The irregularity of the mails has prevented my receiving your letter of the 15th inst., with its enclosures, until this day.
I have read Mr. Bayard's letter to you under date of the 8th inst. All the circumstances connected with the subject to which it refers are within my recollection; but, absent as I am from my papers, I am unwilling to speak with great confidence in relation to events which have occurred nearly thirty years since.
The deposition of Mr. Bayard, to which I presume Mr. Jefferson alludes in his memorandum of the 15th of April, 1806, was taken, as you remark, in the case of a wager. The title of the cause I do not now recollect; but Abraham Smith, a clerk in my store, was one of the parties, and I think the period was during the winter of 1805. It may have been a year later.
In that deposition Mr. Bayard states that a negotiation in regard to the pending election between Mr. Jefferson and Colonel Burr, in February, 1801, was entered into with Mr. Jefferson, through Mr. Nicholas, of Virginia, and General Samuel Smith, of Maryland; and that Mr. Jefferson did agree to certain stipulations or conditions therein specified. It is proper for me to add, that to both Robert G. Harper and General Smith the same interrogatories were propounded that were answered by Mr. Bayard, and that the testimony (if my memory is correct) of Mr. Bayard was, in every material point, sustained by both these gentlemen. These examinations were made under a commission issued out of the Supreme Court of our state.
Several copies of these depositions were made from the originals, and I have reason to believe that one copy of them was in the possession of Mr. Bayard or Mr. Harper, and another in the possession of Stephen R. Bradley, Esq., of Vermont. They were read by different gentlemen; among them, I think, was General John P. Van Ness, of Washington city, and Rundolph Bunner, Esq., late a member of Congress from this state, who, I have no doubt, can and would, if asked, detail their contents. I should suppose that General Smith would not only recollect the occurrences in February, 1801, but the contents also of the deposition to which he has sworn.
During the contest I was the advocate of Mr. Jefferson's election, and corresponded with different members of Congress; among the number were Edward Livingston and Albert Gallatin, Esquires. The letters I then received enumerated not only the doubtful states, but the doubtful men of both parties which were in Congress. These letters have been carefully preserved.
It is due to the character of the late Mr. Bayard to remark, that, so far as the circumstances have come to my knowledge, there was nothing in the transaction calculated in the slightest degree to impeach his fidelity to his party or his honour. The object of the negotiation was not to aggrandize or to elevate himself or his friends, but to secure and perpetuate certain cardinal points of federal policy.
I have not seen the works of Mr. Jefferson, but I will obtain and examine them with care and attention. The history of the times to which these memorandums and documents relate are enveloped in thick darkness. Whether the period has yet arrived when an effort should be made to dispel that darkness is problematical. The means, however, do exist of proving, to the satisfaction of the most skeptical, what are the facts in the case; and, consequently, of doing full justice to all the parties concerned; and that duty, however unpleasant, shall, at a proper crisis, be fairly, impartially, and fearlessly performed.
At my advanced age I do not wish to be drawn into newspaper controversies; nor can I be induced, prematurely, to make any publication on the subject alluded to in this letter. At the same time, you are at liberty to communicate the whole or any part of its contents to Mr. Bayard, in the expectation that it will be used discreetly.
Respectfully, your friend,