The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-03-01
From the National Intelligence,

DEAR STA: John Quincy Adams having lately de-
cared in his place the House of Representatives hat
he never did believe but what wasthe guilty man
In your duel with Mr. Cilley and that the man who
pulled the triyger was but an instrument in my hands
and an article in the weekly Courier and New
York Enquirer edited by James w atson Webb, OF
the 18th instant having charged me and my dssoet-
ates with deceipng Mr. Clay as to the time OF your
meeting and having charged ALSO that the place OF
your meeting changed at my suggestion, and
that but for such deception of Mr.. Clay, hostile
meeting could have taken place between you and
Mr.. Ciley at all II had prepared the suboined state
nsnt TO be submitted to you for confirmation cor
recton.
Your letter in this mornings lntelligencer, dated
Louisville, Kentucky, February 10, 1912, addressed
10 the honorable Henry Clay, compels me now to
submit my statement you through the public print
which Contains your letter.
This do: First That suspicion may rest upon
me at least of getting such as want before
publishing them. Secondly to correct your own let
ler Thirdly, To correct the misrepresentation OF
James Watson Webb in the Courier and Enquirer
And fourthly, to vindicate myself forever from the
imputaton that ever nstigated you either to cha-
lenge fight Mr.. CilIey.
In the first place your letter is inaccurate in this, to
wit:
LIST You say From the commencement of the diff
culty between Mr.. Cilley and my SELF up to the time
sent him the challenge do not recollect that men
toned it to you, (Mr Cay,) 'or any other colleague
friend except Mr. Meneiee and MI. Wise" This
you as your recollection merely. Now, beg TO
refresh your recollection little
In your statement before the select commits of
the House of Representatives the duel, you first
described the verbal interview between you and Col
Webb, when he requested you to bear his note you
then described the interview between you and Mr.
Cilley when be declined to receive the note of Col
Webb, and assigned his for doing. You
add g Then | consulted friends" They agreed
with you that Mr.. Cieys reasons were satisfactory
You then Mr.. Cilley again, and you say We
went behind the Speakers chair, and remarked to
him that, consultation lvith friends &c. you
happy to inform him that his reasons We're
deemed satisfactory relieve you from all re-
sponsibility He expressed his pleasure at the nor-
nation, and you say A" then remarked, as he and
had been alone all our interviews 1t desirable
that h should reduce TO 1rriting the thus as
signed for declining to receive the communication.
Mark that this happened of course, before you
wrote your first letter to him Now ask you, w no
advised you that he should reduce to irrting the
thus assigned for declining to receive the
communication 81
Whoever it was, it certainly not 1; for, as
state below insisted that you should not require Mr.
Cey to put his reasons in 1oriting. 1t could not
have been Mr.. Menefee, for he alone was not
friends; !" | never heard him say, you say, that
he gave such sdvice. When debating with you, as
did pontedly, whether that your proper course,
and whilst urging you simply to state in letter to
Col Webb what MIR. Cilley said to you verbally
leaving Mr.. Cey deny it if it he chose you
quoted any other authority against my opinion but
that of Mr.. Clay, with whom you informed me you
advised that and on other points, and whose advice
you followed in preference to mine. About this
cannot be at fault, because was matter OF such
argument well as statement as to be indeibly i'm
pressed upon my memory and you informed others
OF the fact well myself, and there Is other EVIL
dence of the fact All your friends concurred that
Mr.. Cilley satisfactory; but Mr.. Clay
and myself were devided in opinion
lst. As to whether you should require Mr.. Cilley
to reduce his verbal reply to you, assigning his rea
sons for declining to receive Webbs note, to Dritng
IDLY We, IN your presence, differed as to the form
of the challenge and to the true issue of your con-
troversy.
3dly. We differed, consulting together at his room
whether the unusual and Objectionable terms should
be accepted.
One of these points was at the pery beginning of
the correspondence the other two were at and imme-
dlately after the challenge.
Again. you say, 'l do not recolect naming the sui
ject you" (Mr. Clay) until the morning before the
meeting Friday morning, the Odd, "when called
at your room, think in company with Mr.. Wise,
and exhibited to you the correspondence, and per-
haps detailed to you the circumstances of the affair
| was in company with you. You had expressly
taken to Mr.. Clays room to hear his opinions and
views for myself which he had before expressed to
you when | was not with you. Thus taken by you
note his advice and counsel did note it, and never
can forget it. You exhibited to him mean on Fri
day morning. the 23d of February, 1888, the day be-
fore he dueD none of the correspondence, ercept the
challenge you had drawn. 1t obvious that he had
and known all the preceding correspondence be-
forehand. You did not detail the circumstances Of
the affair for there necessity for that either
He already knew all, and entered directly and fami
arly into conversation upon the main points, as fully
known to him from the beg inning. What is his re-
collection on that point? Does he not recollect tha
he informed before that morning? His recoec-
ton might possibly, aid yours and mine both very
much
When you saw Mr.. Clay again, "about nine
o'clock Of the night preceding the mecting, and, as
you say, had "a moments conversation with him
SIN which you made known to him your Dant Of skill
in the Of the uoeapons selected by your adversary,
did he not then fully know, and was he not shown
the 1critten Terms prescribed by Gen. Jones, the
cond of Mr. CilIey? Did he not advise their adop-
ton, as | state in the relation of facts hereto ap-
pended2
In the second place AS far as you know or be-
eve is there the least foundation for the charge in
the Courier and Enquirer, either that | or my asso
ciates deceived MIR. Clay as to the time and place Of
your meetng' Or, that the place of meeting was
changed at ALL at my suggestion that Of any body
else' Or, that the time of meeting was changed to
deceive Mr. Clay any body else? Or, that
changed the time of meeting for any other reason
than to prepare your rifle and to get ready for the
meeting after we returned from the arsenal, about
half past II o'clock, A. NJ, on Saturday, the Oath
Was there any appointment but one as to the
place of meetngi Did not the written TERMS in theiI
first sentence prescribe that the was to be agreed
on by Gen. Jones and myself the next day at IL
oclock Did they not in their last line prescribe that
time to be given you to procure rifle Was
the time delayed longer than necessary for thai
purpose procure your rifle and get it ready for the
fieldi Did not Mr.. Clay board in the same house
with you' Had he not every means ofknowng your
movements and those of your associates the day Of
the meeting'
In the third place | desire you to read the sub
joined statement carefully and attentivey, and to con-
firm it, if correct; to correct it. if inaccurate in
single material particular
1t is painful to me in the extreme thus to be COM
PEELED to call you after the lapse of so long a
time, as witness in my behalf But time cannot
materially impair the facts in the case. The COM