The noted conspiracy of Senator Blount of Tennessee then came to light[51] and precipitated a spirited discussion between the Spanish Minister and Mr. Pickering. The former contended that the plot had been revealed and that no one any longer doubted that the expedition was to have taken place,[52] while the latter maintained that there could have been no connection between Blount's scheme and either the expedition from Canada,[53] or the project attributed to General Clarke.[54] The Secretary argued in support of his position that Blount's expedition was to have been formed in one of the states south of the River Ohio; that it was destined against the Floridas, and perhaps Lower Louisiana; that Blount himself expected to be at the head of it; that it was not to be undertaken but in conjunction with a British force; and that "on the proposal of the expedition to the British Government, it was totally rejected."[55] He maintained further that the suspicion of a British invasion from Canada was groundless for the following reasons:--(1) Preparations for such an expedition would have attracted attention and rendered satisfactory proofs attainable; (2) the troops of the United States, stationed along the Canadian border, were in position to protect the frontier, as well as to get information of any warlike preparations and communicate the same to the Secretary of War, yet no such communications had been made; (3) the British did not have on the lakes a force adequate to such an enterprise; (4) the routes suggested for such a campaign would have interposed great difficulties for the transportation of troops, equipage, provisions, etc., even if they could have been taken without violating the territory of the United States; and (5) the British Minister, after inquiring of the Governor General of Canada and of "the British Secretary of State," denied that his Government either had intended or was then intending such an expedition.[56] V. FEAR OF AN ATTACK FROM THE UNITED STATES.