The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1856-06-18

The following letter from General Webb received
Monday and with full disposition to do him 1juslies We
give il place in columns;
10 hs Editor Of he Union
In your paper Of Saturday evening find the following
In reference 70 my letter TO the Courier and Enquirer
upon Brookss assault upon Sumner;
But who is Gen, Webb, that he should assume the
championship or The freedom Of congressional debate
lis conversion on this subject has been remarkable as
that which now finds him the champion OF black republic
cansm. IL we have read history correctly Gen Webb,
some years ago, challenged member Of Me House Of Rpre
seafaics 70 mortal cobat for exercising he freedom Of de-
6a and II is melancholy fact that the consequence Of
that challenge the death of one of the most gallant as
well tho talented of the sons of New England lie
fell by the hands Of General Webb but by those of
his friend Where then General Webbs high appre-
citation OF the sacred privileges which guaranty TO q mem
Der Of Congress the freedom Of debate7 We submit that
General Webb's antecedents dsquaiy him for cham
pon OF the exemption Of members of Congress from per-
sonal responsibility for words spoken in debate
You in in regard the ofthe melancholy
affair alluded TO. noya challenged 4 member Of the
House of Representatives to mortal combat for exercising
the freedom OF debate but simply addressed letter to
member who had abused the floor OF the House ask
ing whether he held himself personally responsible for the
language used Heprompy replied to my friend that he
could not and would not be answerable elsewhere for
language used the floor Of the House. and pleaded his
constitutional privileges My friend reported to me what
had transpred and as did not know the member by
sight, and there existed personal hostility between US
considered the matter denivey disposed OF Subsequent
y my friend came TO me- and said that he had been adj
yised to require of the party addressed statement in
Ting Of eha hal occurred entreated Of him not TO make
any such application; indeed, insisted that having re-
celved his answer TO my application and reported il to me-
and having expressed myself perfectly willing to let it
rest where that answer had placed ii he had right to do
anyt thing further in the matter.
Other counses, however most unfortunately prevailed
My friend was forced into demandg in disregard Of my
earnest remonstrances written statement OF what had
passed verbally This promptly refused. Recrimi-
nation followed; and, finally, my friend challenged the
party alluded on the ground that he had Jy has r
in itiup raian1
them question Of veracity H
You viii perceive by the foregoing that Twas satisfied
with the answer given claiming the privilege which the
constitution coners Of entire exemption from personal
sponsibity for words spoken in debate did assa
the offending party without first making the inquiry,
which alike courteous and proper; and when he
pleaded his prpge promptly acknowledged its force
and abandoned all idea ofvoatng his person, any
other way interfering with "he freedom Of debate"
In the conviction that you have not tread history
recty" and in the full reliance that it will afford you
pleasure do justice by the publication of this note
am very respectfully, your obedient servant
j. WATSON WEBB
1913 ii Street
We read the foregoing note with profound astonsh-
ment and when have given the facts in connexon with
the death of Mr. Cey the reader viii wonder how General
Webb could intimate that we had failed to do him Gus
ce In this matter we shall have little else TO do but to
cite the record made up by special committee appointed
by the House of Representatives investigate and report
the facts.
General Webb says =" never challenged member Of the
House TO mortal combat for exercising the freedom of de-
bate, Jm simply addressed letter 10 member who had
abused tie floor Of The House asking ,phedr he held
himself personally responsible for he language used" We
shall not stop to comment barefaced qab4e What
else could he by asking Mr. Ciley if he held himself
personally responsible than that he be called to
orta combat il he should answer that he did hold him
self responsible? But General Wcbbs memory treac-
lie did not ask Mr. Cey whether he "hcld himself
personally responsible for the language used His Ian
guagc TO Mr.. Ciey aThe object of this communica-
ton is to inquire of you whether the editor whom
you alluded ION the foor and if So 70 ask The erpaaq-
ton Whch The character Of your remarks renders necessary
1t strikes mind that this language could bear other
Interpretation than that it to be regarded by Mr. Gil
ley notice Of challenge 10 mortal combat if he failed
make either explanation reraxt what he had said
The special committee of the House 1.-THE Hon. Isaac Toucey
being charman reported this language that hs demand
Of explanation under the circumstances which existed
not susceptible Of msnerpretation and the sequel shows
was misunderstood" 1t is certain that the committee
understood il to be preliminary step challenge and
equally certain that Mr. Graves the friend of General
Webb who bore the communication also understood il In
the light he could not have challenged Mr. Clley
for refusing accept IT, But General Webb now says be
challenged Mr Cey but only asked him II be held
himself personally responsibe What else is this than
contemplate DODGE
General Webb proceeds; "He (r Cilley) promptly re-
piled to my friend (Mr. Graves) that he could not and
would not be amenabe elsewhere for language used on
the floor of the House and pleaded his eonsfmionai
privileges" This is very material statement, and is
in direct conflict with the impression made upon the
public mind at the time Of the transaction. When Mr.
Graves handed General webbs note to Mr. Ciley il was
refused and the interview between them verbal On
the same day which Mr. Ciley refused receive Cen
eral Webs note from Mr. Graves this nsnsmed gentle
man handed to Mr.. Ciley the following
HousE or REPRESENTATIVES,,
February 20, 1888.
In the interview which had with you this morning. when
you declined receiving from the note of Colonel J. W.
Webb asking whether you correctly reported in the
Globe what you there represented to have said Of him
10 this House, the 18th instant you win please say whether
you did remark In substance that 10 declining receive
the note you hoped would consider IT, in any respect
dsrespecfol TO me and that the ground which you
rested your declining receive the note distinctly this
That you could get yourself into DIFF
fcues with conductors OF public journals FOR what you
might think proper say in debate upon this floor in dis
charge OF your duties representative Of the people
that gu did not rest your objection our interview upon
any personal objections Colonel Webb a. gentleman
VERY respectfully, your obedent servant
W. J. GRAVES.
Hon. JoSArHAS CILLEv.