The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-03-01
Etom lhe NationaI Inlslligsneer.

From the National TntsIiigsncer.
The following papers have been placed in ou
hands by the Hon Mr.. Wis., with request TO giv'
them place in our columns;
WASHINGTON, February 25, 1872
DEAR STA; John Quincy Adams having lately de
cared in his place the House Of Representatives ina
he never did believe but VIVA, was the guilty mar
in your duel with Mr. Cilley," and that the man who
pulled the trigger was but instrument IN my nanus
and article in the weekly Courier anu ne"
York Enquirer, edited by James Watson Weop' o.
the 18th instant, having charged me and my ascot
dtes" with deceipng Mr. Clay as TO the ftme oil your
meeting and having charged also, that the place o.
your meeting was changed al my suggestion, and
that but for such deception OF Mr. Clay, no hostile
meeting could have taken place between you and
Mr. Ciey at I'LL had prepared the subjoned state
msnt be submittedto you for confirmation OF cor
Fection.
Your letter in this mornings Inteigencer, dated
Louisville, Kentucky, February l6, 1912, addressed
TO the honorable Henry Clay compes me now to
submit my statement to 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, correct the misrepresentation OF
James Watson Webb in the Courier and Enquirer
And, fourthly, to vindicate myself forever from the
impuation that lever instgated you either to chal'
lenge or fight Mr. Cilley.
In the first place your letter is inaccurate in TINS TO
wit:
lst You say From the commencement Of the diff
fcuty between Mr.. Cilley and myself up TO the fine
sent him the challenge, do not recoect that men
toned it you, Mr. Cay) cor any other colleague
friend, except Mr.. Meneee and MI Wise" ms
you state as your recollection merely NOW, peg 70
refresh your recollection little
In your statement before the select commit ee OF
the House Of Representatives on the duel, you hrst
described The verbal interview between you and Col
Webb, when he requested you to bear his note; you
fhanb asc haI tha inta viaw haty
Cey, when he declined TO receive the note Of Col.
Webb, and assigned his reasons for so doing You
add: Then | consulted friends" They agreed
with you that Mr. Cilleys reasons were satisfactory.
You then saw Mr. Cilley again, and you say: we
went behind the Speakers chair, and ! remarked to
him that, on consultation ioith friends, &c. you
were happy TO inform him that his reasons Were
deemed satisfactory to relieve you.frum all re-
sponsibty. He expressed his pleasure at the NOR
nation and you say: {" then remarked, as he and
had been alone all our interviews, u oas desirable
that he should reduce 10 tcriting the reasons 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, who
advised you SHAT he should reduce to ipriting the
reasons thus assigned for declining to receive the
communication r.
Whoever it was, it certainly was not I; for, as
state below Insisted that you should mol require Mr.
Ciley TO put his reasons in writing. II could not
have been Mr.. Menefee, for he alone not
friends - | never heard him say, you say that
he gave such advice. When debating with you, as
did pontedly whether that was your proper course,
Col Webb what Mr.. Cilley said to you verbally,
leaving Mr. Cilley 10 deny it if il he chose, You never
quoted any other authority against my opinion but
that of MIR. Clay, with whom you informed me you
advised that and other points, and whose advice
you followed in preference to mine. Abou, this
cannot be at fault, because it was matter OF such
argument well as statement as to be indelibly 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.. Cilleys reasons satisfactory; but Mr.. Clay
and myself were devided in opinion
ls As to whether you should require Mr.. Cilley
TO reduce his verbal reply to YOU assigning his rea-
for declining to receive Webbs note TO priting
2dly. We, in your presence, differed as to the form
of the challenge and to the true issue ofyouI con
Billy. We differed, consulting together at his room,
whether the unusudi and Objectionable" terms should
be accepted.
One of these points at the pery beginning of
the correspondence the other two were at and immt-
diatey after the challenge.
Again, you say, 81 do not recoect naming the sub
ject to YOU Mr. Clay "unt the morning before the
meeting" Friday morning, the 23d, "when lcaled
OF your room, think in company with Mr.. Wise,
and exhibited TO you the correspondence, and per-
hafs detailed to you the circumstances ofthe affair.
was in company with you. You had expressly
taken to Mr.. Cay's 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
10 note his advice and counsel, did note it, and
can forget il. You exhibited to him q mean on FIJI
day morning. the 23d of February, 1893, the day be-
fore the due) of the correspondence, ercept The
challenge you had drawn. 1t was obvious that he had
and known all the preceding correspondence be-
forehand. You did not detail the circumstances o.
the affair; for there necessity for that either
He already knew ALL and entered directly and fam
arly into conversation upon the main points, as fully
known to him from the beginning. What is his re-
collection that point Does he not recollect thai
he aoas informed before that morning. His recolec
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 melting" and, as
you say, had "a moments conversation with him
ain which you made known to him your cant Of skill
in the use Of the tpeapons selected by your adversary
did he not then fully know, and was he not shown,
the lcritten terms prescribed by Gen. Jones, the Sc
cond Of Mr.. Ciley? Did he not advise their adop-
ton, as | state in the relation of facts hereto APP
pended
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 Mr.. Clay to the time and place OF
your meetngi Or, that the place of meeting was
changed at ALL at my suggestions or that OF any body
esei Or, that the time of meeting was changed to
deceive Mr. Clay or 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, Saturday, the Oath
Was there any appointment but one as to the
place of meetng' Did not the written terms, in the
first sentence prescribe that the place to be agreed
on by Gen. Jones and myself the next day at l.
O'Clock Did they not in their last line prescribe tha
time was to be given you to procure rifle Was
the time delayed longer than was necessary for tina
purpose procure your rifle and get it ready for the
field, Did not Mr. Clay board in the same house
with youi Had he not every means of knowing YOU
movements and those of your associates on the day
the meetng
In the third place | desire you to read the sub
joined statement carefully and atentivey and to con
firm it. if correct to correct it, If inaccurate in