The National Register. — London, England, 1815-02-12 00:00:00

1 4 s? have safely date."—lie ationid eenefede by stating that his reasons for conceiving that Sir John hfurray's conduct was indefensible, w ere--first, that there was no enemy nearer than Villatianea distance of'3o miles) at the time that Sir John was embarking the troops and destioying the omit secondly, that the enemy were not in suffitient force io have justified the aNturlaning the siege of Tar ragona, in the manner that it was abandoned; and lastly, that Ge neral Capons was then in a position between our army and the enemy, Under those circumstances, he did consider the embarka tion, in the manner it was conducted, as most discreditable to the a rmy, and io disgraceful as completely to wirreht lbw* exprts• sinii4 in his dispatch which be had been called upon to substan tiate. public part of the proceedings of the Court 'Werti h! were closed by ACmiral Hellowell's reply, and the Court was wintediately cloud. ► DURLLING. COLONEL. QUENTIN AND LIEUT.-COL. PALMF.It. • We stated some time ago that Colonel Quentin had cross. ed the water into France, with the avowed purpose of calling out Lieut. Colonel Palmer. We have now to state that the meeting has taken place, and that the following are the par ticulars, and the result of the meeting :—On Thursday, the 'ld inst. Lieut.-Col. Palmer returned to Paris from Bour- deaux, where he had been on private business. On the day of his arrival, understanding that Mr. Lawrell, brother-in . law to Colonel Quentin had several times called at his hotel, to inquire for him, he made known to that gentleman his being in town., Accordingly be was waited on.by M. Law rell, with a message. from that gentleman, which Colonel Palmer, notwithstanding numerous letters he found on his table from the most distinguished military characters in Eng land, Eat( St. Vincent and others, dissuading him from ac cepting any challenge on the score of the public duty which he had so honorably fulfilled, instantly accepted. The parties met, on the to day, near Paris. Col. Quentin was attended by Mr. Lawrel!, as his second; Lieut.-Col. Palmer, by Thomas Thompson, Esq. It was settled by the seconds that they should fire at twelve paces, Cul. Quentin only fired and missed. Lieut.-Col. Palmer then discharged his pistpl in the air. Mr. Thompson asked Mr. Lawrell if he was satisfied. Mr.. Lawrell answered that he was perfectly satisfied. Col. Quentin expressed himself to the same effect; and here The affair terminated. The following is the letter of challenge from Colonel Quentin to Lieut.-Col. Palmer: Paris. Jan 3, 1845. SlR,—The manlier in which yon hare reflected on my character, not only during the proceedings tut the Court Martial, but since also,' lus been such as to make it impossible but that you must have inten• tiunally meant to give me cause to seek satisfaction at your hands, and hare expected such a result. If Lam right in so judging I must on my pact assure yen, that it has ever been my (fete' ruination not to disappoint your expectations. Aware of your avowed intention to proceed to France, and unwilling (most especially frmi my pecu liar situation) to transgress the laws, both civil and military, of the Country in which I have found protection, I anxiously awaited, the period of your departure. I have followed you to this country, and I now call upon you as a soldier, a man of honour and a Gentian's'', either to dinsvow the,gross ishinoations you have given to the wort', a• to my want of yersoual courage, or by meeting me to give me ass opportunity of p&uving how false Intl have been. ii tiro your)uiluble servanr, • C, QUENTIN." /..••••••••••■• MR. O'CONNELL AND MR. D'rSTERRE, Ta consequence of an expression of contempt used by Counsellor O'Connell against the Corporation of Dublin, D'Esterre, a..1 1 / 4 1ember of that Body, thought proper to ierent it. Accordinzlv, Thust.daY the `2!..Sb is it. ha ..,ti • dressed a letter to Coupiebor, ()Tootle!' .itt the words :--- "COUNSELLOR O'CONNELL. • " Sin,—Carrieles Paper of the V3d iiiiiant Report of fhe Debates of a Alerting of Catholic Gentlemen, on the subjecrot a til• .) states, that you have applied 11:e appellati..n ut Bio-gartri to the Corporation of this City, calling it a Beggarly Corporatitn ; elm!: therefore, as a Member of that ttudy , and feeling bow painful •Nt:a I beg leave to inquire whether you really used or elpretard your. self in any sorb language? • " I fed the more justiGed in caning . an yin on this necintion. Pa inch language Va 4 not warranted or provoked 1;y any thing . oi►• !lie part of the Corporation ; neither was it consistent IA WI the ~ i ilijeet of your Debate, or the deportment of the other Catholic Gentlemen who were present ; and, though I view it r►o inconsicrent in every respect, I am in hopes the Editor is under error, and not you. ' 6 I have further to rt quest your reply in the . e.ourPr of the evening. And remain, Sir, your obedient servant. [ kVA - " J. N. IVESTERRE, I, llaelielorb-w4 i 2611 i Jan. 11315, " Coungellor O'Connell, Alt - nick-quart.," = ' ' Mr. O'Connell's answer was as follows: Sin,--Isi reply to your letter of yesterday, and without either admitting or distlaiming the expression respecting the Collsoratiin or Dublin, in the print to which you allude, I deem it rigla to you, that from the calumnious manner in which the ltelig.iou ;aid Character cf the Catholics of Ireland are treated iu that Body. Da terms attributed to me, however reproachful, can ex.ecrd the coo. tempttions feelings I entertain for that body in its corporate raps. city—although, doubtless, it contains many valuable persons, whosst conduct IP individuals CI lament) must necessarily be t onfounded in the acts of a General 6 .1 have only to ndsi, that this Idler must close our correspondence .os this subject. j am, eve. - • - " 13ANIET, O'CONNELL, Dlvriion-square, June a, lel% "To J. N D'Esterre, Esq. 11, Ilaelhelors.walk." Mr. D'Esterre was advised to persist in the Correspou. deuce, and. addressed another letter (but directed in a dif ferent band-writing) to Mr. O'Connell. It was i.e•tirned tq hirn by Mr. James O'Connel, inclosed in a Letter of the fol lowing tenor: "Sin—From the tenor of your letter of yesterday, my brother did not expect that your next communication world ti:ive t, en made in writing. He directed me to open his letters in Iri4 absence ; CU, last letter, bearing a ditfrrent address from the former one, wail opened by me ; but, upon perceiving the name siiscribed, 1 bat* declined to read it, and by his direction, 1 ninon it to you inclased, and unread. 0 1 am, Sir, your obedient servant, " JAM ES ()'COxN rLt. " Merrinst.square, Friday Evening, "To J. N. D'Esterre, El. 11, Bachelors'-walk. This letter was received by Mr. D'Esterre on Friday evening. Here the matter rested until ‘Vednesclav and Mr. George I.irlwill, who, at Mr. 0 1 Connell'i, requv, had waited. in town for four days. in expfietat:no Of the pro reeding which Mr. D'4sterre's first letter ai.pealed to ac. noitnce, and wa3 ready to make ttitabie arrangements, at length left town, under the itnprcy,ion that Mr. D'Eqerree Avi..,ers in the Corporation had :discovered their mistake, both as to their man and as to the sup ect in general. On Wednesday morning, however, Sir Edward .Stank F, as the Friend of Mr. D'Esteric, waited upon Mr. O'Connell with the hostile message so lonz expected.—(Sir Edward is one of the Duke of Richmond's City Knights. Wine (+ant to the Castle, and made Wirr.ick-roaster of the. City cf Dithlio, 8001. a year, by the I)L.lce.J—lle message was ac; ceptod; tile necessary melsll , es %tete arranged between Sir Ed/raid and Major Mactiamara, of the County of Clare, sot , . in-law of .fudge Finucanc, eldest son of Francis Macnannita, of Mosieslc. Esq. an officer of consn . uunaie bravery and 1)(401.. ea manners. The hour appnir.ted was three o'clock. on Wed. 14esda, thg ;,lace r t ihtnestle, Lord t..