect on the Buck- 
 tail party — a party, which, after the resignation of Judge 
 Thompson, could hardly be said to be represented in that 
 important branch of the government; and the appointment 
 of Woodworth would have satisfied the republican friends 
 of the governor. Why, then, did the judges of the su- 
 preme court so promptly reject the proposed alteration ? 
 
 Man loves power. The judges did not fail to see, that 
 if you divide a given quantum of power between seven 
 men, the quantity of power, held by each, will be less 
 than when you divide the same quantum between five. 
 
 Mr. Woodworth was eventually appointed. 
 
 There is good reason to believe that the Bucktails set- 
 tled on Gov. Tompkins, during this winter, for their can- 
 didate for governor, in 1820, in opposition to Mr. Clinton. 
 He was, personally, more popular than any other man of 
 any party. The old Tammany men, of the southern dis- 
 trict, preferred him to any other candidate. Mr. Van 
 Buren wished to unite the largest possible number of the 
 old republican party in the state, against Mr. Clinton, and 
 he believed that no name could be so effectual in rallying 
 the old war party as that of Gov. Tompkins; while his 
 flexibility of temper, and apparent frankness, he hoped, 
 instead of repelling, would invite that portion of the fede- 
 ralists who had manifested hostile feelings towards Gov. 
 
 i
 
 1819.] OF NEW-YORK. 501 
 
 Clinton, to rally around Tompkins, and yield him their 
 support. In all these respects, the selection of Governor 
 Tompkins was extremely judicious. But there was one 
 circumstance against him. From the books of the comp- 
 troller it appeared that he, to a very large amount, was a 
 defaulter. 
 
 Gov. Tompkins, during the last war, had been, not only 
 the agent and executive of the state, but he had been the 
 agent of the general government. Immense sums of mo- 
 ney had been received and paid out by him, for both go- 
 vernments. When the credit of the general government 
 was low, he had, in some instances, on his personal re- 
 sponsibility, in connection with the credit he had in con- 
 sequence of his official station as governor of the state, 
 raised large sums of money, which had been expended in 
 the service of the general government for the defence of 
 the state. He had also, no doubt in good faith, paid out 
 in the aggregate large sums of money belonging to the 
 state, to officers of the state and national government, 
 which moneys had not been accounted for, either to Gov. 
 Tompkins, or the proper accounting officers of the state 
 and national governments. Gov. Tompkins was not a 
 methodical business man, and his accounts and vouchers 
 were not in a condition to bear a rigid scrutiny. Under 
 these circumstances, a bill was introduced into the legisla- 
 ture, and passed both houses, {Session Laws of 1819, p. 
 286,) requiring the comptroller to liquidate and settle the 
 residue of the accounts of Daniel D. Tompkins, and, on 
 such settlement, to allow him the same discount or pre- 
 mium on the amount of monies borrowed by him, on his 
 personal responsibility, and expended in the public ser- 
 vice, as were allowed toother individuals and bodies poli- 
 tic for their agency fees in such transactions; that the 
 comptroller should charge the sum, so allowed, to the 
 United States; and that, upon such final settlement, the
 
 502 POLITICAL HISTORY [IS 19. 
 
 treasurer pay the late governor the balance, if any were 
 his due. 
 
 The comptroller, by another section, "was required to 
 credit the governor with all payments made by him accord- 
 ing to law, and to open an account with the persons to 
 whom the governor had advanced the money, and require 
 them to account to the state for its expenditure. This bill 
 passed both houses without much opposition. Mr. Tib- 
 bits, in the senate, thought he discovered something wrong 
 in itj but it finally passed that body nearly unanimously. 
 Undoubtedly Mr. Van Buren, and his leading friends, 
 considered the passage of this law of very great political 
 importance. It is not probable that they, or even Gov. 
 Tompkins, at that time, knew how his accounts would 
 stand if they were correctly settled. This bill relieved 
 them, in a great measure, from the embarrassing charge 
 they apprehended against Gov. Tompkins as a defaulter. 
 If, upon a fair settlement, upon the liberal terms contem- 
 plated by the act, Gov. Tompkins should be able to bal 
 ance his account with the state, then the objection to him 
 as a defaulter would no longer exist. If, according to the 
 views of the accounting officer of the state, there would 
 still remain a balance due from Gov. Tompkins, these 
 disputed items might be claimed, and a difference of opin- 
 ion, as to the construction of the act, might be started^ 
 which would prevent a final adjustment of the balance, 
 either one way or the other, until after the election in 
 April, 1820. 
 
 The annual election of senators and members of assem- 
 bly was now approaching, and each party took the field 
 with great spirit. The federalists, in counties where they 
 had a clear majority, as in Columbia, Oneida, Albany, &c., 
 supported candidates who had uniformly belonged to that 
 party. In counties where they were in the minority they 
 generally supported Clintonian candidates. The middle
 
 1S19.] OF NEW- YORK. ^* 503 
 
 district presented a singular state of things. By this time 
 it was well ascertained, that a very great majority of the 
 republicans of that district were opposed to Mr, Clinton. 
 But the Clintonians and federalists united, constituted a 
 majority, and even then but a small majority, over the ad- 
 verse party. 
 
 The Bucktail party had nominated Charles E. Dudley 
 of Albany, and John T. Moore of Delaware, and the Clin- 
 tonians had nominated Elisha Jenkins of Albany, and 
 Arunah Metcalf of Otsego. The candidates on both sides 
 were, personally, men of good reputation and entirely un- 
 objectionable. My reader will also bear in mind, that if 
 any considerable portion of the federal or Clintonian 
 strength should be diverted from the Clintonian ticket, it 
 would ensure the success of their opponents. Under 
 these circumstances Solomon Southwick, a self-nominated 
 candidate, claimed the support of the old Clintonians of 
 the district; and Abraham Van Vechten — the respectable 
 and justly esteemed and venerable Abraham VanVechten — 
 allowed himself to be a candidate to draw off the votes of 
 a few old federalists who would not vote for a democrat 
 if a federal name was before them. Mr. Southwick chal- 
 lenged and obtained the support of the ultra Clintonians, 
 and Mr. Van Vechten of the ultra federalists. Mr. South- 
 wick, whose conduct never seemed to have been governed 
 by any system or fixed rule of action, may have been in- 
 duced to pursue this course from mere personal hostility 
 ^■•to Judge Spencer and Mr. Jenkins, and perhaps from re- 
 sentment to Mr. Clinton; but Mr. Van Vechten must 
 have been governed by other motives. He, knowing, as 
 he did, that he could not be elected, must have lent his 
 name for the express purpose of securing the success of 
 Messrs. Dudley and Moore, two candidates who chal- 
 lenged support on the ground that they were in favor of 
 an eternal war upon federalists and federalism.
 
 504 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 Eventually, Mr. Van Vechten received two thousand 
 two hundred and twenty-six federal votes, and Mr. South- 
 wick one thousand and fourteen Clintonian votes, which 
 caused the election of Messrs. Dudley and Moore, over 
 Messrs. Jenkins and Metcalf. 
 
 Before the adjournment of the legislature an address of 
 the Clintonian members was drawn, signed and published. 
 Although it was written for effect, shortly before an elec- 
 tion, and must be presumed, on that account, to present 
 the most favorable view of the history of the proceedings 
 in the winter of 1819, as respects the Clintoniansj yet I 
 am quite sure the facts it contains are substantially cor- 
 rect j and I think it presents pretty clearly the points in 
 difference between the two parties. The intention of the 
 author, was to avoid any abuse of the adverse party, and 
 all unnecessary eulogy on the governor. 
 
 Although this address, as originally drawn and finally 
 published, met, I believe, with the cordial approbation of 
 those who subscribed it, yet I was mortified to be informed 
 that it was not sufficiently laudatory of Gov. Clinton to 
 suit the taste of many of his New- York friends; among 
 whom, I am sorry to say, were two young gentlemen of 
 some talents as writers, then lately from New-Hampshire. 
 The gentlemen, to whom I allude, were N. H. Carter, 
 who had recently taken the editorial management of the 
 Albany Register, and Charles G. Haines of the city of 
 New-York. 
 
 If any one should take the trouble of reading the ad- 
 dress, about which I have perhaps already said too much, 
 he will naturally enquire why nothing was said in it about 
 the election of speaker. The answer is, that nothing 
 could be said in justification of the conduct of the Clinto- 
 nian party on that occasion.
 
 1819.J OF NEW-YORK. 505 
 
 The republican members of the legislature, who were 
 opposed to Gov. Clinton, also addressed the citizens of 
 the state, setting forth the causes of their opposition. 
 This document was, I have reason to believe, written by 
 William L. Marcy. It was drawn up with great ability, 
 and like all his other writings, was a production clothed 
 in a style highly finished and elegant. It was my inten- 
 tion to have republished this address also, with a view of 
 showing the points of difference between the two parties 
 as exhibited at the time by themselves, but I have been 
 unable to find it. 
 
 The result of the election, in April, was a gain to the ^ 
 Bucktail party. There were, nevertheless, in the assem- 
 bly, including the Clintonian federalists, a majority re- 
 turned in favor of the governor. 
 
 In the senate, from the southern district, Peter R. Liv- 
 ingston and John Townsend were elected, in opposition 
 to James Talmadge and Pierre Van Cortland, who were 
 the Clintonian candidates. From the middle, Charles E. 
 Dudley and John T. Moore. From the eastern, Benjamin 
 Moers, Duncan McMartin and Thomas Frothinghamj and 
 from the western, Gideon Granger and Lyman Paine, in 
 opposition to Philetus Swift and Nathaniel Garrow, the 
 Bucktail candidates. 
 
 The first named four gentlemen were elected as oppo- 
 nents, and the last five as supporters of Mr. Clinton's ad- 
 ministration.
 
 506 POLITICAL HISTORY [1319. 
 
 CHAPTER XXV. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 1819, TO MAY 1, 1820. 
 
 Before the council of appointment adjourned in April, 
 1819, they issued new general commissions of the peace 
 to several counties of the state, and in the selections to 
 office, seem to have been guided very much by political 
 considerations. The new appointments were made almost 
 exclusively from the friends of the governor, many of 
 whom were federalists, and those left out of the commis- 
 sion were chiefly of that class of politicians called Euck- 
 tails. 
 
 The removal of Richard Riker, recorder of New-York, 
 produced considerable excitement. Although an old 
 friend of the governor; yet from the time that Mr. Clin- 
 ton's friend (Townsend) had refused to second his nomina- 
 tion to the office of judge of the supreme court in pre- 
 ference to that of Jonas Piatt, he had been as bitter, as a 
 man of his pliable and apparent courteous exterior could 
 be, in his opposition to the Clintonians. Peter A. Jay, 
 was the man whom the bar and the substantial citizens of 
 New-York required should be made recorder. His high 
 attainments as a lawyer, the purity of his morals, and 
 his pre-eminent standing as a man of integrity and hon- 
 or, obviously indicated him, as, aside from former politi- 
 cal prejudices, the most suitable man for the office. The 
 council, however, hesitated long before they consented to 
 his appointment, solely and exclusively on the ground 
 that he was a federalist; and, (what surely to an Ameri- 
 can patriot ought not to have constituted an objection,) 
 that he was the son of the late Governor Jay. For my 
 part, although my prejudices were as strong against the
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 507 
 
 federal party, as those of any man; yet I considered that 
 whether by our own wrong, or in accordance with our 
 duty, we had placed ourselves in a condition in which 
 it was not only our interest, but duty, to select our 
 officers from those who were most worthy, who were de- 
 termined to support the re-election of the governor, irre- 
 spective of the political parties to which they had formerly 
 belonged. Doct. Barstow, and several other republicans 
 of the old school, entertained the same opinion, and there- 
 fore advised the appointment of Mr. Jay. He was ap- 
 pointed. 
 
 In July, the council again met. Although the removal 
 of minor office-holding Bucktails and the appointment of 
 Clintonians had been very general; yet Mr. Van Buren, 
 who stood at the head of the opposition to the governor, 
 and led on the attack, had been allowed to hold one of 
 the most important, influential and at that time lucrative 
 oflices in the state, the ofl^ice of attorney general, undis- 
 turbed. It was urged that this inconsistency in the con- 
 duct of the administration ought to be obviated; and af- 
 ter much and long hesitation the council removed him, and 
 appointed Thomas J. Oakley in his place. Upon the 
 principle I have just laid down, (whether it was correct or 
 not, is another question,) there could be no reasonable 
 objection to Mr. Oakley's appointment. He was an able 
 lawyer, and in all respects admitted to be competent. 
 Mr. Van Buren, according to the maxims which before 
 had, and since have governed his political conduct, had 
 no right to complain, and in fact, I believe, he did not; 
 but an outcry was of course raised in the newspapers, on 
 account of the removal of a republican from an important 
 office, and the appointment of a federalist in his place. 
 The appointment of Mr. Jay and Mr. Oakley, did, in fact, 
 more effectually identify Mr. Clinton and his republican
 
 508 POLITICAL HISTORY [1919. 
 
 friends with the federalists than any act which had before 
 been done. 
 
 During this summer a controversy arose between the 
 vice-president, Tompkins, and the comptroller, Archibald 
 Mclntyre, growing out of a difference of opinion in rela- 
 tion to the construction of the act for the settlement of the 
 accounts of the former with the state, which was passed 
 on the 13th April, 1819, in which both political parties 
 ardently engaged, and which agitated the whole com- 
 munity, and increased in heat and bitterness until after the 
 election in April, 1820. 
 
 I shall not attempt to give in detail the particulars of 
 this controversy, but merely state the conclusions to 
 which I have arrived, from my knowledge and participa- 
 tion in the controversy while it existed; and more espe- 
 cially from a careful re-examination, recently made, of 
 the documents in relation to it. If I shall have run into 
 errors, those errors may be readily corrected by the docu- 
 ments contained in the printed journals of the two houses 
 of the legislature. 
 
 During the preparation for the late war with Great 
 Britain, and during that war, the state and national go- 
 vernments had placed at the disposition of the late gover- 
 nor several millions of dollars, to be expended under his 
 direction, and for which he was, of course, called on to 
 account. 
 
 He was irregular and immethodical in business; not sys- 
 tematical in keeping his accounts; employed too many 
 agents; mingled his own private funds with those of the 
 public; was naturally careless about money, and some- 
 times profuse in his expenses. The novelty of a state of 
 "war, and the hurry and bustle incident to that state, in- 
 creased the confusion in which his accounts were involved. 
 No candid man ever charged him with intentional dishon- 
 esty in his pecuniary transactions.
 
 1S19.] OF NEW-YORK. 509 
 
 The comptroller was one of the most amiable and ex- 
 cellent of men. A rigidly honest, strictly correct and able 
 accountant, and assiduous and unremitting in his attention 
 to his public duties. 
 
 Upon the final adjustment of the accounts of the vice* 
 president, from the vouchers presented to the comptroller, 
 though the precise state of the accounts was not ascer- 
 tained, there was supposed, in 1816, to be a balance of 
 one hundred and ten thousand or one hundred and twenty 
 thousand dollars of the public money in the hands of the 
 vice-president, for which he could not legally account. 
 This deficiency was supposed to be, and I believe it to be, 
 owing, not to an intentional appropriation by him of the 
 money of the state to his own use, but to the casual loss 
 of vouchers; to the payment of money, in many cases, 
 when, in the hurry and bustle of the times, no vouchers 
 at all were taken; to the infidelity and knavery of agents; 
 and, perhaps, as he mingled his own money with that of 
 the public, to his sometimes expending for domestic pur- 
 poses more than his income, and thereby, unintentionally, 
 using for private purposes the public funds. 
 
 With views somewhat similar, as I presume, to. those I 
 have suggested as my own, in the year 1818, the legisla- 
 ture, by resolution, referred the settlement of the vice- 
 president's accounts to William A. Bayard, Cadwallader 
 D. Golden and Robert Bogardus, who were directed to 
 adjust them upon principles of equity, without regarding 
 the technical rules by which the regular accounting offi- 
 cers of the state were governed. Mr. Bayard declined 
 acting as a commissioner, but the vice-president submitted 
 his claims to Messrs. Colden and Bogardus. These claims 
 consisted of commissions on $1,075,021.72 drawn and 
 expended and accounted for to the state, and for risk 
 and responsibility for officers and agents, to whom the
 
 510 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 money had been confided, expenses, journeys, &c., at five 
 
 per cent, $53,751 98 
 
 To commissions on $2,363,516 . 27, obtained 
 
 from the United States, and upon per 
 
 sonal loans and advances, expended and 
 
 accounted for, $118,175 80 
 
 To premium on discount of $1,095,000.00 
 
 at twenty per cent, in stock, being the , 
 
 amount loaned on the vice-president's 
 
 personal responsibility, and advanced 
 
 and accounted for, $277,506 00 
 
 These claims, together with the interest on 
 
 the several items, amounted to upward of $600,000 00 
 
 It does not appear that the vice-president expected 
 or requested that the whole of these claims should be 
 allowed him by the commissioners j on the contrary, they 
 were presented to enable the commissioners to select 
 out of them such claims as, in their judgment, were the 
 most equitable, which would amount to a sum sufficient 
 to enable the vice-president to balance his account with 
 the state. As Mr. Bayard refused to act, the commission- 
 ers were incapable of making any decision which would 
 be binding on the state. Messrs. Golden and Bogardus, 
 however, made a report to the legislature, in 1819, in 
 which they pronounced an eloquent eulogium on the vice- 
 president, and recommended that a liberal allowance be 
 made to him. In justice to the vice-president, and to the 
 honor of the commissioners, it is proper to bear in mind, 
 that they were politically opposed to Gov. Tompkins. 
 The report of the commissioners, in 1819, was referred to 
 a joint committee of the two houses, who unanimously 
 arrived at the conclusion that a sufficient sum ought to be 
 allowed the vice-president to enable him to balance his ac- 
 count with the state. The committee ascertained that the 
 balance due from the late governor was about one hun-
 
 1819. j OF NEW-YORK. 5ll 
 
 dred and twenty thousand dollars. Believing that he had 
 been a faithful officer; that the defalcation was owing to 
 the extraordinary state of the times; to unintentional error 
 and misfortune, rather than to intentional deviation from 
 duty; andj as Mr. Tompkins held the second office 
 in the nation, from delicacy towards him, the com 
 mittee were unwilling to recommend the passage of 
 an act which, on its face, would imply that he was a de- 
 faulter. They therefore selected an item, contained in his 
 schedule, of about a million of dollars, consisting of cur- 
 rent money which had been raised by Gov. Tompkins 
 during the war, on the pledge of United States stock and 
 treasury notes, and on his personal responsibility, for de- 
 fraying the expenses of carrying on the war, on which to 
 allow him a premium equal to that paid by the United 
 States to their own agents for converting treasury notes, 
 and their depreciated stocks, into current money. The 
 premium was understood to be, as stated in a letter from 
 Mr. Bacon, one of the joint committee, about twelve per 
 cent. They probably selected that item because twelve 
 per cent on a million of dollars would produce one hun- 
 dred and twenty thousand dollars, supposed to be the pre- 
 cise balance due from the vice-president. The joint com- 
 mittee accordingly recommended, and the legislature 
 passed, the law of the 13th April, 1819, as I have stated 
 in the preceding chapter. 
 
 When the vice-president presented his claim, under this 
 act, to the comptroller, he furnished him with certificates 
 from Doct. Isaac Brunson, Prime, Ward & Sands, and 
 other dealers in stock, showing that the difference in value 
 between treasury notes and United States stock, and cur- 
 rent money, in the year 1814, was about twenty-five per 
 cent. This would have entitled the vice-president to the 
 sum of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, Jror a pre- 
 mium on the one million of dollars raised by him, and
 
 512 POLITICAL HISTORY [1819. 
 
 therefore would, besides balancing his account, have au- 
 thorized him to demand a payment from the state treasury 
 of about one hundred and thirty thousand dollars. The 
 comptroller was alarmed at this demand. He knew it 
 was directly contrary to the intentions of the joint com- 
 mittee who reported the bill, and the legislature which 
 passed itj and he finally resorted to a construction of the 
 act highly technical and rigid, and as foreign to the real 
 intention of the legislature as was the amount of what he 
 supposed to be, and probably what was intended to be, 
 (or why should he have produced the certificates of Doct. 
 Benson and others 1) the vice-president's claim. The act 
 awarded to the vice-president a premium on all moneys 
 borrowed " on his personal responsibility y^ which the 
 comptroller construed to mean on his personal responsibili- 
 ty alone; and therefore, where treasury notes or stock 
 were pledged jointly with his responsibility, the comp- 
 troller refused to allow the premium. This construction, 
 in effect, nullified the act. 
 
 The vice-president fortified his claim by the written 
 opinion of several of the most eminent lawyers in the 
 state. On the other hand, the comptroller offered to sub- 
 mit the question to the judges of the supreme court; to 
 them and the chancellorj or to the judges, chancellor and 
 attorney generalj or to the chancellor, chief justice and 
 attorney generalj or, he proposed, that the vice-president 
 should apply to the supreme court for a mandamus against 
 him, which would necessarily require that court to pro- 
 nounce officially their opinion on the construction of the 
 act in question. The vice-president declined to accede to 
 any of these propositions, but, it is proper to state, that in 
 each of the ways for deciding the question, proposed by 
 the comptroller, the decision would have been made by a 
 tribunal, a majority of the persons composing which were 
 politically adverse to Mr. Tompkins.
 
 1819.] OF NEW- YORK. 513 
 
 The negotiations between the parties finally terminvcted 
 in the month of August, neither party being willing to 
 yield to the other. After it had been agreed that no set- 
 tlement could be made, according to the statement of the 
 comptrollerj and not denied by the vice-president, he pro- 
 posed that his account should be balanced, and to accept 
 of twenty-five thousand dollars as the balance due him 
 under the act of I8l9j but the comptroller, having com- 
 mitted himself in relation to the construction of the act, 
 refused to accede to the proposition. 
 
 The comptroller, not long after, published, in the form 
 of a letter, addressed to the vice-president, a detailed 
 statement of the controversy, to which Gov. Tompkins 
 replied in a very able and eloquent communication which 
 was published and circulated all over the state. The 
 comptroller subsequently replied to this communication, 
 and his reply was also published, and had an equally ex- 
 tensive circulation. This correspondence was conducted, 
 although with much asperity, with great tact and ability 
 on both sides. The comptroller proved himself, not only 
 a distinguished and able accountant, but a talented and 
 accomplished writer. The letter of the vice-president is 
 a splendid production. Shortly before its publication, 
 Mr. Van Buren spent several days with Gov. Tompkins. 
 Although the style of this letter is more florid than gene- 
 rally characterizes the composition of Mr. Van Buren, I 
 have good reasons to believe that he was its real author. 
 But, by whomsoever it may have been written, it affords 
 evidence that the talents of its author were of the highest 
 order. 
 
 These proceedings, and the correspondence which 
 grew out of them, occupied, mainly, the public attention, 
 until the meeting of the legislature. 
 
 The advantage derived from the great personal populari- 
 ty of Gov. Tompkins was nearly balanced by the universal 
 
 33
 
 514 POLITICAL HISTORY [l820. 
 
 confidence entertained by all parties in the integrity and 
 purity ot the motives of Mr. Mclntyre. In private life 
 all men admired and loved him, and in the discharge of 
 the highly responsible duties of the office of comptroller 
 for many years, and under various administrations, he had 
 afforded such proof of his fidelity to the state that no man, 
 even in those times, ventured to charge him with inten- 
 tional error. 
 
 The legislature met early in January, 1820, vi'hen John 
 C. Spencer, of Ontario county, was chosen speaker by the 
 joint votes of the Clintonians and federalists. Mr. Spen- 
 cer received sixty-four votes, Peter Sharpe fifty, (probably 
 the whole Bucktail vote,) and there were seven scattering 
 votes. The assembly, at this time, contained a prodigious 
 array of talent. In the senate the most distinguished new 
 member was Gideon Granger, the late post-master gene- 
 ral. He, beyond question, was one of New-England's 
 most talented sons, but a long course of active life, and 
 rather too much indulgence in living, had impaired his 
 health, which, together with his advanced age, rendered 
 him not fitted for the new theatre on which he was now 
 called to act. 
 
 In consequence of a failure to elect a senator of the 
 United States by the last legislature, the state was now 
 but partially represented in one branch of the national 
 government, and therefore the attention of the present 
 legislature was early called to that subject. It will be 
 recollected, that in the autumn of I818, and early part of 
 the year 1819, the honest republicans of the state were 
 alarmed at the report that Mr. Clinton was about to be- 
 tray the republican interest of the state by procuring the 
 re-election of Rufus King to the senate of the United 
 States. What, then, will be the surprise of the reader, 
 when he is informed that the very men who encouraged 
 the circulation of these heinous charges against Mr. Clin-
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YORK. 615 
 
 tcDjin less tnan twelve months afterwards came out open- 
 ly and decidedly in favor of Mr. King, and alleged as the 
 reasons for their support, the conduct of Mr. King during 
 the late war, and in the senate of the United States, which 
 were equally as well known to them in December, 1818, 
 as in December, 1819, and, as a further reason, that he 
 and his friends had the merit of being opposed to Mr. 
 Clinton ! Yet it was even so. 
 
 Shortly before the meeting of the legislature a pamphlet 
 was circulated from Albany, addressed and sent through 
 the post-office to all the republican members of the legis- 
 lature, in favor of the nomination and election, by the re- 
 publican party, of Rufus King. This pamphlet was the 
 joint production of Mr. Van Buren and Gov. Marcy, and 
 of course was well written. 
 
 The pamphlet admitted Mr. King to be a federalist, 
 but it divided the federalists into three classes, as their 
 political characters were developed during the late war. 
 
 The first class, it alleged, consisted of men who had 
 imbibed strong predilections for the common enemy, and 
 who were so inflamed by party malignity and heated by 
 ambition, as to be determined to rule or ruin. 
 
 The second, were drilled party men, who thought the 
 war impolitic, and therefore opposed the administration; 
 and the third class were men who, although opposed to 
 the men who controlled the national administration, 
 deemed it their duty to join, and did actually join, in aid 
 of war measures. To the third class, the pamphlet al- 
 leged, Mr. King belonged, and in proof of it, his conduct 
 in the senate was referred to, his call upon Gov. Tomp- 
 kins, in the year 1814, and his declarations on that occa- 
 sion, which I have before stated. The pam.phleteers fur- 
 ther urged Mr. King's revolutionary services, and they 
 add, as another reason why he deserved their support, 
 that he and all his friends, were opposed to the re-elec-
 
 516 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 tion of Mr. Clinton. " There is no doubt of it ^"^ say they; 
 and to fortify this assertion they refer to the vote of John 
 A. King, against Gen. German for speaker, at the com- 
 mencement of the last session. 
 
 Why should the same politicians who, in January, 1819, 
 denounced the support of Rufus King, as United States 
 senator, as the most heinous of political sins, without any 
 change in the condition of the country, and upon traits of 
 character developed, and acts dorje by Mr. King in 1814 
 and 1815, which were as well known to them at that time 
 as at any time subsequent — why, I say, should the same 
 politicians, in December, 1819, (for the pamphlet was 
 published the 19th of that month,) declare that the same 
 Rufus King ought to be supported for the office, and vir- 
 tually threaten every man who refused to do so with ex- 
 communication from their political church % The pam- 
 phleteers attempt to assign some reasons for this, but they 
 are, as obviously they must have been, worthless and pu- 
 erile. The object undoubtedly was, to draw in a portion 
 of the federalists to the support of Mr. Tompkins, at the 
 next election; an object which they accomplished, though 
 not to the extent they anticipated. On the other hand, 
 the Clintonians dared not oppose the election of Mr. King, 
 because they feared, if they did so, they should lose the 
 support of Mr. Clinton by the federalists. At the same 
 time, the federalists in the legislature, led by Mr. Oakley, 
 had not self respect enough to spurn the support of a 
 candidate thus imposed on them by men who were de- 
 nouncing their party as so contaminated that Mr. Clinton 
 deserved political death for holding any intercourse with 
 them. Without intending, or feeling, personally, the 
 least disrespect to Mr. King, who, I believe, was a good 
 as well as a great man, I am compelled to say, that the 
 motives which induced the Bucktails to support him, ap- 
 pear to me to have been entirely unjustifiable ; that the
 
 1820.] OF NEW- YORK. 617 
 
 motives which governed the federal and republican Clin- 
 tonians were equally inexcusiablej and that, in relation to 
 Mr. K.'s Clintonian republican and federal supporters,they 
 are also justly chargeable with a truckling and mean poli- 
 cy. I was myself one who was guilty of this meanness, 
 and I therefore speak the more freely of the transaction. 
 I was willing, and I expressed myself so, in 1819, not- 
 withstanding the denunciations of the Bucktails, to Lave 
 voted for Mr. King, but I could not do so without desert- 
 ing my party; and never did I give a vote with so much 
 reluctance, and of which I felt myself so much ashamed, 
 (solely in consequence of the manner in which that vote 
 was extorted from me,) as the vote I gave for Mr. King, 
 in 1820. I ought to have had independence and honesty 
 enough to have voted according to the dictates of my own 
 conscience, in both cases. 
 
 Mr. King was unanimously re-elected. 
 
 In December, 1819, the territory of Missouri applied 
 to congress for admission into the Union as a state; ex- 
 hibiting at the same time a copy of her constitution, by 
 which negro slavery was expressly tolerated. An objec- 
 tion was raised against this clause in their constitution, by 
 Gen. James Talmadge from this state, and a long and an- 
 gry debate ensued, in congress, upon that question. Much 
 excitement was produced in this state by the discussion, 
 and the feeling was apparently universal here, in favor of 
 the ground assumed by Gen. Talmadge. The subject 
 was taken into consideration in the assembly, and a reso- 
 lution offered by Mr. McNeil, of Oneida county, as chair- 
 man of a committee to whom the matter was referred, in- 
 structing the senators, and requesting the members of the 
 house of representatives, in congress, from the state of 
 New-York, to support the ground taken by Gen. Tal- 
 madge. This resolution passed both houses of our legis- 
 lature unanimously.
 
 518 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 On the 4th of February, the assembly proceeded to the 
 choice of a council of appointment, and John D. Ditmis 
 of the southern, John Lounsbury of the middle, Levi Ad- 
 ams of the eastern, and Ephraim Hart of the western dis- 
 tricts, were chosen by the joint votes of the federal and 
 Clintonian members. All, except Mr. Ditmis, were Clin- 
 tonians. 
 
 A few sheriffs and some other officers were removed by 
 this council from political considerations, but, in general, 
 no very important changes were made by it, principally, I 
 presume, for the reason that by this time the offices were 
 nearly all filled by Clintonians. The appointments in the 
 western district were mainly regulated by Mr. Hart, and 
 it is due to him to say, that Mr. Evans, a Bucktail sena- 
 tor, in accounting to me for the reason why Mr. Clinton 
 received so large a majority in the western district, in 
 April, 1820, ascribed it to the very judicious manner in 
 which the appointments had been made, under the advise- 
 ment of Mr. Hart. 
 
 On the 26th of January, a charge was made in the 
 New-York American to the following purport: that in the 
 year 1811, or beginning of 1812, the applicants for char- 
 tering the Bank of America had agreed with Wm. W. Van 
 Ness, Elisha Williams, and Jacob R. Van Rensselaer, in or- 
 der to procure their aid in the application, that the bank, 
 when chartered, should loan to the Columbia County Bank 
 one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, for the term of 
 fifteen years, at an interest of six per cent; that the Bank 
 of Columbia should pay the interest annually to Mr. 
 Williams and his associates, who were to retain in their 
 hands for their own private use, three per cent, that is, 
 one-half the whole annual interest. That after the char- 
 ter was granted and the bank was organized, the directors 
 refused to sanction this agreement, but proposed to pay 
 Messrs. Williams, Van Ness and Van Rensselaer twenty
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YORK. 5 19 
 
 thousand dollars, in satisfaction of the agTeement, which 
 proposition was accepted by Mr. Will lams, in behalf of 
 himself and his associates, and the money was accordingly 
 paid to Mr. Williams, but that after receiving the money, 
 Mr. W. refused to divide any portion of it with his part- 
 ners, unless they would agree that a fourth person 
 should be allowed to receive an equal share of it. 
 
 On the 28th of January, Gen. Root produced in the 
 assembly the paper containing this article, and offered the 
 following resolution: 
 
 " Resolved) That a committee be appointed to inquire 
 into the conduct of William W. Van Ness, Esq. one of 
 the justices of the supreme court of this state, and report 
 their opinion whether the said William W. Van Ness hath 
 so acted in his official capacity as to require the interposi- 
 tion of the constitutional power of this house, and that 
 said committee have power to send for persons and 
 papers." 
 
 This resolution, together with a preamble, stating the 
 grounds upon which the inquiry was directed, proposed 
 by Col. McKown, a member from Albany, was adopted, 
 and a committee appointed: the following are the names 
 of the gentlemen who composed the committee: — Messrs. 
 McKown, Root, Fox, Irving, John Miller, Walbridge, 
 Jedediah Miller, Nelson and Vail. 
 
 It is unnecessary to go into a detail of the proceedings ' 
 which followed the adoption of this resolution. It will 
 be sufficient to state that proofs were taken before the 
 committee, that some circumstances were disclosed which 
 rendered the conduct of some of the gentlemen accused 
 suspicious, but that the majority of the house ultimately 
 decided that the proofs did not warrant an impeachment of 
 Judge Van Ness. The members of the house generally 
 took sides for or against an impeachment, according to 
 the party to which they belonged j that is the federalists
 
 520 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 and Clintonians resisted and the bucktails generally favored 
 an impeachment. 
 
 Judge Van Ness who was a man of great sensibility, 
 was deeply affected by these procedings, and it is said, 
 that his feelings, eventually induced an impaired state of 
 health from which he never recovered.* 
 
 * Mr. Elisha Williams was examined on oath by the committee, and his depo 
 sition as taken by them is annexed to their report. 
 
 He stated that before the bank was chartered he made an agreement with persons 
 who assumed to be its agents, that the Bank of Columbia should keep its accounts 
 with the Bank of America; that the latter bank should allow the former to over- 
 draw its account to the sum of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars, on paying 
 an interest of three per cent only; that this arrangement should continue fifteen 
 years, and that this contract was made with Mr. Williams individually and for 
 his individual benefit. He acted solely for himself, and had a right to make such 
 terms with the Bank of Columbia as he and the directors might mutually agree 
 upon. Judge Van Ness knew nothing of this contract until after the bank vat 
 chartered in 1813. 
 
 Before the Bank of America went into operation, Mr. Wolcott, the president 
 proposed to Mr. Williams a material change of the terms of the contract, alleg- 
 ing that from the probable future condition of the monetary affairs of the country, 
 the bank would be unable to loan so large a sum of money for so great a length 
 of time, at so low an interest. He, therefore, proposed to stipulate that the 
 Bank of Columbia might overdraw its account in the Bank of America, to the 
 amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars for fifteen years, paying an in- 
 terest at the rate of six per cent, and that Mr. Williams and two other responsible 
 persons for him should become sureties for the faithful performance of the en- 
 gagements of the Bank of Columbia. Mr. Wolcott further proposed in considera 
 tion, that the first contract should be abandoned, and the proposed one adopted in 
 lieu of it to pay Mr. Williams twenty thousand dollars. Mr. Wolcott further of- 
 fered to accept as sureties for Mr. Williams, Jacob R. Van Rensselaer and Judge 
 Van Ness. These propositions were accepted by Mr. Williams, and he applied to 
 Mr. Van Rensselaer to become one of his sureties, to which he consented on con- 
 dition that Williams would pay him five thousand dollars out of the twenty thou- 
 sand he was to receive from the Bank of America, to which Williams agreed. 
 Mr. W. then applied to Judge Van Ness, and requested him also to become his 
 surety, to which he readily consented without fee or reward ; but Williams in 
 sisted on paying, and did pay him the same sum he paid Van Kensselaer, namely, 
 five thousand dollars. [See Assembly Journal of 1820, p. 833.] 
 
 Assuming this statement to be true, and it would be extremely uncharitable to 
 doubt the oath of such a man as Elisha Williams, I cannot perceive anything in 
 the transaction which in the slightest degree ought to tarnish the character of 
 Judge Van Ness. The deposition of Mr. Williams was strengthened and support- 
 ed by the testimony of J. R. Van Rensselaer and Charles Newbold, one of the 
 agents and directors of the Bank of America. 
 
 Judge Van Ness, it appeared, had exerted his influence in favor of granting the 
 charter for the bank, and the fact that he had received five thousand dollars, which 
 came originally from that institution, was urged as an evidence that his motives 
 were impure. But Mr Williams testified that the federalist-;, as a party, were ani-
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YOKK. 521 
 
 The governor in his speech at the opening of the 
 session recommended the call of a convention with pow- 
 ers (limited in the act by which the call should be made) 
 to abolish the council of appointment, and consider on 
 such other amendments to the constitution as should be 
 designated by the legislature. Had he done this one year 
 before, and his friends supported his recommendation, it 
 would probably have been better for him and for the state 
 also. 
 
 A bill was brought in and discussed, but as the assem y^ 
 bly greatly differed, not only about the details but the 
 principles which ought to be embraced in it, it failed of 
 becoming a law. Most of the Bucktails were for calling 
 a convention with unlimited powers. 
 
 Early in the session, the comptroller communicated to 
 the assembly a history of his proceedings under the act 
 for " the settlement of the accounts of D. D. Tompkins;" 
 stating the difference in opinion between him and the vice- 
 president in relation to the construction of that act, and 
 the reasons upon which his opinion was founded. This 
 communication was referred to a select committee of 
 which Jedediah Miller of Schoharie was chairman. 
 
 On the 16th of March, the committee made a very 
 long and able report, in which they examined wuth 
 great minuteness, the several matters involved in the 
 controversy, and finally recommended the adoption of 
 the following resolution: — 
 
 " Resolvedj as the sense of this house, that the con- 
 duct of the comptroller in regard to the auditing and 
 settling the accounts of Daniel D. Tompkins, Esq. late 
 
 ious to incorporate this company, because it was known that a majority of the stock 
 would be taken up by federalists, and that thus an institution might be created 
 capable of counteracting the political influence of the Manhattan Company. AU 
 who knew Judge Van Ness, well know that he was much more desirous of politi- 
 cal ascendency, than peouni.iry gains. Is it not then easy to account for his "xer- 
 tions in favor of chartering the Bank of America, without imputing to him con apt 
 motives ?
 
 522 POLITICAL HISTORY [1320. 
 
 governor of this state, both previous to, and under the 
 act of the 13th of April, 1819, has been that of a firm, 
 faithful and intelligent public officer, and meets the full 
 and entire approbation of this house." 
 
 The merits of this report were discussed with great 
 ability for many days. Those who most distinguished 
 themselves in support of the views presented by the 
 committee, were, Messrs. Oakley, Spencer, (the speak- 
 er,) E. Williams, McKown, C. H. Ruggles, now a dis- 
 tinguished judge of the third circuit, Ogden of Otsego, 
 Jno. Miller of Cortland, Fox of Warren, H, Camp of 
 Tompkins, and Tibbits of Troy. The most powerful 
 and efficient men in the opposition, were Messrs. Root, 
 Sharpe, Roma.n,Ulshoeffer, J. T. Irving and Seymour. I 
 have said that this assembly contained much talent; of this 
 assertion the debates on this question, and on the proceed- 
 ings against Judge Van Ness, furnished a conclusive and 
 splendid demonstration. I was a member of the house of 
 representatives of the United States, and of course heard 
 the discussions of that body for two successive ses- 
 sions, and I have on several occasions witnessed the 
 debates in the house of commons in England, and al- 
 though in those bodies there were individuals possessing 
 higher qualities as statesmen, and parliamentary orators 
 than in the New-York assembly, yet if the whole num- 
 ber of public speakers in those bodies were compared, 
 with the whole corps of debaters in the assembly of 1820, 
 I do not think the latter would suffer by a comparison 
 with the former. I may be incompetent to judge — I may 
 be partial to the inhabitants of my own state, and of 
 course I may misjudge, but this is my honest opinion. 
 For skill in argument, parliamentary tact, pungency of 
 wit, and clear, sound, logical powers of mind, few men of 
 the age would, I imagine, have excelled Messrs. Oakley, 
 E. Williams, E. Root, J. C. Spencer, Ulshoeffer, Romain,
 
 1B20.] OF NEW-YORK. 523 
 
 and McKown. The last named gentleman was a young 
 member, and distinguished himself most in the discussions 
 which grew out of the resolution of inquiry into the con- 
 duct of Judge Van Ness, proposed by Gen. Root. It is 
 deeply to be regretted, that he did not longer continue a 
 member of our legislative assemblies. His talents which 
 are of the first order, seemed to me to be particularly 
 adapted for usefulness in those bodies. 
 
 On the 12th of January, Mr. Van Buren offered a reso- 
 lution in the senate, calling on the comptroller to report 
 to that house whether the accounts between the state and 
 T>. D. Tompkins had been settled according to the act of 
 the last session, and if not, then to transmit to the senate 
 a copy of the claim which had been exhibited by the 
 late governor against the state, and generally the action 
 of the comptroller on that subject. 
 
 In answer to this call, Mr. Mclntyre presented a con- 
 cise view of the transactions between him and the vice- 
 president on that subject; and that answer was referred to 
 a select committee of which Mr. Van Buren was chair- 
 man. 
 
 On the 9th of March, the last mentioned committee 
 made an able and eloquent report to the senate, in which 
 they reviewed the proceedings under the act of the last 
 session, and arrived at the conclusion that the comptroller 
 ought to have allowed Gov. Tompkins a premium of twelve 
 and a half per cent on one million fifty thousand dollars, 
 which would produce one hundred and thirty-one thousand 
 two hundred and fifty dollars; and would leave a balance 
 due him according to the estimate of the committee, of 
 eleven thousand eight hundred and seventy dollars and 
 fifty cents; and they reported a bill for the payment to 
 the late governor of that balance, upon his releasing all his 
 claims against the state.
 
 524 POLITICAL HISTORY L^S^O. 
 
 It may be proper to state that it was admitted by 
 the vice-president and his friends, that the services for 
 which he claimed compensation were rendered to the Uni- 
 ted States, and that the losses he had sustained had been 
 incurred in their service, and therefore, that the United 
 States government and not the state of New- York, ought 
 to remunerate hirri for those serivces and losses, and accord- 
 ingly the original bill directed the comptroller to debit the 
 United States witli the amount of money allowed by him 
 to the vice-president for sercives, &.c. 
 
 When the report of the committee, together with the bill 
 came up in the senate, the argument which one would 
 naturally have supposed would have been rather a dry law 
 argument upon the construction of the act of 1819, and 
 the intention of the legislature in passing it, probably 
 with a view of exciting odium against the comptroller, 
 was chiefly directed to the items which had been claimed 
 by the vice-president, and rejected by the comptroller. 
 This course of argument however was excusable, because 
 in discussing the same question in the assembly, the Clin- 
 tonians had criticised with great severity many of the 
 charges made by the vice-president, probably with a view 
 of exciting public odium against him. 
 
 The only speech made in support of the report and bill, 
 was made by Mr. Van Buren. It occupied a part of two 
 days, and was one of the most ingenious, able and elo- 
 quent speeches I ever heard. It has been the custom of 
 the opponents of this gentleman, both in the state and 
 nation, to give him credit for great tact and management as 
 a mere politician, and to deny that he possesses those high 
 and exalted powers of mind which always distinguish the 
 great statesman and the commanding parliamentary orator. 
 But any fair minded man, who has heard Mr. Van Buren on 
 great and important questions in our legislative assemblies, 
 whether state or national, will not hesitate to award him
 
 1820.] OF NEw-roRK. 525 
 
 the meed of high merit. It is on these occasions and 
 more especially in his efforts as a lawyer in our highest 
 courts of judicature, that Mr. Van Buren has afforded 
 decisive demonstration of the most commanding and 
 splendid intellectual powers. In the senate, the opposition 
 to the report and bill was feeble. Mr. Granger after- 
 wards published a written argument, which in conse- 
 quence of ill-health, was not delivered in the senate, pur- 
 porting to be an answer to Mr. Van Buren, but it had lit- 
 tle effect on the public mind. 
 
 The report was concurred in, and the bill was passed 
 by a majority of nearly two to one. 
 
 When this bill from the senate came into the assembly, 
 it was referred to a committee of which Mr. Oakley was 
 chairman. On the 6th of April, he made a report against 
 it. That report assumed that the proceedings of the 
 comptroller, had been, in the judgment of the committee, 
 correct; that no further legislation than that contained in 
 the act of 1819, ought to be had on the subject; that the 
 vice-president must seek his relief under that law, in the 
 same way, and on the same footing of all other citizens; 
 and that he ought to be satisfied with the construction 
 which should be given to the statute by the judicial tribu- 
 nals of the country, and with a view to obtain that con- 
 struction, the committee recommended an amendment to 
 the senate's bill by striking out the whole of it except 
 the enacting clause, and inserting in lieu thereof a provi- 
 sion requiring the comptroller in case the vice-president 
 should not pay the balance declared at the accounting 
 office to be due from him, by the first day of August, then 
 next, to commence a suit against him for the recovery of 
 the same; in which suit the vice-president should be permit- 
 ted to offesett his claim for premiums under the act of 1819. 
 
 This report was confirmed by the majority in the assem-
 
 526 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 biy, and the bill passed as amended by the select com 
 mittee; and here all action in the two houses ended. 
 
 In conclusion, I have to remark, that notwithstanding 
 this controversy continued so long in the legislature, and 
 among the people, and excited so much asperity and bit- 
 terness, the real object of the two parties, so far as the 
 same was to be effected by legislation, did not materially 
 differ. Both parties admitted that the services of Gov. 
 Tompkins during the war, had been great and arduous; both 
 admitted that he had not intentionally wasted or appro- 
 priated to his own use the public moneys; both admitted 
 the comptroller to be a correct, able and faithful ac- 
 counting officer; both were willing and desirous that the 
 accounts of the vice-president with the state should be 
 balanced without the payment by him of a single cent, 
 and neither would consent that after balancins: his ac 
 counts any considerable sum should be paid to him. The 
 difference so far as principle was concerned, consisted in 
 the manner of doing that which all believed ought to be 
 done. The one party desired to pay him^ as a debt, say 
 one hundred and twenty thousand dollars; the other wish- 
 ed to allow him that sum in consideration of his losses, 
 and as a gratuitous reward for his services. Had a bill 
 been brought in, reciting those services and losses, and 
 the confused state of the vice-president's vouchers, and 
 accounts, and directing the comptroller in consideration 
 thereof, to balance his accounts, it must in any stage of 
 this controversy have passed both houses unanimously; and 
 such should have been the bill passed in 1819. The notion 
 of charging the amount allowed to the vice-president, to 
 the United States, was a humbug, and known to be such. 
 Hence it is most evident that the reason the controversy 
 assumed the shape it ultimately did, and of the adverse 
 action of the two houses was, that both parties thought
 
 1820.] OF NEW- YORK. 527 
 
 they could make political capital out of it, and each par- 
 ty thought it could make more than the other. 
 
 On the I8th of January, a caucus of republican mem- 
 bers of the legislature opposed to the re-election of Gov. 
 Clinton, was held at the capitol. Sixty-four members 
 were in attendance, of whom, fifty-two on balloting voted 
 for Tompkins as the candidate for governor, and he was 
 therefore declared duly nominated. 
 
 Gen. Benjamin Mooers of Plattsburgh, of the senate, 
 was nominated the candidate for lieutenant governor. 
 
 Gen. Mooers had been nominated and elected at the 
 very last election a senator from the eastern district, by 
 the Clintonians as a Clintonian. Here is another instance 
 of a senator elected, professing to belong to one party 
 and immediately or shortly after, declaring himself to be 
 of the other. This is a sort of political swindling, — a 
 cheating by false pretences. Probably Gen. Mooers did 
 'not take this view of the question, for he was apparently 
 an amiable and good man, and I believe, as a neighbor 
 and citizen, was universally esteemed. 
 
 The republican friends of Gov. Clinton in the legisla- 
 ture were at this session in the minority. It was not, 
 therefore, thought judicious to make a legislative nomina- 
 tion. In order to prevent a public exhibition of the mea- 
 greness of our number, making a merit of necessity, we af- 
 fected to disapprove of selections of gubernatorial candi- 
 dates by legislative caucuses. Mr. Clinton and John Tay- 
 ler were nominated for re-election at a meeting of the 
 citizens of Albany, of which Mr. William James was 
 chairman. 
 
 The state candidates of both parties were now in the 
 field, and the campaign was fairly and vigorously opened. 
 
 On the 11th of April, a most singular document, hav- 
 ing reference to the coming election, was issued from the 
 press at Albany, and circulated through the state.
 
 528 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 Ever since, and perhaps before the contest for speaker 
 in 1819, and for an United States senator during the 
 same session, a party among the federalists, of whom 
 William A. Duer of Albany, and Charles King of New- 
 York, were the most active, seemed to have been formed 
 with the avowed object at all events of putting down De 
 Witt Clinton. 
 
 The sons of the late Gen. Hamilton and of Mr. Rufus 
 King, early and unanimously formed a part of this asso- 
 ciation. From an article published by Mr. William Cole- 
 man in the Evening Post, a few days after the election in 
 1820, it appears that he too was inclined to join in the 
 combination. From a community of feeling, prejudices, 
 principles, interests and views, several distinguished federal 
 gentlemen residing in various counties in the state, also 
 united eventually with them in political action. One of 
 the strongest objections they seemed to have entertained 
 against Mr. Clinton, was that his party partook of the' 
 character of a personal party; that those whom he was 
 most inclined to favor, were continually lauding him, and 
 that there was among his confidential friends and favor- 
 ites a total want of independence, of character and a sup- 
 pleness of disposition, (which by the by may have been 
 partially true when applied to many of Mr. C.'s old 
 friends in New- York,) disgusting to the feelings of all 
 truly high minded and honorable men who entertained a 
 decent self respect. From frequently urging this view 
 of the character of Gov. Clinton and his confidential 
 friends, this class of federalists acquired the name of 
 " HIGH minded" federalists. 
 
 On the 14th of April, these gentlemen, to the number 
 of fifty, issued an address to the people containing an ex- 
 pose of their political views, and avowing their determi- 
 nation to support the election of Mr. Tompkins, and the 
 reason upon which that determination rested. This is the
 
 1820.] 
 
 OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 529 if 
 
 document which I have characterised as singular; and I 
 do so, not on account of the determination made by its 
 signers, but because of the reasons given by them for such 
 determination; and here let me remark, that so formida- 
 ble an array of talent, wealth, influence in society, and 
 indeed personal worth, embracing so many men and so 
 scattered through the state, I do not believe, can be found 
 .n the annals of our political parties, who combined 
 for the accomplishment of a single political object, but 
 who carried so few of the rank and file men with them, 
 as did these fifty high minded federalists. 
 
 To show that I do not overrate the talents, standing and 
 weight of character of these gentlemen, I give the names 
 of those who signed the address which fell under my 
 observation : 
 
 Peter Jay Monroe, 
 J. O. Hoffman, 
 Jonathan Hasbrouck, 
 Geo. D. Wickham, 
 Morris S. Miller, 
 Melancthon Wheeler, 
 Levi Callendar, 
 Joshua Whitney, 
 John Suydam, 
 R. W. Stoddard, 
 David Hudson, 
 H. Montgomery, 
 H. B. Bender, 
 Geo. W. Tibbits, 
 Thomas Mumford, 
 John A. King, 
 Elisha B. Strong, 
 Geo. F. Tallraan, 
 Joshua A. De Witt, 
 Charles A. Foot, 
 
 34 
 
 James Lynch, 
 Glen Cuyler, 
 John L. Wendell, 
 Charles King, 
 A. B. Hasbrouck, 
 T. S. Morgan, 
 JeS"rey Wisner, 
 James A. Hamilton, 
 Ebenezer Griffin, 
 John C. Morris, 
 Livingston Billings, 
 Tracy Robinson, 
 Johnson Verplanck, 
 Henry Brown, 
 Thomas J. Delancy, 
 Thos. G. Waterman^ 
 John C. Hamilton, 
 John Duer, 
 Jas. Clapp, 
 Wm. P. Sherman,
 
 530 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 Isaac Dubois, Elisha Ely 
 
 Zeb. R. Shepherd, H. Yanderlyn, 
 
 Alanson Austin, W. W. Mumford, 
 
 Garrit Post, Wm. A. Duer. 
 
 In their address, they commence by affirming that the 
 federal party — a party of which they claim to have been 
 members, and of whose principles they profess their entire 
 approbation, no longer exists. They say, as a party it is 
 dissolved and annihilated, and that even the bonds " of 
 mutual confidence and private regard dive severed, perhaps 
 forever." 
 
 They approve of the doings and administration of the 
 general government, and they affirm that the federalists 
 have now " no ground of principle," on which to stand, 
 and therefore declare their intention of uniting with the 
 great republican party of the state and union. They do 
 not object to the capacity of Mr. Clinton, to his morals 
 nor to the measures he had recommended. The sole 
 ground of objection against him is, that they allege he 
 is attempting to form " a personal party." 
 
 The palpable absurdity with which this address strikes 
 my mind is this, that while every school boy in the state 
 knew that Mr. Van Buren and his friends entirely approved 
 of the measures recommended by Gov. Clinton, admitted 
 his competence as to talents, and his virtues as a private 
 citizen, and that they opposed him solely and exclusively 
 on the ground that the federal party did exist in the state, 
 and that Mr. Clinton was secretly inclined to favor it; 
 yet the high minded gentlemen opposed Mr. Clinton 
 because, as they alleged, the federal party did not existj 
 and thereupon joined the party who held the contrary 
 position. 
 
 The case presents this most extraordinary spectacle. 
 Two parties unite to oppose the election of a governor, 
 neither of which charge upon him a want of capacity, or
 
 1820.] or NEW-YORK. 531 
 
 integrity, or utter a solitary complaint against his mea- 
 sures. The one party declare that the federal party does 
 not exist; and yet it joins the other, " the great republi- 
 can party," whose only bond of union is a belief that the 
 federal party does exist, which proposition the high 
 minded men had publicly avowed was untrue. Such are 
 some of the inconsistencies of politicians! 
 
 The election was very close. The anti-Clintonian 
 party, which now fairly deserves to be denominated the 
 republican party, succeeded in electing a majority of the 
 members of the assembly, and in two of the senatorial 
 districts, notwithstanding which, Mr. Clinton was re- 
 elected by a majority of one thousand four hundred and 
 fifty-seven votes. 
 
 The senators this year elected were Walter Bowne and 
 John Lefferts, from the southern; Wm. C. Bouck, Tilly 
 Lynde, and John Miller, from the middle; Ephraim Hart, 
 Oliver Forward and Elijah Mills, from the western dis 
 tricts.
 
 532 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 CHAPTER XXVI. 
 
 FROM MAY 1, 18iJ0, TO MAY 1, 1821, 
 
 The result of the election, so far as respects political 
 power, was a complete triumph to the opponents of the 
 governor. In the senate they had for some time had a 
 strong majority, and the new senators elected added to 
 that majority. In the assembly the majority against the 
 governor was eighteen. How did it happen that Mr. 
 Clinton, when his friends were slain around him, after a 
 competition with a man who, perhaps, was personally 
 more popular than any man the state ever produced, 
 should have walked off the field in triumph ? 
 
 Among the causes to which this result is to be ascribed, 
 the following appear to me most prominent: 
 
 The people are always sensitive, and justly so, in rela- 
 tion to the management and expenditure of their money. 
 If the vice-president was popular as a governor, Mr. Mc- 
 Intyre -was equally so as a citizen, and as a faithful guar- 
 dian of the treasury; and no doubt many of the personal 
 and political friends of the late governor suspected that 
 there was something wrong in his accounts, and in his 
 management of the public funds, and withheld from him 
 their votes on that account; and I think the inference 
 may be fairly sustained, that he lost more from the suspi- 
 cion, than he gained from the sympathy of his republican 
 friends. 
 
 Notwithstanding the division produced by the corps of 
 high minded federalists, ihe great body of the federalists 
 gave Mr. Clinton a more unanimous support than they 
 had done either Mr. Burr or Gov. Lewis. As a party, 
 the name of Tompkins, was peculiarly odious to them.
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YORK. 533 
 
 Their repeated, though unsuccessful contests with him, 
 had increased, rather than diminished their hostility. Mr. 
 Clinton, had never deceived them. From the year 
 1813, when he and many of his most devoted friends sup- 
 ported Van Rensselaer against Tompkins, he had never 
 made professions to them which he had not endeavored to 
 fulfil. They admired his indomitable firmness and moral 
 courage. 
 
 Intelligent men of all parties entertained a high regard 
 for his talents. On all occasions Clinton manifested great 
 respect for literary merit, and the institutions of science. 
 This brought into his support the friends and patrons of 
 those institutions, and, generally, the scientific men of the 
 state. 
 
 But the most effectual cause of his triumph was the 
 able, ardent, and uniform support he had given to the ca- 
 nal policy. He had, from the origin of that policy, com- 
 mitted himself in its favor, and had boldly staked his po- 
 litical fortunes on its issue. He was its uncompromising 
 friend, while we have seen that Gov. Tompkins had stu- 
 diously avoided any direct commitment in favor of the 
 measure, and many of his most ardent supporters, particu- 
 larly in the southern district of the state, were yet open 
 and virulent opponents of the whole scheme of internal 
 improvements. The shrewd, clear sighted yankee farmers 
 of the west saw and appreciated all this. Hence the 
 strong majorities for Clinton in the great republican coun- 
 ties of Ontario and Geneseej and hence the majorities for 
 him m the eastern and western districts, those districts 
 being most directly interested in the accomplishment of 
 the great work. The returns of the election showed a 
 majority for De Witt Clinton, in the eastern district, of 
 two thousand three hundred and fifty-two, and, in the 
 western, three thousand four hundred and fifty-two, while 
 the middle district gave the vice-president a majority of
 
 534 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 one thousand one hundred and sixteen, and the southern 
 three thousand two hundred and thirty-one. 
 
 The result of the election however, had, in every part of 
 xhe state except the western district, and a small portion 
 of the eastern, drawn together and formed into one body 
 nearly all the old republican party, in opposition to the 
 executive authority of the state. 
 
 This state of things was extremely awkward and embar- 
 rassing to the few republicans who still continued to yield 
 to the governor their support. We felt that we were a 
 mere handful of men dependent on the federalists for our 
 political existence. We knew that that party, whom we 
 had formerly so zealously, and some of us efficiently op- 
 posed, were as well aware of the true state of things as 
 we could be. Perhaps it was jealousy — perhaps it was 
 unfounded suspicion — but I confess I thought the federal- 
 ists regarded us as an incumbrance upon them; or rather, 
 somewhat as the rich man regards his poor relatives, who 
 have been cast upon his charity and whom he feels bound 
 in honor to maintain, although the expenditure for that 
 maintenance goes to diminish an estate which he has a 
 right exclusively to enjoy. 
 
 But, if the federalists did entertain these feelings, had 
 we any cause of complaining of them on that account ? 
 From the nature of the case were not those feelings ex- 
 tremely natural ? We were a fraction of the republican 
 party, which party held the control of the state. We 
 detached ourselves from the majority of our party and by 
 the aid of the federalists, since the commencement of the 
 year 1819, had controlled the patronage and political 
 power of the state, and yet, we still professed to be op- 
 posed to the federalists. We declared that our opinions of 
 their principles and measures remained unchanged, and we, 
 who were a small minority, when compared with the 
 federalists, and a still smaller minority of the republican
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YORK. 535 
 
 party, claimed an almost exclusive controlj and vastly 
 more than our share, of the state patronage. Was this 
 reasonable 1 Could such a state of things last 1 To 
 illustrate its absurdity I will suppose the federal and re- 
 publican parties, in 1819, to have consisted of twelve men 
 only; seven of whom were republicans and five federalists. 
 I will suppose that A. and B.,two of the republicans, de- 
 tach themselves from the seven, and by the aid of the five 
 federalists seize upon the state patronage and use it all, or 
 nearly all, for their own benefit. It is most evident that 
 so unfair and unequal a state of things could not long ex- 
 ist. The five federalists, knowing that A. and B. held 
 power entirely at their pleasure, would either seize it 
 themselves, or a portion of them would go over to the five 
 republicans, with whom they could, at least, have an equal 
 share in the division of the spoils. 
 
 It is most obvious that one or two axioms may be de- 
 duced from this view of the matter. First — that there 
 can, (in general,) be but two political parties in a free 
 state. Second — that when a fractional portion of the party 
 in the majority differ in opinion with the majority of their 
 party, and if that difference is so fundamentally important 
 as, in their judgment, would render the success of the ad- 
 verse party beneficial to the country, they ought to with- 
 draw from their old associates and join as rank and file 
 men the adverse party; but in no case ought they to at- 
 tempt to form a third party, in expectation of the aid of 
 the minority party of the two great parties. It is an ex- 
 pectation which can never, from the nature and constitu- 
 tion of man and of human society, be realized. 
 
 True it is, if an individual believes the object and end 
 of both the great political parties to be injurious to the 
 country, he has the right, and it may be his duty to with- 
 draw himself entirely from the political field; and if there 
 be a sufficient number of individuals who entertain similar
 
 536 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 Views, a new party may be formed; but in this case it is 
 the duty of the new, or third party, to make war indis- 
 criminately on each of the two existing parties. But such 
 a state of things can seldom exist long. It is as unnatu- 
 ral as a battle between three ships at sea, each fighting 
 against the other two. 
 
 The title of the Albany Register was, about this time, 
 changed to that of the New-York Statesman, and it was 
 now under the exclusive management of Mr. Carter. 
 
 On the 25th of August Judge Buel transferred all his 
 interest in the Albany Argus to Moses I. Cantine and 
 Isaac Q. Leake. Mr. Cantine, it will be recollected, was 
 a brother-in-law of Mr. Van Buren. 
 
 That paper, under the judicious and prudent control of 
 Mr. Buel, had acquired a very great and commanding in- 
 fluence in the democratic party. A more discreet newspa- 
 per editor than Mr. B. could not be selected from the whole 
 corps editorial in the state. Although not brilliant, he 
 was wise; but the profits accruing from the state printing 
 were, and are, very considerable, and Mr. Buel had, by 
 industry and good management, acquired a handsome for- 
 tune during the six years he had been state printer; it was 
 therefore, thought reasonable that he should give place to 
 other personSjwho were supposed to have equal, or perhaps 
 superior claims on the democratic party. The contract 
 was probably, in reality, made, rather with the leaders of 
 the democratic party than with Messrs. Cantine and Leake 
 — the last named gentleman stipulating to pay Mr. Buel 
 a round sum of money for his printing establishment and 
 the favor to it, and the party leaders agreeing that Cantine 
 and Leake, who, by the by, were both entirely ignorant 
 of the printing business, one of them having been bred a 
 lawyer and the other brought up in a bank, should be ap- 
 pointed state printers. This bargain was ultimately car-
 
 1S20.] OF NEW-YORK. 537 
 
 ried into effect, and sanctioned by an act of the legisla- 
 ture. 
 
 On the same 25th day of August a meeting was held at 
 Tammany Hall, of which Stephen Allen was chairman, 
 and Adrian Hagerman secretary; at which it was resolved 
 that a convention, with unlimited powers to amend the 
 constitution, ought to be called. 
 
 Heretofore the republicans opposed to Mr. Clinton, as 
 well as those who supported him, had differed in opinion 
 in relation to the details of a bill for the call of a conven- 
 tion. The re-eleetion of Mr. Clinton had probably pro- 
 duced, in the ranks of the democracy, an unanimity of 
 opinion on that subject. They perceived that the only 
 sure means of ridding themselves of him, was by a change 
 of some of the principles of the government; and they 
 availed themselves, with great skill and adroitness, of the 
 propensity of the people for an alteration of the constitu- 
 tion, to effect that object. I speak now, not of the mass, 
 but of some of the considerations which probably influ- 
 enced mere politicians. 
 
 The meeting at Tammany was, no doubt, the result o^ 
 a consultation of the party leaders in the state; for the 
 democratic newspapers generally, throughout the country, 
 now advocated a convention with powers unrestricted. 
 
 On account of the approaching presidential election a 
 session cf the legislature, in November, was required for 
 the appointment of electors. 
 
 Peter Sharpe, of New-York, was elected speaker of the ^ 
 assembly. He received sixty-nine votes for that office, 
 and John C. Spencer fifty-two. Derick L. Vanderheyden 
 was chosen clerk by the following vote; — D. L. Vander- 
 heyden sixty-three, and Aaron Clarke sixty-two votes. 
 Mr. Clark was an excellent clerk, but not a very decided 
 politician; both parties claimed him, or rather he occa- 
 sionally claimed both parties. A majority of the reformed
 
 538 POLITICAL HISTORY [1820. 
 
 democratic party was now found, but barely strong 
 enough to oust him by one vote. In a pecuniary point 
 of view, and perhaps in all other respects, his ejection 
 from the clerkship of the assembly was beneficial to him. 
 He removed shortly afterwards to New- York, and I 
 scarcely need add, he has since been twice elected mayor 
 of that city. 
 
 The governor's speech, which was written with his usual 
 ability, contained many highly important suggestions and 
 recommendations. 
 
 He advised the passage of a law for the choice of presi- 
 dential electors by the people, by general ticket, to con- 
 tinue in force until the United States constitution should 
 be so amended as to require the electors to be chosen in 
 separate districts, throughout the union. 
 
 He protested against the interference of the officers of 
 the national government with our state elections. On that 
 subject, he said: — " Our government is complex in its or- 
 ganization, and it is essentially necessary to preserve the 
 state governments in their purity and energy. A free 
 government could never exist in a country so extensive as 
 the United States, without a judicious combination of the 
 federal and representative principles. The apprehensions 
 which some of our wisest statesmen entertained, at the 
 formation of the constitution, that the state governments 
 would constantly encroach on the powers of the national 
 government, appear not to have been realized. The prac- 
 tical tendency has been in the opposite direction. The 
 power of the general administration has increased with 
 the extension of its patronage. And if the officers under 
 its appointment shall see fit, as an organized and disci- 
 plined corps, to interfere in the state elections, I trust that 
 there will be found a becoming disposition in the people, 
 to resist these alarming attempts upon the purity and inde- 
 pendence of their local governments: for, whenever the
 
 1820.] OF NEW-YOHK. 539 
 
 pillars which support the edifice of the general govern- 
 ment are undermined and prostrated, the whole fabric of 
 national freedom and prosperity will be crushed in ruin. 
 I have considered it my solemn duty to protest against 
 these unwarrantable intrusions of extraneous influence, and 
 I hope that the national legislature will not be regardless 
 of its duty on this occasion." 
 
 He also again recommended a state convention to amend 
 the constitution, to be binding on the following conditions* 
 
 First — That the question whether a convention should 
 be called, should be submitted to the people and decided 
 by them by a majority of votes at the polls of election; 
 and second — if a convention should be in this way called, 
 that their doings should again be submitted to the people 
 for their confirmation or rejection. 
 
 On the eighth of November, the second day after the 
 legislature convened, the assembly proceeded to choose a 
 council of appointment; and the following was the result 
 of the vote: — southern district, Walter Bowne, seventy- 
 one; middle, John T. Moore, seventy-one; eastern, Roger 
 Skinner, seventy-one; western, David E. Evans, seventy- 
 one. The Clintonian candidates were Townsend, Ross, 
 Frothingham and Barstow, who each received fifty-four 
 votes. 
 
 All the members of the new elected council were politi- 
 cally hostile to the governor, and all, except Mr. Evans, 
 were particularly and especially so. The propriety of se- 
 lecting Mr. Skinner for a councillor, was questioned with 
 great plausibility. He had been, about a year before, ap- 
 pointed United States judge of the northern district of 
 New- York, an office which had become vacant by the 
 death of Judge Talmadge. In more early, and perhaps it 
 might not be too much to say, purer days of the republic, 
 that same senate of which Judge Skinner was a member, 
 had resolved that the holding of an office under the United
 
 540 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 States was incompatible with a seat in the New-York le- 
 gislature. But here, it was not only determined that Mr. 
 Skinner should continue to hold his seat, to which no one 
 at that time objected, but that he should be thrust into the 
 very whirlpool — the vortex — of party operations and man- 
 agement. This certainly was wrong, and the condemna- 
 tion of the practice has been distinctly pronounced by an 
 amendment to the constitution, which was proposed by 
 the convention of 1822, and sanctioned by the people. 
 
 The new council did not meet until the next winter's 
 session. 
 
 On the next day the presidential electors were chosen 
 without, I believe, any serious disagreement. The Clin- 
 tonians, however, held up candidates, but the republican 
 ticket, headed by William Floyd and Henry Rutgers, as 
 state electors, succeeded by a majority of eighteen in the 
 assembly and eight in the senate. 
 ^ Gen. Root brought in a bill declaring that slavery 
 could not exist in this state, being inconsistent with its 
 constitution and laws. Upon the principles contended for 
 by Mr. Root, the bill was, of necessity, declaratory in its 
 character. He contended that the Declaration of Inde- 
 pendence was the fundamental law of the land, in all 
 those states which claimed, or admitted, that that instru- 
 ment was framed by their agentsj and that it especially 
 made a part of the constitutional law of New-York, be- 
 cause it was actually incorporated into our constitution. 
 
 That declaration declared that all men were born free 
 and equal, and that life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- 
 ness was the inalienable right of all. It resulted, as a self 
 evident truth, that if all men were born free and equal no 
 person could be born a slave. 
 
 Gen. Root, however, was not able to get a vote taken 
 on the merits of his bill. It was postponed.
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 541 
 
 I copy the following very imperfect sketch of the last 
 remarks of Mr. Root, on this subject, from the New- York 
 Statesman. Every person who has heard him when exci- 
 ted in debate, will readily perceive that the sketch fur- 
 nished by the report cannot have done justice to the spea- 
 ker: — 
 
 " Mr. Root hoped for the indulgence of the committee, 
 for once more occupying the floor in defence of the prin- 
 ciples of this bill. The gentlemen from Orange, (Mr. 
 3ofland,) has cited the common law of England, and co- 
 lonial precedent, as authority for justifying and legalizing 
 slavery in this state. Mr. R. said, that after the revolu- 
 tion a statute was passed by this state, declaring that after 
 the first day of May, 1788, the common law of England, 
 and the laws of the colony, should not continue in force 
 any farther than such laws were applicable to our republi- 
 can institutions and customs. But even the common law 
 of England does not sanction the existence of slavery at 
 home. It was true, that in the earlier periods of English 
 history, while the feudal system was yet in vogue, a spe- 
 cies of slaves, called villains, were held in bondage by the 
 iron-handed barons. But this barbarous age had gone by, 
 and Magna Charta had annulled this system of vassalage. 
 Slaves could not now breath in England. True, she gra- 
 ciously permitted slavery to exist in her colonies ; but we 
 were not compelled to abide by a custom which she had 
 tolerated. In reply to his friend from New-York, Mr. R. 
 observed that a very considerable proportion of our statutes 
 are merely declaratory, setting forth principles which are 
 found in the constitution. He wished gentlemen to look 
 at the preamble of the constitution — there was to be found 
 the interpretation of that charter of our citizens. He 
 referred also to the Declaration of Independence, as con- 
 taining the principles of this bill. Our constitution is 
 based upon that Declaration, which is explicit upon the
 
 542 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 equal rights of all men. Out of that sacred soil, said Mr. 
 R.J our constitution, and all our laws spring; and we can- 
 not tear up that soil without defacing it. He inquired, if 
 people would confine themselves to paper constitutions — 
 if they would not look abroad beyond these narrow con- 
 fines of right and wrong — if they would not recur to first 
 principles — to the laws of nature and of nature's God — to 
 the foundations of equity and justice. Before these broad 
 and fundamental principles, the laws of men ought to 
 vanish like a mist before the beams of the sun. The gen- 
 tleman from New-York asks time to read the constitution! 
 Will that gentleman acknowledge that he is not acquaint- 
 ed with the constitution 1 He was, however, willing to 
 give time for reflection; but the sooner the bill passed, the 
 better for the state. Mr. R. concluded with hoping that 
 the committee would pass the first clause of the bill, and 
 then go to dinner." 
 
 It appeared, from a report of the attorney general, that 
 he had commenced a suit against the vice-president, in be- 
 half of the state, to recover the balance due from him as 
 reported by the comptroller. 
 
 On the 10th November Mr. Skinner brought a bill into 
 the senate, accompanied with a release of all claims of 
 Mr. Tompkins against the state, which bill declared the 
 acceptance, on the part of the state, of the release, and 
 directed the comptroller to cause it to be filed and there- 
 upon to balance his accounts. 
 
 This bill, after some feeble opposition, rather to the 
 haste with which action on the bill was pressed, than to its 
 principles, passed both houses and became a law. Thus 
 this question, which had produced so much discussion in 
 the legislature, and controversy among the people, was 
 finally put at rest. 
 
 The great and absorbing question which occupied the 
 attention of the legislature, and the public generally, du-
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 543 
 
 ring this sessiorij was the call of a convention to amend 
 the constitution. The democratic party now held a majo- 
 rity in both branches of the legislature, and judging from 
 the returns of members of assembly at the spring elections, 
 and from more recent demonstrations of public opinion in 
 various parts of the state, no discreet man could doubt but 
 that, if a convention should be authorized, a large majo- 
 rity of the delegates would be republican. They, there- 
 fore, wisely determined to do what I pressed upon the 
 Clintonians to do, in 1818 and 1819, which was, to get up 
 a convention while they had the power of controlling it. 
 It was one of Mr. Van Buren's maxims, that that which 
 ought to be done should be done quickly. — A sound max- 
 im, applicable to most of the concerns of human life. 
 Much may be lost, and seldom any thing can be gained by 
 delay. 
 
 That part of the governor's speech pertaining to a con- 
 veniion was referred to a committee, of which Mr. Ul- 
 shoeffer was chairman. The committee, with great promp- 
 titude, reported a bill for the call of a convention with 
 unlimited powers, whose doings were to be submitted to 
 the people, and confirmed or rejected, as they should think 
 proper. 
 
 This bill came up for discussion, in the assembly, on the 
 15th November. All the members professed to be in fa- 
 vor of the principle of the bill, and the first clause of it 
 passed unanimously; but they differed in relation to the 
 details, and the proper time for considering it. The Clin- 
 tonians wished to postpone action on the question until 
 the regular session in the winterj and Mr. J. C. Spencer, 
 from Ontario, contended that the counties ought to be 
 represented in a ratio proportioned to the present number 
 of inhabitants, which might be done if action on the sub- 
 ject should be put off till the next winter, because the re- 
 turns of the United States census, then being taken, would
 
 544 POLITICAL HISTORY [IS-^l. 
 
 be before them in February. He showed that some of the 
 western counties would then be entitled to nearly double 
 their present representation. Mr. Ford argued that the 
 question whether there should or should not be a conven- 
 tion with unlimited powers, ought first to be submitted to 
 the people. 
 
 It is due to candor and truth to state, that the Clinto- 
 nians, as a party, were, notwithstanding their vote on the 
 first clause of the bill, opposed to any convention with 
 unlimited powers. They believed that the action of the 
 convention would be exclusively controlled by the repub- 
 lican party, and they feared that would be done, which 
 eventually was done, namely, that the judiciary system 
 would be abolished and a new one established, by which 
 the judges and chancellor would be, if I may be allowed 
 to coin a word, constitutionized out of oflSce. Notwith- 
 standing the legal learning and talents, and integrity of 
 the judges of the supreme court, much of popular preju- 
 dice had accumulated against them, principally, if not 
 solely, in consequence of their interference with political 
 concerns; and, as the judges belonged to different parties, 
 citizens, who were members of each party, had felt dissat- 
 isfied w^ith such occasional interference. There were, too, 
 a great number of ambitious young lawyers in the state 
 who acted with the democratic party, who, it may fairly be 
 presumed, had their eyes upon some of the great offices 
 then secured to the incumbents by the constitution, and 
 w^ho did not fail to encourage those jealousies and fan the 
 embers of animosity against the judges and chancellor. 
 Of all this the Clintonians in the assembly were fully 
 aware, and they therefore made use of every effort to pre- 
 vent an immediate call of a convention. On the other 
 hand, it is, in my judgment, very evident that the leading 
 republicans would not have consented to the proposed 
 convention had not Mr. Clinton been re-elected, and had
 
 1821.] OF NEW- YORK. 545 
 
 they not entertained a well founded belief that they could 
 control the essential action of a convention when formed. 
 I make this assertion from my knowledge of the men, 
 and from the fact that until the present session they 
 apparently, by a tacit understanding among themselves, 
 disagreed as to the details of a bill for the organization 
 of a convention. In justice to Gen. Root, however, I 
 ought to remark that his action on that question for three 
 successive sessions was perfectly uniform and consistent; 
 but the chairman of the committee Mr. UlshocfFer, had the 
 session next preceding the present, contended that the 
 question of convention or no convention ought first to be 
 submitted to the people, and had himself offered the very 
 amendment to the bill then under consideration, now pro- 
 posed and advocated by Mr. Ford, and which Mr. Ul- 
 shoefFer now vehemently opposed. 
 
 All attempts to postpone, or alter the material features 
 of the bill, by the minority, both in the senate and assem- 
 bly, finally failed, and it passed both houses on the eigh- 
 teenth of November. 
 
 In the council of revision, the bill was considered on 
 the 20th of November. Mr. Justice Van Ness and Mr. 
 Justice Piatt, were both at that time absept, holding cir- 
 cuit courts. There is, in my mind, little doubt that it had 
 been pre-determined by a majority of the council to veto 
 the bill; and it was supposed that all the members of that 
 body, except Judge Yates, would concur in such vote. 
 None of the members felt a deeper interest than Judges 
 Van Ness and Piatt in preventing a convention, but they 
 probably were desirous of avoiding any direct personal 
 action on the question, and it is not at all improbable that 
 the arrangement, which at this moment called them in the 
 discharge of their official duties from the seat of govern- 
 ment, may have been made at their instance. 
 
 35
 
 546 POLITICAL HISTOR-i [1821. 
 
 Inasmuch as the governor's political existence depended 
 on the popular will, and it was pretty well known that an 
 immense majority of the people were for a convention, 
 either with or without limited powers, and more especially 
 as the governor was committed in favor of a convention 
 with unlimited powers, both he and his friends were desi- 
 rous that he should not be compelled to vote on the bill, 
 and at any rate that he should not vote against it. 
 
 The members of the council who were present at 
 the time the convention bill was considered, were Gov. 
 Clinton, Chancellor Kent, Chief Justice Spencer, Judge 
 Yates and Judge Woodworth. 
 
 The Chancellor was called on for his opinion, and de- 
 clared it against the bill, and the Chief Justice concurred 
 with him. Judge Yates voted in favor of it; but when 
 Judge Woodworth was called on, who all supposed would 
 vote against the bill, to the utter astonishment of the 
 chancellor and chief justice, as well as the extreme em- 
 barrassment of the governor, he voted in favor of it. 
 This produced a tie in the council and compelled the 
 governor to give a casting vote. He did so, and the bill 
 was rejected. 
 
 The propriety of passing the convention bill did, be- 
 yond all doubt, present a question upon which intelligent, 
 honest and patriotic men might differ; and one can hardly 
 perceive why Judge Woodworth should have been con- 
 demned as acting from improper motives when he voted 
 in favor of it. His conduct nevertheless was animadverted 
 upon with great severity, and the purity of his motives 
 impeached. 
 
 The reasons of this attack upon the Judge were, that he 
 had but a short time before claimed to be a prominent 
 member of the Clintonian party; that he had solicited his 
 appointment as judge, upon the ground that he was the 
 political friend of the governor; that his claim had been
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 547 
 
 allowed by the governor and council of appointment, m 
 preference to other candidates, admitted to possess high 
 standing as lawyers, and a high grade of talent; that the 
 passage of a convention bill at that time had become a 
 party question, and that Judge Woodworth ought not 
 at such a juncture to have abandoned his political friends, 
 through whose power and influence he had received a 
 high and important office from which he could not be 
 removed. 
 
 Another imputation was made against Judge Wood- 
 worth, which if unjust was extremely cruel. 
 
 Judge Woodworth had been sued in the supreme court as 
 endorser of a promissory note for several thousand dollars, 
 for James Kane, for whose benefit the note was endorsed, 
 and who had become insolvent. He set up in his defence 
 that the body of the note had been materially altered after 
 he endorsed it. The supreme court gave judgment against 
 the Judge; and he had brought from that judgment, error 
 to the court for correction of errors; which matter was 
 then pending before the court of errors. It was alleged 
 in private circles and publicly talked of, that Judge Wood- 
 worth was induced to give the vote above referred to in 
 the council of revision, in the hope, or in accordance 
 with a secret understanding with the party in the majority 
 in the senate, that that majority would decide that the 
 judgment rendered against him by the supreme court 
 should be reversed. 
 
 Before I go further I may perhaps as well state that the 
 cause came on for argument in the court of errors, in Marchj 
 1821. The reportof the case will be found in 19 John. 391; 
 Woodworth vs. Bank of America. The cause was argued 
 by Talcott and Van Buren for the plaintiff in error, and 
 Hoffman and Henry for the defendants. The opinion of the 
 majority of the court was delivered by senator Skinner 
 in favor of reversing the judgment,and with him seven-
 
 548 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 teen senators concurred. The chancellor delivered an 
 opinion in favor of affirming the judgment, and with him 
 nine senators concurred. Every senator who was for 
 affirming the judgment of the supreme court were Clinto- 
 nians, and every one who voted for reversing, were political 
 opponents to the governor.* This circumstance gave color 
 to the allegation that the judge, in giving his vote as a 
 member of the council of revision, was governed by im- 
 proper motives. I was not present during the whole of 
 the argument, and therefore, according to established 
 usage, did not vote on the question. It is however, per- 
 haps due, in frankness and candor, to Judge Woodworth 
 and the party in the majority, to state that at that time I 
 expressed an opinion, and have ever since retained it, that 
 Judge Woodworth's defence was a good and valid one, 
 and that the judgment of the supreme court was wrong. 
 The note, when endorsed by Woodworth, was not made 
 payable at any particular place. Afte.r he endorsed it 
 Mr. Kane added on the margin of the note the words 
 "payable at the Bank of America." Before those words 
 were added, the endorser could not be made liable unless 
 a demand had been made of the maker personally, or at 
 his usual place of residenoe. By adding those words, (if, 
 as the supreme court assumed, they made a part of the 
 note,) the liability of the endorser was increased, or rather 
 the condition on which the endorser might become liable 
 was altered- for he then became chargable with the debt 
 by a demand of payment of the note at the Bank of Ame- 
 rica, and notice to the endorser of non-payment. This, I 
 then thought, and so informed my friends, and I now 
 think, was such an alteration of the note and of the condi- 
 tions upon which the endorser became liable, as, (being 
 done without his consent,) exonerated him. But I do not 
 mean to discuss the merits of the question. I may be 
 wrpng and when such distinguished jurists as Chancellor
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 549 
 
 Kent, Chief Justice Spencer, and Judges Van Ness and 
 Piatt entertain a contrary opinion, I certainly have good 
 reasons to doubt the soundness of my own opinion. 
 
 Is it necessary to impute improper motives to Judge 
 Woodworth for his vote on the convention bill 1 
 
 It surely does not follow that because he believed De 
 Witt Clinton a more suitable man for governor than Dan- 
 iel D. Tompkins, he was bound to be of opinion that a 
 bill for calling a convention, which had passed the two 
 houses of the legislature, would be pernicious if it became 
 a law. Were the two questions, on their merits, at all 
 connected "? Gov. Clinton himself had recommended the 
 very measure which the bill before the council provided 
 for carrying into effect. True, he had advised that the 
 question whether a convention should or should not be 
 called, ought first to be submitted to the people. But the 
 question had been several years before the New- York 
 public; scarcely a word had been uttered from any quar- 
 ter against the measure; the governor, as I have before 
 stated, had recommended it; and, within a few days, the 
 members of the assembly, consisting of federalists, Clinto- 
 nians and Bucktails fresh from the people, had unani- 
 mously recorded their votes in favor of the principle of 
 the bill. Why, then, should Judge Woodworth be 
 charged with being governed by corrupt motives in yield- 
 ing his assent to it 1 
 
 The case of Judge Woodworth was, in my judgment, 
 very diflferent from that of Mr. Childs, Gen. Mooers, or 
 Mr. Evans. They were elected by the Clintonians, and 
 immediately combined with those who opposed their elec- 
 tion to exclude the party, to whom they owed their elec- 
 tion, from all governmental patronage. Mr. Woodworth 
 differed with his political friends, not about the principle, 
 but the details of a proposed law.
 
 560 POLITICAL HISTOEY [1S21. 
 
 The objections of the council of revision were drawn 
 by Chancellor Kent, with his usual ability. Even the 
 council admitted that the constitution ought to be revised, 
 and therefore, of course, did not contend against the prin- 
 ciple of the billj but they alleged, first — that the legisla- 
 ture had no constitutional authority to create a convention 
 with unlimited power, even to propose amendments to the 
 constitution. Second — that, if they had such power, the 
 bill ought to have required the convention to submit their 
 amendments separately to the people, and not in gross; 
 and the council argued with great force, that if the people 
 were competent to decide on the amendments when taken 
 all together, they were most assuredly competent to de- 
 cide on each separate amendment. In other words, if 
 they were capable of deciding on the whole of an instru- 
 ment, they were capable of deciding on all the parts of 
 which that instrument was composed. 
 
 On Monday evening, the 20th November, the bill was 
 returned to the assembly by the council of revision, with 
 their objections. Much agitation and excitement prevailed 
 in the house upon the occasion. Mr. UlshoefFer, however, 
 after a very decent, and considering the feeling which 
 then prevailed, moderate address, moved that the bill, to- 
 gether with the reasons assigned by the council of revision 
 against its becoming a law, be laid on the table; and the 
 house unanimously sustained the motion. 
 
 This movement of the council produced consequences 
 directly different from what were intended. The object 
 was to preserve the supreme court, and it accelerated its 
 destruction. The chancellor and judges were charged 
 with exercising an almost arbitrary power, with which, by 
 the old constitution, they were invested, to defeat the de- 
 clared will of the people. It did not require any special 
 gift of prophecy to predict what would be the result of a 
 contest, in a free country, between four men on the one
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 551 
 
 side and the people on the other. Immediately after the 
 adjournment of the assembly a meeting was held at Skin- 
 ner's Mansion House, of the members of the legislature 
 opposed to the details of the convention bill, although I 
 am not aware that any of the Clintonian senators attended 
 on that occasion, at which a committee, consisting of John 
 C. Spencer, Samuel M. Hopkins, Herman Gansevoort, 
 Rowland Fish and Myron Holley, were appointed, and 
 who addressed their constituents on the subject of the bill 
 which had been vetoed by the council of revision. The 
 address was drawn, as I presume, by Mr. John C. Spen- 
 cer; it evinced great ability, and among other things, 
 pointed out clearly and forcibly the inequality of repre- 
 sentation in the convention proposed by the bill; but the 
 current in favor of a convention was too strong to be 
 checked in its progress. The public mind had, by this 
 time, received an impression that Mr, Spencer, and those 
 acting with him, were, at heart, opposed to any conven- 
 tion which should be vested with powers adequate to what 
 it was deemed the emergency required, and the democrat- 
 ic party were not then in a humor to listen to any reason- 
 ing coming from a source so suspicious. 
 
 Congress assembled in December, and Mr. Clay, who 
 had for many sessions been speaker of the house of repre- 
 sentatives, resigned his office, and his seat as a member of 
 congress. 
 
 Mr. John W. Taylor, of Saratoga, an old and respecta- 
 ble member of that body, was proposed by the members 
 from the northern and middle states as a suitable person 
 for his successor. The southern members were divided. 
 Some were for Mr. Nelson of Virginia, and some for Mr. 
 Lowndes of South-Carolina. Mr. Taylor was eventually 
 elected by a small majority. The contest seemed to be 
 rather a sectional one, and particularly between the slave 
 holding and non slave holding states, except as respected
 
 552 political' history [1821. 
 
 the opponents of Mr. Clinton in the state of New-York. 
 The members belonging to that party, from this state, 
 generally voted against him. Nothing exhibits more dis- 
 tinctly the proscriptive spirit of party than this opposition 
 of the New-York members to Mr. Taylor. He had been 
 a member of our legislature in 1812, and had stood firm 
 against the corrupt efforts of the applicants for a charter 
 to the Bank of America. He had, on all occasions, as a 
 member of the assembly, faithfully sustained the republi- 
 can interest in the state. In 1813 he entered congress, at 
 which time he withdrew himself from the local contests 
 which prevailed here, and in the national legislature uni- 
 formly supported the democratic party, and particularly 
 the measures of the administration during the war. 
 
 The speaker of the house of representatives, for the 
 time being, as every one knows, holds a powerful influ- 
 ence in the action of that controlling branch of our na- 
 tional legislature, and gives a very great impetus to the 
 political power of the state of which he is an inhabitant. 
 But Mr. Taylor had declined to make war upon Gov. Clin- 
 ton, and his colleagues who had opposed Clinton's re-elec- 
 tion, utterly regardless of the consideration I have just 
 stated, zealously resisted his election, solely and exclu- 
 sively on the ground that he had voted for Mr. Clinton as 
 governor. 
 
 It will be recollected that the senate, on the 15th No- 
 vember, passed a resolution calling on the governor for 
 such information as he possessed relative to the interfe 
 rence of the general government, or its officers, as an 
 organized and disciplined corps, in our elections. To this 
 the governor, on the morning of the 10th inst., sent the 
 following reply: — 
 
 " TO THE SENATE." 
 
 "Gentlemen — Fully appreciating the patriotic solici- 
 tude of the senate to prevent all unwarrantable intrusions
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 553 
 
 in the political affairs of the state, I have received their 
 application for information on this subject with great 
 pleasure, and I shall, in due time, make them a communi- 
 cation, w^hich, I trust, will be satisfactory in its nature and 
 salutary in its tendency. 
 
 DE WITT CLINTON." 
 
 In the speech of the governor he did not affirm, although 
 he clearly intimated, that the officers of the national go- 
 vernment had interfered in the late election, and he then 
 states hypothetically, that, " if^ as an organized corpSy^ 
 they shall so interfere, he trusted that there would be 
 found a becoming disposition in the people to resist such 
 alarming attempts. He undoubtedly considered, and it 
 strikes me he had a right so to consider, the suggestion as 
 a mere opinion founded upon what he supposed the Uni- 
 ted States had evinced to be their general policy — an 
 opinion which any one had a right to controvert and show 
 to be erroneous. He did not mean it as an affirmation, 
 the proof of which he could in fairness be called on to 
 produce by documentary evidence. The senate, however, 
 chose to claim that he had taken the latter ground. They 
 probably did not imagine he would have replied at all to 
 the resolution, and in that case they meant to assert that 
 he had put forth a false accusation against the national 
 government. The senate, in acting upon the supposition 
 that Mr. Clinton would evade a contest, entirely mistook 
 their man. No point is more prominent in Mr. Clinton's 
 character, than a constant readiness for combat with a po- 
 litical opponent. The bitter irony contained in the answer, 
 and the menacing attitude assumed by the governor in 
 respect to the majority of the senate, extremely annoyed 
 them. In order to carry on the war on their part, they, 
 on the evening of the 20th November, introduced the fol- 
 lowing preamble and resolution: —
 
 554 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 " Tn Senate — Nov. 20, 1820. — Whereas his excellency 
 the governor, in his reply to the call of the senate for in- 
 formation, relative to the general government, or its offi- 
 cers, as an organized corps, interfering in our elections, 
 has not furnished the senate with any evidence in support 
 of such charges. And whereas it is highly improper that 
 the chief magistrate of the state should criminate the ad- 
 ministration of the general government, without ample 
 testimony in his possession, by reason whereof the good 
 people of this state may have their confidence in the gene- 
 ral government greatly impaired. Therefore, 
 
 " Resolved^ That the senate repose the strictest confi- 
 dence in the patriotism and integrity of the general go- 
 vernment, and will not change such opinion, or yield to 
 any insinuations against such administration, but upon full 
 and satisfactory testimony." 
 
 This resolution was proposed by Mr. P. R. Livingston. 
 It was not anticipated by the governor or his friends. 
 The only indication of an extraordinary movement was, 
 that when the evening session of the senate commenced, 
 the lobby and galleries were crowded with an unusual 
 number of spectators, who were observed to be composed 
 almost exclusively of citizens who had distinguished them- 
 selves by their opposition to Gov. Clinton. As the mo- 
 tion was entirely unexpected, no member of the opposition 
 was prepared to resist it by any thing like an argument. 
 Mr. Livingston made a speech in favor of the resolution. 
 He declaimed, with his usual zeal, against this act of the 
 governor of the state of New-York, and represented it 
 almost as treason against his liege lord, the president of 
 the United States; and he adjured all true republicans to 
 unite with him in denouncing a declaration by the execu- 
 tive of this state so utterly unfounded, uncalled for, and 
 indefensible.
 
 1821.] or NEW-yoRK. 555 
 
 It was urged in vain that the manner in which the 
 charge was intimated, did not warrant the senate in calling 
 on the governor for documentary proofs; that, if the 
 speech would fairly bear the construction for M'hich the 
 mover of the resolution contended, only five days had 
 elapsed since the original resolution had been delivered to 
 the governor, and one of those days was Sunday; that, if 
 nothing but documentary evidence would satisfy the sen- 
 ate, it was evident that if, as was alleged, the action of 
 the general government had extended all over the state, 
 the evidence of improper conduct must be collected, from 
 individuals residing in different and various counties, and, 
 of course, that not only weeks, but months must elapse 
 before that evidence could be obtained, collected and di- 
 gested, in a form suitable to be presented to the senate. 
 It was further stated, that the governor, by his last com- 
 munication, had committed himself to furnish the evidence, 
 and that the adoption of the proposed preamble and reso- 
 lution would, on the part of the senate, be prejudging the 
 case before evidence was furnished them. The preamble 
 and resolution was adopted by the usual party vote; and 
 the clerk was directed to deliver a copy of it to the governor. 
 
 The next morning he sent to the senate the following 
 brief but indignant reply: — 
 
 "TO THE SENATE." 
 
 " Gentlemen — I have this moment received a resolution 
 of your honorable body, which, as well as the one to 
 which it refers, I shall fully notice at the next meeting of 
 the legislature: and shall therefore, at this late hour, pass 
 it over with the expression of my sincere regret that any 
 branch of the legislature should, in so unprecedented a 
 manner, lose sight of the respect due to itself, and the 
 courtesy due to a co-ordinate department of the govern- 
 ment. DE WITT CLINTON."
 
 556 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 On the motion of Mr. Skinner, this message was direct- 
 ed to be returned to the governor; seventeen senators 
 voting in favor of it. The legislature on the same day, 
 and indeeed in a few moments afterwards, adjourned until 
 the next January. On account of the collisions between 
 the two houses and the council of revision, with respect 
 to the convention bill, and especially on account of the 
 proceedings I have last related; the parties separated in 
 ill humor, and with bad feelings towards each other. It 
 will be recollected that Mr. Van Buren had ceased to be 
 a member of the senate, notwithstanding he was the 
 acknowledged leader of the democratic partyj his bland 
 and conciliatory manner, his caution and his aversion to 
 personal controversies would have greatly assuaged if not 
 prevented the violent personal animosities which were ex- 
 cited during this short session. 
 
 While I entirely disapprove of the course taken by the 
 senate in relation to that part of the governor's speech 
 which protested against the interference of the agents of 
 the national government in our state elections, I am com- 
 pelled to say, that I think the intimation was, to say the 
 least, impolitic on his part. 
 
 He must have known, that there was not at that time 
 the least inclination among the people of this, or any 
 other state in the union to oppose the administration of 
 Mr. Monroe. He had been very tolerant towards the 
 federalists, and that party felt no disposition to wage a 
 hopeless warfare against him. Our foreign relations were 
 prosperous, and our commerce was in a flourishing condi- 
 tion. There was no just cause of complaint against the 
 measures of the general government, and although, many 
 ardent democratic politicians were not well pleased with 
 the president; yet, they did not choose publicly to de- 
 nounce him. He was not a man of vigorous intellect, but 
 he was discreet and prudent. It was owing to his dis-
 
 1821.1 OF NEW- YORK. 557 
 
 -' t 
 
 cietion, and to the unusual political calm which prevailed 
 during the eight years in which he presided, that no pre- 
 sident, with the exception of Gen. Washington, ever sailed 
 so smoothly through two presidential terms as he did. 
 He had no warm friends, or open enemies. He was 
 in 1820, re-elected without opposition. What could Mr. 
 Clinton hope to gain by attacking such an administra- 
 tion ? 
 
 On the 9th of January, 1821, the legislature again met, 
 and on the seventeenth of the same month the governor 
 sent to the assembly a message, accompanied with a great 
 number of affidavits, certificates and letters, showing the 
 interference of national officers, and in some instances 
 very strong presumptive proof that the patronage of the 
 general government had been used for the purpose of en- 
 couraging opposition to his re-election. The documents 
 were very voluminous and were sent to the assembly in 
 a bag, for the purpose of more conveniently transporting 
 the papers. Hence the message received the name of 
 The Green Bag Message. 
 
 Among a variety of other matters, it appeared that Col. 
 John P. Decatur, naval store keeper at Brooklyn, and 
 some other United States officers, had made great efforts at 
 the late election to defeat the Clintonian ticket in the 
 county of Kings, and that other United St^s officers 
 had been very active in various parts of the state. 
 
 Among the documents contained in the green bag, was 
 a letter from Mr. Van Buren to Henry Meigs, then a 
 member of congress from the city of New- York, recom- 
 mending by name the removal of several Clintonian depu- 
 ty post masters, and the appointment of men of opposite 
 political sentiments in their places. The letter was evi- 
 dently written in great haste. He says, " unless we can 
 alarm them" (the Clintonians,) " by two or three prompt 
 removals, there is no limiting the injurious consequences
 
 558 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 that may result from it." He adds, " If any thing is 
 done, let it be done quickly." He does not charge the 
 incumbents with any misconduct. Two of the four post 
 masters whose removal he advised, were instantly dis- 
 placed. This letter was dated the 4th of April, 1820. It 
 was at the time of its publication, and has since been a 
 subject of considerable animadversion, much more in my 
 judgment that it deserved. Mr. Van Buren did no more 
 than other party men, from the organization of the govern- 
 ment, had done before him. He recommended the removal 
 of his enemies and the appointment of his friends. The 
 error was in the practice which had been tolerated by all 
 descriptions of of men for many years. 
 
 Mr. Clinton and Judge Spencer themselves had frequent- 
 ly exerted their influence with those who administered the 
 national government, in the same manner as Mr. Van Bu- 
 ren did his on the present occasion. The green bag mes- 
 sage and documents were referred to a joint committee of 
 the two houses. 
 
 Immediately after the legislature had organized, the 
 committee of the assembly, to whom the objections of the 
 council of revision to the convention bill had been referred, 
 made a long and laborious report. The report criticised 
 with great severity the objections of the council, animad- 
 verted upon the conduct of some its members, and hardly 
 abstained from impugning their motives. The rejected 
 bill, together with the objections of the council of revi- 
 sion, and the report of the select committee, were referred 
 to a committee of the whole house. 
 
 Soon after the commencement of the session, and I be 
 lieve, on the second or third day, Mr. John C. Spencer 
 asked leave to bring in a bill providing for a convention 
 to amend the constitution. The principal features in this 
 bill, which differed from that which had been rejected by 
 the council were,
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 559 
 
 First. It provided that the people at the next annual 
 election should vote on the question for or against a con- 
 vention. 
 
 Second. That if a majority of the electors should vote 
 for a convention, the governor should issue a proclama- 
 tion announcing the fact, and thereupon in the month of 
 June following, delegates should be chosen from the several 
 counties who should compose the convention. 
 
 Third. That the number of delegates to be chosen by 
 each county should be in proportion to the population, 
 to be ascertained by the census then lately taken. 
 
 Fourth. That the amendments recommended by the con- 
 vention should be separate and distinct, and severally sub- 
 mitted to the people, and be respectively confirmed or 
 rejected, as a majority of the people should decide by 
 their votes. 
 
 This project, which seems to be a reasonable one, and 
 would probably have been adopted had it been proposed be- 
 fore the minds of men became highly excited and exasper- 
 ated, was not listened to by the majority. Indeed, leave to 
 bring in a bill containing this scheme, was refused to Mr. 
 S. upon the plea that the bill then before the house ought 
 first to be disposed of. 
 
 A long and exciting debate followed on the orignal bill, 
 and the objections of the council of revision, without 
 coming to any decision; but after many days, the ques- 
 tion was finally taken upon the bill; and it was lost, more 
 than one-third of the members voting against it. The 
 committee on the subject were then directed to bring in a 
 new bill, which they accordingly didj but it was in sub- 
 stance the same as the bill which had been rejected. Af- 
 ter this second bill had been discussed for some time, Mr. 
 Burt offered an amendment to it which obviated the prin- 
 cipal objection of the council. By this amendment, the 
 question of convention or no convention was to be sub-
 
 560 POLITICAL HISTORY fl821. 
 
 mitted to the people at the next annual election. This 
 movement presented a new, though perhaps not a very 
 unusual course of party operations. 
 
 The democratic party in the legislature were determined 
 on passing a convention bill, but they well knew that no 
 such bill could be passed by a majority of two-thirds of 
 both houses, unless it should be so drawn as not to be 
 obnoxious to the views expressed by the council of revi- 
 sion; they, however, did not wish to appear to concede 
 that the ground taken by the council was correct. On the 
 other hand, although the Clintonians professed a desire 
 for a convention, if the consent of the people could first 
 be obtained; their leaders at that time really wished to 
 prevent a convention upon any terms. They therefore 
 were anxious that the majority should hold the attitude 
 they had taken against the principles put forth by the 
 council of revision. Mr. Burt was known to be in full 
 confidence with the democratic leaders in the assemblj'', 
 and there is not, in my mind, a shadow of doubt but that 
 he brought forward this amendment after consultation 
 with them and in accordance with their wishes; and yet 
 Mr. Ulshoeffer, Mr. Sharp, Mr. Remain, and I believe 
 every leading democrat in the house, with the exception 
 of General Root, voted against Mr. Burt's amendment, 
 and every Clintonian, with the exception of Mr. Bough- 
 ton of Ontario, voted for it. There were for the amend- 
 ment, eighty-one — against it, twenty-five. In this form 
 the bill passed both houses. 
 
 A regard to truth,compels me to state one other fact. After 
 Mr. Burt's amendment had been adopted, and while the bill 
 was in the house of assembly, a prominent Clintonian 
 member of the assembly stated in the presence of a Clin- 
 tonian senator, that he had reason to believe the council 
 of revision would reject the bill in the form it then was, 
 if they could be supported in the measure by their friends
 
 1821.] or NEW-YORK. 561 
 
 in the legislature. In justice to that senator, I must be 
 allowed to add, that he told the member that whatever 
 others might do, he would not consent to resist the bill as 
 amended ; that he had for many years been in favor of a 
 revision of the constitution ; that the proposed bill was, in 
 his judgment, as unobjectionable as any bill which could 
 be devised that would pass both houses, and if it should 
 be rejected by the council, he should still vote for it, 
 and make what efforts he could, to obtain two-thirds of 
 the legislature in its favor. If the project I have men- 
 tioned, was one seriously entertained by the majority 
 of the council, of which I have no other evidence than 
 what I have stated, it was abandoned ; for it finally passed 
 that body without opposition. 
 
 During the present session it became necessary to elect 
 a senator of the United States, in place of Mr. Sanford, 
 whose term expired on the fourth of March. Mr. San- 
 ford was a candidate for re-election ; but at a caucus of 
 republican members of the legislature, which was attended 
 by eighty-two members, Mr. Van Buren received fifty- 
 eight votes, and Mr. Sanford but twenty-four. Mr. Van 
 Buren was, of course, declared regularly nominated. This 
 enterprising and ambitious man, having for several years 
 constituted the active and moving spirit of his party in 
 New-York, began now to turn his attention to the general 
 government. Washington presented to his restless and 
 active mind, a far more extended theatre of action than 
 Albany. The way wasopen, and the time was propitious 
 for him to take the field there, with a fair prospect of 
 being the great man of the Empire State. 
 
 As a national politician there was no reason to appre- 
 hend that Mr. Clinton would be sustained by a majority 
 of the people of New-York ; and the pecuniary embarrass- 
 ments of Gov. Tompkins, his impaired health, his failure 
 
 in the recent election in this state, and his irregular habits, 
 
 .^6
 
 562 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 rendered It morally certain that he would retire from 
 public life after the term for which he had been elected 
 vice-president should expire. Who, then, could stand in 
 the way of Mr. Van Buren from his own state 1 It is not 
 improbable that he, at that early period, anticipated the 
 splendid success which subsequently attended his career 
 as a national politician. 
 
 The Clintonians, in the legislature, voted for Mr. San- 
 ford. In this, I ihen thought, and now ihink, they were 
 wrong. It was not pretemled that Mr. Sanford's political 
 principles varied essentially from Mr. Van Euren's ; nor 
 was it claimed for him, that he was personally, a man of 
 more integrity, while all admitted that Mr. Van Euren 
 possessed a higher grade of talent. What, then, was to 
 be gained by voting for Mr. Sanford ? I refused to do so; 
 but as my political friends all made a point of supporting 
 Mr. S., under an apprehension that my vote for Mr. Van 
 Buren would be regarded as an abandonment of them, 
 which I had no intention of doing, I did not vote at all on 
 the question. 
 
 In the senate, Mr. Van Buren received seventeen votes, 
 and Mr. Sanford eight ; and in the assembly, the vote 
 stood sixty-nine for Mr. Van Buren, and fifty-two for Mr. 
 Sanford. 
 
 Mr. Benjamin Knower, of Albany, was this winter ap- 
 pointed by the legislature, treasurer, in lieu of Mr. Ger- 
 rit L. Dox. 
 
 Mr. Dox was considered a little unstable and wavering 
 in his politics, while ]\Tr. Knower was a decided and ex- 
 tremely active and influential politician, which probably 
 was the principal reason of the change. There were, 
 however, other and better reasons. Mr. Knower had been 
 brought up an apprentice to the hatting business, in Mas- 
 sachusetts, and while he was yet a young man had estab- 
 lished himself in Albany as a hatter. Bv his industry
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 663 
 
 and personal labor, he had acquired considerable wealth, 
 and by his integrity and fair dealing, had gained the confi- 
 dence of all who knew him. He was one of nature's 
 great men, and an honorable specimen of what a laboring 
 American mechanic, favored with vigorous intellectual 
 powers, may become. Though zealous in his political 
 principles, he was frank, candid, and liberal ; and, though 
 an ardent partisan, he was kind and benevolent. 
 
 The successful prosecution of the construction, and early 
 completion of the canals, required the appointment of an 
 other acting commissioner j and provisions for that pur- 
 pose were accordingly made by the legislature. 
 
 The office of canal commissioner had now become a 
 great state office. Much depended on the ability and 
 fidelity with which these officers discharged their duty; 
 and the immense amount of monies which passed through 
 their hands, and was expended under their direction, 
 clothed them with a patronage which put it in their pouer 
 to exercise a great political influence, especially in those 
 parts of the state where the canals were located. 
 
 When it was determined that an additional commis- 
 sioner should be created, a number of respectable and 
 powerful candidates for the appointment, from the valley 
 of the Mohawk and other parts of the state, were an- 
 nounced ; and among the most pressing, were Gerrit L. 
 Dox, the late treasurer, and Moses Austin, the senator 
 from Greene county. But several of the central and inte- 
 rior counties in the state, and such were Schoharie, Otsego, 
 and Delaware, claimed a right to be represented in the 
 canal board — a board which had now become one of pri- 
 mary importance — and they, with great unanimity, irre- 
 spective of party considerations, recommended William 
 C. BoucK, a senator from the county of Schoharie. He 
 was, however, afterwards regularly nominated at a demo- 
 cratic legislative caucus, and subsequently appointed by
 
 564 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 nearly the unanimous nomination of both houses of the 
 legislature. In the senate, the vote for him was quite 
 unanimous, with the exception of Mr. Rosecrantz, a respect- 
 able and worthy senator, of German descent, from Herki- 
 mer county, who, with true Dutch obstinacy, declared he 
 would ^^ never vote for a hucktaiiy 
 
 Mr. Bouck was a self-made man ; but his native saga- 
 city and shrewdness, his great caution and prudence, and 
 his almost intuitive knowledge of men, had already given 
 him an influence among his political friends in the quarter 
 of the state in which he resided, for which those who were 
 not intimately acquainted with him, or were not good 
 judges of the human character, knew not how to account. 
 Van Buren, however, early knew, and properly appreci- 
 ated him. 
 
 The selection of Mr. Bouck was exceedingly judicious. 
 Far from disappointing, he exceeded the anticipations of 
 his friends. The history of our canals will show that he 
 rendered services to the state of a charcter highly impor- 
 tant. 
 
 The joint committee on the Green Bag Message, on the 
 15th of March, made their report. They produced several 
 affidavits impeaching the depositions which accompanied 
 the governor's communication ; and, in their report, they 
 speak with great asperity of the course taken by the go- 
 vernor, and conclude by alleging that the existence of any 
 extraneous influence has never been observed in any of 
 our elections. It is difficult to conceive how honorable 
 men could bring themselves to make such a declaration in 
 the face of an intelligent community, nine-tenths of whom 
 must have Leen satisfied that it was incorrect. 
 
 The governor, in his Green Bag Message, had reminded 
 the legislature of the resolution passed by the two houses 
 in 1790, that it was improper, for a person holding an 
 office under the government of the United States, to be a
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 565 
 
 member of the state legislature. This resolution the 
 joint committee repudiate in no measured terms j and yet, 
 a few months afterwards, the delegates of the convention, 
 and the people of the state, incorporated the substance of 
 that resolution into our constitution, — so highly did they 
 approve of the principle involved in it. 
 
 The legislature adjourned in the latter part of the 
 month of March. 
 
 For the purpose of giving, in a connected form, the 
 proceedings of the legislature, I have omitted to notice the 
 action of the new council of appointment, which, it will 
 be recollected, consisted of Waiter Bowne from the south- 
 ern district, John T. Moore from the middle, Roger Skin 
 ner from the eastern, and David E. Evans from the west- 
 ern. They were all decidedly hostile to the governor, 
 and Mr. Skinner was said to be, not only politically, but 
 personally unfriendly to him. From the standing of 
 Judge Skinner, and from his activity in all party opera- 
 tions, he was supposed to be the efficient man in the 
 council, and from that circumstance it acquired the name 
 of Skinner's Council. Judge Skinner, from his conduct 
 in this body, and perhaps from other parts of his political 
 conduct, was supposed to be naturally vindictive and ma- 
 lignant in his feelings. It may be so, but I have before 
 remarked that from the observations I made in the course 
 of my acquaintance with him, my impressions in relation 
 to his character, and the native propensities of his mind, 
 were not in accordance with such a supposition. He was 
 not, it is true, a great man ; but I think he possessed kind- 
 ly and social feelings. He had been educated in a school 
 of politics which taught him to believe that every legal 
 measure ought to be taken to diminish the power of an 
 opponent, and that to the " victors belonged the spoils." 
 This maxim, which has been so much the subject of ani- 
 madversion, and has been for many years denounced by
 
 566 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 all parties in the state when in the minority, has been 
 pracliced by each and every party when in the majority. 
 I do not affirm that the practice has been right, but I state 
 as a historical fact, that such has been the practice. It is 
 true, Mr. Skinner's Council carried out this system with 
 greater rigor than even here we had been accustomed to. 
 But in fact, the war was about men, and not about mea- 
 sures, and perhaps on that very account the feelings of the 
 party in power were more highly excited. Mr. Skinner 
 was attacked with great severity by the Clintonian news- 
 paper writers ; and I have no doubt his feelings were 
 much soured j but from a long and intimate acquaintance 
 with him, he has left no other impression on my mind than 
 that of a kind hearted, friendly and companionable man. 
 He has many years ago, gone down to the grave, and has 
 not to my knowledge, left a single relative in the state of 
 New-York, and I feel for that reason a higher obligation 
 upon me to do justice to his character and memory. 
 
 The council met on the 12th of January, and on the first 
 day of their meeting they ordered the issuing of eleven writs 
 of svpersedeas to as many sheriffs of counties. They re- 
 moved Archibald Mclntyre from the office of comptrol- 
 ler. The comptroller, since Mr. Mclntyre had been the 
 incumbent of the office, had been considered rather as a 
 working man than as a politician. Neither the council of 
 1807, 1810, 1813, nor 18M, although Mr. Mclntyre was 
 decidedly hostile to them, had manifested the least dispo- 
 sition to remove him. They were aware that it required 
 time and experience to become well acquainted with the 
 financial concerns of this great state, and with the best 
 and most proper mode of managing them j and they treat- 
 ed Mr. Mclntyre as before stated, rather as a laborer em- 
 ployed by the state than as a political office holder. Be- 
 sides, all men admitted that he was an accurate and able 
 accountant, and an honest man. His removal produced
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 567 
 
 great excitement and its effect upon community would have 
 been greater had not the council made a judicious selec- 
 tion of a successor. That successor was John Savage, 
 the son of the venerated senator Edward Savage, and late 
 chief justice of this state. Mr. Savage was a modest, re- 
 tiring man, but all who were acquainted with him knew him 
 to be a person of sterling good sense, strict and rigid in- 
 tegrity, amiable in his disposition and unblemished in his 
 morals and character. 
 
 The council also, on the same day, removed Thomas J. 
 Oakley from the office of attorney-general. This was 
 anticipated. Samuel A. Talcott, then a young lawyer, 
 who resided in Utica, was appointed in his place. Mr. 
 Talcott had not then acquired much eminence at the bar, 
 but he soon developed talents in his profession of the 
 highest order. This appointment was considered as pecu- 
 liarly Mr. Van Buren's; and the amiable traits in Mr. 
 T's character and his splendid legal talents fully justified 
 Mr. Van Buren in taking a warm interest in his favor. 
 Mr. Talcott had been a federalist, but with many others 
 of that party had opposed the election of Mr. Clinton ; 
 and Mr. Van Buren, no doubt felt, that good policy re- 
 quired that some distinguished mark of attention and 
 respect should be bestowed on some of the individuals 
 who had been ranked among the federalists. Mr. Tal- 
 cott too, was a young man, and it was said to be a part 
 of Mr. Van Buren's policy to appear as the patron of 
 young men whose abilities and situation in life afforded a 
 promise that they would become influential in society. I 
 recollect that Judge Piatt, about that time, in speaking to 
 me about this and some other similar appointment, said, 
 with a very significant look, " This is the age of young 
 men." Generally speaking, I do not think political lead- 
 ers are sufficiently aware of the importance of enlisting 
 young men in their cause. The young have ardor, enter-
 
 568 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 prise and vigor, and the prospect of a long life before 
 them. They too, are less suspicious and less selfish than 
 their seniors. 
 
 The council did not confine their operation, even on the 
 first day of their meeting, to the removal of civil officers, 
 but superseded several gentlemen holding military com- 
 missions. Heretofore, this class of office holders, in con- 
 sequence of the unproductiveness of their offices, had, 
 during all the political revolutions, remained undisturbed. 
 General Anthony Lamb, the commissary-general, was re- 
 moved to make place for Alexander M. Muir, and Gillead 
 Sperry, a colonel of a regiment of calvary in Clinton 
 county, was also removed. No allegation of misconduct 
 appears to have been made against either Gen. Lamb or 
 Col. Sperry. I But the removal which produced the great- 
 est excitement, was that of Solomon Van Rensselaer from 
 the office of adjutant-general. The gallantry of General 
 Van Rensselaer as a soldier, is well known and univer- 
 sally admitted. The military services he had before that 
 time rendered to the nation, constitute a part of its 
 history. During the late war, though a federalist, he had 
 volunteered his services on the Niagara frontier, and in 
 a daring, though ill-advised attack, led by him, upon the 
 British at Queenstown, he had been dangerously wounded. 
 Notwithstanding all these circumstances, and notwithstand- 
 ing he had been retained in office by Governor Tompkins, 
 although an open political opponent during the whole 
 period he administered the government, the present coun- 
 cil, without any charge of official misconduct, removed 
 him. William L. Marcy, the late governor, was appointed 
 in his place. Stephen Allen was appointed mayor of 
 New-York, in lieu of Cadwallader D. Golden, and Peter 
 A. was removed from the office of recorder, to which 
 Richard Riker was appointed.* 
 
 * The governor refused to sign the minutes of the proceedings of the council. 
 t Sea Note G
 
 1821.] OF NEW-YORK. 569 
 
 After making these changes in the great officers of the 
 state, the council proceeded into every county and re- 
 moved all, or nearly all the sheriffs, clerks, surrogates, 
 judges of the courts of common pleas, and justices of the 
 peace, who were known or suspected to be politically 
 opposed to them. 
 
 Although this council may seem to us extremely rigor- 
 ous, it must be confessed they were rather carrying out 
 the principle imbibed, and the practices tolerated under 
 the old constitution, than striking out a new path for 
 themselves. Mr. Skinner and his colleagues were play- 
 ing the same game in respect to Gov. Clinton, which he 
 had done when himself a member of the council, with 
 respect to Gov. Lewis, and when on the motion of Mr. 
 Clinton, Maturin Livingston, the brother-in-law of Lewis, 
 was removed from the office of recorder of New-York, 
 and Dr. Tillotson, another near connection and personal 
 friend of Gov. Lewis, was removed from the office of 
 secretary of state. 
 
 But there is one act of this council, which, in my judg- 
 ment, admits of no reasonable apology. The act to which 
 I refer, was the removal of Gideon Hawley from the 
 office of superintendent of common schools. Mr. Haw- 
 ley had by great skill and labor formed our common 
 school system. All who know him, and he is now, and 
 was then generally known, admit not only his fitness, but 
 his peculiar fitness for that office. On the able and faith- 
 ful discharge of his duties depended, not the temporary 
 success of this or that party, but in a considerable degree 
 the weal or woe of the rising generation. The council 
 removed him and appointed in his place Welcome Esleeck, 
 Esq., a mere collecting attorney, who had scarce any of 
 the requisite qualifications of a superintendent of schools. 
 So gross was this outrage, that the political friends of the 
 council in the legislature, would not submit to it. Gen,
 
 570 POLITICAL HISTORY [1821. 
 
 Root soon after the appointment of Mr. Esleeck for, as 
 was well understood, the mere purpose of getting rid of 
 him, introduced a bill, or attached a clause to some bill 
 on its passage in the assembly, enacting that the secreta- 
 ry of state should, ex-officio, be the superintendent of com- 
 mon schools, which soon passed through both houses with 
 acclamation. Mr. John Van Ness Yates, a man of great 
 versatility of talent, was then secretary. Both he and his 
 successors have performed well and faithfully their duties 
 as superintendent of schools. There is, however, one 
 objection to Gen. Root's law. The secretary of state is 
 necessarily a politician ; but the man who presides over 
 our system of popular education should be entirely detached 
 from all political parties. It is the improvement of the 
 mind and morals of children, and not the promotion of 
 the success of a party, which should call into action all 
 his energies, and to which all his efforts should be di- 
 rected. 
 
 Soon after the removal of Mr. Mclntyre, the Clinto- 
 nians nominated him as their candidate for a state sena- 
 tor from the middle district. The candidate, regularly, 
 should have been taken from the county of Otsego, but 
 the Clintonians of that county feeling indignant at Mr. 
 Mclntyre's removal, cheerfully gave up their right to the 
 candidate, and he was by his political friends in the dis- 
 trict supported with great cordiality. On the other hand, 
 the democratic party considering this, as it really was, an 
 appeal to the people from the decision of the council, and 
 a sort of trial by the country whether his conduct in rela- 
 tion to Gov. Tompkins had been correct, exerted them- 
 selves to defeat his election, with great zeal and energy. 
 The people rendered their verdict in favor of Mr, Mcln- 
 tyre ; a result the more honorable to him, because at the 
 preceding election, the bucktail or democratic majority in 
 that district was about eight hundred, and Mr. Mclntyre,
 
 1821.] or NEW-YORK, 571 
 
 together with his colleague, Mr. Hasbrouck, was this year 
 elected by a majority of about four hundred. 
 
 In the assembly the democratic party elected sevent}'- 
 members, and the Clintonians fifty-two. In the senate, 
 from the southern district, Abraham Gurnee and Abel 
 Huntington were elected ; in the middle, Archibald Mc- 
 Intyreand Abraham Hasbrouck j eastern, David C. Judson 
 and Daniel Shepherd • western, Samuel M. Hopkins and 
 Henry Seymour were chosen. 
 
 The members elected from the southern district, and 
 Mr. Seymour from the western district, were republicans, 
 and the others were Clintonians. The majority of votes 
 in the state for a convention, was seventy-four thousand 
 four hundred and forty-five ! ! 
 
 This overwhelming majority is an evidence of the 
 powerful current of public opinion in favor of that mea- 
 sure j and if an able general ought to foresee the result 
 of a battle, Mr. Clinton, Chief Justice Spencer, Judge Van 
 Ness and others, as good politicians, ought to have 
 known that a current was in motion which it was in vain 
 to resist, and which would overwhelm in ruin all who at- 
 tempted to resist it.
 
 (Note B, Referred to on Page 335.) 
 
 I do not now recollect the particulars of the altercation between Judge Taylor 
 and Mr. Purdy. Of one thing however, I am certain, that all men at the time 
 justified Judge Taylor for committing this apparent act of violence. The provo- 
 cation therefore, on the part of his antagonist, must have been great. Judge Tay- 
 lor, though a man of high tone of feeling, inflexible resolution and indomitable 
 courage; was utterly incapable of unjustifiably assailing an adversary. 
 
 (Note C, Referred to on Page 389.) 
 
 1 was mistaken in stating that no convention was held in pursuance of the cir 
 cular referred to in the text. I was led into the error by a pretty careful exami 
 nation of the files of the Evening Post. Not finding in that paper any account o 
 the proceedings of any convention held in pursuance of the call, I inferred that 
 no such convention was held. The conjecture expressed in the text, that "one 
 object of the convention was to take into consideration the conductof the Eastern 
 Federalists," and probably to deliberate on the question, whether the Federalists 
 of New- York should be represented in the Hartford Convention, was also entirely 
 unfounded. Col. Stone, in the Commercial Advertiser of April 15, I84i2, says the 
 convention tras AeW, that he was a member of it, that its ''immediate object 
 was to consider Mr. Van Buren's conscription bill, then before the Senate," and 
 that the Hartford Convention was not named at that convention. 
 
 (Note D, Referred to on Page 155.) 
 
 Since the publication of the first edition, I have been informed that the report 
 that Gov. Jay, after his retirement from public life, refused to read political news- 
 papers, was incorrect. Judge William Jay, in his letter to me, after stating that 
 the report was untrue, and that such a lefusal would not have been consistent 
 with the interest every good man ought to take in the welfare of his country, 
 says: — "He," (Gov. Jay,) " read the papers constantly, and, at times, took pa- 
 pers of opposite politics, that he might obtain more full information of passing 
 events. So, also, he made it a point of duty to vote at every election." It is 
 singular how the report mentioned in the text obtained currency. I have heard 
 it asserted as truth, among well informed men, perhaps a hundred times 
 
 (Note E, Referred to on Page 412.) 
 
 The Bank of the United States was chartered during this session. The bill for 
 its charter was reported by Mr. Calhoun, chairman of the finance committee. It 
 was supported generally by the Republican members of Congress, and among its 
 supporters Clay, Calhoun, Forsyth, Ingham, Lowndes and J. W. Taylor weie the
 
 EXPLANITORY NOTES. 573 
 
 most influential and efficient. It was opposed by the Federalists as a party, at 
 the head of whom in the H. R. was Mr. Webster. They were joined by some of 
 the southern and a few other democratic members. By the aid of these, Mr 
 Webster entertained sanguine hopes of resisting successfully the passage of the 
 bill, but his expectations were disappointed by a defection in his own ranks, 
 which he did not anticipate, and which he perceived with surprise and mortifica* 
 tion. Mr. Grosvenor from this state, and Mr. Hulbcrt from Massachusetts, before 
 the close of the discussion, declared themselves in favor of the Bank, and even- 
 tually about fifteen other Federalists voted with them in favor of the bill. 
 
 While the bill was in committee of the whole in the H. R. an incident occurred 
 which in the history of political parties deserves to be noticed. Doct. Lewie 
 Condit, a member from N. Jersey, moved to amend the bill by providing for the 
 location of the Mother Bank in the city of New- York. He was supported by Gov. 
 Robertson, a member from New Orleans, by Mr. Forsyth from Georgia, and many 
 others of the southern and western members, and his amendment was adopted by 
 a large majority. Mr. Robertson, Forsyth and others contended with great and 
 decisive effect that the Bank ought to be located in the Commercial Metropolis. 
 It will be recollected that Mr. Dallas of Philadelphia, was at that time Secretary 
 of the Treasury. The evening succeeding the day on which Dr. Condit's mo- 
 tion was adopted, Mr. D. set on foot a very active system of electioneering, and 
 the next day Mr. Clendenin from Ohio, moved a reconsideration of the vote, 
 which motion was carried. 
 
 It was at that period pretty well ascertained, that the bill for chartering the 
 Bank would not pass the house, without the vote of a large majority of the re- 
 publican members from New-York. Mr. Taylor, therefore, invited a meeting of 
 those members. Such a meeting or caucus was held, and Mr. T. proposed that 
 unless the friends of the Bank would consent to rescind the vote upon Mr. Clen> 
 denin's motion, the New- York members should agree to vote against the bill. 
 A m.ajority at first seemed inclined to do so, but Mr. Irving from the cityof New- 
 York being called ou, declared that he had given his word " to the administra- 
 tion," as he expressed himself, to vote in fivor of the Bank, and he should do so. 
 Upon this, Mr. Taylor said, if the member from the city, which was most inter- 
 ested in the question, chose to relinquish his opposition to the location of the 
 Bank in a rival city, he (Mr. T.) coming as he did from the country, would not 
 assume the responsibility for the sake of sustaining the supposed interest of the 
 city, of opposing the chartering of the Bank, and with him nearly all the coun- 
 try members concurred. It would therefore seem, that either the Bank would have 
 been located in New-York, or no bank would have been chartered, if Mr. Irving 
 had not declared his determination to vote for a bank, to be stationed in Phila- 
 delphia. Eventually, all the republican members from this state, except Messrs. 
 Girdsall, Root, Savage and myself voted for the Bank. 
 
 (Note F, Referred to on Page 469.) 
 
 In the first edition it is stated that Gen. Root was appointed by this council 
 District Attorney for the county of Delaware. This is an error. The fact was, 
 a majority of the council ogrccd to appoint Mr. Root, which occasioned an im- 
 pression upon my mind that he had been actually appointed, and I incautiouslf 
 ■tated the fact without referring to the minutes of the council.
 
 574 explanatory notes. 
 
 (Note G, Referred to on Page 568.) 
 
 Tlietoxt iswron^ as respects the removal of Col. .Speri-y. He was charg-ed 
 witli ollicial malconduct as president of a court martial. Information recently 
 receivoii from a wntlenian who then residcjd at Plaltsbursrli. and was an officer 
 in the militia, eiiahle.s me to slate, that a brother of Col. S. at that time was a Lieut. 
 Col. of u Re;rim(jnt of Infantry, and that Maj. A. G. Fla.!;i,' had raised a uniformed 
 hallaliiMi. Tlic conifianies which composed Maj. Fla^r^'s battallion consisted 
 each of 100 men. The Lieutenant Colonel contended that Maj. F. had no right 
 to enli'^t more than 64 men in one company, and on that srround he returned as 
 delini|uenl some 30 or 40 of Flagg's men. On the trial oflhe.se men Major Flagg 
 cm|jloyed Mr. Wulworth. the present Chancellor, as their counsel. He contended 
 thaliheoflicersof the battalion under whose orders the accu.sed had acted, if there 
 had been a delin(picncy, were the delinquents, and not the privates, v ho inno- 
 cently and in good faith had at their own expense equipped themselves ; that 
 if the officers had been the accused, they must have been tried by a general court 
 martial, ^^■hich would have been ordered by Maj. Gen. Mooers, in which event 
 they would have h.id a fair trial; that to evade an impartial investigation, the 
 present course had been adopted, and a court had been organized with a presi- 
 dent, who was the mere instrument of Lieut. Col. Sperry, whose feelings were 
 strongly bia-s-sed against the accused. Mr Walworih probably advocated the 
 causi; of his clients with some warmth, and the president. Col. Sperry, alleging 
 that he trealcil the court disrespectfully, commanded him to be silent ; but he 
 conliiiuim; to advise his clients, the court forced him to leave the room, and sta- 
 tioned a mar.shal at the door to prevent him from returning. These facts were 
 represented to the Council of Appointment,and on that representation Col. Sperry 
 was removed. 
 
 Note H, Referred to on Page 245. 
 
 Present information enables me to say that the imputation of sinister motives 
 implied in the text against the venerable Elclward Savage is unjust. The only 
 new appointment, that of Mr. Crary, was induced by a political necessity which 
 then existed, the history of which would not now be interesting, but which en- 
 tirely exonorates both Mr. Sava^'e and Mr. Crary froni the charge of being 
 iuHucnced by any other than honorable motives. 
 
 Note I, Rrferred to on Page 328. 
 
 Sir>ce the publication of the first edition. I have again examined the pamphlet 
 referreil to in page .329, on the authority of which, the statement in the text is 
 principally made. I find that the pamphlet does not expressly state that the 
 petition (w hich has been lost) contained a prayer for the grant of the salt works; 
 but from its tenor no reader can fail of inferring that a lease of those works was 
 one of the main objects of the Company. Whether I was induced to allege 
 that these works were petitioned for, from reading the pamphlet, or by finding 
 the allegation in some cotemporary newspaper, I can not now determine. 
 
 1 make these remarks for the purpose of stating, that it was far from my inten- 
 tion to charge any ofthe gentlemen named inihe text as petitioners, with improper 
 motives. It is by no means probable that at that day the low price for which salt 
 ■would eventually be manufactured was anticipated, or the real value ofthe salt 
 springs appreciated. The application for a charter for the State Bank was a 
 party measure, and these gentlemen signed the petition as li^aders of the Repub- 
 lican party, and as slate officers. My sole object for in.sertiug ibis account in the 
 text was, to atford an illustration ofthe danger of leL'islalive grants of monopo- 
 lies ; and I mentioned the names of Gov. Taylor. .ludge Spencer, Doci. Tillotson 
 and Col. Jenkins, as evidence that men of high character for patriotism .sometimes 
 innocenlly sign petitions for exclusive grants, without sufficiently considering' 
 the evils which may result from them. Judge Spencer has recently denied (as l 
 think in rather uncourteous termsj that he had any concern in asking for a lease 
 of die salt springs.
 
 NOTES BY GEN. ROOT— VOL. I. 
 
 (Note J., Referred to on Page 4.) 
 
 The author, thus early in his Book, announces his intention " to delineate in 
 detail the character, and develop the motives of the actors in the political drama, 
 and the causes which impelled those actions." It was rather unfortunate that he 
 made the announcement, but much more so, that he has actually and extensively 
 carried out that intention. No man undertaking to give a political history of 
 past, or even of present times, can judge correctly of the motives which impel 
 political men to action. The evidence can only be gathei-ed from the ephemeral 
 publications of the day, and the denunciations and too often calumnious declara- 
 tions of political adversaries. In such publications, nought but the basest of 
 motives are ascribed to an adversary ; while, in his presence, or in a deliberative 
 assembly, the same defamerswould concede to liim the most honorable intentions. 
 The political friend will generally content himself with an approval of the act, 
 without enquiring into the motives. Should the historian undertake to judge of 
 the motive entirely from the act itself, he might be led to a wrong conclusion by 
 his approval, or disapproval, of the same act. Such is man, that he can not entirely 
 divest himself of prejudice. Better, far better, then, to invest himself with a 
 goodly share of Heaven-born charity, and ascribe no evil intention to fellow 
 man, unless clearly developed by his actions. E. B,. 
 
 The right of the historian to deduce from the actions of men, the motives of 
 action, has, I believe, been generally accorded to, and exercised by, all writers 
 of history. But the motive assigned, is merely the opinion, or ra-lher the deduc- 
 tion, of the individual writer. The reader, after considering the action, sits in 
 judgment on the historian, and judges of the correctness of his inferences. These 
 speculations on the causes of the action of men, constitute a part, and in my 
 judgment an important part, of what may be called the philosophy of history. 
 I may have been, and probably in some instances have been, wrong in the 
 motives I have ascribed, but whether wrong or right, the reader must and ought 
 to judge. I must, however, be permitted to add, that I have not knowingly, on 
 any occasion, been influenced by the party publications of the day, in ascribing 
 motives to individuals. J. D. H. 
 
 (Note K., Referred to on Page 33.) 
 
 The independent tenure of office of the State .Judiciary did not growontof the 
 aristocratic bearing of wealthy and influential families, giving a higher tone and 
 current of thought, and producing a diflcrent state of society from that in gome
 
 576 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 
 
 of our sister states. The independence of the judiciary was a principle dear to 
 the Whigs from the earliest epoch of our history. The higher Courts in England 
 were the King's Courts, and the judges -were appointed by the Crown, and their 
 duration in office, as well as their stipends, were dependent upon the royal 
 will and pleasure. Their decisions, when royal prerogative was in question, 
 were, of course, very likely to be swayed by the influence which gave 
 them being, and sustained them in power. The advocates of freedom, and the 
 champions of the people's rights, were the fated victims. Their liberties, and 
 frequently their lives, were the sacrifice upon the unholy altar of judicial 
 dependence and corruption. Long they struggled to make the judiciary 
 independent of the crown. Eventually they were successful, and the King 
 was compelled to issue his commissions to them daring good behaviour — " dum 
 bene sese gesenerit." — On the completion of the revolution (in 1688) by the 
 installation of a whig King, this right and immunity was secured to them forever. 
 In our revolution, when the people became the sovereign, and assumed the 
 place of majesty in all judicial proceedings, the same judicial independence wa« 
 preserved. The whigs in this country, as well as in England, have been uni- 
 form in this respect. E. R. 
 
 The learned author of this note is undoubtedly correct in ascribing the inde- 
 pendence of the judiciary in England to the well founded apprehension of the 
 whigs, that the dependence of the Judges for the tenure of their offices upon the 
 King might effect their decisions on questions in which the royal prerogative 
 was concerned. But is there the same reason to apprehend that in thiscouutrj-, 
 where " the people have assumed the place of majesty," that they, speaking 
 through the po!ls of the election, will encroach on the rights of individuals, or 
 on their own rights as a body, by an influence, growing out of a power to 
 create or remove, through their agents, the highest judicial functionaries? 
 
 J. D. H. 
 
 (Note L., Referred to on Page 37.) 
 
 The constitution of 1777 had provided that such parts of the statute law of 
 England and Great Britain as were in force at the beginning of the Revolution, 
 should continue to be the law, subject to the action of the Legislature. The 
 statute of jeofails, as well as many other amendments to the practice of the 
 law and pleadings, was in force. The Legislature had provided for the 
 revision of the laws, and appointed Samuel Jones and Richard Varick re- 
 visors. In 1788 the revised statutes were re-enacted, and went in force on the 
 first of May in that year, when all the statutes of England and Great Britain, 
 and of the late colony of New York, ceased to be in force. Instead of this 
 important statute being "drawn by Samuel Jones," and " its pas.sage effected 
 by his address, talents and influence," he was but a mere copyist of old statutes, 
 throwing and condensing them into one act. The revisors, and especially Mr. 
 Jones were sedulously careful to retain the exact words and phraseology of all
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTES, 577 
 
 the old statutes, however qnaint the expression or obsolete the tenns. The 
 .'reason given for tlie retention was, that we had the benefit of a long coarse of 
 judicial decisions to settle their true meaning and construction, which would 
 be entirely lost by the least variation. These expressiona were very 
 much altered in subsequent revisions, and I have not been advised that the 
 public has materially suffered for want of those judicial decisions. Mr. Jones 
 was an able lawyer, but his eminence was not derived from the exercise of his 
 talents in effecting the passage of the revised statutes of 1788. E. R. 
 
 (Note M., Referked to on Page 48.) 
 
 " The most objectionable part of Gen. Hamilton's scheme was the assumption 
 by the nation of the debts of the respective states, and the chartering of a Bank 
 To these measures the republicans of this state were generally opposed." — This 
 assertion of the author is partly correct and partly incorrect. The republicans 
 of this state were generally, I believe, opposed to the assumption of the state 
 debts. We had then six members of the House of Representatives — three 
 federalists and three republicans. The republican members voted against 
 the assumption. This state had paid its troops better, and defrayed the expense 
 of the war within its borders in a better currency, than those of most of the other 
 states. During the war many of the state troops were raised by classes, and 
 well paid. After its close, the regiments and corps raised as its quota, and put 
 upon the continental establishment, were liberally rewarded in the grant of 
 large quantities of valuable land. In the sale of its unsettled lands, the state 
 had the means of payment within itself. It had then lately, and before the 
 ratification of the constitution by nine states, issued a large emission of state 
 currency, which was as good as gold and silver. In addition to these reasons, 
 the republicanshad not been zealous to consolidate the Union, and decorate it with 
 all the trappings of a .great nation. They were for presei-ving the importance 
 of state authority and state rights. In short, tlie republicans were opposed to 
 the accumulation of a large national debt, while Mr. Hamilton declared it a 
 national blessing. 
 
 The Bank had the unanimous vote of this state in Congress." The division 
 on that question appeared to be rather geographical than political. The eastern 
 and commercial states were generally in its favCr, while the southern and 
 planting states, with the exception of their commercial towns, were in opposi- 
 tion. The former saw the necessity of a national currency, equally good in every 
 state, and were convinced tliat a national Bank was the best calculated to effect 
 that object, while the latter, not having by experience been made so well 
 acquainted with the laws of currency and exchanges, could see no necessity for 
 such an institution. Hence some of their most eminent statesmen, among whom 
 
 ' I learned the supposed fact that three of the members from this state voted 
 against the incorporation of the first U. S. Bank, from an old newspaper. It 
 WB.S probably incorrect. J. D_ jj_ 
 
 37
 
 578 EYPLANATORY NOTES. 
 
 Mr. Jefferson and Mr. Madison held a conspicuous rank, could see no authority 
 in the Constitution to create one. 
 
 There is no definite specific grant of the power ; and to derive it from the 
 clause which empowers congress to make all laws which shall be necessary and 
 proper for carrying into execution the aforementioned powers, it mast be made 
 to appear that a national bank was a necessary and proper instrument to carry 
 out, at least, some of those powers. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, 
 and excises, and make them unifomi throughout the United States; — to borrow 
 money on the credit of the United States ; — to regulate commerce with foreign 
 nations, and among the several states, — and to regulate the value of money — re- 
 quired of congress to provide a national currency, sound and uniform in all parts 
 of the United States. To pay the debts, to support armies, and to maintain a 
 navy, congress are bound to provide a safe depository of the public moneys, and 
 the safest and cheapest mode of disbursing and transmitting them to any part of 
 the United States. Southern planters had not yet di.scovered that a national 
 bank was necessary and proper for the due execution of all or any of these powers. 
 The eastern members of congress, and those from commercial towns, were better 
 acquainted with the laws of currency and exchange. They knew from experi- 
 ence that exchanges to a large amount must be made in a paper medium, and 
 the evils of depreciated state currencies were fresh upon the memory. The 
 hazard and expense of transmitting funds to distant parts of the United States 
 were known to them. They perceived that a national bank was a cure, and the 
 only cure for these evils. That it would furnish a paper medium of exchange, 
 sound, and of equal value in all parts of the United states : — that it would be a 
 safe depository of the public monies, and would transmit the funds safely and 
 free of expense to any part of the United States. They might have added, that 
 the bank could be made to keep the public money free from executive control 
 till duly appropriated according to law. Had they then believed that the Presi- 
 dent had the pov^-er under the constitution to require any officer of the treasury 
 to open its doors and disburse its treasures at his will, and in ca.se of disobedience 
 to remove him from office, and appoint one in his stead who would be ready to 
 obey his commands ; — and had they imagined that any future one could be found 
 daring enough to make such requirement, I have no doubt it would have been 
 urged as a prominent reason in favor of the bank. But without this there were 
 sutRcient reasons to induce all the republican members from this state, from all 
 New England and from New Jersey and Pennsylvania, to vote for the bill, and 
 for Washington to approve. 
 
 When the charter of the bank was about to expire, and the question of its re- 
 newal began to agitate the public mind, tliis country was in the midst of its diffi- 
 culties, which resulted in war. Great Britain had vexed us by the impressment 
 of our seamen, and by her orders in council blockading all the northern coast of 
 continental Europe. France, too, under the pretence of retaliating the British 
 orders in council, visited our commerce with the destructive influence of her 
 Berlin and Milan decrees. The federalists, although they did not undertake 
 entirely to exculpate, evidently took sides with Great Britain, as against France 
 if not their own country. They cast the heaviest censure upon France, and weta 
 opposed to a war w ith Great Britain. The republicans, on the other hand, threw 
 the greatest blame upon Great Britain, as having led the way in depredation. 
 At this time a large portion of the stock of the bank of the United States wa*
 
 EXPLANTAORY NOTES. 579 
 
 owned in Enclani^. It was not originally subscribed by Englishmen, but had 
 been remitted there in payment of debts. The prejudice of the republicans 
 was very strong against Great Britain, and every thing British or in any wise 
 connected with her. The bank was called a British bank, and its supposed 
 influence in this country was dreaded. A majority of its directors were federal- 
 ists, and this circumstance, added to their British predilections, induced the 
 whole federal party to favor its re-charter. Under such circumstances it is not 
 wonderful that the great mass of the republican party were opposed to the 
 bank. 
 
 Nought but a sense of a strong nece«sity of a National Bank could induce any 
 republican to give it his support. I remember well how often I attempted to 
 reason my political friends into a belief that a National Bank was so necessary 
 to a sound currency and a safe management of the Ti-easury that ^ve ought not 
 to hazard the timely creation of a new one. I attempted to repel the notion of a 
 supposed British influence in this country through the English stockholders. 1 
 urged that the influence, if any, would be the other way — America operating 
 upon England. As the English stockholders could have no agency, not even 
 remote, in the management of the affairs of the Bank, they could have none of 
 that influence which the disposition of pecuniary favors may be supposed to 
 give — but, on the contrary, the stockholders, deriving their income from funds 
 managed by American Directors, liable to sequestration by the American 
 gevernment, dependent as to its amount in a great measure upon the peaceful 
 and prosperous condition of this country, and in the event of a war its receipt 
 entirely cut ort', at least for a lime, would have every inducement which interest 
 can prompt to influence their government to forbear. All this reasoning was of 
 no avail with the republicans of Otsego and Delaware. With them it was a 
 Federal Bank, a British bank, which wou'd keep us under Federal and British 
 influence. They were my constituents, for I was their Representative in Con- 
 gress. I was unwilling to displease my constituents, and therefore stepped 
 aside when the vote was taken on re-chartering the Bank. I fled the question — 
 a trick 1 have seldom performed, and of which I never was proud. E. E-. 
 
 (Note N., Referred to on Page 83.) 
 
 The act requinng ih-> Town Inspectors to canvass the votes and return the 
 result of their canvass, did not become a law till the winter of 1790. I remember 
 it well. 1 was a member myself. Joshua Dewey of Otsego introduced the 
 bill. I voted for it cheerfully, recollecting with what anxiety we waited the 
 spring before, from the last week in April till 4th Thursday in May, for the can- 
 vass. Till the canvass by the supervisors, it was extremely doubtful whether 
 I was elected. I came out but 20 ahead of the highest of my adversaries. The 
 supervisors gave me the certificate. The next year the result of the town 
 canvass was returned to the County Clerk — he made the estimate and gave the 
 certificate. I remember loo the battling I had with £bcnezer Foot, the County
 
 5S0 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 
 
 Clerk who declined for a longtime giving me the certificate, in 1800, on acconnt 
 of an e final being added to my name by one of the towns. Probably Mr. Ham- 
 mond was led into the error by finding on the journal of that year, that a bill for 
 that purpose was introduced into one or the other of the two Houses. E. B.. 
 
 (Note O., Referred to on Page 127.) 
 
 Judge Jay is in a very great error in saying, that " during the six years of 
 Grov. Jay's administration, not one individual vi^as dismissed hy him from office 
 on account of his politics," unless he would have his readers believe that the 
 acts of the Council under the great Seal of the State and the signature of the 
 governor are not his acts. Judge Hammond, too, has looked into " the wrong 
 bill" to find the numerous dismissals from qfficeon account of their politics, during 
 the two last years of Governor Jay's power. " Removals" from office were 
 made at that time by issuing a new general commission of the pleas, or of the 
 peace, or both, as the occasion required. It was held that a new general com- 
 mission to the county superseded all the officers then in commission,* and whose 
 names were not included in the new. Under the old constitution, county Judges 
 (other than the first Judge) and Justices of the Peace held during the pleasure of 
 the Council ; but new commissions were to be issued once in three years. 
 "When, therefore, Mr. Jay's Council, and also his successor, wished to make a 
 sweep in a county, thej^ would issue a new commission, when prehaps the old 
 one was much less than three years of age. Thus, in Delaware, the fifst eom- 
 mission of the pleas, and also that of the peace, V)a.3 issued the latter part of 
 March, or beginning of April, 1797. During the August session of the Legis- 
 lature in 1798, a new commission was issued. Judge Gabriel North and assistant 
 Justice Benajah Beardsley were omitted in the new, and Tory Federalists 
 appointed in their stead. In the commission of the peace, myself, and I think 
 four other Justices of the Peace, were omitted, and of course superseded. Doct. 
 "White, of Cherry Valley, was in the Council. He knew me well. He must 
 have known Judge Nortli. ButEbenezer Foote was then in the senate, and the 
 deed was undoubtedly done at his instance, and probably backed by Mr. 
 Butler, then my colleague in the assembly. Mr. L'Hommedieu, then a member 
 of the Council, told me he enquired if there was any cause for removal. No 
 answer was given. He voted against our removal. I believe there were many 
 cases of the kind in the state. Let Mr. Hammond, if he again gets access to the 
 books of the Council, look at the names of those in the new commission, compare 
 them with those before that time in office, and he will be able to discover some- 
 thing of the causes as well as the manner of mak.ag removals. If the new is 
 much lees than three years younger than the old commission, he may rest assured 
 that some covert object was in view. Removal from office on account of politics 
 was began under Ja3''9 administration, and carried to as high a pitch as it ever 
 
 * Gen. Root will see, if he will tarn to Vol. I., p. I7i, that I did " look into tho 
 right bill."
 
 BXPLANATORY NOTES. 581 
 
 WBfl since tbat time. The fashion has been followed, and frequently to a ridica 
 lous extent, but hardly ever, if ever, exceeded. Gov. Jay, I have been informed, 
 told Messrs. Clinton, Spencer, and Roseboom, while in the Council in 1801, that 
 he was himself opposed to such measures, but that his friends urged him on, and 
 he was forced to comply. I have no doubt, nor had I in the time of it, that both 
 Gov. Jay and President Adams were, "during the reign of terror," urged by 
 the madness of the times, and the pressure of friends, to do many things their 
 own pt-udent counsels forbid. 
 
 The ardent feelings of the General, when he was a young man and a busy 
 actor in the scenes he describes, must have returned and had some iniluence upon 
 him when he wrote this note. 
 
 With respect to those general commissions of the peace mentioned by General 
 Root and spoken of by me in the page above referred to, they did indeed operate 
 as a removal of all incumbents of office not included in the new commission, 
 but these commissions ■were, I suppose, made out according to the recom- 
 mendations of the members from the respective counties, subject to the revision 
 and correction of the members of the Council in whose district the county into 
 which the new commission was to issue happened to be situated. I do not 
 believe the Governor had much, and very rarely any thing, to do with the 
 selection of these comparatively petty officers. That Judge Jay -was strictly 
 correct as respects the general principles which governed his father's conduct 
 with respect to removals from office, I have no manner of doubt. 
 
 On page 127, 1 mention the removal of John Jacob Lansing from the office of 
 Sheriff of New York, without any charge of mal-c&nduct against him. It is 
 true no charge appeared on the books of the Council, but I was nevertheless in- 
 correct as appears from the following letter which I received from Judge Jay. 
 
 J. D. H 
 
 New York, Jan. I5tfi, 1846. 
 Mt Dear Sir: — 
 
 A few days since I was at the house of an elderly gentleman of the bar of this 
 city, and be, of his own accord, and without my having made the slightest allusion 
 to your work, brought out the 1st Vol. of your historj', and remarked, that he 
 had detected an inaccuracy in it respecting my father. He then turned to the 
 passage in which, in reply to my assertion that the Gov. had never removed a 
 man from office on account of his politics, you cite the cases of Lansing and 
 Peck, for whose removal no causes are assigned on the minutes of the Council, 
 and you seem to take it for granted that they were removed on account of their 
 politics. The gentleman informed me that he was familiar with the case of the 
 sheriff— That Lansing was a federalist, and of course a political friend of the 
 Gov., but although a good sort of man, he was indolent and inefficient — That the 
 lawyers made great complaints that they could not get their writs returned, and 
 that the Governor removed him in consequence of these complaints. 
 
 WILLIAM JAY. 
 
 Jabez D. Hammond, Esq.
 
 582 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 
 
 (Note P., Referred to on Page 128.) 
 
 The bill for the gradual abolition of slavery, which passed the assembly during 
 the session of 1799, was not lost in the senate. It passed into a law, and begnn 
 to operate on the 5th July, 1799. It was introduced in the assembly by .lohii 
 Swartwout, of. New York, and provided that from and aftor the 4th day of ,Iuly 
 next, every child born of a slave, should be taken and adjudired to be born free, 
 but might be held as an apprentice servant, if a male, till 28, and if a female, till 
 25 years of age. I moved an amendment of the bill, to render the male free at 
 twenty-one, and the female at eighteen. I urged the propriety of putting the 
 children of slaves upon the same footing as the children of freemen — that they 
 were so already, both by the constitution and laws of this slate, and by the 
 Divine Law. The declaration of Independence was made the preamble to the 
 Constitution of this state, and of course part and parcel thereof, at least the prin- 
 ciples therein declared are recognised by the constitution, and thereby became 
 law, and of as much binding force as any part of that instrument. It declares that 
 all men are born equally free, and are entitled to retain inalienable privileges, 
 among which are life, libertj', and the pursuit of happiness. The Divine lavv 
 w^as promulgated at the creation of the world. To man was given dominion 
 over all created things— any m'Z«. is therefore entitled to hold property. By 
 our laws a slave can hold no property, but is himself the property of another. 
 The law of God is paramount, and our slave laws are void. The slaveholders 
 at that time were chiefly Dutch. Thej- raved and swore by diintler nn/t hlixen 
 that we were robbinsr them of their property. We told them they had none, and 
 could hold none in human flesh, while yet alive, and we passed the lavi". 
 
 I have held the same principle in regard to slavery from that time to the 
 present day. 
 
 In 1821, when a member of the assembly, T introduced a bill* declarin? that 
 slavery cannot exist by the laws of this state, and enforced its passage by the 
 same general course of argument I urged in my more youthful days. I got 
 quite a respectable vote in its favor, and should nndoubtedly have got a much 
 larger one had it not been for the law of 1317, which made all free after the 4th 
 Julj% 1827. E. R. 
 
 The positions here taken by so eminent a statesman and constitutional lawyer 
 as Gen. Root, are entitled to great consideration ; and the more so. because, if his 
 principle be sound, (and I for one believe it to be so) all the states which were 
 represented in the Congress of 1776, became parties to the Declaration of 
 Independence, and thereby admitted the principles promulgated in this iristrn- 
 ment to be the fundamental law of the old thirteen United States. The result i«, 
 that the adoption of the declaration of Independence by the respective states, 
 virtually abolished slavery in all those states. J. D. H. 
 
 * See Vol. I., page 540—541.
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 583 
 
 (Note Q., Referred to on Page 229.) 
 
 The author has given quite a correct account of the union of the Burrites and 
 Bepuhlicans against Gov. Levv'is in 1805-6 — and which was said to have been 
 consummated at the celebrated Dyde supper. I know something of it myself. 
 Although I was not much of a Burrite, being in Congress and absent from home 
 till within a tew days of the election, and then cautiously refraining from all 
 positive action in regard to it, yet I was set down as such, and am so registered 
 by the author. Happening in Albany shortly after the Dyde supper, I wag 
 invited to make one of a large dinner party. The guests were chiefly distin- 
 guished men, who in the election of 1804, had given the preference to Col. Burr. 
 A few distinguished men were present who had preferred Gov. Lewis. We 
 were highly complimented for our early and superior sagacity in discovering the 
 unfitness of Gov. Lewis for this important office. As I had taken no active part 
 in the elcct-nn, I seemed to be the peculiar object of even lavish encomium. 
 They allowed that I had been actuated by a noble and disinterested patriotism — 
 not from any attachment to Col. Burr, but from a persuasion that the public 
 interest would not be promoted by the election of Lewis. They endeavored to 
 persuade us to believe that we had pursued the republican path, while they had 
 inadvertently been led astray in the pursuit of a phantom. E. B,, 
 
 (Note R., Referred to on Page 248.) 
 
 I was acquainted with Burr, and I thought w^ell acquainted with him, -when 
 in the height of his power and fame. I was two years with him in the assembly ; 
 was in Congress when he was President of the senate, and have heard him in the 
 Supreme Court and Court of Errors. From this knowledge of him I draw quite 
 diflercnt conclusions, in regard to his talents, from those of the author. As a 
 lawyer and as a scholar he was not inferior to Hamilton. His reasoning powers 
 were at least equal. Their morfe.s of argument wore very different. Hamilton 
 was very diffuse and wordy. His words were so well chosen, and his sentences 
 BO finelj' fonned into a swelling current, that the hearer would be captivated. 
 The listener would admire if he was not convinced. Burr's arguinents were 
 generally methodized and compact. I used to .say of them, when they were 
 rivals at the bar, that Burr would say as much in half an hour as Hamilton in 
 two hours. Bnrr was terse and convincing, while Hamilton was flowing and 
 rapturous. They were much the greatest men in this state, and perhaps the 
 greatest men in the United States. Burr was not distinguished for his morality, 
 nor was Hamilton ever dabbed professor of the moral law. E. B,.
 
 584 EXPLANATOKY NOTES. 
 
 (Note S., Referred to on Page 329.) 
 
 I 
 
 The information given the author by William A. Clarke, member of assembly 
 from Orange county, in relation to the proposed distribution of stock in the State 
 Bank as an inducement to its passage, is correct. I was in Albany while the 
 bill for the incorporation of that Bank was pending in the legislature. I was 
 not a member — I had been the year before, but was then a member elect of 
 Congress, to take my seat at the next session. I had for years before been 
 politically associated with those engaged in procuring the passage of the bill, 
 and with most of those intended for directors of the bank. I could not of 
 course be ignorant of the object, nor of the proposed means for its accomplish- 
 ment. In the first place it must be Republican, to counteract the political in- 
 fluence of the Albany Bank, and thus to make it grateful to the parly and insure 
 its passage, the stock must be well distributed throughout the state, and the 
 ■way to do it most readily would be for the republican members of the Legislature 
 to take shares. I was asked to take a part in the bank, and I did subscribe for 
 fifty shares. I returned home, and when I learned that the bill had passed both 
 Houses, and had become a law, I went to Albany to pay in the first instalment, 
 and take the scrip for my shares. I called upon most of the directors, but the 
 paper to which I had subsaibed for my shares, vas not to be found, and of 
 course no shares were reserved for me. The Directors afterwards allowed me 
 sight shares, and, as one of them told me, from those reserved for themselves. 
 I declined to take them, as I had prepared to take the whole number subscribed 
 for, and did not wish to be troubled, at so great a distance from the Bank, with 
 so small a share of its stock. After the adjournment of the legislature, John 
 Lamb, one of the members from Delaware, presented me with a certificate of 
 eight shares for myself, and offered me eight other shares allowed him. He saio 
 he should not fill them up himself, and it was thought I should be satisfied with 
 the sixteen shares. In a fit of more spunk than wisdom, I rejected the whole. 
 
 There was nothing of mystery in the passage of the bank. It was passed as 
 fk party measure, with the avowed intention of distributing the stock among the 
 party. There was no assurance that tlie stock would be above par. There was 
 no body to assure, nor was there any need of it to secure the passage of the bill. 
 It was urged, by the projectors and managers of the scheme, that the stock would 
 be above par, to induce prominent republicans as well as members of the legis- 
 lature to go into the measure. The affidavits of Luther Rich and others were 
 never taken as applicable to this bank ;*— nor was the " Jedediah Bushel" anec- 
 dote. Members of the legislature did not sign to any paper, and there was no 
 disguise in the transaction. These affidavits must have been made with reference 
 to subsequent transactions, and the affair of Judge Peck was in the case of the 
 charter of the Mechanics and Farmers Bank. E. R. 
 
 * I have myself seen a printed paper purporting to be a copy of the aflSdavit 
 of Luther Rich, as set forth in the text. Gen. Root does not of course claim to 
 make this negative allegation from his own knowledge. His suggestion in 
 relation to Judge Peck may be, and propably is, correct. J. D. H.
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 585 
 
 (Note T., Referred to on Page 330.) 
 
 WTien the State Bank was created, the procurement of bank charters was not 
 a matter of speculation. It was not then, as a few years afterwards, reduced to 
 a corrupt science. The projectors of this bank found that their friends in New 
 York had attained mucli of political influence by means of the Manhattan Bank, 
 and w^ere desirous of doing the same in Albany, by the establishment of a new 
 one in that city. They were apprehensive that without some correlative source 
 of gain, the stock of a new Bank in Albany would not be profitable ; and indeed 
 that it might be difficult to induce them to become so. Accordingly they took 
 the Onondaga Salt Springs to aid along their project. That being denied, they 
 sought to push it forward by spreading the stock among the influential repub- 
 licans of the state, including members of the Legislature, and carry it through as 
 a party measure. Nothing in the transaction had the least semblance of a 
 corrupt influence. No one would hesitate, from motives of delicacy, to offer to 
 a member, nor for him to take, shares in a bank sooner than in a turnpike road or 
 the old canals. But afterwards, when leading members of the party put them- 
 selves in opposition to a projected Bank charter, either because it might aid the 
 political power of their adversary, or impair the gains of their own cherished 
 institution, the petitioners, to secure success, resorted to means corrupting in 
 tlieir character, and demoralizing in their tendencies. Their shares would be 
 assigned to members, and upon a credit, and with assurance of a certain premium 
 in the event of a charter. In the case of the Mechanic's and Farmer's Bank, the 
 members had their shares, and speculators were present and purchased them in. 
 In this bank it was said that the informal scrip, or brief minute, was made out to 
 "J. Bushel" and by Judge Peck assigned in the Tisual informal manner. But 
 transactions of this kind had not yet become wicked in the public estimation. 
 They were talked of as pleasantries. The Merchant's Bank in 1805 had powerful 
 opposition to encounter, and of course made use of powerful means to accom- 
 plish the object. Then the shares and assurance became downright corruption. 
 This was the commencement of that " corrupt practice" mentioned in page 329 
 by our author. E. H. 
 
 The General says, that " nothing in the transaction had the least semblance of 
 coiTupt influence." I have no doubt of his sincerity, and I readily concede that 
 he did not discover any corrupt influence. It will be remembered that he was 
 not at the time a member. But grant that Wm. A. Clark's account of the trans- 
 action is correct, and concede that representations were made that the stock 
 would be above par (and I am quite sure "Wm. A. Clark did so state, and if he 
 did not, he is, I believe, now living in Orange county, and can correct me if I 
 err) did not the assurance that everj- republican member should have a certain 
 number of shares, if the charier for the bank passed, have a tendency to induce 
 the republican members to act and vote from mercenary motives ? The General 
 nimself was angry because he did not get his full tale of Btock— Why was he 
 angry, if shares were not desirable ? J. D. jj.
 
 586 EXPLANATORY KOTES. 
 
 (Note U., Referred to on Page 338.) 
 
 The author thinks the application for the charter of the bank of America a 
 meritorious one, and standing on its own merits ought to have been granted 
 Had he been well acquainted with the application of Col. Throop for a five million 
 bank, he would have arrived at a diiferent conclusion. I \vill proceed to give 
 the outlines of that application, bat 1 must do it entirely from memory, and 
 without any journal or document to refre.sh it. 
 
 The old Bank of the United States had expired by the limitation of its charter, 
 and the bill for its revival had been rejected in the Senate of the United States 
 by the casting vote of the Vice President. A large share of its stock was held 
 by foreigners, mostly Hollanders. Col. Throop was their agent, at least to 
 the amount of five millions of that stock. Early in the session of 1812, he made 
 an application to the legislature of this state, in behalf of these foreign stock- 
 holders, for the incorporation of a bank of five millions of ihi.s stock, and as a 
 bonus for the charter he proposed to pay into the treasuiy of this state ten per 
 cent on the capital, before the company should be allowed to operate under the 
 charter. Thebillwas ready drawn, and presented with the petition to the senate, 
 read the first and second lime, committed to a committee of the whole liouse, 
 and put upon the general orders. I ofton called for the consideration of the bill, 
 hut it would never "co7«e at nit/ call." The applicants for the five million 
 bank, or Bank of America, pretended to have of the stock of the old United States 
 Bank, but it was known they had but little if any of it at command. They too 
 were to give a bonnx often per cent ; but subsequent events showed, what waa 
 then believed, that they never intended to pay it. This application, when com- 
 pared with Col. Throop's, could have no merits of its own. I was extremely 
 anxious to pass the five million bank. I urged the advantage ofsavingthis large 
 foreign capital in this country, as well as the rich accession of half a million 
 of dollars to our treasury. It was this proposition which suggested to my mind 
 the plan which I submitted for tlie adoption of the Legislature, to institute a 
 board with full power to grant bank charters. My plan was to authorize the 
 Secretary of State, Comptroller and Attorney General, to grant charters or 
 licence to any company to caiTv on banking operations, under proper restrictions 
 and for a limited period, on paying in all their capital, and ten or more per cent 
 upon it as a bonus into the treasury. This, I urged, would limit banking capital 
 to the wants of the country, keep the stock above par, and ensure fidelity in the 
 companies. The revenues to be derived from this source, I was for applying to 
 the school fund. Had my plan been adopted, what a rich blessing it would 
 have been to the countrj' ? li.. K. 
 
 The facts contained in this note are of great importance, and ought to have 
 been inserted in ray histoiy. If any additional evidence were required to prove 
 that the Legislature acted corruptly in chartering the Bank of America, the fact
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTES. 587 
 
 that they rejected Col. Throop's application, urged as it was by the talents and 
 eloquence of Gen. Root, and granted the petition for a charter to the Bank of 
 America, is of itself decisive. J. D. H. 
 
 (Note V., Referred to on Page 41. ) 
 
 I am reminded by Gen Root of an error which I regret has been often repeated. 
 From the time of the adoption of the federal constitution, in 1788, till about the 
 time o£the election of Gen. Jackson in 1828, the party opposed to the federahsts, 
 was known as the Republican party. For a long time the word democrat, or 
 democratic, was used as a term of reproach. The republicans were by the 
 federalists called democrats, as synonymous with the word Jacobin. And indeed 
 it was intended to convey the idea that the republican party in principle and 
 practice was nearly allied to the Jacobinic Clubs in France. On the other 
 tiand, the republicans, with a view to cast odium on tlieir opponents, called the 
 federalists aristocrats. 
 
 In writing my history, 1 carelessly used the words democrat and derrwcracy 
 according to their proper meaning, since the presidency of General Jackson. 
 As the alteration of the stereotype plate, in every case where the error occurs, 
 would occasion considerable expense, ihe reader himself is requested to make 
 the correction. J. D H.
 
 INDEX TO VOLUME I 
 
 ACT, to raise the pay of militia, for privateering, 380. For raising two regiments 
 of colored men, 3S1. Relating to inland navigation, 301. In relation to 
 internal improvements, 425. 
 
 ADAMS, JOHN, candidate for President, 1796, 101. Is elected, result of canvass 
 102. Violent oppositon to his administration, its cause, 116. 
 
 ADAMS, JOHN Q., letter in favor of the embargo, 266. 
 
 ADDRESS, of Clintonian party, 504. 
 
 ALLEN, PETER, controversy, 413-17. 
 
 ALLIANCE between France and America, celebrated in New- York, 106. 
 
 ANTI-FEDERALISTS, their reasons for voting for adoption of Federal Constitu- 
 tion, 26, 26. 
 
 ANSWER to the Governor's speech, 282. Of the Senate, 369. 
 
 ARISTIDES, remarks upon, 188. 
 
 ARMSTRONG, JOHN, elected Senator of United States, 153. Appointed Minis- 
 ter to France, 215. Secretary of War, 358. Retires, 379. 
 
 AUSTIN, MOSES, account of his nomination for senator, 470-1 
 
 B. 
 
 BANK, U. S., charter expires, attempt to renew it, 290. Plan to establish a great 
 bank in the city of New-York, 299. Merchants' Bank, New- York, 332- 
 35. Mercantile Company, Albany, 219. Bank of America, project to 
 defeat the passage of the bill, 312. Bill passed, 314. 
 
 BANKS, chapter xvii. 323. Chartering Manhattan Bank, 325-7. State Bank, 3ais. 
 Merchants' Bank, 330. Proceedings in chartering Bank of America, 336. 
 Chemical Bank, 337. 
 
 BENSON, EGBERT, appointed Justice of the Supreme Court, 81. 
 
 BOUCK, WILLIAM C, member of Assembly, 368. Appointed Canal Commis- 
 sioner, 663. His character, 564. 
 
 BRIBERY, bill for the prevention of, 233. 
 
 BUCKTAIL PARTY, origin of name, 451. Obtain a majority in Assembly, 532. 
 
 BUEL, JESSE, Editor of the Plebeian, 224. Establishes the Albany Argus, his 
 character, 358. Appointed State Printer, 383. Transfers the Argus to 
 Moses I. Cantine and I. Q. Leake, who were appointed Slate Printers, 
 636. 
 
 BURR, AARON, acts with the Federalists in ns9, .39. Chosen United States 
 Senator, 60. Elected member of Assembly from Orange county, 136. 
 His conduct in respect to the Presidential election in 1800, 137-44. He 
 loses the confidence of the republicans, 303. Becomes a candidate for
 
 590 INDEX. 
 
 Governor in opposition to the Democratic party, 203. His party de- 
 scribed, 203. Is defeated, reflections on his defeat, 208-9. Charged 
 with treason, 243 His character, 254-9. 
 
 c. 
 
 CADY, DANIEL, member of Assembly, character, 272. 
 
 CANAL, bill passed to construct, 441. Proceeding in relation to, 492. 
 
 CANAL COMMISSIONERS, names of persons first appointed, 301. Their powers 
 and political character, 301. Appointed under Ihe aet of 1S16, 425-6. 
 
 CAUCUS, how far its proceedings ought to be binding, 192. Of Federalists, re- 
 specting the support of Col. Burr for Governor, 208. Proceedings of, 
 411-12. To nominate United States Senator, 4S4. 
 
 CHANGE, of the mode of nominating candidates for the Senate, 294. 
 
 CLARK, ISRAEL W., editor of Albany Register, character, 472. 
 
 CLINTON, GEORGE, opposes adoption of U. S. Constitution, 4. His re-election, 
 41. Re-election, 62. Investigation by tne Assembly as to the validl'.y of 
 his election, 76. His views in relation to appointments and removals, 
 83. Declines a re-election, SS. Elected member of Assembly, 135. No- 
 minated Governor, 154. Elected, 102. Elected Vice-President, 216. 
 Reasons assigned for his vole against U. S. Bank, 290. Letter to Wil- 
 liam Dunning, 209. A portion of the democratic party for giving him 
 the vote of the state lor President, 2GS. Death, 312. 
 
 CLINTON, DE WITT, elected member of Assembly, 108. Chosen Senator from 
 Southern District, 115. Member of Council of Appointment, 153. Of- 
 fers resolution in the Senate that Pre;idential Electors shall be chosen 
 in districts by the people, 183. Chosen United States Senator, 183. Ap- 
 pointed Mayor of New-York, resigns his seat in U. S. Senate, 197. Re- 
 marks on same, 197-200. Mayor of New-York, 262. Resolutions and 
 speech approving the general administration, 271. Mayor of New- York, 
 289. Nominated (or Lieut. Governor, 291. Project to support him for 
 President, 297. Nominated candidate for President, 315. Defeated, 
 322. Displaced from Mayorality, 399. His memorial to Legislature 
 in favor of Canal, 424. Appointed Canal Commissioner, 425. Schemes 
 to defeat his nomination for Governor, 434. Elected Governor, 443. 
 Speech to Legislature, 449. His political position, 474. Speech in 1819, 
 482. Re-elected, 531. Speech in 1820, 538. Controversy with Senate, 
 652-7. 
 
 COLDEN, C. D., appointed Mayor of New-York, 464. 
 
 COMMON SCHOOLS, provisions for, proposed by Jedediah Peck, 129. Fill for, 
 168. Bill passed for support of same, 216. Governor urges attention 
 to the fund, 280. Laws respecting remodelled, 374. System improved, 
 491. 
 
 CONVENTION, at Poughkeppsie, 21. Its proceedings, 22-9. 
 
 CONVENTION, question on calling, 543. Meeting at Tammany Hall recommend 
 a bill for calling same, 537. 
 
 CONVENTION OF 1801, recommended, 159. Its proceedings. 165-7. 
 
 GOODIES, their origin, 397. 
 
 COOPER, CHARLES D., Secretary of State, 440. 
 
 COOPER, WILLIAM, attempt in the Assembly to impeach him, 77. Resolution 
 rejected, 82. 
 
 COUNCIL OF APPOINTMENT, its powers, 32. Governor claims exclusive right 
 of nomination, 32. Members of, in 1789, 38. In 1790, 44. In 1791, 49 
 in 1792, 64. Dispute with Gov. Jay, 165-S. Peculiarity of this feature
 
 INDEX. 591 
 
 m the constitution, 169-70 Its proceedings in 1301, 172. Reniarks up- 
 on, 180 Proceedings in 1806, 234. Lewisite Council chosen, 237. Its 
 proceedings, 238. Cliaraeter of its members, 245. Of 1808, 261. Its 
 proceedings, 261. Of 1810 and its proceedings, 280. Of 1811, 289. Of 
 1812, Clintonian in its character, 304. Of 1813, Federal, 343. Its pro- 
 ceedings, 346, Of 1815, its proceedings, 392-6. Of lsl6, 417. Effect 
 of influence in, 420. Of 1817, 436. Proceedings of, after election of Ue 
 Witt Clinton, 446. Manner of its selection in lbl8, 458-9. Of 1820, 618. 
 Of 1821, 639. Its proceedings, 567-70. 
 
 CRAWFORD, WM. H. candidate for President, 410 
 
 CRUGER, DANIEL, Speaker of the Assembly, 413. 
 
 D. 
 
 DEMOCRATIC PARTY, their success in ISOO, 134. Great success in 1803, 194. 
 DUDLEY, CHARLES E., elected Senator from Middle District, 603. 
 DUELS, singular combination of Burr's friends, 187. Duel between De Witt Clin- 
 ton and John Swanwout, 186. Between Hamilton and Burr, 210-14. 
 DUER, WILLIAM A., member of Assembly, character, 427. 
 DYDE SUPPER, 228. 
 
 E. 
 
 EDWARDS, OGDEN, introduces bill for convention, 469. 
 ELECTORAL LAW proposed by J. Swartwout in 1799, 122. 
 ELECTOl^vS FOR PRESIDENT in 18l0, 152. 
 
 EMBARGO, 260. Effect of, 265. 
 
 EMMETT, THOMAS ADDIS, appomted Attorney-General— character, 346. 
 EMOTT, JAMES, chosen Speaker, 363. 
 
 FEDERALISTS, points of difference between them and Anti-Federal party, 16-19. 
 Causes of defeat in 1300, 162. Obtain a majority in Assembly, 296. 
 Causes of again becoming a minority, 286. Success in New-York, 296. 
 Charged with partiality to the British, 223. Obtain majority in As- 
 sembly, 311. Of New-York, disapprove of Hartford Convention, 369. 
 Favor the nomination of Clinton, 436. Generally supported Clinton, 
 474-5. Two parties among, 484. 
 
 FELLOWS, HENRY, and Peter Al'.in, controversy for seat in Assembly, 413-17. 
 
 FRENCH REVOLUTION, feelings of Americans in relation to, 72. 
 
 G. 
 
 GERMAN, OBADIAH, elected to the Assembly, 115. Character, 218. Elected 
 United States Senator, 276. Elected Speaker of Assembly, and contest 
 respecting same, 477-82. 
 
 GREEN BAG MESSAGE, S57. 
 
 H. 
 
 HALE, DANIEL, appointed Secretary of State, 112. 
 
 HAMILTON, ALEXANDEK, great agency in relation to the United States Consti- 
 tution, 4. His letter to T. Pickering, 14. Member of National Conven-
 
 592 INDEX. 
 
 tion, 11. His conduct in respect to Presidential Election in 1800, 144^53 
 
 Pamphlet against John Adams, 147. Argument in Supreme Court ia 
 
 the case of Harry Croswell, 266. 
 HART, EPHRAIM, appointed Canal Commissioner, 495. 
 HARTFORD CONVENTION, 3S3. 
 
 HAWLEY, GIDEO.N, Superintendent of Common Schools, 346. Removed, 569. 
 HENRY, JOHN V., appointed Comptroller, 134. Removed, his character, 174. 
 HIGH MINDED FEDERALISTS— their address, 523. Names, 529. 
 HILDRETH, M. B., appointed Attorney-General, 262. Death, 345. 
 HOBERT, JOHN SLOSS, elected United States Senator, 110. His letter to the 
 
 legislature, 110. Death, 217. 
 HOGEBOOM, JOHN C, his character, 196 
 HOLT, CHARLES, establishes the Columbian, 279. 
 HUNTI.VGTON, HENRY, member of the Council of Appointment, character, 234. 
 
 JAY, JOHN, candidate for Governor, in 1792, 55. His election defeated by de- 
 struction of Otsego votes, 63. His prudent conduct on that occasion, 70. 
 Candidate for Governor in 1795, 90. Elected, 90. Reception on return 
 from England, 91. His first speech, 95. Re-elected in 1798, 113. Refu- 
 ses to call an extra session of the legislature, 144-6 Declines a re- 
 election, 155. 
 
 JAY, PETER A., member of Assembly, 427. Recorder of New-Y'ork, 606. 
 
 JEFFERSON, THOMAS, elected President, 160. His election celebrated at Al- 
 bany, 160. 
 
 JEIVKINS, ELISHA, appointed Secretary of State, 174, 262, 2S9. 
 
 JONES, SAMUEL, appointed Comptroller, 104. Importance of that office, 104. 
 Resigns, 133. 
 
 JONES, SAMUEL, Jr., elected member of Assembly, 296. 
 
 K. 
 
 KENT, JAMES, member of Assembly, 53. Appointed Justice of Supreme Court, 
 112. Chief Justice, 214. Chancellor, 366. Hisopposition tothe billfor 
 encouraging privateering, 380. 
 
 KING, RUFUS, chosen United States Senator, 44. Appointed Minister to Lon- 
 don, 103. Elected United States Senator, 343-5. Supports the war, 878. 
 Nominated for Governor, 425. Re-elected United States Senator, 617. 
 
 KING, CHARLES, member of Assembly, his motion to approve of the gallantry 
 of the Officers and Seamen of the Navy, 368. 
 
 KNOWER, BENJAMIN, State Treasurer, his character, 562. 
 
 LANDS, sale of, 57. 
 
 LANSING, ABRAHAM G., appointed Treasurer, 193. Re-appointed, 282. 
 
 LANSING, GERRIT Y., chosen Clerk of Assembly, 237. Removed from office 
 
 of Master in Chancery, 289. 
 LANSING, JOHN, Delegate to National Convention, 11. Appointed Justice of 
 
 the Supreme Court, 47. Nominated for Governor and declines, 204, 
 
 His controversy with De Witt Clinton, 241. 
 LAWRENCE, JOHN, elected United States Senator, 103. 
 LEWIS, MORGAN, appointed Attorney-General, 51. fustice of Supreme Conrti
 
 iKDfcXi 59S 
 
 78. Chief Justice, 180. Nominated for Governor, 204. Elected, 208. 
 
 Speecti, 232. Elected State Senator, 285. Supports Gov- Tompkins, 286. 
 LIBEL, law of amended, 207. 
 LIVINGSTON, BROCKHOLST, Justice of Supreme Court, 180. Associate Judge 
 
 of Supreme Court of United States, 240 
 LIVINGSTON, GILBERT, speech in Poughkeepsie Convention, 26. 
 LIVINGSTON, MATURIN, Recorder of New- York, 215. Supports Merchants' 
 
 Bank application, 219. 
 LIVINGSTON, ROBERT R., his support of the Federal Constitution— his change 
 
 and opposition to the Federalists, 107: Candidate for Governor, 113. 
 
 His death and character, 351. 
 LOTTERIES, grant of to Colleges, 373. Dr. Nott's efforts in favor of, 373. 
 
 M. 
 
 MADISON, JAMES, his Kentucky resolutions discussed in New-York Legislature, 
 125. Nominated for President, 264. Favors the Burrites and Lewis- 
 ites, 266. Removes G. Granger from the office of Postmaster General 
 and appoints R. J. Meigs, 391. 
 
 MANHATTAN COMPANY chartered, 129. 
 
 MARCY, WILLIAM L., Recorder of Troy, 467. Pamphlet -vvritteu by him in fa- 
 vor of R. King, 515. 
 
 MARCUS and PHILO CATO, letters of, 227. 
 
 MARTLING'S LONG ROOM, meeting at, 230. 
 
 MARTLING MEN, oppose Clinton, 270. 
 
 McCORD, ANDREW, Speaker of the Assembly, 237. - 
 
 MoINTYRE, ARCHIBALD, elected to the Asssembly, 115. Appointed Comptroller 
 234. Removed, 566. Elected State Senator, 570. 
 
 MITCHEL, SAMUEL L., chosen U. S. Senator, 215. His Charater, 216. Speech 
 in the Assembly, 283 
 
 MONROE, JAMES, candidate for the Presidency, 405. Nominated President, 412. 
 
 MORNING CHRONICLE, 185. 
 
 MORRIS, GOUVERNEUR, chosen U. S. Senator, 134. Canal Commissoner, 301. 
 
 N. 
 
 NORTH, WILLIAM, appointed United States Senator by Gov. Jay, 113. Chosea 
 Speaker of Assembly, 280. 
 
 o. 
 
 OAKLEY, THOMAS J., Surrrogate of Dutchess county, 281. His character, SST. 
 
 Appointed Attorney-General, 607. 
 OTSEGO COUNT i", destruction of its votes, 63. 
 
 I^ARTIES, first organized on the question of adopting the Federal Constitation 
 
 3. In the Convention at Philadelphia, 12. 
 PECK, JEDEDIAH, elected to the Assembly, 115. His character, 123. 
 PLATT, CHARLES Z., chosen Treasurer, 351. 
 PLATT, JONAS, appointed Clerk of Herkimer county, 53. Nominated for 
 
 Governor, 279. Character, 279. Appointed Judge of Supreme Cooitt 
 
 366-7. 
 
 38
 
 594 INDEX. 
 
 PORTER, PETER B., Canal Commissioner, 301. Appointed Secretary of State, 
 
 396. 
 PRENDERGAST, JEDIAH, contest with Wilson about his seat in Senate, 462-4^ 
 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, result of, in 180S, 202. Also in 1812, 322. 
 PURDY, EBENEZEK, charged with bribery, 219. Resigns his seat in Senate, 219. 
 
 R. 
 
 RADCLTFF, PETER W., his conduct in the Council of Appointment, 346-9. 
 
 KESOLUTION, that officers of United States could not hold seats in the New- 
 ' York Legislature, 46. By Mr. Spencer, that Comptroller (Jones) could 
 not hold his seat as Senator, 1 1 0. In Senate, for loan to the Nation, 353. 
 To loan money to Niagara sufferers, 364. That Governor furnish infor- 
 ' mation relative to interference of United States officers at state elec- 
 
 tions, 552. 
 
 RESTRAINING LAW, first act relating thereto, 331. 
 
 RICHMOND ENQUIRER, attack upon De Witt Clinton, 264. 
 
 ROOT, ERASTUS elected to the Assembly, 115. His active part in debate in the 
 Senate, 371. Resolution to inquire into the conduct of W. W. Van 
 Ness, 519. His bill declaring slavery unconstitutional, 540. Speech 
 thereon, 541. Speech at caucus for nominatmg Clinton President, 316. 
 
 s. 
 
 SANFORD, NATHAN, chosen Speaker of the Assembly, 288. Senator of United 
 States, 393. 
 
 SAVAGE, JOHN, member of Assembly, 368. 
 
 SCHUYLER, PHILIP, chosen United States Senator, 44. Re-elected, 106. 
 
 SEDITION LAW, manner of executing it by Federalists, 130. 
 
 SENATORS of the United States, bill for choosing, rejected by Council of Bevi- 
 sion, 43. 
 
 SEYMOUR, HENRY, elected Canal Commissioner, 497, 
 
 SHARPE, PETER, chosen Speaker, 537. 
 
 SHELDON, ALEXANDER, Speaker of the Assembly, 202-3. 
 
 SLAVERY, bill for abolition of, passes the Assembly, 123. Question about ad- 
 mitting Missouri with right to hold slaves, 517. 
 
 SOUTHWICK, SOLOMON, chosen Clerk of the Assembly, 190. His character, 
 190. Editor of Albany Register, 267. Shcriffof Albany, 273. First Pre- 
 sident of Farmers and Mechanics' Bank, 291. Is an agent for applicants 
 for Bank of America, 301. Trial for bribery, 318. Nominated for State 
 Senator, 375. Defeated, 376. Removed from the office of State Praiter, 
 383. Appointed Post-Master of Albany, 407. 
 
 SPENCER, AMBROSE, member of Assembly, 79. Of the Council of Appoint- 
 ment, 153. His correspondence with Judge Foote, 176. Appointed At- 
 torney-General, 181. Appointed Judge of the Supreme Court, 201 
 Supports Gen. Armstrong for President, 358. Letter to R. Riker by 
 Gen. King, 319. Opposition to Clintonians, 360. His influence declines. 
 419-20. Supports Clinton for Governor, 422. Reconoiliatiofi with 
 Clinton, 430. Appointed Chief Justice, 500. 
 SPENCER, JOHN C, supported by Clintonians for United States Senator, 484. 
 
 Speaker of the Assembly, 514. 
 STATE SENATORS, classed politically, 451. Clintonians, their several cban^ 
 
 ters, 451-3. Bucktails the like, 453-6. Federal, 456. 
 SUPREME COURT, members of, 42. Project respecting, 498.
 
 INDEX. 595 
 
 T. 
 
 TAMMANY SOCIETY, its History, 340. 
 
 TALLMADGE, MATTHIAS B., appointed United States Judge of Northern Ui«. 
 
 trict, 217. 
 
 TAYLOR, JOHN, Speech in the Senate, 294. Nominated Lieutenant-Governor, 
 354. Elected, 357. Acting Governor, his character, 439. Personal af- 
 fray between him and Judge Purdy, 335. 
 
 TAYLOR; JOHN W., member of Assembly, his character, 305. Elected Speaker 
 of the House of Representatives, United States, 551. 
 
 THOMAS, DAVID, elected member of Assembly, 115. Agent of Bank of America, 
 tour through Western counties, 301. Appointed Stale Treasurer, 263. 
 Re-appointed, and causes for his re-appointment, 305. Arrested and 
 tried for bribery, 317. 
 
 THOMPSON, SMITH, appointed Justice of Supreme Court, 180 His character, 
 181. Appointed Chief Justice, 366. Appointed Mayor of New-York, and 
 declines, 238. Appointed Secretary of the Navy, 497. 
 
 TIBBITS, GEORGE, elected senator, 376. 
 
 TILLOTSON, THOMAS, appointed Secretary of State, 174. 
 
 TOMPKINS, DANIEL D., member of Convention of 1300, 165. Chosen memter of 
 Congress, 209. Appointed Justice of Supreme Court, 214. Nominated 
 for Governor, causes, 238. Elected, 246. Re-elected, 28S. Speech, 
 261. Message proroguing Legislature, 309. Re-elected, 357. His popu- 
 larity, 361. Endorses Treasury notes, 378. Influence and popularity, 
 391. Message recommending abolition of slavery, 432. Resigns his of- 
 fice as Goverr.or, 439. His accounts with the state, 501-21. Nomina- 
 ted for Governor, 527. Calls an extra session of the Legislature, 379. 
 Declines the office of U. S. Secretary of State, 390. Candidate for the 
 Presidency, 407. Nominated Vice-President of United States, 412. 
 
 TOWNSEND, HENRY A., member of the Council of Appointment, his political 
 character, 366. 
 
 TREATY WITH GREAT BRITAIN, opposition to it, 92. 
 
 V. 
 
 VAN BUREN, MARTIN, first civil appointment, 262. First appearance in the 
 Legislature, 321. His bill for repealing the restraining law, 371. Ap- 
 pointed Attorney-General, 392. Elected U. S. Senator, 861. His sup- 
 port of Clinton for President and Tompkins for Governor explained, 
 429. 
 
 VAN NESS, WM. P., appointed U. S. Judge for southern district, 217. 
 
 VAN NESS, WILLIAM W., member of Assembly, his character, 217. Leader of 
 the Federal party in the Assembly, 235. Appointed Judge of Supreme 
 Court, 247. Proceedings in Assembly against, 618. 
 
 VAN RENSSELAER, STEPHEN, candidate for Lieut. Governor in 1795, 90. Elect- 
 ed candidate for Governor against George Clinton, 155. His letter to 
 his tenants, 161. Nominated for Governor, 356. 
 
 VAN RENSSELAER, JACOB R., Member of Assembly, his character, 272. Ap- 
 pointed Secretary of State, 366. 
 
 VAN VECHTEN, ABRAHAM, appointed Attorney-General, 231. He-appointed 
 349.
 
 596 INDEX 
 
 w. 
 
 WAR, with Great Britain, 317. Difficulties in carrying on same, 363. British cap- 
 ture Washington, 377. Collisions between Senate and Assembly, 351. 
 Vigorous measures of the Legislature, 381. Peace, 393. Condition of 
 country at close of war, 394. 
 
 WASHINGTON, GEORGE, declines a re-election to the Presidency, 101. His 
 death, 132. 
 
 WHEATON, HENRY, editor of the National Advocate, 343. 
 
 WILKIN, JAMES W., chosen Speaker, 268. 
 
 WILLET, MARINUS, candidate for Lieutenant-Governor, 293. 
 
 WILLIAMS, ROBERT, elected to the Senate as a Republican, 280 His conduct 
 in the Council of Appointment, 281. 
 
 WOODS, DAVID, elected Speaker, 431-47. 
 
 WOODWORTH, JOHN, nominated United States Senator by the Assembly, 191. 
 Defeated on joint ballot, 192. Appointed Judge of the Supreme Court, 
 500. His suit with the Bank of America, 547. 
 
 YATES, ROBERT, Delegate to National Convention, 11. Charge to the Grand 
 Jury of Albany county, 30. Candidate for Governor against Gov. Clin- 
 ton, 39. Appointed Chief Justice, 47. Candidate for Governor against 
 John Jay, 90. Resigns office of Chief Justice, 112. 
 
 YATES, JOSEPH C, elected State Senator, 221. Appointed Judge of Supreme 
 Court, 262. 
 
 YATES, JOHN VAN NESS, Recorder of Albany, 289. Removed, 430. Character, 
 289. Appointed Secretary of State, 468. 
 
 ^OUNG, SAMUEL, elected member of Assembly, 368. Chosen Speaker, 372. 
 Author of Amicus Juris Consultus, 380 Supported for United States 
 Senator, 486.
 
 r\
 
 J^ Q ^ THE LIBRARY 
 
 v.\A u^ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 v)4- vt3 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 AVAILABLE FOR 
 01K(JULAT10N Al- ' i ' i.l^ 
 
 DISPLAY PERIOD 
 
 
 2-TrToi2 
 
 1^' MAR 1 3 r/'|2 
 
 ,.-.. ^ .i. 
 
 
 #l*ErD-^POA 
 
 
 p. 
 
 JLO-lDjEe=^Jti M 
 
 20w-8,'61(C2084s4)476
 
 3 1205 OOOQo 7533 
 
 ^^ 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 857 183 8 
 
 ■; -i
 
 
 ^ ■''*^^^.^^^*'"^\'Ci^X*^' 
 
 ,"^