New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-07-28

.n,bo ..cr. It Of the Hon. p. q. Brooke of Sout
Soss called ssshusstt. 4 H. ~ sed iss M0.
Guys National Hotel n -" city. Having isforne'
Mr.. Buringsme thst had p we communication Z
make to him, snd thst desired Pm o n1eIvis.
for that purpose, we went, at kf Huesetuon, 70 III
own room where we were entirely alt,ne. stated,
the first place, tbst wished him 10 kL ow tnst hat
cone merely to denver verbai message 70 nun, aes
TO take back such reply as hc might think proper .
send by me, and that my convection With th. mstte
wouh, in all events, enfthere. Having thus exp snec
my own position In the matter, then Informed oin
that was requested by Ky friend Col Books, to So
that he regarded certain language employed by him
Mr. BuIlingame) in his speech on the Brooks and
Sumner affair, as injurious and offensive to him mr.
Brooke. That being already under srrsignment for
The assault on Mr.. Sumner, he had wished to get no
Gle Of sh II s hsd for th fes.on
forborne till now, through several days, TO send him
any message Of a hostile character But within the
last few days he had heard from various sources that
he Mr.. Buriingame) stood ready to answer, m any
way and to any person aggrieved, for what he had
s8id Col Brooks felt justified, thereO in sending
ne t. him TO inquire distinctly whether he (Mr. Bur
liz game would accept call from him Col. fsfooks
to answer for the ofense which he had given him"
The above discloses the purpose for which Mr.. Be-
cock called. What follows is the extract from his
own account, Published by Mr.. Brooks Of what oc-
CURED between u.s.
This statement was made for Mr.. Brooks by his
Iected friend long after the conversation Of whiDh it pro
ftsses to give the substance The presumption is that
il contains all that could aid Mr.. Brooks. However
much it might be to my advantage to state the whole
conversation as understand it, still, nasmuch as it
was pirate, at Mr.. Bococks request refrain from
doing So have kept what said to me in the frank
ness Of free conversation quite away from the news
papers, and shall continue to do 10. confess that
pleased with the barring and conversation of Bocock
He appeared really desirons of preventing hostile
meeting, and am sure that nothing but strong de-
sire to serve his friend could have induced him to
place in his hands the above statement. When exam
ined the statement discloses what to source Of
satisfaction. It appears from it that did not seek
difficulty with any one; that felt that no man, not
even Mr. Brooks. had Of complaint az ,inst me;
that would not admit myself viOlator Of the rules
of personal parliamentary propriety, as l should
have done had stated to him that intended TO insult
Mr.. Brooks anybody else the floor of the House;
retracted Of my language and was ready to give
retraeted none Of my language end was ready to give
him satisfaction. may well rest myself this state
ment leaving generous public TO view it in the light
in which it was made. 1t viii be- remembered by Mr.
Bocoek that expressly refused in our subsequent in
teIviews to permit the word "honor with respect to
Mr. Brooke to be placed in the statement written TO
my friends, and that because Of such refusal he
thought Mr.. Brooks would deem 1t unsatisfactory.
Mr.. Brooks, / think, on Close examination of his
friends statement, will fail to find those "apologes"
which he says are there indicated Would it not have
been wise in MIR Brooks and more in accordance with
the Code, Of which we hear much, had he sent
note TO in the first place. instead of resorting to
irregular way to obtain my views? My answer, it
seems, satisfactory, and he was impressed with
the belief that" "was an elevated gentleman
On his OWL showing, the affair closed, and may
say without doing injustice TO Mr.. Bocock, that
quest was made that should keep the transaction
secret.
Nearly two weeks after this, Mr.. Bocock, as Mr..
Brooks states, came to 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 it was a request which could
not haze been willingly made by Mr.. Bocock. 1t is
not necessary to disclose the given for this
markable proceeding. looked at bis statement, and
when had read the first part, thought it did me
justice, but when had read the paper carefully
saw that whatever may have been Mr.. Bocock's in
tentiops it would do injury, and refused to give
my consent to 1t.
Thus things remained until the following day. when
Mr. Boeock addressed letter, from which, it not
being private extract the following having reference
to my refusal to indorse the statement in previous
interview: he real point Of the matter is that you
did not intend to reflect Mr. Brooks personally"
After suggesting number of ways by which this
could be stated he writes: at may be done by your
Saying reply to this note that you did not intend
"to reflect Mr.. Brooks personally" Again, 81 am
"sure you ought not to object to the latter course
These few words disclose the desire of Mr.. Brooks,
through persuasion to get something which might sat
y his friends for neglecting me in his liberal calls on
gentlemen for personal satisfaction. did not reply to
the letter in writing but stated to Mr. BOcock that as
the matter seemed complicated, it might be bet
ter for both of us to hold our future conversa.
tons in the presence of others. I consulted the
Hon. George Ashmun and Mr.. Speaker Banks.
stated to them, a. nearly as can remember, thst
observed in my speech the rules of personal and par
amontary decorum-that could lot qualify rstract
any portion of it, and that held myself responsible
to any gentleman aggrieved by it. To avoid misun-
derstandirg, 1 desired my friend Mr.. A.hmun, to re-
duce my views to writing, which he did, approving
the position taken by me, as also did Mr.. Banks. Mr..
Bocock said Mr.. Brooks would not deem my position
satisfactory it yielded nothing. Another interview
was had when adhered to the former form, substan
TALLY, as drawn by Mr. Ashmun, which was copied by
Mr. Banks. When the friends of Mr.. Brooks left, it
was not known whether would be satisfactory not.
I underste cd Mr.. Bocock to say that he thought it
would not be. must say was surprised when saw
the memorandum the next day in the Union, not
having received notice that it was satisfactory
and appended to the speech Of Mr.. Brooks in such
way as to give the impression that it was eItorted and
not persuaded from That it was liable to miscon-
structon soon ascertained. Still think should
have left it az il was had not not heard on what
deemed good authority that Mr.. Brooks and some Of