The daily Minnesota pioneer. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1854-1855, 1855-08-08
LOUISVILLE, KY, July 81, 1855.

LOUISVILLE, KY, July 81, 1855.
Sir:-Your note of yesterday, sent by the
hand of your friend Major Lewinski, is received.
This is the second note of the kind that l have
received from the family of Henry Clay
About ten years ago, l received note from
one of your brothers, saying he was informed
by some person that had spoken of him as
insane, and asking whether, if he should fur
nish the testimony of a specified number of
men that he was in his right mind, l would
accept q challenge from him.
You say that the object of your note of yes
terday is solely to inquire whether hold my
self personally responsible as a gentleman"
for publications in my paper attacking private
individuals. 1 am not aware, sir, that it par
ticulary concerns you to know what general
rules Of action prescribe for myself as an ed
itor. have no objection, however, to inform
ing you, that, if do any man such an unpro-
voked and mortal wrong in my columns as to
entitle him, in my opinion, to take or seek my
life, will hold myself responsible to him in
the field, and that, if any gentleman does me
such a wrong as to make me wish for his blood,
l will call him to the field.
l presume, sir, that all, which it concerns
you to know from me, is whether l would &C
cept challenge from you on account of my
comments in the Louisville Daily Journal Of
the 18th instant, upon your communication
published in the same paper on the same day.
Without putting you to the trouble of ad
dressing the question to me in due form, say
to you plainly tibet would not. do not wish
to kill you, and am very clear in the opinion
that my article affords you neither just cause
nor rational pretext for killing me. l made
no attack or imputatiOn upon your private
character, which, for ought l know, is unob-
jectionable. l merely gave utterance to the
thoughts and feelings naturally and necessarily
excited in my mind, and, as | believe, in the
whole public mind, by your demolishing the
sacred old dwelling house of your father, and
selling the lumber. You stated, in your pub
llshed communication, that "aspersiOns both
public and private" had been cast upon you
for pulling down your fathers house. You
thus admitted that your conduct had already
became a matter of public notosiety and dis
appreciation, and subject of public and pri-
vate denunciation, which you called asper-
sion," yet these aspersions, so-called, had not
been noticed by you. When you attempted
defence of your conduct and assigned your rea-
nesday, you certainly gave license for those
reasons, for which, as [ presume, you now wish
to hold me to personal responsibility.
My article was not tenth part so harsh to-
wards you personally, rs yours was towards
me. You stigmatized me, by necessary and
direct implication, as "public calumniator,"
charged me in the same manner with the sPRo-
sTITUrloN of the columns" of my paper, and so
used the words "L1AR and WILLIAM" as to show
that they were meant for me. responded
with more moderation than you had right to
expect, merely denouncing that act of yours,
which, as it related to a glorious old memorial
of departed greatness, was almost, in its char
acter, PUBLIC act, and which has made the
heart of the nation recoil. ..t--.
l repeat, sir, that treated you with for
bearance. You spoke in your communication
as if the thought Ofselling the material fyour
fathers house never occurred to you until
much of it had been stolen and otherwise TAX
en- away, and you added, that, if you had sold
one inch of it for private profit, you would feel
yourself unworthy to be Kentuekian," and
would "hy to some remote corner of the earth
to hide your "vile and dishonored head" l
might, in reply, have shown that the deter.
minatcn to sell the lumber of that old man.
sion was not only fixed in your mind but a
FOWCu duu puUliSuCu " VIC WOLlu uuuSt yOui
own hand and mouth before the old mansion
itself was broken up. l might have shown
that you gave public notice, under your own
name, in the Lexington Observer of July 9th,
1854, and in several successive numbers of
that paper, that you expected to take down
your dwelling house at Ashland in August,
that you, would have for sale "a large quantity
of the old material" then in it, and that "ANY
ONE WANTING SUCH MATERIAL COULD GET
BARGAIN BY APPLYING ON THE PREMISES"
However, all this is very little to my present
purpose. have only to repeat thatpI would
not accept challenge from you on account of
my article on Wednesday. And, as see no
necessity for my adopting the etiquette of
duellists in telling you so, shall send this by
mail. 1 scarcely need add, that, if have err
ed in any statements of fact in regard to your
conduct, shall, on having the errors pointed
out to me, taky pleasure in correcting them.
. Yours, &C., ..r. ,.. .ass..f
!, go ,--.,., ...r [ Gro. ID. PRENTICE.
"a j. B. Clay, Esquire. ~ - H.. 1882.
Gof1,ars,nu nF n UTo,,