holding fast to a narrow definition of treason, decided that whatever Burr might have said was protected under his First Amendment right of free speech and, finding no evidence of treasonous intentions or acts, ruled for acquittal. After explaining all this very clearly, the author concludes that historical scholarship cannot give any definitive answer to the nagging questions about Burr’s true intentions or to the roles played by major figures such as Jefferson and Wilkinson. Rather than leave readers with that underwhelming result, Lewis uses this crisis as an avenue of inquiry into the ways different social and political groups obtained and interpreted news. The book is, therefore, more about public opinion and discourse, shaped by all kinds of interests and values, than about Burr or his activities. Reactions to the so-called conspiracy highlighted the weakness of both the federal union and national sentiment as well as widespread anxieties about the future. In this way, Lewis makes contradictory primary sources serve a useful historiographical purpose, as he unravels the intimate relationship between social communication and political power. His arguments are lucid, and his research is impressively thorough, as demonstrated in the almost two hundred pages of detailed notes. This book is not an easy read. Readers looking for a continuous narrative will be frustrated by its structure, which reflects the myriad perspectives and multilayered complexities of perceived reality, but the intricately probing depth of Lewis’s work on the evolving political culture of the young republic definitely rewards the effort.

中文翻译：

---

詹姆斯麦迪逊的论文：总统系列。第 8 卷：1814 年 7 月至 1815 年 2 月 18 日编辑。安吉拉·克莱德 (Angela Kreider) 等人

坚持对叛国罪的狭义定义，决定伯尔可能所说的一切都受到他的第一修正案言论自由权的保护，并且在没有发现叛国意图或叛国行为的证据的情况下，裁定无罪释放。在非常清楚地解释了这一切之后，作者得出结论，对于伯尔的真实意图或杰斐逊和威尔金森等主要人物所扮演的角色的唠叨问题，历史学术无法给出任何明确的答案。刘易斯并没有给读者留下令人印象深刻的结果，而是利用这场危机作为探究不同社会和政治团体获取和解释新闻的方式的途径。因此，这本书更多地是关于由各种兴趣和价值观塑造的公众舆论和话语，而不是关于伯尔或他的活动。对所谓阴谋的反应凸显了联邦联盟和民族情绪的弱点以及对未来的普遍担忧。通过这种方式，刘易斯使相互矛盾的原始资料成为有用的史学目的，因为他揭示了社会传播与政治权力之间的密切关系。正如近 200 页的详细笔记所证明的那样，他的论点清晰明了，他的研究令人印象深刻。这本书读起来并不容易。寻求连续叙事的读者将对其结构感到沮丧，它反映了感知现实的无数视角和多层次复杂性，但刘易斯对这个年轻共和国不断发展的政治文化的深入探索肯定会奖励这种努力。