The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1849-09-21

HiOoA shah pht " -
had preferred against me in that very ar
/, licle was true, although he had made, O.
yer his ow signature, in his letter OF apollo
f ~, clear and unqualified giihdrdTdi OF
} every word OF H. Ii is true, that III his
. publishing DR.. l!epderson's letter and slate
men,, he reiraius from making any COM
ment, but it is equally true, that 10y the
publication he endorsed 1t and made II his
own. Why its publication Did he not
know that il was improper TO publish any
thing outside Of the correspondence unless
by agreement Does he think that The
opinions Of his friend Dr.. Henderson and
his other three friends, can qualify or al.
ter in the slightes, degree, The settlement
lbe,ween him and nyselfl Where was the
use then of the publication of DIR. Hender'
sons statement for on the very week be.
fore the publication of the correspondence,
there appeared in the " Hornets Nest, "
the friend of Mr.. Barringer, and certainly
not without his appreciation, notice that
the difficulty between Mr.. Barringer aud
myself had been honofabiy anu amicsby
adjusted.
To say that II was published to correct
reports prejndicial'to him will not do, be-
cause the simple publication OF the cores
pondence would correct all mIsrepresen,a.
lions as TO Tie terms Of the adJuslment.-
The settlement stands uponliis own basis,
and il is too late now TO attempt TO vary II
by an, thing thet vas said before OF after.
/ Mat then was It's object, The letter
aud statement shows Il. FIRST. that he
went to the Cala~ba Springs (not to the
T feldl prepared to hght aud secondly
which was rs main object, 10 explain Why
1t was he did not accept a direct In'Ilalion
to the field, as 1t was construed 10y him to
be, iaslead Of having Dr.. Henderson nj.
dress me ro'o which opeued the door for
recoucinotion.
Here then - The true Iclscn Tor the puD
T lcaiion Of Dr.. II rde,son's statement, aud
unfortunately in doing so contrad'cis has
I letter 10 me and the whole spoudence.
/ Look ct IL. Dr.. Henderson says 10 has
I statement that when called upon TO act as
Mr.. Bsfrineer's friend. he at once pro.
nounced my letter a direct invitation TO
the field, aud such also nas the opIaiOn oi
Mr.. Barrtugcr. Let u see then how this
statement agrees with The spondcuee.
I The frs, letter received when We met
at the Caiawba Springs on the 21,h ult.,
was from Mr., Bafunger acconpan, lng
one from DR.. II. Mr.. b as l1ljuWs:-
" our note OF the Eth inst. was banded
TO me Morganlon on Tuesday evening Of
the 2lst. It's conleots are nov under
consideration, bat a, The sugg"s'ioa Of my
friend y H., 6nll octlon thereon j. post.
poned for reasons which lie viii give. -
Now mark d.. lis reasons.
Your communication dated August
l7Ih, directed To- my friend Mr.. X. Bar
ringer by HE hand Of l.. c. Davidson, Esq
/. nov before mr.. | confess IT places me
as the friend of Mr.. Barr,uger IN an ask.
ward position, for II may be understood ps
either a reremp,oty invitation 10 the 6sij,
or demand for exploration.
Tho above Dor Of Dr.. II. contains the
reasons assigned ~ Mr. Barrnser for a
poslp1neme Of faal action 90 my lcuer
Nos defy the most perfect criuc 10 show
It hc can, oae No d ~ the Whole CORES
poudcnce, thst vii SUSAN h,m n the
statement, that ~ cons querec 81 Nhl' vas
learned al the Spnugs Mr. Birunser &c
ceptance Was declined being delivered.
Dies Dr. II. say tho same letter, that
his position had been changed II coase.
quence Of any thing be had heard } on he
contrary does be not say that hls position
was awkward % acc unl e mol know Ing
whether II s.aa p~,omriDty invitation To
The field 90 demand or espisna' -
Can i5n.usge he more rypIcil II Mr.
Barrngcr or h,. lneud d. Henderson, be
lieved my lctler to BE challenge, Nhy was
iinul boldly ayoned 10 tie spondencc
for certainly no source, however reliable,
should have itfleuced them 20 syos df
ferent opinion, ahtn ri, letter vas before
them aaI uuque,ilouatly the highest az
Jhority. Again, NY note was delivered
70 Mr. Bitunger nt Norgan,on on the
2I-t last. AID We did rot meet at the Ga.
tawha Spring, ull The 9Th although,
lie had SIX da, 70 consider ay letter, du.
WbhNu iiNti'F hAtNfAtNE ~ tftf w ~
statement, he had consulted several gentle.
men-yc, he arrived at the Springs still II
doubt, whether my nole was challenge
, or not, and "pa-ipooss Guai action there
%, until | would tell him what i, meant
: | did frankly dis''ose its import, whcl
was received bS bin, aud under which The
settlement was mada. To make, then, I
statement ! 3 days after, tho tendency D
which Is to change the comp exon Of Tie
comprqmlse, for the benefit of one Of To,
. parties, without The consent or kaoslcdg'
/ ai lie other, Is m"st extraordinary, M,
& without excuse or pa.talion.
Boz suppose my frs, note was q oiaI
Ieugr. pray Whist - lhe second J Was
asked 10 withdraw ~ No. Did With
r. draw ~ No. What then did d5l
$ SAID tt vos not Intended az an invitation I
I. the field, but demand Tor satisfaction; re
Hera'iog the very word, Of the first, whs
he said constituted a challenge.
What then did mean by demand e.