The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1844-09-06
From me Mem York Tribune.
THE MARTYR CILLEY MIR. Ola

with the haLlual tone and teachings Of that
paper We find the following extracts from
a speech at Granville, by the Hon. 10. S.
Bosworth Ct this City:
/" " hat was the course Of Henry Clay
when the nomination came before the UNI.
ted Suite Senate2 Dad be doubt the CO.
paciiy OF Marlin Van Buren, TO I'll this mis-
sion with credit TO the country No man
can believe 1t. Had he any thing to allege
against his moral character No, FEEDER
alism, mid all its fertility in delraction,
made no such charge. MIR. Van Buren, had
never challenged his f How man to mortal
combat, nor been instrumental IN sending a
human being TO an untlmcly grave. The
ghost Of no murdered CIley haunted his
reputation; no widowed wife, nor orphan
children, ~ the fi,iu dreams Of broken and
Melancholy slunbcrs, call him murderer,
Poor Clley was murdered IN
cold blood to vndicate the character OF
James Watson Webb to be called gen
ileman."
NON this attack on Mr. Clay because Of
hlsvnle asnins, confirming Mr. Van Buren,
as Minister 10 Engiand might just as well
have been directed against Mr.. Calhoun, or
any one OF the emincn, Loco Focos who
voted TO reject him. Mr.. Bosworih knows
very well that Mr.. Van Buren, was rejected
on account Of the uupa.roiic and uustatcs
manlke instructions lie gave 10 Louis
VI Lane, former Minister to England, to
urge OF tho British Government, that the
Administration (of Adams and Clay) which
sci up such high prctensions with regard
10 the West India Trade was out Of power,
ind tina, It's assumptions ought no, TO be re
memLcred 10 the proud &c Of the new Ad
ninstratian. To rcprobate this most ex
rtaordnnary aud IN National sentiment,
Mcssrs. Clay. Webster, Frolinghuysen and
other Wings, voted TO reJecl Mr.. Van Blu
rcn, as DID Mr.. Calhoun aud several Locos.
Il became Mr., Boswur.h, then, to meet
heir objection, ADD mol pretend ignorance
i OF It's existence.
+ And now to the Ciley Duel, so magnan
+ mously thrust into the discussion as nat
ter Of reprodch 10 MIR. Clay by this Loco
I Foco llbeler and blackguard. What had
Mr.. Clay to do with III Let US recall the
history.
Jonathan Cllley Of Maine and VIM, J.
Graves Of Kentucky entered Congress to
ecihcr on The opening Of the session in De
cember, 1897. Mr.. Graves was Wing,
Mr.. Cllley Loco Foco. They had no &C.
quaiu,auce or intercourse with each other
of course, no difference. Mr.. Cliley
vas an ardent, ambitious, aspiring young
man, MIR. Graves consiilulIonaly reserved
and retiring. On the l2ih Of February,
1898, MIR Ctley made speech rejecting
very severely on J. w. Webb Of the Cour-
Ter and Enquirer. Mr.. Webb promptly TO
paired to Washington and wrote perfect.
IS courteous and pacific note, asking an cx
PLANTATION Of the offensive language. THIS
note he asked Mr.. Graves TO band TO Mi.
Cllley, and Graves (aho had recently been
in this city, and been treated with signal
attention ard hospitality BY the Wings
here, ard By Col, Webb among the mum
bef) compAed with the request. Cilley de-
clincd 10 receive the note Mr.. Graves re.
quttd the grounds Of this refusal. Clliey
replied $50 Mr.. Graves distinctly understood
UltFJ ludA bt biu wv NHOOaN " w hI1Hh
into controversy With Editors for what he
might sne ct to say as a Representative on
the 1lor Of Congfess-and that he did not
rest his non reception Of the letter on GIy
personal objection 10 Col, Webb as gen
lleman. Mr. Graves considered himself IN
duty bound 10 be satisfied with these rea.
sons, received back tho letter, aud consid
cred the affair al an end. lie asked, 10
avoid any future misrepresentation from
other partles, that Mr.. Cllley should reduce
his reasons 10 writing. 10 which he under
stood Mr.. e. TO assent, and they parted
IN perfect kindness and mutual regard.
Mos, unfortunately, Mr. Clllcy now fell
INTO the hands OF bad advisers, and was in
duced 10 refuse statement in writing oil
the reasons he had given verbally. The
expected note did not reach MIR. Graves.-
He wrote one stating the substance Of the
conversation, as he had understood IT.,
and asking Cllcy If this was correct MIR.
Ciley denied ,hn, be had said any thing of
the sort. He had only, he said, refused
Webb's note because he chose to be drawn
into no controversy with him, adding that
no meant no disrespect to Mr.. Graves.
Here was Mr., Graves at once involved in
q dilemma by want Of candof on the part
Of his opponent. Webb was good enough
ior Cllley to abuse, but not good enough
TO receive any explanation OF that abuse
and this, not because Of Mr.. Chley's po
silion as Member Of Congress, but because
the man who had wantonly assa!led him
"dd not choose lubc drawnintoa contfoser.
sy with him." Obviously, the man should
have thought Of this before he made tho frs;
aueck. II i, had beena black waiter at an
oyster cellar whom he had thus assaulted, be
ouph, to have been wiling TO answer CIV.
II note Of inquiry from him.
But the unexpected response oil Cllley TO
Graves had (according TO the least absu'd
! portion Of the laws OF honor, SO called) now
, lnextricably involved Mr.. Graves |. was
idle for Cllley TO disclaim in empty words IN
! len>,oual disrespect to Mr.. Graves. Ever
since trf>se we're laws Of honor, so term.
" cd, The party~.ho says, will not receive
f.. et.kt