Newspaper Page Text
his dull sleepy look was changed into a wild,
almost devilish.expression.
He looked as Job did when he 'contorted.
The General lost his usual mahogany color,
and looked pale; but he said nothing.
Lazy Sam won the race hy about thirty feet.
Job was suddenly cool as a cucumber. And
a he put the twenty-five hundred dollar check
in his greasy pocket book winch he did very
deliberately, lie looked round cunningly,
‘I think that’s leetle past common;’ said Job.
‘Why, Gin’ral, Sam’s laid you as cold as a
wedge.’ He turned round suddenly to his
rider, ‘Jim, you’re a snorter, here’s five dol
lars, why it all goes in a man’s lifetime, but
the Gin’ral looks as though he’d been squeez
ed through the little end of nothing.
POLITICAL.
■ TT..T
very high de
From the Macon Messenger.
MESSRS. STEPHENS AND STILES.
Wepublishedlastweek, aspeecliof Mr. Stiles
and will also give room for one of Mr. Ste
phens’s, perhaps in our next number. The j
speech of Mr. Stephens concludes with the |
following very pointed note :
Since the preparation of the foregoing sheets '
for the press, 1 have seen published in the j
Globe what purports to be a speech delivered i
in the House upon the same subject, by “ Mr. :
Stiles of Georgia,” in which are some remarks J
quite personal to myself. This, I take it lor j
granted, was written by himself, and published i
by his authority. And I notice, that in what j
he reports me to have said to him in the House, ;
in the progress of his speech, he has repte-j
sented me as saying what 1 can hut belive he j
knew that 1 did not say, and he has entirely j
omitted what I am equally confident lie must j
hare known that I did say.
Here is not only a suppressio reri, but a clear ;
gestio falsi; either of which, according to I
most casuists, is wholly inconsistent with a ,
ee of “ moral ^foment,” a '“l i
litude, even 1
by the attrociousness ol that hyp'tfEJ' jpTTiat :
would commence the grossest of personal at
tacks with the profession “ of all kindness.” i
Efforts to assail me or my position, from :
such a soui re, and of such a character, as those
of that member, ei her as originally made or
now reported, will prove no less important in
their object, than they were doubtless malig
nant in their origin. To his remarks as far as ;
my position is concerned, therefore, I have no
reply. To such an argument I shall never
deism to reply. That position I have placed •
fully before the country, and leave the coun
try to judge of it.
But, ns far as his remarks may have been
intended to answer the purpose of conveying
a personal insult, I have this reply ; that no
man, without a provocation, would have chos- j
en the arena of the House, and profaned its
w.tlls (in such a purpose, or to give vent to Lis
private malice, who wasjjot a knave by nature, ;
and a pa/hoon at heatt. And 1 take this me/hr
od of making this reply, l>ecause 1 do not i
choose to select the floor of the House as the
proper place for personal altercations. I did ,
not come here for that jturpo.se.—And in so
doing, I feel that I should no less degrade my- |
self, than offer an unpardonable indignity to, 1
made Use of no such statement, why was it,
wlieh he had risen for the purpose of seeking
explanation and of effecting corrections, that
he made no allusion to it ?
As to the second part of tile charge, viz :
the allegation that I had omitted to state all
that he did say. That there were probably
remarks made by him, which, from the dis
tance that we were separated, may have been
lost in the confusion of the House, I do not
pretend to deny; but even had they been
heard, or kuown to me at the time of writing
out my speech, I am not sensible of any obli
gation resting on me to become the reporters
of another. The labor incident to the usual
course on such occasions I felt quite sufficient
for myself—that is, to report my own remarks,
ana such portions of those of another as I
conceived necessary to explain my own. But
does this justify his course ?—excuse his low
and tardy vengeance ? He dues not pretend
that there was any vat iance between my own
speech, as delivered and as published; and it
is that at which his venom is directed, and to
which he has undertaken to assign “ the pur-
pnse of conveying a personal insult,” and
which, after a fortnight’s deliberation, has at
length elicited his most ungentlemanly reply.
In conclusion, 1 have only to say, that the
object of this individual must be obvious to
my intelligent constituents; and 1 have no
fear that he can thus escape the consequences
of the position which he lias assumed on this
question, nor evade the odium of having fail
ed to vindicate his honor, when he chooses to
complain that it has been assailed.
WILLIAM II. STILES.
Extract, of Mr. Stile's speech “on the right of
members to their seats in the House of Re
presentatives."
It is to me a source of regret that the course
which my colleague has jiursued on this ques
tion, has made it necessory to advert Jo jjneu
unenviable position whiefe..^ ftrard'to it, he
1 J"; ‘assume. I regret that he
Srfitilu nave thought it necessary, by a laboied
speech, to have convinced us of his want of
title to his seat, when that end could have been
so much more effectually and consistently ac
complished, without the utterance of a single
word, by his absence from this hall. But I
regret, more than all, that, with a declaration
on his lips that he is not entitled to his seat, he
should still undertake to vote, act, and receive
the emoluments to which a right to that seat
alone entitled him. There was a time when
such assurance would have been considered
at least a want of delicacy ; when such a dif
ference between ojriniotr and action would
have been held at ieast a want of consisten
cy ; but those days, I suppose, are gone, and
the time arrived when such unblushing effron
tery is deemed, perhaps, an exhibition of
“ moral firmness,” surpassing that which dis
tinguished General Jackson at New Orleans,
and equalled only by that of the judge who
pronounced the infamous sentence upon him.
My colleague says that this is a question for
the judgment of this House : but let me tell
him, in all kindness, that he has, in my opin
ion, mistaken the tribunal in which such a
question was properly cognizable. His posi
tion involved a question, let me say to him,not
ii i i ii t - to be tried and decided in this House, but
that high minded and honorab e constituency, , a]one fo be deterrnined in flora conscientias.
whose representative I am. And if any apol- , Before that tribunal do I arraign and charge
oey be due for the language used, .even in this !
place, I can only say, in extenuation of my er
ror, (if such it lie,) that I was taught, in that
“code of morals” in which “1 whs educated,”
that “ a fool should be answered according to
bis folly;” and my instinct tell tne that Hack
stands sometimes should be treated in a similar
way.
A. H. STEPHENS.
Washington, Feb. 26, 1S44.
TO THE PEOPLE OF GEORGIA.
A friend has called my attention to a note
published by Mr. Stephens, of Georgia, as an
addendum to his printed speech in the House
of Representatives, “ on the right of mem
bers to their seats in the House of Represen
tatives,” and to which I replied while he was
present in his place.
It is evident that this note is an appeal to
the public for satisfaction of his “private
griefs,” and as he thought proper to select
that mode of settling whatever questions of
fact or morals may have existed between us, I
conceive 1 have no alternative left, but to vin
dicate myself before the same tribunal, by a
brief statement of the occurrences which elici
ted his abuse. Whether he has selected the
usual and proper “ method" of satisfaction for
remarks deemed by him “quite personal” to
himself, was a question referable alone to bis
own judgment; and bis “discretion” having
decided that question in the way indicated in
liis public note, 1 proceed to refute, for the sat
isfaction of my constituents, such of his
charges as may seem to bear on tire position
assumed by me in debate, leaving him sole
master of that bloodless field, wherein a “war
of wor ds” is the only conflict. I did occupy
my hour upon the subject stated, and, in the
course of my remarks, commented upon the
inconsistencies of Mr. Stephens’s opinions and
conduct. If my allusion to him had been
deemed offensive at the time it was uttered, lie
had the opportunity to repel it, nr to explain,
as 1 r epeatedly yielded to him the floor for
eitherpurpo-e. He was furnished with anoth
er opportunity on the succeeding morning,
when he arose to correct such parts of the re
porter's account of my remarks as he deemed
erroneous. On neither of those occasions did
he make any such effort ; but now, after the
lapse of a fortnight, would palliate his neglect,
ami excuse his want of resentment, by the
insinuation that there is a variance between the
circumstances as detailed in my speech, and as
they actually occurred in the House; and, al
though my remarks were apjdicable to his po
sition, upon which he states in his note he
does “ not deign a reply,” yet he seizes the
oppor tunity to indulge in a jiarade of vulgar
epithets, which his loss of position and unfor
tunate personal situation enable him to use
with impunity.
It will thus be perceived that the following
quotation from his note is the only portion of
it in relation to which 1 am left at liberty to
offer any explanation. He states : “ And I
notice in what he reports me to have said to
him in the House, in the progress of his speed),
he h as represented me as saying what I can
but believe that he knew that I did not say,
and has entirely omitted what 1 am equally
confident he must have known that 1 did say.”
As to the correctness of the former part of
the charge—viz: that of misrepresenting what
he did say—hut reference to the subjoined ex
tract from my speech, (and which includes my
entire remarks upon the point of Mr. Ste
phens’s position,) it will be observed that a
single question, whether I “would undertake
to be the keeper or the judge of his con
science,” is the only remark which I quote
him as making. Now, that this question, if
not in those identical words, was, at least in
substance, asked me by Mr. S., 1 can not only
most confidently appeal for corroboration to
every member of the House, but indirectly
establish it by that individual himself. On the
morning after the delivery of my remarks, Mr.
S. (as 1 have already had occasion to mention)
called ray attention to the reporter’s account
of what occurred between us, and the paper
wl licit he at that time held in his hand was a
copy of tlie morning Globe, and from which
1 make the following extract:
“ Mr. Stephens, on leave being given him
to explain, said: 1 he gentleman had no
right to judge of his (Mr. S.’s) conscience.”
Here is the very idea I quote him as mak
ing, wanting only the interrogatory form,
which is as correct as the sketches of report-
ers generally are; and, if erroneous, if he bad caustic
hint with the commission of two high and
enormous offences.
He cannot but know, from the study of that
profession for which be was educated. tW na
ture r»r>j criminality of the offence; and I
therefore leave him to name it, while I ebatge
him with taking that to which he says, and
perhaps thinks, he knows that he has no right,
or even “ color of title.”
Again: he cannot but know, from the pro
fession he has followed, that, to participate in
the deliberations of this body, with no right to
a seat, is against the constitution ; and I there
upon charge him with the offence, (leaving him
to name it,) which arises out of the violation
of an instrument which he has sworn to sup
port.
[Mr. Stephens, on leave being given him,
asked if the gentleman would undertake to
be the keeper or the judge of his conscience?]
Mr. Stiles replied : God forbid that I should
ever be the keeper of such a conscience !
Yes, sir, my colleague, with a declaration
on his lips, and a feeling in his heart, that he
is not entitled to his seat—whilst, consequen
tly, in the very act of violating the constitu
tion of his country—lays his hand upon the
word of life, and calls upon God to help him,
or not to help him, as he may or may not sup
port that instrument. If not before high
heaven—if not before the world, at least in
the silent workings of his thoughts, he must
plead guilty ! guilty ! Sir, I dismiss him ;
and, without presuming to be his “judge,” I
may say to him, with as deep sincerity as ever
it was pronounced from the bench to a con
demned criminal, “ may God Almighty have
mercy upon your soul !”
from KtndalTs Expositor.
“ THOU SHALT NOT KILL.”
dialogue between a Deacon and his Minister, o n
the subject of the Presidential Election.
Deacon—I come to advise with you as to
the course which, as a Christ'an, I ought to
pursue in the next presidential election.
Minister—Well, what are your difficulties?
D.—I am a true Whig, and I hope a true
Christian. In 1828 I was much inclined to
vote for Gen. Jackson on account of the great
services he had rendered the country, but you
advised me that, as a true Christian, 1 could
not do so, because he had set at defiance the
laws of God and man, by fighting a duel.—
The Whigs now present us a candidate for
the Presidency who has fouehttwo duels, and
been an accomplice in a third. What am I to
do?
M.—I have heard that Clay was a duelist, j:
but have never inquired into the particulars. I
D.—I have, for I thought it my duty to do i
so when called on to put him at the head of
the nation to see the laws faithfully executed.
Shall I give you the particulars.
M.—Go on.
D.—Here is a “Biography of Henry Clay,”
written by his particular friend, George D.
Prentice. At page 30, we are told lie accept
ed a challenge from Col. Daviess, but it was
adjusted. At page 45, is an account of his;
first duel. Here at e the words of the Biogra
pher, viz :
“ Mr. Clay brought a resolution before the
House [the Kentucky Blouse of Representa
tives,] that each member, for the purpose of
encouraging the industry of the country,
should clothe himself in garments of domestic
manufacture. This resolution called into ex
ercise all Mr. Marshall’s talents of vitupera
tion. He denounced k as the project*of a
demagogue, and 2 a variety of epithets
I°- -IBS author which no parliamentary rules
could justify. Mr. Clay’s language in reply
was probably of a harsh character, and the
quarrel proceeded from one stage to another,,
till according to the laws of honor, which eve
ry Kentuckian of that day was taught to reve
rence, no alternative remained to Mr. Clay,,
and he was requited to challenge his antago
nist. The challenge was accejited. The par
ties met, and the first shot was exchanged
without other effect than a slight wound to
Mr. Marshall. On the second or third trial,
Mr. Marshall’s balfgave Mr. Clay a slight flesh
wound in the leg, and the seconds now inter
fered and prevented a continuance of the com
bat.”
This account is given by a friend and apolo
gist. But it shows that Mr. Clay was the thal-
Icnger and that twice or thriic lie deliberately
attempted to take away the life of a fellow-
man.
M.—But does not the Historian say Mr.
Clay has repented this early crime ?
D.—He says, “we have no doubt that Mr.
Clay erred in this affair with Mr. Marshall,
and it is said that he himself looks back to the |
incident with disapprobation and regret.” If!
there had been any sincere repentance it would I
have shown itself in his subsequent conduct, j
So far from that, some seventeen years after-;
wards, he publicly proclaimed his determine-j
tion to commit the same crime if lie could fend j
an antagonist, and the next year did commit it!, j
M.—Let us have the particulars.
D.—Prior to the election of President by !
the House of Representatives in 1825, it was
should, reason. The true corrective will be
found, when all shall unite, as all ought to
unite, in its unqualified proscription.”
D.—I had observed that passage and re
flected upon it. I will sndeavoj to give the
views it suggests.
1. To kill in a duel is MURDER, by the
laws of God and man. »
2. According to Mr. Clay’s reasoning, mur
der of this sort, is to be excused because it is
“ an affair of feeling." Otherwise he is with
out excuse.
3. All malicious murder is “ an affair of feel
ing,” and is excused on the same ground.
4. How can all unite “in its unqualified
“ Being the friend of Mr. Grates, 1 could
not invoke the authority of the police to prevent
the duel."
H is friends, Messrs. Chas. King and Rever-
dy Johnson, concur in stating, that on their ur
gent appeal to Mr. Clay to aid in arresting the
duel, Clay replied in substance, “ that we
saw how he was situated. Mr. Graves had
consulted him. He ought not, he said, to
have been consulted ; but having been, the
honor of his friend who was the challenger,
might be compromised by any advance on 1 is
(Mr. Clay’s) part to arrest the progress of the
affair.” These gentlemen found Mr. Graves
with Mr. Clay on that occasion, it then being
proscription,” when men like Mr. Clay, whom past six o’clock in the evening, and early the
society recognizes as its leaders, apologize for
the crime and persist in committing it ?
5. So far from promising reformation in this
address, Mr. Clav avows that he “may be forc
ed” to fight again. What is his “deeper ab
horrence” worth, with this avowal on his lips ?
G. Is it not the suiest way to arrive at that
“ unqualified proscription” which Mr. Clay
says is “the true corrective,” for “all” to
■unite in the unqualified proscription'' from the
high offices of the country, of all who are guil
ty of this awful crime ?
M.—I believe the blood of no murdered
man is upon Mr. Clay’s head.
D.—I am not certain of that. But be that
as it may, it is no apology for Mr. Clay that be
did not succeed in his murderous design.—
The reason why the blood of Randolph does
not rest on his bead, is thus lightly given by
his Biographer, pages 299, 300, viz : “ In
due time, the jiarties fired and luckily for both
of them, or at least for Mr. Clay, Mr. Raft-,
dal pit’s life was saved byjij* -gdwnfThe un
seemly tufflFent constituted such a vast cir
cumference, that the locality of * the thin and
swarthy Senator was at least, a matter of ve
ry vague conjecture. Mr. C. might as well
have fired into the outspread top of an oak, in
the hope of hitting a bird be supposed to be
snugly perched somewhere among the branch
es. Ilis ball hit the. centre of the visible object,
but Randolph was not there—and of course
the shot did no harm and no good.”
This shows that if the blood of Randolph
does not rest on Mr. Clay’s head, it is not for
lack of malice or of deadly aim.
M.—But you say you ate not sure that the
blood of the murdered does not rest on Mr.
Clay’s head : what did you refer to ?
D—To the murder of Mr. Cilley in 1836.
M.—Why, Mr. Clay had nothing to do with
that.
D.—You are greatly mistaken. He was
M r. G raves’ adviser from the beginning, until
he went out to fight, and was clearly an accom
plice in the murder.
M.—What authority have you for that?
D.—’I he authority of Mr. Clay’s particular
f und, and of Mr. Clay himself. You may
remember, that Mr. Graves of Kentucky was
the bearer of a challenge from James Wat
son M ebb, to Mr. Cilley, for words spoken in
debate. Mr. Cilley verbally declined accept
ing the challenge for reasons which were en
tirely satisfactory to Mr. Graves. But upon
consultation with Mr. Clay, it was determin
ed to require Mr. Cilley to put his reasons in
writing, and to state among other things that
he considered James Watson Webb a gentle
man. This he refused to do, because he
could not in conscience, and for not admitting
that to be hue which he knew to be false, Mr.
Graves challenged and killed him. And this
charged in a letter published in Philadelphia, ji he did under the advice of Ilenry Clay as I
purporting to be written by a member of the ; -
Beauties of Whiggery.
“Mr. Clay, has long since forfeited all claims to the
suffrages ol the South, hy his zealous support of the Ta
riff; and his advocacy of the Force Iiilt. w ill afford an ad
ditional reason for his receiving the determined opposi
tion of the State Rights Party.”—Ga. Journal, Dec.
25.1838.
“We can never srfpport the distinguished Orator
whose powerful eloquence, has in so many instances
been directed against the interests of the South We
can never support an advocate of the “Force Bill”—we
cannot support • Harry ofthe West.”—Georgia Journal,
Feb. 26, 1839.
“We were among those who believed Mr. Clay was
wedded to a United States Bank, but events as they have
transpired. convinces us that we were in error.’ “We
are pleased that he has abandoned the project, and sin
cerely hope that the energies of his great and powerful
mind, will be directed to the support of what we conceive
to he more beneficial to the country.— Ga. Journal, May
28.1839.
“Our correspondent with oil his zeal, cannot arrive at
the forced construction, that we necessarily because Mr.
Calhoun is in favor, and Clay and Webster opposed to
the Sub Treasury scheme, are tinctured will) Clavism,
Wehsieristn. Federalism, the American System and Ab
olitionism. Of these sins we have never been accused
by our enemies, and it is too late in the day for us to be
catechised hy our friends.”
To answer our correspondent categorically, we have
to say. that vve are neither a Clay nor Webster man, and
so far as the Sub-Treasury is concerned we are not a
Calhoun man.”—Georgia Messenger, April'26.1838.
“As to die other charges of minor consideration, but
no less false, viz:
That the Georgia Whigs are in favor of a National i
Bank.
That the Georgia Whigs are in favor of Henry Clay.
That the Georgia Whigs, are penegyrists of Daniel
Webster.
We would express out denial in a very emphatic mon
osyllable, were not the use of it offensive to “ears po
lite.”— Georgia Messenger, August 23, 1838.
To the Editor of the Georgia Messenger:
“The opposition which is made to Henry Clay by the
States Right Party, is one ol principle. They have no
predilections for him as President of the United S ates,
nor love for his political creed. He hasalwavs been the
open ami avawed. hut generous opposer of tbeir doc
trines. They cannot, to be consistent cast their suffra
ges in his favor, and opposition to his election, will be aa
firmly persevered in, as will be the opposition ofthe same
party, to Martin Van Btiren."—Georgia Journal, June
11. 1839.
“We will strive to promote the cause of State Rights,
by placing before the people, the acts and opinions of a
distinguished son ofGeorgia, (G. If. Troup,) in contrast
with those of Martin Van Buren and Henry Clay.”
( Georgia Journal, July 9, 1839.
“Mr. Clay has identified himself with a course of poli
cy on the part of the Federal Government, which is in
our opinion no less unjust ihau injurious to the best in
terests of the South; against his views, we have warred
hitherto, and shall continue to war uncompromisingly.”
[Southern Recorder, April 3, 1838.'
“Wc consider that a choice of either (Van Buren or
Clay.) would be a great evilu therefore we. shall choose
neither.—Southern Recorder, May 7,1839.
Cure tor Corns.—Corns may be cured by binding
them tight at night with a piece of sponge, moistened in
a solution of pearlash. The com may be brushed off in
the morning, having been dissolved by the yctiAtl of the
Blouse, that Mr. Clay had bargained to make
Mr. Adams President, on condition of receiv
ing preferment at his hands, whereupon Mr.
Clay published a card in the newspapers
which concluded as follows, viz :
“ I pronounce the member, whoever he may '
be, a BASE and INFAMOUS CALUMNIA
TOR, A DASTARD AND A LIAR; and
if he dare unveil himself and avow his name,
I will hold him responsible, as I here admit
myself to he, to all the laws which govern and
regulate the conduct of men of honor. 1
H. CLAY.” |
Mr. Clay was then Speaker of the House of
Representatives, and it was from that high sta
tion that he thus hurled defiance at the laws of
God and man, shocking all the moral and re
ligious feelings of this great nation.
M.—But no duel grew out of that, I believe.
D.—No ; hut it was not in consequence of
any retraction or repentance on the part of
Mr. Clay, as the events of the next year am
ply demonstrate.
M.—Go on.
D.—Mr. Adams was elected President hy
the aid of Mr. Clay’s vote and influence, and
appointed Mr. Clay Secretary of State. In a
speech in the Senate at the next session of
Congress, John Randolph characterised this
coalition of known political enemies, as the
union of the “ Eastern Puritan with the Wes
tern Blackleg." Mr. Clay immediately sent a
challenge. Mr. Clay’s Biographer has not
thought proper, in the text of his work, to give
us any account of this duel, hut in the news
papers of the day, 1 find the following official
account of the meeting, viz :
“On Saturday, the Sth April, at half past
four o’clock, a meeting took place between
Mr. Clay and Mr. Randolph, upon a call of
the former, in consequence of certain expres
sions used hy the latter in a recent debate in
the Senate, which Mr. Clay considered offen
sive, and applied personally to him.
“Mr. Randolph was attended by Col. Tat-
nall, ofGeorgia, and Major Hamilton of South
Carolina. Mr. Clay, hy Gen. Jessup of the
Army, and Mr. Johnson of Louisiana.
“ The parties met on the ground—exchang
ed salutations, and took their stations.
“ The Pistol of Mr. Randolph, which was
suspended by his side, went off'. It was per
ceived to he an accident, and so pronounced
by Mr. Clay; immediately, however, upon
the report of the pistol, Mr. R. turned to Col.
T. and said, “ I told you so.” Col. T. then
turning to Gen. J. observed, “ Sir, the fault is
mine—Mr. R. protested against the use of the
hair trigger—it was at my express instance the
hair was sprung.” Another pistol was hand
ed to Mr. R. The parties resumed their sta
tions and exchanged shots without effect.
“ Immediately after the report of the pis
tols, while Col. T. and Gen. J. were reloading,
Col. Benton, of Mo. rode up, and united with
Mr. Johnson and Col. Hamilton in an effort to
stop the affair, which proved ineffectual. The
patties again took their stations, and the word
being given, Mr. Clay raised his pistol and
fired, and the ball passed through Mr. R’s
clothes. Mr. R. reserved his fire—holding his
pistol perpendicularly up—said, “ I do not
fire at you, Mr. Clay.” and discharged his pis
tol in the air. He added, “it was not my in
tention to have fired at you at all; the unfor
tunate circumstance of my pistol going oft’ac
cidentally, changed my determination.” At
this instant Col. Benton came up and said,
“Yes, Mr. R. told me so expressly, 8 days
ago.” The parties simultaneously approach
ed towards each other, both with extended
hands, Mr. R. remarking, “ Sir, I give you
my hand,” which was received hy Mr. Clay,
and the affair thus happily closed.”
M.—But look here ; Mr. Clay’s Biographer
in his Appendix, page 292, n -tices this duel,
and says Mr. Clay “regrets this incident.”—
He gives an extract from Mr. Clay’s address
to his fellow-citizens soon after the duel, in
which he says, “ I owe it to the community
to say, that whatever heretofore I may have
done, or, by inevitable circumstances, may be
forced to do, no man holds in deeper abhor
rence than I do, the pernicious practice of du
elling. Condemned tis it must he, by the judg
ment and philosophy, to say nothing of the re
ligion, of every thinking man, it is an affair of
feeling, about which we cannot, although we
Here is a letter from Mr. Clay to Henry A.
Wise, dated February 2S, 1S42, in which Mr.
Clay says:
“ I did not know that Mr. Graves bore a
note from Col. Webb to Mr. Cilley until after
the delivery of the note and after Mr. Graves
received from him a verbal answer. In that
stage of the transaction, for the first time, Mr.
Graves communicated the matter to me, and I
congratulated him on the fact of that answer
beiug perfectly satisfactory and such as to ab
solve him from all obligation to pursue the af
fair further."—“On conversation together, we
both agreed that, to guard against future mis
understanding and misrepresentation, it was
desit able that Mr. Cilley should put it in writ
ing what lie had verbally answered.”
Upon this advice Mr. Graves required a
written statement from Mr. Cilley, containing
a concession that Webb was a gentleman;
and not being able to obtain it, he returned to
Mr. Clay for further counsel. In reference to
what then pasred ; Mr. Clay says in the same
letter:—
“ When on the day preceding the duel,
Mr. Graves in company with you, came to my
room, I was informed that lie had determined
to challenge Mr. Cilley, and lie showed me
the challenge which he had drawn. Upon
reading it, 1 thought it closed the door to all
accommodation, stated that objection, and
sketched a draught in my own handwriting
which would admit of an amicable adjust
ment.”
This draught in Mr. Clay’s own handwrit
ing, was copied hy Mr. Graves and sent to Mr.
Cilley. It was in the following words, viz :
Washington City, Feb. 23, 1S3S.
Hon. J. Cilley :
As you have declined accepting a commu
nication which I bore to you from Col. Wehh,
and as by your note of yesterday you have re
fused to decline on grounds which would ex
onorate me from all responsibility growing out
of this affair, I am left no other alternative hut
to ask that satisfaction which is recognized a
mong gentlemen My friend Hon. Henry A.
Wise, is authorized hy me to make the ar
rangements suitable to the occasion,
Your obedient servant,
\V. J. GRAVES.
From a statement published by Messrs.
Wise and Jones (the seconds,) after the duel,
it appears that Mr. Jones stated to Mr. Wise
(when Cilley accepted the challenge,) that he
was authorized by Mr. Cilley to say, that in
declining to receive the note from Mr. Graves,
purporting to be from Col. Webb, he meant
no disrespect to Mr. Graves, because he en
tertained for him then, as he does now, the
highest respect and gthe most kind feeling;
but that he declined to receive the note be
cause he chose not to he drawn into any con
troversy with Col. Webb.”
Yet, after this second disavowal of any dis
respect to Mr. Graves, was this duel pushed,
under the advice of Mr. Clay, to a fatal ter
mination.
But this was not the last of Mr. Clay’s agen
cy.— He was duly informed of the acceptance
of the challenge written by him, and of the
arrangement to fight with the deadly rifle. In
the same letter he says :
“ My belief is, that I never saw the terms
according to which the combat was to be con
ducted, prior to the duel, although I think
they were stated and explained to me,probably
by you" (Mr. Wise.)
That he was in possession of all the parti
culars, is proved by the statements of Charles
King and Reverdy Johnson,Esqr’s., published
by Mr. Clay himself, in which the former says:
“ At neither interview were we shown the
written challenge and acceptance or the terms
of the duel, but had them explained, to us on
ly by Mr. Clay.”
By Mr. Clay’s own evidence, therefore, it
appears, that he advised the written corres
pondence which led to the duel, that he drew
the challenge, and that he knew the terms on
which they were to fight.
M.—Well, when he knew that the parties
had arranged to commit mutual murder, did he
not i^ntke the power of the law to prevent it ?
D.—So far from that, he directly refused to
do so! In the letter already referred to, Mr.
Clay says;
next morning the awful murder was consumat
ed almost in sight of the Capitol !
Mr. Clay says, he did not expect the duel to
he fought the next day, because Mr. Graves
had not at that time procured a rifle ; but Mr.
Clay’s colleague from Kentucky in the Senate,
and one of his particular friends in the House,
borrowed one about twelve o'clock at night
with which the fatal deed was consummated in
the niornig.
Mr. Wise, who was Mr. Graves’ second,
has declared that the duel was caused hy Mr.
Clay’s advice which differed from his own ;
and Mr. Clay says in his letter :
“ I admit without any rcserca'ion uhaterer. that on all
the paints of the controversy respecting which he (Graces')
asl.cd my opinion. I gate it to him freely, according to the
best of my judgment.''
It thus appears:
That Mr. Clay helped to conce t this murder. And :
That when the plan was all complete, he refused to
aid in rrrestir.g it. ...
Docs not the-bloodof Cilley rest on Mr. Clay's head ?
M But .Mr Graves was .Mr. Clay’s friend, lie says
he was hound 'o give his advice when asked.
D.—That may he ; lint can any man lawfully advise
his friend to commit murder ? Can any man, knowing
that a murder was in contemplation, acquit himself of
his duty to God and man, without taking efficient steps
to prevent it! With Mr. Clay, this was not “an affair
ol feeling” like hi duel with Randolph; he at least
could " reason” in this case.
M— Is your case fully stated ?
I).—No; 1 have one point more. The Constitution
ofthe U. States says:
“ For any speech or debate in either house, they (the
members of Congress) shall not be questioned in any
other place.”
When Henry Ciay was appointed Secretary of State
in 1825. he took the following oath prescribed hy law, in
pursuance ol the Constitution: viz.
‘ I HENRY CRAY, do solemnly swear that 1 will sup
port the Constitution of the United ‘States.
SO IIELI* ME GOD ”
Yet. the words for which he challenged and attempted
to kill John Randolph were spoken in debate in the Senate
of the United States. If .Mr. Clay had been a private citi
zen, this challenge would have been a violation of the
constitution; being Secretary of State, and under oath
to support that instrument, it was not only a violation
ofthe constitution, hut ofhis SWORN COVENANT
WITH HIS GOD.
I low can I, as a Christian, or good citizen, support
for President a man who not only violates the most sacred
lairs, human and dirine. butsetsat naught his SOLEMN
OATHS? What will become of our laws, our ronsii-
titntion nr our country, when a mail who is capable of
becoming so excited By “ an "fair of feeling.'’ that he
cannot reason though he should, shall hold in his hand the
Executive Power of this great Republic? Graves, the
principal in this tragedy, is now spreading out his bloody
hands to die people of Kentucky imploring them to vote
for his principal! Is this fit company for Christians?
M.—I confess you have made out a stronger case
against Mr. Clay than I supposed possible
He has twice shown himself willing to commit murder
in duels, and twice attempted it.
He has aided and counselled another in pursuing unto
Death, a fellow man, who had repeatedly disavowed all
personal disrespect or unkindness towards his pursuer,
simply because he refused to admit ichat he believed to he
untrue. For this cause only, a happy wife was made a
widow, and little childreu made fatherless.
He has violated at the same time, the constitution ofhis
country and his oath bifore his God.
I have now to repeat the advice given you in 1828;
for in some respects, Mr. Clay's crimes exceed those of
mg party proiess to Be the friends of re
ligion. late and order. If true to this profession, we can
not vote tor men who set at defiiiance man's laws, and
God’s laws, and rush to the commission of crime over
the constitution and their ouths.
Nay, I am not sure that we ought not, if our Whig
leaders persist in pressing on us such a candidate, to take
the most effectual way to prevent his election hy voting
for his opponent.
From the Philadelphian.
The Hartford Times, in alluding to Henry
Clay’s celebrated “card,” issued when Kre-
mer cried aloud and spared not, sums up the
argument in the subjoined brief and emphatic
manner, which is worth whole volumes of de
nial from parties interested and criminated,
who of course say “ not guilty,” according to
the usual formulas on occasions of this sort.
Here are the facts, not to be evaded, misre
presented or denied. And yet tLie people are
asked to vote for a man whose political prin
ciples bang so loosely on him that for an office
he betrayed his state and his party, and who,
after publicly declaring that the charge against
him was a lie, proved its truth by doing the
very thing with which he had been charged.
Is treachery of this sort a Presidential quali
fication ?
“ Now we ask our readers to mark this point.
Henry Clay’s “card” denounced the author
of the letter in the Columbia Observer as *• a
base and infamous calumniator, a dastard and
liar.” The letter was written in January
1S25, about four weeks previous to the elec
tion of John Quincy Adams, and stated that
there was evidence that Mr. Clay was about
to vote for John Quincy Adams, against the
special instructions of the Legislature of his
own State, and that Clay would he rewarded
by a high office for his treachery. This is the
substance of the letter which called out Clay’s
“card” of a general challenge—this is what
Clay pronounced to he a “calumny” and a
“lie.” In February about four weeks after
the publication of Clay’s card, the Presiden
tial election in the House of Representatives
took place. Clay voted for Adams, against
the instructions of Kentucky, as the letter
said he would. Shortly after that, Mr. Clay
was appointed Secretary of State, thus prov
ing the statement of the letter which Clay de
clared to be a “ lie.” How much reason had
he for the public challenge he put forth ?
Hartford Times.
' > ^TGLAND^ CHINa!*
The article below, which the National In
telligencer copies ft oat the old blue-light An
glo-American organ of the last war—the New
York Commercial Advertiser—renders quite
transparent the liberal policy adopted by the
government of England in regard to the com
merce of other nations with China. The
British Commercial says, as the news it gives:
“ How it has come into our possession, eiftcr so
long a delay, we are under no obligation to tell.
It is sufficient for the reader to be assured that
it is authentic."
There is no need to throw an air of myste
ry ovei the Commercial Advertiser’s sources
of information, when it undertakes its old of
fice of breaking English news to American
ears. It will be seen, hy the roundabout in
telligence which the editor gets from some
agent in this country, derived from (in all like
lihood) another British agent in China by the
Ann McKim, that our minister, Mr. Cushing,
is not to be permitted to visit the imperial
court. It seems that “ a ■>. impression prevailed
that- Sir Henry Pottinger and the English au
thorities would much prefer that other nations
should be content with the assurance that the
same commercial privileges had been secured to
all, and that no attempt should be made to esta
blish diplomatic relations with the imperial
court, with a view to the formation of separate
treaties," Sfc. i\v.
This, the reader will remark, is the language
of the American editor, in conveying his En
glish news to the country. “ The English
authorities much prefer,” &c. So it will be
seen that the English authority in China al
ready sets up to dictate what diplomatic rela
tions other independent nations shall establish
jvith China, and what rights they shall enjoy
there. All the ceremonial had with Keying,
a kinsman as well as representative of the
Emperor, and Kiking, the viceroy, hy the
American consul at Canton, ends after the
civilities in the rebuff given in the brief inter
rogatory, on the part of the Chinese automa
tons. “ Why go to Pekin ? There is no neces
sity for liis (,\lr. Cushing’s) going there, as the
comma rialprivileges and terms winch had been
agreed upon with the English were gi anted also
to the Americans.” This is nothing more nor
less than the reply of the “ English authority
in China,” through the instruments of the
Emperor whom their power has compelled
him to appoint, or who are bribed over to their
interests. It is clear that England looks upon
China as a conquest, and means to take the
same measures with that empire that she has
done with that of India. While she is riveting
her power, anti, by terror and bribery, bring
ing the mandarins and other great subjects
under her influence, as she did the nabobs of
India, she will be very gracious to the mer
chants of other nations, and will not imme
diately lav claim to the lion’s share—the whole.
But when she has made herself absolute over
the natives, and turned the millions into sea-
poys under the British officers, she will hold
another language to all commercial rivals. In
the meantime, she will interdict other govern
ments from immediate communication with
the Celestial authorities, and make them take
their answer from the terrestrial “English
authorit es” established on the seaboard of
that empire.
It will be observed from the tenor of the
Commercial Advertiser’s article, that its editoi
is as much under British influence as Keying
or the Chinese viceroy. He is quite willing
that this country sIiohH Go ...mti-tiz to hn\e its
diplomatic relations with China put. under En
glish guardianship, and allow our rights to de
pend upon her will. Walsh’s Paris letter also
intimates, through to-day’s Intelligencer, that
England undertakes to manage for all the rest
of the world in that quarter of Asia ; and he,
as well as his federal brethren in this cauntry,
would be glad to see all the nations acknowl
edge his vassalage to their great patron.
OUR REPRESENTATIVES IN CON
GRESS.
We have been gratified to notice the high
character which has been already attained hy
the democratic portion of our delegation in
Congress. Our younger members have parti
cularly distinguished themselves and acquired
lasting reputations as vigilant and able defen
ders of republican principles and the Consti
tutional rights of the South. Upon the two
great questions which almost exclusively occu
pied Congress since the beginning of the pre
sent session, they have assumed the true—the
democratic—the Constitutional position and
maintained it with great firmness and ability.
The republican party have reason to he proud
of their able representation on the floor of
Congress. And grateful for the zeal, the elo
quence, the ability, and the energy which
they have displayed in the defence of our dear
est rights and principles. Of Colquitt and
Black it is only necessary to observe, that they
have nobly maintained their well-earned repu
tations.— We admire that generous warmth
which cannot keep cool, when the vital and
constitutional rights of the South are invaded
by open foes, or abandoned by treacherous
friends. We tender our humble meed of ap
probation to Colquitt, Black, Cobb, Stiles,
Lumpkin, and Harbalson. Nor should Col.
Chappell, the worthy representative from our
own section, although a political opponent he
foigotten. We have observed with pleasure
the imnly and independent course pursued by
him in regard to the question of admitting the
members elected by the general ticket system.
We observe with pleasure that Col. Chappell
has not quite sunk the old State Rights men
and Nullifier into the Clay Whig, in spite of
some sharp raps over the knuckles from the
Savannah Republican and others. It was
once our pride and pleasure to do battle sid s
by side with’ the Col., for the identical princi
ples involved in this case.—Macon Democrat.
NEWS FROM CHINA.
It is somewhat remarkable (says the New
York Commercial Advertiser of Saturday)
that the most curious, and not by any means
the least important, intelligence from China,
brought hy the Ann McKim, which arrived
more than a week ago, has not yet found its
way to the public. How it has come into our
possession, afterso longa delay, we are under
no obligation to tell. It is sufficient for the
reader to be. assured that it is authentic, as, in
deed, is evident from its tenor.
When the Ann McKim sailed, as is proba
bly known to every body, the American resi
dents at Canton were expectingthe speedy ar
rival of Mr. Cushing; and much interest was
felt in the question of his proceedings and
their result. An impression prevailed that
Sir Henry Pottinger and the English authori
ties would much prefer that other nations
should be content with the assurance that the
same commercial privileges had been secured
to all, and that no attempt should he made to
establish diplomatic relations with the Imperial
Court with a view to the formation of separate
treaties ; and it was believed that this was also
the feeling of the Chinese Emperor.
Nevertheless, it was known to he the pur
pose of Mr. Cushing to visit Pekin if possi
ble. Mr. Forbes, the American consul at
Canton, hid received a despatch from Mr.
Legare, then acting Secretary of State, in
structing him to ascertain from the Chinese
high officers whether M r. Cushing would he re
ceived at the capitol ; and for this purpose he
requested an interview with Keying, the Im
perial Commissioner, in the early part of Oc
tober, which was granted. The designated
place of meeting was at the elegant country
house of Puntiuqua, a wealthy Chinese, on
the banks of the river, a few miles above Can
ton. The American party consisted of Mr.
Forbes, Mr. Edward King, Dr. Parker, and
one other; the Chinese, of Keying, who is
a kinsman as well as the representative of the
Emperor, Kiking, viceroy of the two Kwang
provinces, and Hwang an 1 Hieuling, asso
ciates of the Chief Commissioner, all being
officers of the highest rank.
The Americans were conducted to the pre
sence of the Commissioners hy two mandarins,
and found them in the largest apartment of
the house ; the central portion of the room
was fenced in as it were by ranges of chairs
and small Chinese tables, forming a large hoi
low square. Within this were Keying and
liis associates. As the American approached,
Keying came forward and received them most
graciously, asking the name of each when
pre-ented, an 1 shaking them cordially hy the
hand. His example was followed hy the
"V iceroy, and then Keying pointed out seats to
his visitors near liis own, taking care that all
were seated at the same moment with himself.
The attendants, petty mandarins, and servants,
amounting to nearly a hundred, stood about
the room, gazing at the Americans with evi
dent curiosity. None were seated except the
four high officers and the guests.
Mr. Forbes was placed at the left side of
Keying, the Chinese post of honor, and be
tween them was a small table on which they
both leaned. A linguist then came forward,
kneeled at the feet of Keying, performing the
kotou, and then stood erect before him to in
terpret. Keying first asked concerning the
health of Mr. Forbes, how long he had been
in China, if he had a pleasant passage, and,
lastly, how old he was—this question, oddly
enough, being deemed a compliment by the
Chinese. He then told Mr. Forbes that his
own age was 55, and that of the Viceroy 65.
The object of Mr. Forbes was, first to pre
sent his credentials and be recognised as con
sul, and then to fulfil liis instructions respec
ting the reception of Mr. Cushing at Pekin—
the latter a delicate affair, which required much
tact and judgment, and, Mr. Forties being
to communicate through Dr. Parker and the
native linguist, each understanding the othei’s
language imperfectly, the difficulty was much
increased. The business conference was open
ed by the production of Mr. Forbes’s com
mission as consul, to which was attached the
signature of the President, “John Tyler.”
Dr. Parker at the same time produced a
Chinese translation of the document, which
Keying placed upon the original, and slowly
read aloud every word, and whenever the
commission requested the Chinese authorities
to protect and give aid to the consul, he put
his bands together, and waving them up and
down, declared emphatically, as the Chinese
linguist said, “ truly must do so to which
his associates murmured assent. He and the
Viceroy appeared to look with much interest
upon the signature of the President, and all
the petty mandarins crowded round to have a
sight of it.
After this, servants brought little howls
made of cocoa nut shells, beautifully carved
on the outside and lined with silver. These
were filled with a thick sweet liquid, compos
ed of pounded almonds and rice, hoi led with
sugar, and very hot; the officers each took a
bowl, as did the guests also, and the former
gravely nodding their heads, all drank to
gether.
The business then proceed, Mr. Forbes sav
ing that an envoy from the government of the
United States was on his way to China to pay
his respects to the Emperor; that he came
with the most friendly feelings and intentions,
and wished to know “in what way he had bet
ter proceed to Pekin, whether hy land or
water.” As was expressed, Keying at once
replied, with some astonishment, “ Why go
to Pekin ?” and added, in substance, that there
was no necessity of his going to Pekin, as the
commercial pt ivileges and terms which had
been agreed upon with the English were gran
ted also to the Americans and all other for
eigners, and “every thing had been settled.”
He then repeated, “ Why go to Pekin ?” and
asked, with some anxiety, what object Mr.
Cushing could have in going there, other than
that of arranging a commercial treaty. He
said that, if there was no other object, it
would be perfectly useless for Mr. Cushing to
go there, for “ no one at Pekin knew any thing
about the foreign trade,” and evinced the most
decided unwillingness tha- such an intention
should be persisted in, dwelling much upon
the “ fatigue and difficulty of going so far,”
and the uselessn -ss of taking so much trouble.
In this opposition to the Pekin scheme the
Viceroy and the other commissioners earnestly
concurred, and all that could he said in reply
had obviously no effect. Keying said, how
ever, that he would transmit any communica
tion to the Emperor which Mr. Forbes should
wish to make, and that an answer should be
returned ; and he asked Mr. Forbes to give
him, in writing, whatever he desired to say,
clearly and explicitly, to which he would give
a clear reply. He asked, also, for a copy of
the consular commission, and of the instruc
tions from Mr. Legare respecting this parti
cular business. He expressed feelings of the
highest regard for the American nation, and
said that these were the feelings of the Empe
ror also, and of all the people of China ; that
we had ever been good friends to the Chinese,
and he hoped we ever should be, and that the
friendship and interccuse between the two na
tions would increase as time went on.
The Unjust then said that the Imperial com
missioner invited the American gentlemen to
partake of some refreshment with him; and a
small regiment of servants made their appear
ance, bearing a great variety of little porce
lain cups and bowls, filled with Chinese deli
cacies, among which the famous bird’s nest
soup was not forgotten. The Americans
made out awkwardly enough with the chop
sticks, while the hundred Chinese stared at
them with great intensity, much amused ap
parently hy their manner of eating. Keying
was exceedingly polite to all, but treated Mr.
Forbes in particular with distinguished atten
tion ; for, seeing his difficulty with the chop
sticks, he more than once fed him with his
own. He also took four small cakes with his
fingers from his own dish, partly rose from his
seat, and gave one to each ofhis guests, which
was a high compliment. The entertainment
consisted chiefly of paste balls stuffed with
meats and fruits.
Eating over. Keying talked with Mr. Park
er about his hospital, commending him highly
for 1 is skill and benevolence, and asked his
advice concerning some ailments with which
he himself was troubled. A few more words
passe-;, when the Americans rose to take leave
and the Viceroy came forward to Mr. Forbes,
asking him in the most serious manner wheth
er he understood distinctly what had been
said, and what they wished him to do in re
gard to the written communication, &c. Key
ing and his three colleagues then put on their
caps with the peacock feathers, shook hands
with their four visiters in the most cordial
manner, and attended them to the door and
into the piazza, where they remained bowing
anil chinchinning until the Americans were out
of sight. One of the superior mandarins ac
companied the latter to the outer gate of Pun-
tiuqua’s grounds, where he shook hands with
them all, and the ceremonies were at an end.
The Viceroy and the th ee commissioners
were not habited in their robes of ceremony,
hut wore dark purple dresses or tunics, each
having on a belt studded with gems and the
other usual appendages of mandarins.
Keying is represented as large, rather cor
pulent, ami of harsh features and complexion,
but with a countenance expressive-of good na
ture though not of much intelligence. His
manner was perfectly easy and polite, as well
as dignified, and his whole hearing to the
Americans was extremely kind. Kiking, the
Viceroy, is an old man, quite emaciated, and
with a countenance expressive of great cate
and anxiety, as if worn out by heavy respon
sibility, which truly rest upon him, for the two
Kwang provinces are the most turbulent in
the empire. Hwang and Hienling are des
cribed as superior men, the former noted tor
his high attainments in Chinese literature, and
the latter a general in the Tartar army.
In regard to the chief object of thisinterview,
the probability is that permission to visit Pekin
will not be accorded to Mr. Cushing. Key
ing and his colleagues manifested the most de
cided opposition to it, and, although they
might communicate to the Imperial Court the
wish of our government, they would doubtless
say nothing in favor of it, if they did not ad
vise against it. It is not improbable that sir
Henry Pottinger had intimated to Keying th6
inexpediency of any foreign ambassador be
iug received at Pekin, as none had been re
ceived on the part of the English.
And it seems to us that the point should not
be insisted on, when the very suggestion was
so unpalatable. Our government had better
undertake nothing, titan undertake and fail.
If insisted on and refused, then serious neces
sity arises of employing coertion or threats ;
and it would he both impolitic and ungener
ous to take advantage of the sufferings and
distresses of the Chinese government, panting
after a ruinous and exhausting war, and now
desirous to secure repose even at the cost of
yielding in matters of cherished and long-con
tinued policy. Besides, there can be no doubt
that all important objects can be as effectually
gained by negotiation with Keying, if not even
more so.
It is doubtful whether the new system of
trade and opening of the new ports > n
North will be of any advantage to China. Hei
imports will soon he much larger than her ex
ports, and the balance of the trade will turn
greatly against her. The native manu ac
tures ( too,will be injured by foreign competition.
