On p. 667, a fictional contention was put in Harison’s argument “that there may have been a deliberate attempt to prevent testimony and suppress evidence.” That was implicit in the refusal to allow Callender to be called at the trial, and in his subsequent death, but was not in the Caines notes.
“I do not deny”: “I do not deny the well-known maxim, ‘the jury decides the fact, the judge determines the law’ .. .[but] on the judgment of malice—that is a combination of fact and law that only you have the right, and thus the power, to decide.” In other notes taken by one of the appeals judges, AH went on to say that “in criminal cases, the law and the fact are always blended” and if, in the jury’s judgment, “the law is different from what the Court advances, they are bound by their oaths and their duty to the Creator and themselves, to pronounce according to their own Convictions.”
Here we have Hamilton in the Croswell case justifying jury nullification in seditious libel, just as Jefferson in his Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions justified State nullification of a Federal Sedition Act. Though poles apart in their concept of Federal power, Jefferson was prepared to challenge the Executive, as Hamilton was to challenge the Judiciary, in urging States or individual jurors to resist or ignore sedition law.
Maria Reynolds Clement was not present at the trial, nor was Matthew Lyon or his son. The dramatic production of Callender letters is fiction, though such letters transmitting money from TJ to JTC exist and were cited. The unnamed state legislator is fictional, but the information he conveys is true: as a result of Hamilton’s argument, a State law was passed restricting the abuse of libel. Truth as a libel defense was enacted into the New York State Constitution in 1821, setting the pattern for many other States. In 1961, not only was Hamilton’s requirement for the showing of evil intent reaffirmed by the Supreme Court, but even if a defamatory charge was untrue, the plaintiff in a libel action against public figures had to show that the publication acted “with actual malice” and “in reckless disregard of the truth.”
“It is only by the abuse of the forms”: An example of my revision of the notes of the trial is this: The paragraphs beginning “It is only by the abuse of the forms of justice that we can be enslaved . . .” and “The sight of this, of a fellow citizen’s blood . . .” constitute a straightening-out and dramatic rendering of these obviously hasty notes: “It is not thus that the liberty of this country is to be destroyed. It is to be subverted only by a pretense of adhering to all the forms of law, and yet by breaking down the substance of our liberties. By devoting a wretched, but honest man as the victim of a nominal trial. It is not by murder, by an open public execution, that he would be taken off. The sight of this, of a fellow citizen’s blood would first beget sympathy; this would rouse into action and the people, in the madness of their revenge, would break upon the heads of their oppressors, the chains they had destined for others.”
The quill-penned note-taker caught the gist of Hamilton’s argument, but not its logic and eloquence, which I have tried to restore.
What is the basis for my speculation that Maria Reynolds and Aaron Burr had a longstanding relationship? That they knew each other is an established fact: Burr represented Maria in her divorce from James Reynolds in the mid-1790s. Since she had no money, it had to be for little or no fee—probably the token sixpence in “court costs.” Perhaps this free lawyering was done out of friendship, or a common detestation of Hamilton, or as the natural action within a continuing love affair. But more telling evidence of their lengthy association is in a memoir in the possession of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania from which excerpts have never been published at length.
Julian Boyd, the Jefferson historian, noted that after Hamilton’s pamphlet appeared using Mrs. Reynolds as his shield, only three sources “seem to have voiced the opinion that, far from being the aggressor, [Maria] herself was the victim of a cruel and slanderous fabrication.” One was Jacob Clingman, who married her; another was James Thomson Callender, the polemicist; and “another was Peter A. Grotjan, a Philadelphia merchant who wrote long after the event and in such a mixture of verifiable fact and implausible recollection tinged with romanticism as to make his account usable only with extreme caution.”
With that caveat, let us examine the sections of Grotjan’s memoir that deal with Maria Clement, the name she assumed. The memoir was written in 1846, intended not for publication but for the study of his Philadelphia family. Of its 40,000 words, about 2,000 deal with Maria and her daughter. They are the only evidence unearthed so far that they returned to America, and that they were helped by Aaron Burr. Here it is in print for the first time, written by an old man about events that took place more than four decades before. The reader can decide if it has the ring of truth.
Selections from Memoirs
óf Peter A. Grotjan
You have often my dear children solicited me to give you a sketch of the adventures of my past life and I have often promised you, that if my time, circumstances, and situation would permit, I was willing to undertake this agreeable task. This period has at length arrived. The term of my public services has expired, and my present age (nearly 70 years) admonishes me, that I have arrived at that period of life at which I can without censure withdraw from the turmoils of it.
In the spring and summer of 1800, Mr. Edward Addicks and Frederick Brauer, two particular friends of mine, the latter being a fellow boarder, rented some rooms at a farm house on the margin of the Schuylkill River near the Falls, with a family the name of Culp, in order to enjoy the summer afternoons and evenings at this rural and truly romantic retreat, where I often visited them by general invitation and spent many a delightful evening and Sunday. It appeared that a lady of very retired habits, also had rooms there and a permanent residence for the summer. I had not yet seen her and it appeared that Messrs. Addicks and Brauer had only met her at the dinner table. However, I was shortly afterwards introduced to her one evening, and a walk on the banks of the river proposed. She went by the name of Mrs. Clement, was remarkable [sic] handsome, and particularly interesting, in consequence of a shade of melancholy visible in her countenance. She was well bred and well informed, and although of rather a romantic turn of mind, she was free from affectation or pretensions.
The acquaintance of this charming person was a great acquisition to our social circle. But notwithstanding the great propriety of her conduct, there was a mystery attached to her situation and lonely seclusion, well calculated to awaken the curiosity of persons of our age. Messrs. Addicks and Brauer who had more frequent opportunities to converse with her than myself, had learned that her history was somehow or other connected with that of Aaron Burr and General Hamilton but further their knowledge did not extend. Having recently read a pamphlet published by General Hamilton in justification of some bitter political controversy between him and Aaron Burr, in which the former exposed the character of a Mr. Reynolds and his wife, but especially traducing the character and reputation of the surviving widow of Mr. Reynolds in the most glaring manner, the idea struck me that this lady might be Mrs. Reynolds under the assumed name of Mrs. Clement.
Without communicating my impressions to her or anyone else, I notwithstanding had many opportunities during our conversations to allude to various parts of her history, as if speaking of another person. I frequently perceived her astonishment and surprise and found that she gave me credit for more knowledge of her affairs than I actually possessed. My uniform friendly and delicate conduct towards her, had won her regard for me, and one evening, when alone accompanied by a flood of tears, she begged my friendship and confidence. She said she felt herself irresistibly impelled to make me acquainted with her sad history, and if my advice could not better her condition, my sympathy would assuage her sorrows.
She then gave me an outline of her history, up to the time of our conversation, which I will endeavor to narrate as faithfully as the lapse of forty-four years will permit. Having from that period until her death (which took place about 1
0 or 12 years ago—1832 or 4) been a true and disinterested friend to this lady, many circumstances have occurred after the year 1800, which will connect her with the thread of history.
She informed me that her maiden name was Maria Lewis, that she was born in New York and was married very young to a Mr. Reynolds. This person was an active politician of the Federal party, and as such the friend and co-adjutor of Hamilton, deeply initiated in all the intricacies of political maneuvering and as such employed by the General in the execution of various plans. In the meantime Hamilton became deeply enamoured with the charms of the beautiful Maria and succeeded in seducing her affections from her husband.
The various political maneuvers did not remain unobserved by the sagacious Aaron Burr, who sought the acquaintance of Mr. Reynolds, whom he by some means convinced of his political errors. The consequence was a disagreement between him and Hamilton which ended in breaking up their connections and throwing the weight of Reynolds secret knowledge into the scale of Aaron Burr. Hamilton and Burr, both men of powerful intellect, both crafty and ambitious, had been for years political opponents and this circumstance greatly widened the breech [sic] and increased their personal dislike.
However, Mr. Reynolds soon afterwards died, and left his widow with one small child, a daughter, named Susan. In due time she consoled herself for the loss of her husband by marrying a gentleman by the name of Clement. [Did Clingman change his name to Clement?] Of this person she gave me very little information, except that he got into great pecuniary difficulties, and left her and the child without protection. She stated that she had never heard of him since. From that moment Mr. Burr befriended her, and extended his support to her and her child for many years after.
In 1799 [1797-ed.] some political scheme of General Hamilton’s having been counteracted and foiled by the tactics of Aaron Burr and several severe animadversions having appeared in the public prints against the General, he published in pamphlet form a refutation, wherein he exposed his intrigue with Maria Reynolds in colors, the most glaring. Depicting the character of Reynolds as base and unprincipled, he accused him of having been privy to his intimacy with Maria and did not spare Aaron Burr’s character as a political maneuverer. This pamphlet created considerable sensation but was a death blow to the reputation and prospects of the unfortunate Maria.
Dragged so ungenerously before the public by her seducer, pointed at as a vile prostitute, her situation was lamentable in the highest degree. Shame and remorse nearly annihilated her and but for the assistance of Aaron Burr, she would have fell an early victim of despair, instead of living for many years after as a highly respected married lady. As this period of her story, which I have greatly condensed, she was so overcome by agonizing feelings, that she could not proceed for many minutes.
Under these dreadful circumstances, Mr. Burr provided a place of education and board for the child in Boston under her mother’s maiden name as Susan Lewis, and advised Mrs. Clement to retire for a while to some other place in the deepest seclusion and privacy. She followed this advice, removed privately to Philadelphia and lodged with a poor but respectable widow whom she had known in the days of her prosperity, until she accidentally heard of the family of Mr. Culp and their retired situation on the banks of the Schuylkill, where she expected to remain secluded and unobserved during the summer.
She added that her leisure time had been devoted to write a pamphlet in answer to that of Hamilton in which she had given a faithful history of the arts and wiles employed by him for her ruin. This pamphlet she had placed in the hands of Mr. William Duane, editor of the Philadelphia Aurora, for publication and that it was her desire and request that I should peruse it. I made several efforts to that effect, but could not obtain it, Mr. Duane, stating that in the event of certain political movements, it should be published, but before that time he did not wish to communicate the contents to anybody. It was never published. Thus passed the summer of 1800, at the close of which she returned to the humble dwelling of her friend, and I only heard from her occasionally.
This was the first year of Th. Jefferson’s administration and laid the foundation of a long and permanent ascendancy of Democratic government and measures. The Alien & Sedition Law, the Stamp Act, (under which I became a naturalized citizen) the Window Tax, and many other obnoxious and anti-republican laws were repealed but not without great opposition and bitter feelings from the Federal Party, who to give vent to their disappointed feelings showered their unmitigated abuse, both in public and private on the head of Thomas Jefferson. He was a Jacobin, A Visionary—An Atheist. They accused him of being in love with a negro woman under the euphonious title of “Black Sall,” a lampoon in verse, to that effect was published and widely disseminated, the composition of which was attributed to John Quincy Adams. Aaron Burr who had been elected Vice President, also got his share of abuse, but being rather of a cunning and intriguing disposition was not so heavily persecuted . . .
I discovered in the beginning of this year [1801] that the situation and pecuniary circumstances of Maria Reynolds (who had now reassumed the name of her last husband Clement) were very embarrassing and precarious and offered her my services to make her circumstances known to Mr. Burr. This formed the commencement of my correspondence with that celebrated person. Whatever may have been the failings of Aaron Burr, I have always found him to be a man of the highest intellectual character and of a humane and generous disposition towards those who suffered.
He shortly afterwards visited Philadelphia and sent me an invitation to see him at the Indian Queen in Fourth Street. I found him a lively and very agreeable man in conversation. He informed me that the daughter of Maria, then about 14 years of age, who he had placed in a Seminary in Boston, with the assistance of some of his friends at that place, under the name of Susan Lewis had informed him that she was very anxious to see her mother but that under present circumstances it could not be, with propriety, affected, unless she could be respectably introduced into Society, without revealing her parental history. I was fully impressed with the existence of these difficulties, but still felt desirous to gratify her innocent and natural wishes, if it could be done with propriety and safety to the persons immediately interested . . .
Some short time previous to this event, Maria Clement had consented to superintend the household affairs of a celebrated old French Doctor by the name of Mathew who had been made acquainted with her history, and her situation was comparatively much more respectable and comfortable . . .
From January 1, 1806 to December 31, 1807
During my endeavors to settle my affairs in the most advantageous manner, I in some measure retired from at least Gay Society, and practiced the strictest economy, consistent with comfort. I rented an office in Walnut near Front Street, a small two story brick building with one sleeping room on the second floor. Here I kept Bachelor’s Hall, that is to say breakfast supper and lodging, and dined at a boarding house. My intimacy with Dr. Mathew and Maria Reynolds (now Clement) then his housekeeper and still under strict incognito as to her adventures; remained uninterrupted . . .
I remained at St. Jago to await the arrival of Capt. Grafton with whom I intended to return. He arrived in January 1807, and the first information I received of him from Philadelphia was the intelligence that my friend Dr. Mathew had been married to Maria Reynolds or Clement, or rather as she was only known by her maiden name, to Maria Lewis. It pleased me much, but did not surprise me. She was highly amiable and handsome, she was besides an exemplary housewife, and personally as well as from gratitude much attached to the Doctor . . .
Susan Lewis married to a Mr. Wright at Boston . . . and had one daughter by him. It seems however that they could not agree and were divorced by mutual consent. Her mother, Mrs. Mathew, wishing to have her daughter near her to come to Philadelphia (which she accordingly did in 1808) and lived with her mother for several years, when on a visit she made to some friends in New York, she got acquainted with a Mr. Phillips a merchant in that plac
e, and a native of Scotland whom she married and resided with him in New York until his death. This was probably the happiest period of her life, as he was an amiable man, much respected and in prosperous business. She had by him one daughter named Josepha . . . Mr. Phillips died suddenly and unexpectedly of an affection in the brain, I believe in the summer of 1818 or 19, and sometime after his widow and her daughter came to Philadelphia and resided with her mother (Mrs. Mathew).
From this period forward, she brought on by degrees, her own subsequent misery and degradation. I have often pondered and reflected on the probable causes, which could have eventuated in so deplorable an issue; and am strongly of the opinion that the desultory manner of her early ed ucation, the knowledge of the shame and exposure of her mother during the most interesting time of her youth, the secrecy and deceptions she was forced to practice in early life had greatly contributed to give a wrong direction to a mind naturally virtuous, innocent and amiable.
It is with sincere grief that I have to call to my mind the direful end of this once lovely and beautiful creature, who under all circumstances, looked on me to the last, as her over sincere friend, and affectionate brother. It is not my purpose minutely to describe the conduct of her latter years. Suffice it to say, that vanity by degrees led her on to utter ruin step by step. She was married again to a young man of irreproachable character, but in less than a year afterwards gave him cause to declare that he would live with her no longer. I was applied to by her mother and herself to heal this breach, and had an interview with her husband for that purpose. All that he chose to communicate to me on that delicate subject was that the nature of her conduct and behavior was such that no consideration should induce him to live with her any longer. They then parted by mutual consent. From that time forward she added to her misery the vice of intemperance and became fierce and unmanageable, even by those whose opinions she had hitherto respected, until she became unfit for decent society. She subsequently went on to New York, where sometime afterwards she died in misery and poverty, amongst a wretched class of human beings. Her daughter, Josepha remained under the care of her grandmother until she grew a lovely woman and was married. She is now a widow (1846) and the single remnant of that family.
Scandalmonger: A Novel Page 57