The Sun.
London, England, 1835-11-21 00:00:00

MR. BLAGK AND MR. ROEBUCK.

MIS• AP GILL IVR AY' S STATEMENT.
(From the Morning Chronicle.)
In consequence of an article contained in Mr. Roebuck's
weekly pamphlet, of Nov. 12, under the head of " Mr. N.
„°,ldsmid aita Mr. John Black, the Editor of the Morning
,onicle," the following correspondence and occurrences
44 taken place, viz. :

(No. I.—Copy.)
LETTER FROM MR. BLACK TO MR. ROEBUCK.

" 232, Strand, Nov. 13, 1835.
T:1.81%--In a pamphlet purporting to be ' Prospects of the
1it?Illg Session, by J. A. RoebuckP., there is an article
With your initials attached to it, in which great liberiies are
with my character; and in particular cowardice is im-
Ved to me, and the epithets ' base' and utterly disgraceful'
she also applied to my conduct; and I am told, if I have any
milTne left, I must now heartily repent of what is imputed to
-Ze In the same articles it is also stated, that a correspon-
tr e between a Mr. Goldsmid and myself was published in
e Chronic/e. This I deny, as no such correspondence ever
PPeared in that paper.
I wish to know whether you are the author of the article
ope—laining those offensive epithets, and if you are, I then call
J°ll to retract them, without qualification or reserve.
friend who delivers this will convey tome your answer.
" I am, Sir, your obedient servant."

(No. ll.—Copy.)
LETTER FROM MR. M`GILLIVRAY TO MR. ROEBUCK.

No. 13, Salisbury-street, London, Nov. 14, 1835.
No: e, left a note for you this morning at your chambers,
, . . . .
Ra mond sldinffs, it being the duplicate of one
aPGre7lotrilv Yleft at the cambers of Mr. Falconer, No. 9,
raY's Inn-square, to whom a reference is pasted upon your
i°?r, and the object of both notes being to apprise you that
'lave a communication to make requiring your immediate
attention.
„ I had previously without success made inquiry respecting
:kit address of the publisher of your weekly pamphlet. A
4rPeated application to the same quarter has obtained the ad-
ths to which this letter is directed, and I therefore adopt
mode of conveying to you the intimation already given as
n„'s-mentioned, that I have a communication to make re-
v4ll4„ TfC your immediate attention.
this shall, therefore, expect to hear from you in reply to
kfe; land I hope to be informed when and where you can
pipni me the opportunity of delivering personally the corn-
qkcation with which I am entrusted.
" I have the honour, &c.

``
J. A. Roebuck, Esq., M. P."

(No. lll.—Copy.)
LETTER FROM MR. ROEBUCK TO MR. M'GILLIVRAY.
" Christchurch, Hants, Nov. 15.
4wlx—I S ' am now staying at Mudiford, near Christchurch,
ai"ta• This letter will reach you to-morrow morning. You
he"' Probably leave London on Monday evening, and arrive
iir„° ,°ll Tuesday morning at 12. I will at that time be at
'lll°Y's Hotel, Christchurch.
gin‘ !flake these arrangements, as lam desirous of so mama-
% g affairs as not to lot any one have an idea of the purport of
tlr Visit, which I suppose from your letter to be a hostile one.
„,:jf by any accident you should not arrive at Christchurch
rnt Itlesday morning, write me a note from the hotel, asking
vohlor frank for Mr. John Smith. I shzll then know that
are arrived, and no one will be on the qui vice, by a stran-
,4l,Triaking application for me. In a little place like this
precautions are necessary.
arn sorry you have had any trouble in finding me. All the
t,u, I thought, knew that lost week I was at Bath, and all
4 friends know that I have been here since the close of the
111-osnslT,- Your complaints have induced me to say thus much,
.si,"gu Ido not think any blame fairly attaches to me.—l am,
Your obedient servant, "J. A. ROEBUCK.
Simon M'Gillivray, Esq."

kill compliance with 'this appointment, Mr. Black and
41.• McGillivray proceeded to Christchurch, where they
eved on Tuesday morning ; and at an interview at the
Arms Hotel, Mr. 111‘Gillivray delivered Mr. Black's
ti'ter to Mr: Roebuck, who acknowledged himself to be
e author of the article complained of, and refused to re-
Aset any part of it. He proposed also to write to London
t a friend to act for him. Mr. M.Gillivray objected to
delay, and said, that as Mr. Roebuck had recognised his
:ter to be a hostile one, he expected to have found him
e prepared. Mr. Roebuck replied that the delay was
I\l`Gillivray's own fault, in not having communicated
eitf)tre clearly the object of his mission, and he declined
they coining to London or appointing a friend on the
?t+ both which plans had been suggested by Mr. M‘Gil-
i•vt4Y. In short, Mr. Roebuck refused any other altern t-
Zo than to write to London for a friend, and to meet againAl the same place on Thursday at noon, and finally Mr.
`Gillivray acquiesced in this proposal.
.ttoo Thursday, thi3 19th, Mr. Black and Mr. M‘Gillivray
iht"rdingly returned to Christchurch, when Mr. Roebuck
roduced Mr. ReTans to Mr. "M‘Gillivray as his friend,
and,
4, after some discussion and preliminary arrangements, a
I;;itir.ig took place, of which the following correspondence
'" give a sufficient report, viz.:—
(No. IV.—Copy.)

NOTE FROM MR. WGILLIVRAY TO MR. REVANS.
,;(1` Mr. 111‘Gillivray presents his compliments to Mr. Revans,
Itit? as it will scarcely be possible to prevent some public
tt2eaof the meeting to-day, he begs to suggest the enclosed
of
for Mr. Revans's consideration."

(No. V.—Copy.)
COPY OF THE STATEMENT ENCLOSED IN NOTE NO. IV.
to`` Mr. Revans, on behalf of Mr. Roebuck, admitted that the
ll,icspondenee between Mr. Black and Mr. Goldsmid not
huo2g been published in the Morning Chronicle, Mr. Roe-
tlie publi
re cation was so far untrue, and there could be no
it inretracting it. As to the imputation of cowardice,
Oink' not been intended ; but Mr. Roebuck had really con-
to izred Mr. Black to be a philosopher, and not a likely. person
foi:,ght duels. As to the epithets base and utterly disgrace-
solid43*.applied to the publication of the letter about Mr. Gold-
Air. Roebuck refused to retract them ; and upon that
th'und the gentlemen went to the field, to which Mr. Roebuck
°wed the way.
end Mr. Roebuck, after the first fire, repeated nearly the above,
qui°xpressed personal respect for Mr. Black ; but being re-
ored to retract the terms base and utterly disgraceful,' he
llsed to do so, and Mr. Black's friend deemed it necessary
so proceed, when a second shot was fired without effect, and
fort,' conversation ensued, in which Mr. Roebuck refused any
I3„!er concession than repeating his high respect for Mr.
r. Black's second id not deem it necessary, on
behalf,; and M
to carry the matter fudrther."

(No. Vl.—Copy.)
cc , NOTE FROM MR. REVANS TO MR. M'GILLIVRAY.
41114 btr• Revans presents his compliments to Mr. M'Gillivray,
kr. Te:gs to state that he will forward, by to-night's post, to
hoo.vitleoner, a statement approved of by himself and by Mr.
44411ek• In the meantime, Mr. MiGillivray can publish any
Inept he may please, upon his own responsibility.
Thursday, Nov 19."
'rhis statement
responsibility.

MR. RE VANS' STATEMENT.
he
hvfo
rl
al
y :owLng letter was deliverod to Mr. Roebuck on
1114.14ay morning at Mudiford, near Christchurch, by Mr

332, Strand, Nov. 13, 1835.
StR.
r—ln a pamphlet purporting to be " Prospects of the
%Cling Session, by J. A. Roebuck, M. P.'," there is an
IL!'n with your initials attached to it, in which great
covrto ties are taken with my character, and in particular
k,, 'dice is imputed to me, and the epithets "base" and
apilg disgraceful" are also applied to my conduct ;
Ao I,t_ am told, if I hare any shame left, I must
sqq heartily repent of what is imputed to me. In the
Aio article it is also stated that a correspondence between a
Th: Goldsmid and myself was published in the Chronicle.
p,,,14..1 deny, as no such correspondence ever appeared in that
aniele"l wish to know whether you are the author of the
tontaining these offensive epithets ; and if you are, I
ti
4m
to
upon you to retract them, without qualification or
kty friend,le4e,
who delivers this, will convey to me your answer.
I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
JOHN BLACK.

3. A. Roebuck, Esq., M. P.

to this Mr. Roebuck answered verbally—
q). That he. was the author of the paper in question.
• That he had no retraction to make.
3. And
that he would send at once for a friend, who would '
1;1/1 Christ Church on Thursday morning., at twelve.
APGillivray said this, was inconvenient, and asked Mr.
bvebuek to go to London. Mr. Roebuck declined, and said that
04 -„t'end would be at Christ Church at the time mentioned.
4ltursday Mr. Revans arrived and acted for Mr. Roebuck.
as it Revans on being introduced to Mr. M•Gillivray said, that
aPgeared that the correspondence between Mr. Black and
nickGoldsmid had not been copied into the Morning •Chro-
thia Mr. Roebuck was of course willing to admit, that in
",,e was in error. Mr. Revans felt also authorized in say-
. di), that Mr. Roebuck had never intended to impute cowar-
Ph, '() Mr. Black ; that he really believed him to be a philoso-
kr-r',,,nd as such would of course not fight. This was all
ti I.evans could admit. Mr. M'Gillivray desired a retrac-
tr°4,°' ,the words "base" and "disgraceful," which was not
Aeu: Thereupon a meeting was immediately arranged.
kiv„„' .Roebuck received Mr. Black's fire, fired in the air, and,
' I)earing towards Mr. Black, said, " Now, Sir, I again re-
. trici that I had no intention of imputing cowardice to you. I
dea,that I was led into error in stating that the correspon-
Aio between you and Mr. Goldsmid was copied into the
fectr.ning Chronicle, which I have been informed is not the
dy,t But lam still of the same opinion respecting the con-
lity& .1)f Yourself towards Mr. Goldsmid • and I vindicate to
Pubr the right of stating my opinion Of the public act of a
`'a r•
man."
`‘4. r• M`Gillivray then insisted that the words "base" and
b,
wi'sraceful" should be retracted, as he said they now could
mitbout dishonour to Mr. Roebuck. •
• corkir' Roebuck answered, " that his opinion respecting the
tfiy huct,io question remained unchanged ; that. he could not
4rtd e Qid not think it base and disgraceful—it was dishonest
olinitist—and still, in his opinion, disgraceful."
On this Mr. M•Gillivray said that the affair must go on, unless
plain Roebuck consented to withdraw the expressions corn-
°f• Mr. Roebuck walked back to his ground, and
Were then exchanged, but without effect. Mr. Roebuck

asked what was now required, and an apology was again de-
manded and again refused. Mr. Revans observed that they
were there with their minds made up—that no apology would
be made—andihat, if Mr. M'Gillivray desired, the affair must
go on.
Mr. M'Gillivray here declared that he was the proprietor
of the Morning Chronicle, and that Mr. Black ought not to
be further exposed on account of that journal.' Mr. Roebuck
asked if that was meant as a threat ? Mr. Revans here re-
minded Mr. M'Gillivray that though he might be proprietor
of the Morning Chronicle, in this affair ho was second, and that
if he desired to fight, it must of course be with the other second.
Mr. Revans further observed that he was ready to meet Mr.
M'Gillivray immediately in any way he might desire. Mr.
M'Gillivray then observed that he did not know Mr. Revans,
and Mr. Roebuck answered " I, Sir, am sufficient guarantee
for any man. Mr. Revans is my friend, and I desire
that no altercation of this sort may proceed. If you
are not satisfied, I am here, and you must determine
what you will do. lam not to be driven from what I believe
just from any threats of assassination. I vindicate to myself
the right of saying that I think the conduct of a public man
" base" and " disgraceful," and I will not be driven from this.
Choose what you will do."
On this Mr. M'Gillivray decided that the affair should end.
Mr. Roebuck then said to Mr. Black, " I have respect for
you, Sir, but though I say this of you, I still assert my right to
speak of your acts as I have done. It must now, however, be
distinctly understood that hereafter Mr. Black is personally
responsible for every thing said in the Morning Chronicle,
and by me will be held so."
Mr. Black replied that he did not think that what Mr. Roe-
buck was now doing would do him credit. Mr. Roebuck re-
plied that he himself must be allowed to judge for himself.
Subsequently, Mr. M'Gillivray sent a statement of the pro-
ceedings to Mr. Revans for his approval, who replied that
Mr. M'Gillivray was at liberty to publish any statement on
his own responsibility.
Nov. 20, 1835. SAMUEL REVANS.

MR. McGILLIVRAY'S OBSERVATIONS UPON
MR. RE VANS' STATEMENT.
Oa this statement of Mr. Revans I have only two observa-
tions to offer.
First, in regard to Mr. Roebuck's having fired in the air.
If such was the case, I was not aware of it, and the idea of its
having been the case never occurred to me till I saw the state-
ment in the columns of the Globe. I cannot say that such was
not the case. I cannot say, from my own knowledge, whether
Mr. Roebuck did or did not fire in the air, and Mr. Black is
equally unable to confirm or to contradict that statement. Mr.
Revans did not state to me that his principal had fired in the
air. It is true that in a conversation which followed the first
shot, Mr. Roebuck said, " You saw how I fired ;" and I un-
derstood that to allude to careless &inn-, as to taking aim ; but
both pistols were fired simultaneously, on the word being
given ; and I repeat, I had no idea of Mr. Roebuck having
fired in the air till I saw it so stated in the Globe.
Next, as to my having declared myself to be the Proprietor
of the Morning Chronicle, I have no hesitation in admitting
that my having referred to that subject at all was unpremedi-
tated, and provoked by unexpected pertinacity, expressed in
terms which I considered unnecessarily offensive on the part
of Mr. Roebuck. In stating that I did not know Mr. Revans,
although such was literally the fact, my meaning was merely
that I did not know him in that question, and had no cause of
quarrel with hint ; and on Mr. Roebuck's vouching for him as
a gentleman, I replied that I had said nothing to the contrary.
In 'ward, however, to the declaration ascribed to me, as to
the Morning Chronicle, what I said was, not that I was the
Proprietor, but a Proprietor of that Journal.
SIMON M'GILLIVRAY.

TO THE MEMBERS OF BROOKES'S

CLUB.

Gentlemen—Ever since I read the newspaper accounts
of Mr. Daniel O'Connell's sayings and doings at Man-
chester and Glasgow, on his mission (as he terms his re-
turn to Ireland through those towns) 1 have felt, as a
member of this Club, that it would be incumbent on us
to take them into our serious and dispassionate considera-
tion, since, in my opinion, we are collectively and indivi-
dually compromised by them. There is an observation
somewhere in the writings of Thomas Paine, that " that
which is a disgrace to human naturr .throws something of
a shade over all the human character, and every individual
feels his share of the wound which is given to the whole."
This strikes me as a sound moral maxim, forcible when
applied to relations between individuals and society at
large, but acting with incalculably greater force, and
fraught with more cogent conviction when applied
to those small select societies called clubs, more
especially political ones. When men are admit-
ted into these associations, they become, as it
were, bound like our Saxon forefathers in an union
of frank pledge mutually to one another for good
behaviour, voluntarily submitting themselves to the club as
to a tribunal, whence lie's no appeal, the whole body thereby
becoming responsible to the public for the decent behaviour
at least of its members. On this ground I appeal to the
Club for its judgment on the conduct of Mr. Daniel O'Con-
nell, one of its members. lam taking it for granted that
the newspaper accounts of his exhibitions of himself at
Manchester and Glasgow are correct, and I think myself
entitled to entertain this opinion from so long a period
having since elapsed without any contradiction, apology, or
explanation on his part. Thence I infer that in his own
opinion his language and deportment were unexceptionable,
gentleman-like, and becoming. I know not how other
men's minds may have been afected on reading the re-
ports above-mentioned ; but on mine was produced a strong
feeling of disgust, not unaccompanied by a sense of humi-
liation and shame at being, as a member of the club, ex-
posed to the imputation of participating or acquiescing
in, or tolerating, such proceedings. In a word, I felt
acutely my share of the wound. Upon the present occa-
sion I beg leave to dismiss all political considerations. In
his late transaction with Mr. Raphael, regarding the repre-
sentation of Carlow, I exclude entirely the pecuniary fea-
tures of the case. These may probably be investigated

before the House of Commons, or a Court of Justice, or
both. I confine myself, therefore, entirely to comment
upon the manners and the language which every decent
society has a risht to expect, and a to exact from its
members.
Impressed with this view of the case, I beg leave to
submit to the members of Brookes's whether or no the
style and tone adopted by Mr. Daniel O'Connell towards
Mr. Raphael (both being members of this Club) is such as
we are willing to have introduced amongst us—such as we
could ever be brought to sanction or to endure ? Is it
even couched in such terms as one member of a civilized
community ought to be permitted to apply to another ?
In his second letter to Mr. Raphael, Mr. Daniel O'Con-
nell is pleased (I should conceive through a species of mis-
giving) to call his outrageous expression (which he had on
a former occasion applied to the Duke of Cumberland)
" the usual Irish phrase." With Mr. Daniel O'Connell

himself this may be (and too apparently is) a very usua,
phrase, but I cannot believe that it is a usual phrase with
any one else in Ireland. 1 once had an opportunity of see-
ing a great deal of that country, passing several months
there,• mixing with classes of every degree. I went much
among the peasantry, about whose character I had conside-
rable curiosity, taking much interest in them. I witnessed
and joined in their various amusements in their most un-
guarded hours, being accompanied by persons whose pre-
sence dispelled all suspicion. I was forcibly struck by the
absence of anything gross or offensive among them. On
the contrary, their natural politeness was such as to place
at his ease any man accustomed to the best society. The
object of their natural and most decided aversion seemed
to be a blackguard, the precise epithet which they were in
the habit of applying whenever their indignation was ex-
cited, or, whenever they wished to give vent to their
reproach.
What Mr. Daniel O'Connell is pleased to style the
" usual Irish phrase," I scarcely ever heard, and I cannot
help thinking that any man in Ireland, in whose mouth it
was familiar, would be very short-lived, at least were he
willing to abide the usual consequence of indulging in it.
In that case, Mr. Daniel O'Connell himself would not be
so old as he is by a fortnight. He has placed himself in a
state of impunity, exalted or degraded, as men may happen
to regard it. At all events, however, he stands in the pre-
dicament of being the last man in the world who ought to
allow himself the use of such language, which, on the
contrary, with the least feeling of self-respect, he ought
particularly to avoid. I would, moreover, wish to ask
you, gentlemen, your opinion of his speech respect-
ing the Duke of Wellington. Was there ever any-
thing equal to its presumption and insolence, except
its injustice ? I doubt if there is a tap-room in
the country, out of which he would not have been
turned for it. It is an insult to the nation, a sort
of general offence. We may, howe'Ver, rest sat'sfied
that it has been most amply rebuked—rebuked most se-
verely, though unintentionally and unthought of, by the
properest individual in the country, in his eloquent address
to a public meeting at Bath—by Colonel Napier, a some-
what more competent judge, and more capable of estimating
the great qualities of the Duke of Wellington than Mr.
Daniel O'Connell. This Gallant Officer, in drawir.g the great
man's character, drew unconsciously his own—generous in
mind, capacious in understanding, and above all, just, the
gentleman, soldier, scholar, patriot, stand forth conspicuous,
drawn by the hand of a master, unconscious of what he
was about. Look at this picture and on this, drawn equally
in the same way, and with the same unconsciousness,
both strikingly alike, neither requiring a name to be written
under it. On looking back, during no very long period,
towards Mr. Daniel O'Connell's proceedings, whether
writing a whimpering letter to a calumniated friend, or a
blustering one to the base and bloody Whigs, or reviling the
Sassenagh (meaning the English, Hibernice, the enemy),
or (when endeavouring to impose upon them) extolling
them for their candour, generosity, and love of justice,
whether bullying with a deluded crowd at his heels, or fall-
ing on his knees before a Roman Catholic priest (thus play-
ing at once idol and iclolator), I cannot but think that it is