Why the Grand Jury did not overwhelm Wilkinson with manifestations of appreciation and gratitude is revealed by John Randolph in a letter to Nicholson reporting on the indictments: “But,” said Randolph, “the mammoth of iniquity escaped. Not that any man pretended to think him innocent, but upon certain drawn distinctions that I will not pester you with. “Wilkinson is the only man that I ever saw who was from the bark to the very core a villain. I cannot enter upon it here. Suffice it to say that I have seen it--so that it is not susceptible of misconstruction.... Perhaps you never saw human nature in so degraded a situation as in the person of W. before the G. J., & yet this man stands on the very summit and pinnacle of executive favor--whilst Jas. M--e [James Monroe] denounced....” Just then Monroe stood in Randolph’s good graces. But like so many others he soon was to incur that inconstant gentleman’s displeasure. A few days later Randolph wrote again: “W-- is the most finished scoundrel that ever lived. A ream of paper would not contain all the proofs--but what of that? He is ‘the man whom the king delighteth to honor’ & all who are in search of promotion find it to their interest to shut their eyes and ears to the evidence of the guilt--among them I could name some, whom I blush to think upon.” Randolph then described in detail the scratches with a pen-knife and restorations in the Burr letter which he claimed were made in Wilkinson’s own handwriting. He concludes: “Let me know what the opinion is with you of this redoubtable thief taker (set a thief etc.) who commands our armies.” In another of his emotional letters to the President, Wilkinson confessed his perplexity at the direction the case had taken: “You are doubtless well aware,” he wrote, “of the proceedings here in the case of Burr. To me they are incomprehensible as I am no jurist. The Grand Jury actually made an attempt to present me for suspicion [Wilkinson meant “misprision”] of treason on the ground of having failed to report Dayton to you. I feel myself between Scylla and Charybdis. The jury would dishonor me for failing in my duty, and Burr and his conspirators for performing it.” The jury’s treatment of Wilkinson provided the subject for a bitter dispute that ran for days in the pages of the _Enquirer_. Under the heading “Drowning Men Catch At Straws,” Editor Ritchie set forth that he was authorized to contradict the slander uttered in Davis’s _Virginia Gazette_ and _Daily Advertiser_ (The _Enquirer_’s Federalist rival) that a motion had been made before the Grand Jury to present the General for high treason and that on the question the jury had divided equally.