The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1854-05-19
COMMUNICATED

To THE EDITOR OF THE DIsPATCH.-
There appeared in your paper Saturday, 18th nst
which had appeared of a settlement of difficulty
between himself and Col. Crump. In reply, l state
that furnished the correspondence for publications
and according to the custom of the country, either
party has right TO publish correspondence of that
nature, if he thinks proper to do SO, without any
previous understanding to that effect; for such publ
cations are more common than otherwise. Relative
to garbling the correspondence, | deemed it unne-
cessary to cucumber the papers, or trouble the pub
lie, with all the letters that passed between the par
ties; and only deemed it necessary to publish
much a, would show the basis and terms of settle
ment DR.. Aguew nas right to complain; for, in
my opinion, the correspondence published repre-
sented Df AS position in more favorable light than
draws of his personalities really made after his
having refused to withdraw them, and had
thereupon been challenged: whereas, according to
that he made withdrawal after the challenge was
SENT which he had refused to do before. As to the
conversation that took place between Col c. and DR..
c. was not party to It; for nv positive declaration
to DR.. c. when delivered him the first letter from
Col Crump, was that all communications should be
submit the fore going facts to the public and pro.
nounce any charge of designed Misrepresentation
dicuous. THOS. A. SMITH.
To THE EDITOR OF THE DIspATcH:-In the Dis
patch of the 18th inst, there card under the sig
nature of Dr. jas. A. Agnew, referring to a pubca-
ton in regard TO personal difficulty between him
and myself In this card Dr.. A. complains that that
publication, which authorised by me, totally and
grossly msrepresents the nature and effect Of the
settlement. This publication of DIR AIS is followed
by from his friend DR.. A. E. Campbell, who SAYS
that the statement published is incorrect and pro-
ceeds to give what he calls full abatement of the
facts of the case they occurred The first ground
of complaint made by DR.. Agnew is that any publi-
cation of the facts was made. have only to state
in reply that it is usual. where difficulties of this
character have become known, for either party to
make publication OF the correspondence, and in
publishing the facts, submit that Injustice
done to any one. The second ground of com plant
maj ia hu r "A "a haHh aQ
garbled The publication of DR.. A. Z Campbell
containing, he says full statement of the facts
and of the correspondence, Shows that the only two
letters omitted in the publication authorised by me,
is the letter No. in which he refuses to retract and
my letter No 8, demanding satisfaction. l am at a
of this omission of these two letters in the
pondence The object of the publication was to
show the ground OF quarrel and the terms of adjust
ment. These letters shed light upon that subject
and therefore it was supposed TO be unnecessary
publish them. The third ground of complaint
versasion between the parties were omitted
Now, Mr.. Campbell states that preliminary to
the conversation that took place between him and
myself that he had hoped the affair would terminate
differently, but wished me to understand this not
coming from him al DR., A 70 friend, but from him
private Individual. Much conversation took place
between DR.. c, and myself some of which has been
detailed by Dr. c. but do not perceive that IL sheds
any light upon this terms of iustment, that any
advantage would have accrued TO Dr.. A., If all the
conversation had been detailed. have thusreviewed
the three grounds Of complaint made by DIR. A and
submit to the public whether there has been any
misrepresentation Of his conduct IN the card com
mented on by him. .,-,-..s..f
my is-n" CHAs. A. CRUMP.