The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1856-07-29
THE DAILY DISPATCH.
Tnrsaay Merninx. July 20, 1886.
THE BROOKS AND SUMNER AFFAIR.


Inc Statcmeuh 0i Ncoefhs burIlng0m6
and Campbell.
The National Intellgencer of yesterday, con-
tans the statement of Messrs. Burlingame and
| Campbell Mr.. BurIingsme opens hs statement
by the following extract from his speech in the
House on the 22i June:
On the ed day of May. when the Senate and
House had clothed Themselves ia mourning for
brother fallen in the battle of life In the distant
State of Missouri, the Senator from Massachusetts
sat in the silence of the Senate chamber engaged
In the employments appert tanning to his office when
member from this House, who had taken an oath
TO sustain the Constitution, stole into the Senate
that place which had hitherto been held sacred
against violence, and smote him Cain smote
his brother.
Mr.. Keitt, Gn his seat) That ia false.
Mr. Burlingame- will not handy epithets with
the gentleman. l am responsible for my own Ian
guage Doubtless he is responsible for his.
MIR keitt lam.
Mr.. Burlingams shall stand by mine
One blow was enough but did not satiate the
wrath OF that spirit which had pursued him through
| two days Again and again. quicker and faster
tell the leaden blows, until he was torn away from
| his victim, when the Senator from Massachusetts
tell in the arms OF his friends and his blood ran
| down on the Senate floor. Sir, the act was brief
aud my comments on 1t shall be brief also de-
noance 1t IN the name of the Constitution it vioa
TED denounce ii in the name of the sovereignty
| OF Massachusetts, which was stricken down
| by the blow. | denounce II in the name
| OF civilization, which it outraged. / de.
nonuee 1t in the name of humanity denounce
1t In the name Of that fair plsy which bulies and
| prizs hghtcrs respect What strike q man when
| he is pinioned-when be cannot respond to blow
Call you that chvslry In what code of honor
qua you get your authority for that l do not be
| leve that member has friend so dear who must
not in his heart of hearts, condemn the act Even
the member himself, if he has left spark of that
chivalry and gallantry attributed to him, must
loathe and scorn the act. God knows / do not
Wish TO speak unkindly, or in q spirit of revenge
| out owe II to my manhood, and the noble State
IN part represent TO express my deep adherence
| of the act
Mr.. Burlingame then relates the fact that Mr.
Bocock, of Va, called on him on behalf of Col
| Brooks, and republishes his reply to Mr.. Bocock.
as heretofore published in the Brooks correspon.
dence. lie then says:
| This statement was made for Mr. Brooks by his
| selected friend long after the conversation of
which it processes to give the substance The pre-
sumption is that it contains all that could aid MI
Brooks
| However much it might be to my advantage to
| state the whole conversation as j understood it,
still, inasmuch it "prirats," at Mr. Bocock
| own request refrain from doing kept what
| was said to in the frankness of free CONVEX
| sation quite away from the newspapers. and shall
| continue to do SO. ! confess that was pleased
| with the bearing and conversation of Mr. Bocock
4
| tile meeting; and am that nothing but a
strong wish his friend could ever have in
| duced him to place in his hands the above state
| ment
| When examined, the statement discloses what is
| 70 me source of satisfaction. 1t appear
| from it that did not seek difficulty with any one;
| that felt that no man-not even Mr.. Brooks-had
| cause of complaint against me; that would NOT
| admit myself violator of the rules of personal
or parliamentary propriety, as should have done
| had slated to him that l intended to insult Mr.
| Brooks or anybody else on the floor of the House;
| that dsavowed the character of boaster; that
| retracted none of my language, and was ready to
| give him satisfaction / may well rest myself on
this statement of Mr.. Bocock, leaning . generous
public to view it in the light in which 1t was made
| 1t will be remembered by Mr.. Bocock that ex
pressy refused, in our subsequent interviews, to
permit the word honor" TO be placed in the
statement written by my friends, and that because
| of such refusal he thought Mr. Brooks would deem
| 1t unsatisfactory.
| Mr. Brooks, think, ON a close examination of
his friends statement will fail to find those 'apolO
| eies' which he says there indicated Would it
| not have been wiser in Mr.. Brooks, and more in
| accordance with the code" of which we hear 80
much, had he sent note to me in the first place
Instead of resorting to an irregular way to get my
views Ny answer, it seems. was satisfactory
| and he was Impressed with the beefthat" was
! elevated gentleman On his showing the
| affair closed: and, may say, without doing
| injustice TO MIR. Boccck, that q request was made
| that should keep the transaction secret Nearly
| two weeks after this, Mr. Bocock, as Mr.. Brooks
states. came to me with the singular request that
| would permit statement of the conversation we
| had together to be placed In the hands of Mr.
! Brooks. / am confident il was a request which
| could not have been willingly made by Mr.. Bocock
not necessary to disclose the reasons given for
this remarkable proceeding. looked at his state
ment, and when had read the first part thought
| it did me justice, but when read the paper more
| carefully 4 saw that, whatever may have been MIR
| Bococks intention, it would do me injury, and !
| refused to give my assent to it. Thus things re
| manned until the following day. when Mr.. Bocock
addressed me letter from which (it not being pri-
vate) extract the following, having reference to
my refusal to endorse the statement in previous
| interview The real point of the matter is that
ynu ND not intend to reflect on Mr.. Brooks person
| ally" +.
Alter suggesting q number of ways by which
this could be stated, he writes 1T may be done
oy your saying, in reply to this note that you did
nor intend to reflect on Mr.. Brooks personaliy."-
| again: i am sure you ought not to object to the
| latter conrse.' These few words disclose the de-
sire OF MI Brooks, through persuasiou to get some
htag which might satisfy his friends for negectipc
me III ns hoerai calls on gentlemen for personal sa
| nsiacuon- oid not reply to the letter in writing
but stated to Mr.. Bocock that as the matter seen.
ed complicated it might be better for US both to hold
our future conversations in the presence of others
leonsuited the hon Geo Ashmun and Mr. Speak
| er Banks. stated to them as nearly as can re-.
member, that observed in my speech the ruIes of
| personal and parliamentary decorun; that I could
not qualify or retract any portion OF it, and that
held my self responsible to any gentleman aggriev.
ed byit"
To avoid Misunderstanding, desired my friend
Mr.. Ashmun, to reduce my views TO writing
which he did-approving the position taken by me-
| As did also MIR. Banks. MIR. Bocock said Mr
| Brooks would not deem nay position satisfactory
as it yielded nothing. Another interview was
| had, when | adhered to the form substantially
as drawn by Mr. Ashmup, which was copied by Mr.
Banks When the friends of Mr. Brooks left il was
not known whether it would be satisfactory or not
| / understsod Mr. Bocock TO say that be thought it
| would not be- ! must say was surprised when
saw the memorandum the next day In the Mon
not having received notice that it was satisfac-
| tory-and appended TO the speech of Mr.. Brooks
| i'm such . way ~ to give the impression that IT
| was extorted and not persuaded from me- Thatit
was liable to misconstruction l soon ascertained.
Still l think should have left 1t as it was had
not heard, ON what deemed good authority. that
Mr.. Brooks and some of his immediate friends
were claiming that had yielded to his menace
| that he had backed down" the North and con
quered Massachusetts,. Knowing in my soul that
| such was gross perversion of what meant by
my statement determined at once to make my
H. E~l