Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1838-05-11

he committee were OlspOstO u puIsue 'Ho
every form. Not content with tracing The cause oil the
challenge in the written correspondence, IN Inc assign
ment Of reasons for the challenge, under Mr.. Graves 5
own hand, and in the various propositions when were
submitted on The field, from the beginning 10 me emu u
The contest, they proceeded TO put 10 every witness WHO
was believed 10 know any thing upon the SUBJECT, Tue
direc, inouiry. whether "air. Graves or his second, al
any time before Mr.. Cilley fell, communicated to MT.
Cilley, his second, or attendant friends, that a question
OF yeracily between MIR. Graves and Mr.. CIHey, was a
point of difficulty to be adjusted" MIR. Jones answered.,
"Cerlainly not TO me, nor to Mr.. Cilley, AT any time, to
nv knowledge, either before or during the day the duel
was fought. did not hear Of the existence OF such q
question. until the Sunday or Monday after MIR. Ciliry
was killed. The written correspondence between Mr.:
Graves and Mr.. Cilley, does not show the existence OF
nny such question of veracity." Mr.. Bynum answered,
"Ibeard no such communication, directly nor indirectly,
from either MIR. Graves or his second, made or minated
to Mr.. Cilley or any of his friends, before lie fell" Mr..
Schaumburr answered, 81 did not understand that there
was a question Of vcracity' between the parties, nor was
there any conversation On the subject" DIR. Duncan
answered, "They never did to my knowledge. never
heard the question OF veracity assigned, during MIR. Gil
ley's life. Us The cause of any difficulty"
MIR Pierce answered, 81 never held any conversation
with Mr.. Graves, or his second or attendant friends, in
relation 10 The lutte fatal duel, nor did | ever hear, until
subsequently, to the 9th of February last, that any ques.
ton OF veraciry between Ar. Graves and Mr.. CiIley was
a point Of difficulty to be adj usted." Dr.. Foltz answer.
ed, sThey did not Mr.. Wise answered. " do not
know what Mr.. Graves may have communicated to Nr.
Sllt dl u llIUE OllSlG III iS'1u 40 I" - HdSSNiSh Va =
racitv between them. presume they both knew what
had passed between them verbally. | believe that did
state to Mr.. Jones, or 10 other trends OF Mr.. CIiley, uh
the ground, that Mr.. Graves said MIR. Cilley had assign
ed 10 him the reason fer declining 10 receive the note OF
Col. Webb, that he did not choose to be held accountable
for words spoken in debate. | think | so informed MIR.
Jones when asked him if MIR. CiIley could not assign
! his reason on the ground; but of this am not positive.
Mr.. Crittenden answered, "Not that | know Of. know
of no communication between any of these parties other
than as befure stated, so far as | now reCollect. Wine
ther those communications involve any such question:, 1t
is not for inc 10 decide; no such question was maze, III
terms, that | knew Of"
MIR hrneIce answered, "hlr. Graves had no commu.
nication of any kind with Mr.. Cilley, his second, or at
tendant friends, and of course did not communicate TO
them that such a question was a point OF diiiiculty.-
Nor did the second Of Mr.. Graves, as far as | remember,
make such a communication except so far as may be i'm
piled from the propositions made by him, IN connection
with The correspondence, &c. One, at least, OF the
friends Of Mr.. Graves, in the presence OF his second,
made frequent attempts TO direct the attention OF the sc.
cond and friends of MIR. Ciney to the difficulty which
was presented by the terms OF Mr.. Graves's first note
giving his version Of what MIR. CiIey had said aud
the ground which Mr.. Cilley had subsequently, assumed.
But it was not referred TO, an terms. as a question OF We
racity. II was believed that Mr.. Ciney had honorable
grounds, which would be satisfactory TO MIR. Graves, aud
at the same time compatible with the truth, which would
effect the object, without making directly such n ques'
lion while efforts were pending 10 accommodate. "he'
Their the views, thus expressed, were communicated to
Mr.. Cilley, | know not. For the character Of what &C.
CURED on This point, so far as | participated in 1t, The
committee are referred 10 my general statement"
Mr.. Graves said 10 Dr.. Follz, on the way 10 The field,
"Thot he had been the bearer Of a note from Col. Webb
10 Mr.. CilIey, inuuiring if Mr.. Cilley had been correctly
reported in The Globe. Mr.. CllIey refused 10 receive
the mole, and declined giving his reasons. which lmpll.
Gated me, in consequence of which ! challenged him, bat
have no personal anInosity towards him" Mr.. Wise
said on the field, Jones', these gentlemen have
come here without animosity toward each other they
are fighting merely upon a point Of honor. "Thcsc men
have nothing against each other; they are merely settling
a point OF honor.
This concurrent testimony Il all, without exception,
taken in connection with The written correspondence.
the various propositions and answers on The field, and
the farther fact that MIR. CIlley had not been informed
that Mr.. Graves had undertaken 10 repeat TO others any
verbal communication between them or that any Inisap-
prehension or misunderstanding existed between them
on that subject, utterly repels the suggestion, thai any
question Of veracitY had arisen, or had been made, or
was the cause of the challenge, or the death Of MIR. Cilley.
Indeed, any misapprehension on that subject would have
given no more just ground Of luminosity, and least of all
Of the highly %vindictive feelings necessarily aroused by
a question Of veracity. than the very evident misapprc.
he nsion which Nj. G. labored under, in regard 10. some
parts of the note Of James Watson Webb, Of which he
was the bearer.
The committee will not, in justice 10 MIR. Graves, hnr.
Dor the belief, that there were ranking secretly in his
bosom any vindiS}IGye, " question If nc-.onoi "n,H ~,
and prompting him 10 carry on a deadly warfare under
another pretexl, not only without a direct and explicit
disclosure of The real cause OF difficulty, such as would
have left no misapprehensiono on The mind OF any one,
but under circumstances which misled the other party
and his friends, and left him, under that false impression,
to The forfeit Of his life.
The committee have, therefore, come 10 the conclu.
sion, that the words spoken by Mr.. Cilley in debate in
the House Of Representatives, the refusal OF Mr.. CIliey
10 receive a demand for explanation Of those words, and
his refusal to assign any other reason for it, than thai, he
chose to be drawn into no difficulty upon The subject,
were the causes which led TO the death of MIR. Cilley,
under the circumstances which have been substantially
detailed.
II remains 10 inquire whether there has been a breach
Of the privileges Of the House.
It is a breach of the highest constitutional privileges
Of the House, and of the most sacred rights of the peo.
pie in the person OF their representative, 10 demand, in
a hostile manner, an explanation Of words spoken in de.
bate; TO be the bearer Of such a d emand; to demand a
reason for refusing 10 receive it, beyond The mere vo.
luntary election of the member Intercepted; or 10 de-
mand, under any circumstances, any reason at all. No
member con be questioned in a hostile way, and put to
his plea, and yield to it, without subjecting himself to
great disadvantage in the estimation Of many, and i'm.
pairing his influence and his usefulness as a member
II is a still moro aggravated breach Of the privIle-
gs Of the House, and Of the rights OF the people in
The person Of their representative, 10 challenge a mem
Der, and TO STAY him in combat, for refusing TO com
ply with any such demand. IL is the highest offence
which can be committed against either House OF
Congress; against the freedom of speech and of debate
therein; against the spirit and The substance OF that con.
slitutional provision, that for any speech or debate in Ell
,her House the members shall not be questioned in any
other place, and violates essentially the right Of perfect
immunity dscchere for words spoken in debate here,
which is essential 10 the independence ofCongress, and
TO The existence of constitutional liberty. And when
this. offence is committed by a member, it calls for the
exercise OF The highest powers Of the House TO purge 1t.
self Of the evil, 10 maintain effectual!y It's rights and
privileges, and to preserve i~nviolabIe this immunity,
which is guaranteed by The Constitution, not for the
sake of the individual, but for his constituents aud for
the country.
The present case is without any circumstance Of ex.
tenuation. A member of the House, in q manner most
strictly parliamentary, on an occasion most appropriate,
in language most decorous and moderate in defence OF
the honor Of The House against an anonymous and un.
founded charge of corruption, had alluded 10 the publish.
ed records of former proceedings with perfect truth and
accuracy; had, in obedience to his duty, declined a hos