of memory afterward, is no sufficient excuse. There was no lapse of memory when he wrote to Mazzei, and he then knew full well that the house of representatives was republican. We are therefore justified in the conclusion that he did mean to accuse the President, and, when the letter was published by his Italian correspondent, he attempted to evade the consequences justly due to the man who proves a traitor to friendship.

Our next illustration of Mr. Jefferson's insincerity shall be afforded by his conduct, with reference to Colonel Burr. As usual, our author accompanies his relation of this matter with a kind apology, which we must say, we think not very satisfactory. But the professor shall be heard for himself:

"On the 15th of December, when a precise return of the votes had not been received, Mr. Jefferson wrote to Colonel Burr, and informed him of the reports in circulation that he had received a smaller number of votes than himself in some of the states, yet still enough to put him before Mr. Adams. He at the same time expressed his regret that he should lose the benefit of Colonel Burr's talents in the cabinet. The language used on this occasion has been thought inconsistent with a remark made in his diary, that Colonel Burr's conduct had, very soon after their acquaintance, "inspired him with distrust."* The passage in this letter runs thus: "I feel most sensibly the loss we sustain of your aid in our new administration. It leaves a chasm in my arrangements, which cannot be adequately filled up. I had endeavoured to compose an administration whose talents, integrity, names and dispositions, should at once inspire unbounded confidence in the public mind, and insure a perfect harmony in the conduct of the public business. I lose you from the list, and am not sure of all the others. Should the gentlemen who possess the public confidence decline taking a part in their affairs, and force us to take people unknown to the people, the evil genius of this country [meaning Hamilton] may realize his avowal, that he will beat down the administration." But surely it is not at all extraordinary that this favorable testimony of Colonel Burr's qualifications, founded quite as much on his popularity as on his talents and integrity, should be at variance with Mr. Jefferson's opinion at a previous or a subsequent period; or that when in 1801 Burr had excited suspicions of his good faith, and in 1806 and 1807 had proved himself undeserving, Mr. Jefferson should have returned to his first unfavorable impressions." Vol. ii. p. 76.

Let us now hear Mr. Jefferson :

"I had never seen Colonel Burr till he came as a member of the Senate. His conduct very soon inspired me with distrust. I habitually cautioned Mr. Madison against trusting him too much. I saw afterwards, that under General Washington's and Mr. Adams's administrations, whenever a great military appointment or a diplomatic * Jeff. Corr. vol. iv. p. 520.

VOL. I.-NO. I.

one was to be made, he came post to Philadelphia to show himself, and in fact that he was always at market, if they had wanted him. He was indeed told by Dayton in 1800, he might be Secretary at War; but this bid was too late. His election as Vice-President was then foreseen. With these impressions of Colonel Burr, there never had been an intimacy between us, and but little association. When I destined him for a high appointment, it was out of respect for the favor he had obtained with the republican party, by his extraordinary exertions and success in the New-York election in 1800." Correspondence, vol. iv. p. 520.

We have here, it will be perceived, a distinct avowal that nothing but the popularity of Burr in New-York led Mr. Jefferson to think of nominating him to office: his purpose was not founded on the qualifications, real or supposed, of the man; his capacity and integrity were not the moving causes, if Mr. Jefferson may be believed. Now admit that he afterward saw cause to change his opinion of Burr; how are we to reconcile the reason here assigned for having destined him to a high appointment, viz., mere respect for his popularity in New-York, with that which he assigned to Burr himself in his letter of December 15, 1800.* He thus writes:-" While I must congratulate you, my dear Sir, on the issue of this contest," (the election which elevated both himself and Burr) "because it is more honorable and doubtless more grateful to you than any station within the competence of the chief magistrate, yet for myself and for the substantial service of the public, I feel most sensibly the loss we sustain of your aid in our new administration. It leaves a chasm in my arrangements which cannot adequately be filled up. I had endeavored to compose an administration whose talents, integrity, names and dispositions, should at once inspire unbounded confidence in the public mind, and insure a perfect harmony in the conduct of the public business. I lose you from the list."

Was language like this calculated to convey to the mind of Colonel Burr the impression that Mr. Jefferson's purpose of appointing him to office was the result solely of his "respect for the favor he [Burr] had obtained with the republican party in New York?" If it was not, are we to conclude that Mr. Jefferson meant to deceive his correspondent into a belief that he thought better of him, than he really did? Shall we be told, in answer to this plain proof of double dealing, that the courtesies of life forbade Mr. Jefferson to say to Burr, "I value you as a convenient instrument for my purposes simply because you

Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 444.

happen now to be the idol of a part of the people whom I dare not disregard?" Let it be granted: still we are constrained to ask, why this gratuitous exuberance of affection, respect and praise? We see not the necessity for saying any thing to Burr on the subject; but if such necessity existed, surely Mr. Jefferson might, without any violation of courtesy, have simply informed his correspondent that he had designed to tender to him an office in the new administration, but that his election as vice president had put it out of his power to do so. We have heard that he who has made politics a trade, has embarked in a filthy calling; and if its pursuit requires that truth and honor should be sacrificed, that systematic deception should take the place of that honesty and fair dealing which are "the glory of man's nature," it is indeed a corrupting employment; but we think we have heard and read of some men in our own country, who could conduct public affairs without a resort to duplicity. Not to name others, as we might do, we ask, would George Washington have left it on record that he nominated any man to office on mere party considerations, and yet inform the nominee, in substance, that he had proposed him from the high consideration he entertained for his virtue, his integrity, and his talents?

But the dissimulation of Mr. Jefferson does not stop here. He has himself furnished additional testimony on this point. We have already seen that soon after Burr entered the Senate, Mr. Jefferson, upon his own showing, had not confidence in him; that he cautioned Mr. Madison repeatedly not to rely upon him; and yet, some years afterward, in 1806, after the people had refused to re-elect Burr to the vice presidency, in an interview which Mr. Jefferson had with him, the particulars of which he has himself recorded, he tells us: "I observed to him that I had always been sensible that he possessed talents, which might be employed greatly to the advantage of the public; and that as to myself, I had a confidence that, if he were employed, he would use his talents for the public good."* Confidence in a man who, upon a very short acquaintance, had inspired him with distrust! Confidence in one who "was always at market" to be bought by a party; in one against whom he "habitually" cautioned one of his own political friends and advisers! Such confidence, if it really existed, betrays a want of judgment not one degree removed from downright stupidity; and if it did not exist, the brand of duplicity is indelibly fixed on him who professed to feel it now Mr. Jefferson's worst enemy never charged him with stupidity.

* Correspondence, vol. iv. p. 520.

It were easy to proceed further in our exhibition of the defects of character which marked Mr. Jefferson; but enough has been said to put our young countrymen on their guard; and we confess it affords us no pleasure to dwell upon the picture of moral delinquency. Rejecting Christianity himself, and seeking to make young infidels by the wholesale, building his system of morals upon the miserable sophism that the end of actions alone determined their virtue, stooping to the meanness of recording the unguarded language of familiar conversation, that it might furnish that testimony which inordinate self-conceit made necessary to comfort, calmly waiting until death had shut the door against the possibility of contradicting that testimony, violating the sacred claims of friendship, and practising consummate duplicity, the list of Mr. Jefferson's defects surely needs no addition there is however one trait more of which it becomes us to say a word, if it be for no other purpose than that of recording our protest against an opinion of dangerous tendency, which should have been rebuked by our author.

It was the received belief of many who knew Mr. Jefferson, that he was deficient in courage. The opinion was founded chiefly upon his conduct, while Governor of Virginia, during the war of the Revolution. We mean not to enter upon the details of that conduct; our author furnishes us with a defence of it, composed for the most part of a formal vindication prepared by Mr. Jefferson, and by him published anonymously in 1805; in which, as he wrote in the third person, the statement, without any seeming departure from modesty, commends Mr. Jefferson, and possesses also the additional advantage of appearing to be the testimony, not of the accused, but of some third person who professes to have been an eye witness. We candidly acknowledge that in our view it is of very little moment whether Mr. Jefferson was a coward or not. He resigned his office of Governor because, as he said, he possessed no military qualifications, and desired that some one should rule who was a soldier. thing is certain, that no incident of Mr. Jefferson's political life ever shook his popularity as much as his conduct during the invasion of Virginia by Arnold. In the legislature which immediately followed his resignation, an impeachment was proposed, and a day was appointed for a hearing at the next session; but the proceedings were ultimately dropped without investigation, and a resolution was adopted by the lower house which was exculpatory and complimentary; this in the Senate was pared down to a simple expression of the high opinion entertained "of Mr. Jefferson's ability, rectitude, and integrity as chief magistrate," and a wish to remove from him "all unmerited

One

censure." Our author informs us that this alteration of the resolution by the Senate, served "to improve the form, without affecting its substance:" vol. i. p. 157-note. A comparison of the two resolutions led us to the belief that the sole object of the Senate's alterations, was to affect the substance. The point however, is of little importance, nor should we have touched at all the question of his courage, but for the fact that his biographer repels the charge of cowardice by the production of what we deem very equivocal proof of firmness of nerve.

66

Among his political assailants in Albermarle, was one whom he thought to have so far transcended the just limits of party warfare, that he had determined to challenge him, and would have done so, if the friend he consulted had seconded his purpose." Vol. ii. p. 501.

And this is one proof that Mr. Jefferson was a hero. He actually thought of sending to his antagonist an invitation to the duello! and said he would have done so, but for the want of a friend to second his purpose; for we know not how, save from his own declaration, professor Tucker can possibly know what he would have done. What an illustrious exhibition of courage! What a craven spirit must have belonged to General Washington, for he would have refused to fight a duel! What a mortification to the chivalric Jefferson, that when one friend refused to bear his challenge, he had not another on earth to whom he might apply for the purpose. But to be serious; there is something worse than ridiculous in this contemptible item of testimony to Mr. Jefferson's bravery. It becomes not a professor of moral philosophy to adduce evidence like this with nothing more to mark his reprobation of it, than the declaration that "men in general" consider it satisfactory. Young men are ready enough to adopt the belief that what the world calls wounded honor, can be healed only by a murder; they are ready enough to consider duelling as evidence of valor: it was not necessary then to countenance indirectly their false notions; it had been more in keeping with the lessons of the professor's chair, at least to have intimated that in his view the supposed proof was no evidence at all; for that while a miserable poltroon may have his "courage screwed to the sticking place" and fight from that most contemptible cowardice, a fear of the world's laugh; it demands moral courage of the highest order, to brave the world and obey the Maker of it.

We proceed now to speak of the character of Mr. Jefferson's mind. It was more remarkable for its activity than for its accuracy: it was deficient in the power of nice discrimination, it wanted logical precision. In all that Mr. Jefferson has left behind him, one looks in vain for the evidence of that severe