Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1843-08-16
VOLUME 30. NUMBER 80.
From the National InteLIigeHeey.
To TIE PUBLIC.


Immediately upon the death Of Mr.. Cilev. in HI. dina,
win Mr. Grnyes, the whole weight OF an almo., insuppor,'
aD!e odiim iel upon my reputation for my conduct m the
analr' The world knows with wha, rancor of maIic. ~
not with what ingenuity OF falsehood, / was assaleJ- vs..
not only Justly eliminated with the offence of puy,IIxg
put most uniusiiy aud cruelty charged far beyond thar Of
a committee was appointed by the House of Represen,,-
i've 70 investigate the question Of a breach OF privilege in
vowed IN the death Of one OF its members. and made iu,e.
nau ana reported the result. At first | awaited n for
maj TRIAL before the House for a full opportunity Of def,nc.
ihal opportunity never was afforded. The House after
molhs OF discussion, which served only to afford malice i,s
privilege OF persecution, contrary to NV most
monstranees, laid the whole subject on the table forcve,
In the investigation and the discussion of tho duel bv o,bers
my conduct had been land bare, without explanation. and
without the deiences which an oFEy rRtAI. before the bou..
would have thrown around il.
Denied a trial, | was lott to time and The certain ,,;,n,L.
VI uuu reaFiess, though not regardless, of public senu.
men'' l was willing to abide the unjust censure which had
1HSNened around my name until the moment of nv yindi-
eanon should come. And | determined that momen, .bonII
oe-~henever a responsible person, in a tangible sb,no
suOulu venture TO make the accusation, which had been in
angioly and lresponsibly made by ANONYMOUS pubEc,t;on.
nes iast aetermined never to notice in any shape.
puI, IN the mean time, however, from the fatal day Of the
= " ums une, whenever my friends, and especially any
= my Soinlding constituents, who never doubted. even
whist all the rest Vt the world seemed to eondeu,n me
"heh tnose who had the right to know injured of M 80,
Se enlt N Pafhcularsot the duel which constituted my de-
fence, 1 never hesitated TO inform them. Tbere
points on which they wanted to know the reasons of INV con-
duct. For example: III "h-
lst. Why did Mr.. Graves at first REQUIRE Mr. C1lsv . 49,,
wrirngl lou IN
%. Why was the point Of rraeity no, alleged in tho
challenge as Its cause
80. And wss that point made on the ground
| Inese two last queries were, as its journal will show. re.
heraied by the Committee of Invesugauonl
All why were such unusual terms n : wera nronos.5..
cepted7 OPOseos &c
was continually compelled to answer such inquiries as
w. III frequently compelled to discuss points they in.
vowed. invariably answered the first of these on.sdoos
BY saying ihatl mad differed with Mr.. Graves on The 80,
r,s -, -. w. Cnley 20 reduce his reasons Orreply to WI
the better counsel OF Mr.. CLAW. Again. Il, ,,swsI =. .y
second aud third questions, | said mat Mr.. Cav dr.v ,bs
J0h o. ue challenge with MS own hand, and pu, the i,spe
Oh 4 point OF PnHefito, which he considered easier se,,isd
mah the one Of UeTGeity; that for the same reason tho I,,,s-
point thoush often mentioned, was not pressed upon tho
gIo1hd' aud That was not the subject OF adjustment unon
ne ground because It was not the point putin the cb,l.n-.
anu IN answer TO the fourth, / said that | opposed but ,Ss,
VII LAY approved OF the adoption Of the terms for n. !.
Us ! aNe 1'feaay published. In defence of the course
pursued oy Mr.. Graves, never failed to quote the nutbo-i-
y u the advice OF his friend Mr.. Clay; as in defence al INV
own course on the ground quoted the authority Of Messa.
Cntenden and Mtnefcc. This | have done in r,o,s ,b,,
q hundred instances in the last four wears and va -.
Of !aie' dare say that Mr.. Graves NAV have done N. sam
'Mns' i aIHde To these particulars to show how Iule | inn,-
S.HeG mat l was not At liberty to use, in defence both Of
MT. graves and myself, an authority so high as th.t Of NJ,
Clay. never dreamed that was doing anytime inoran
90 % ms tnough / was careful at oil times not unnecess.-
ny :" m'oiNe ms name. At the time | first did 10 and
years alter, | was the devoted admirer and friend Of NJ
lay ana would have made any honorables sacrifice to m.ks
him the President of the United States. slwavs fmnJ L,
authority, particularly among his political friends. 70 prevail
10 my defence when used IN private, and IL wo. ,lxsvs a
ghuneanon 10 know that it would be equally awaiting when
uoeeanie necessary 10 use it in public not only to refl,e the
charge that insugated the duel, but to prove tb., vac ;,
me controlling adviser even OF MIR. Graves
always, indeed, intended TO appeal 10 Mr. CI,v 8, she
proper uhie' ana / was confident that he would not besitste
toooey a respectful summons, nor fail to assure the worIJ of
ue ruin In no hostile spirit did I ever mention his mar i,
ue aiiair; but, on the contrary, looked with copt;deni a.
'acuon TO HIM as a witness Of such high character th,, bs
mere cord, when once spoken, would dispel the cloud NJ
uunmy rom around my name. Thus, then, was diyulged
70 many, IN private, the part which Mr.. CLAY had in Inns
80. -Se'e' ulNllged by me 10 impute tor n moment 10
nm the base conduct OF iHsfLgafiHg or eau,,,s ,be All.
70 10 inSuipate him even IN giving wrong advice TO Mr..
pSnes' out SIMPLY TO satisfy my friends that Mr. Grsve.
had higher counsel than mine, TO show his iush6r,,;,, 80
mine Dr. Foltz's letter, rendered TO inc voluntarily. show
that the very morning after the duel tins ~ a. -
my information then TO him.
Except as have thus described, have never quoted NJ,
10y : "aine N connexion with the affair. Indeed have
~ lepenta me idea that ne or any one else ~inshgated Mr.
NS'cT ID me challenges and, lest Il might ininre Mr. Clav
IA me east l have purposely abstained from publishing tins,
ne auvsed IN the matter at all; and never published the fact
ului iaiely, when the moment. / thought. had arrived Which
imPerauvely called on me in self defence "a m,te +. DnbI,.
appeal to hun as a witness IN my behalf ~
tor nearly four years had been waiting for that mom.n,
Al the extra session OF Congress, in the sprin0 Of IslI
John U Albums made a most brutal and unppyoked au,cI
upon me Tor the part | bore in that duel. The nation
""nesso my iofoearanee at that time. Again. at this
session IN the debate upon Mr.. Marshalps resolution 20
eensure MN tor presenting a petition to dissolve the Linen
tie renewed ms attack with redoubled violence and ven
geance. tie distinctly charged in his pl,ce ,r,t d. ,
murderer more guilty OF the blood Of Mr.. Cilley ",ban
Tue man who pulled the trigger" Al the mouenth he wasut,sT.
ing ms false accusation, under the prctcxt of citing a legis.
,auNo precedent IN hts own case, there. Immediately behind
hin' III a range with my eve, sat the witness, who, above all
men, was the man 10 prove my innocence TO the very ,rr1,-
ser himself! There sat Mr.. CLAY, who knew the ,cr,,s,
uOh was false and there stood John Quincy Adams making
u, and attempting TO make the world believe II yv,s Co..
Mr. Adams had been the President Of the Uni,ed S,,,.s.
MI Clay had been his chosen Secretary Of STATE NJ,
Adams was as hoary with honors a with sge: his cbauc.
ter was so high that IL had become national proB,r,y ,nJ ~,
Mo'u "asnkeiy to become history. No less a witness than
te man oehlnd NM hearing him, could made up the fear.
TOT odds against the accused. But that witness bs o~,
'u''eu ana uled inend-one as great, If not far greater Than
ml7ei-One who could balance word against word. and
give PROOF against asseruon-one whose fame was mar of
the nccusers own hist0fy-was there. A word r,,, ~.
would silence the accuser forever; ny, perhaps csus. evc,
MN TO retruct the accusation. True, that then and tb.,s
that witness could not speak. but elsoWber. =. -, ~
or write. 'PeaN'
II not to the public prints, to his old friend he mich, d,oo
0 hne saying only "Nou are wrong, | know II 80 90,
nave "I0nged an innocent man by charging him with what
no man Is guilty. I advised In the duel of Grace -
Ciiey, and | know that no one caused or i,.,..,.J 49,
tormet 10 challenge or TO fight the lattcrp Lo.. tb.n H..
: pOraIa hinf from him would be enough. There be wss
P'tsent before me-such a witness, with such an sceuser
mo the accusation a damning one-couId I do otb,r-,..
than rise as | did and appeal ~ the two Kent,rkv $500.
~ witnesses m my bchaf1 / accused neither of ,b.n
far from u, for they were my own best witnesses q, Wi
on accusation from myself: No; said only that they knew
another, higher, better nnd more distinguished man t,,, I
had ndrised Mr. Caves in the prcliminaura Of h. Al
and that he advice, not mine, had been followed. Could
] say less TWAS on appeal % the best witness In The case.
VINO had never been heard, 20 speak. Was u not a. a mo.
mont when sclf-doience required the appeal 10 DO made
Yet the witness did not, bv word or sign, respond. OF
his / did not complain, as he. perhaps, thouRht that his 81.
lenee was enough. lie was known. and I would have been
content with inference slone from his silence forever but
how mortified sod gueved was / soon after this nppoaL 4,
see the following editorial article IN q paper known 10 be
devoted 70 Mr.. Clay, showing on its face an implicsuou 81
ssstt maj N.Y. was m some sense priyy TO new and id