Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1856-07-29


Brooks, of what occurred between US =
"Mr. Burlingame then commenced an ex-
PLANTATION, which led to long conversation be-
tween us, in the course Of which he made
many statements which he SAID were confo
dental Omitting these, the answer which
he desired me to bear to you was substantially
this: that he had no unkind feelings whatso-
ever Tor you, but, on the contrary regarded
You as man Of courage and man of honor
that while he disapproved of the assault on
Mr.. Sumner, and felt bound as a Massachu.
sets man to condemn it, he had designed to
discriminate between the man and the act
Let 1t be remembered that this language was
used on the LIST of July, and he had said no
more on the subject than his sense of repres-
sentative duty required. Under these circum-
stances, he was surprised to find that you had
taken exception to anything which he said
In relation to the boasts that had been thrown
out i'll his name, he stated that they had not
been authorized by him, but on the contrary
he very strongly condemned them and their
author; and il, after all this, you were not
satisfied, and wanted his blood he stated
that he could do nothing less than accept, and
would do so. Before leaving MIR. Burlin-
game 1 recaptulatcd what l understood to be
his answer. He agreed that was right snd
added, "Describe me to him as you see me-
Do justice to my kind feelings to him, and do
justice also to my manhood"
This statement was made for Mr.. Brooks,
by his selected friend, long after the CONVEX
sation, of which he processes to give the sub
stance. The presumption is that it conains all
that could aid Mr.. Brooks. However much
it might be to my advantage to state the whole
conversation, as l understand it, still, mas
much as it was now private at Mr.. Bocook's
own request, refrain from doing so. l have
kept what what was said to me in the frank
ness of free conversation, quite away from
the newspapers, and shall continue to do so.
/ confess that was pleased with the bearing
andconversatiOn of Mr. Bocock. He appeared
really DESTROYS of preventing hostile meet
ing, and l am sure that nothing but a strong
desire to serve his friend could ever have in
duced him to place in his hands the above
statement. When examined, the statement
discloses what is to me source of satisfaction.
1t appears from it that did not seek diff
Guilty with any one,-that felt that no man,
not even Mr., Brooks, had cause of complaint
against me. That would not admit myself
violstor of The rules OF personal or p&rlia-
mentary propriety, as l should have done had
l stated to HIM that intended to insult Mr..
Brooks, or any one else on the floor of the
House, that | disavowed the character of
boaster, that retrscted none of my language,
aud was ready to give him satisfaction. l NAV
well rest myself on lis statement, leaving a
generous public to view it in the light in which
it was made.
1t will be remembered by Mr. Bocock, that
l expressly refused in our subsequent inter-
views to permit the word "honor," with res.
pect 10 Mr.. Brooks, to be placed in the state.
ment by my friends, and because of such
refusal he thought Mr.. Brooks would deem it
unsatisfactory. Mr.. Brooks, think, on
close examination of his friends statement,
will fail to find those "apologies" which he
says are indicated. Would.it not have been
wise in Mr.. Brooks, ahd more in accordance
with the ''code" we hear sosmuch of, had he
sent note to me in the first place, instead Of
resorting to an irregular way TO obtain my
viewss y
Ny answer, it seems, was satisfactory, and
he was impressed with the belief that was
all elevated gentleman. On his own showing
the affair was closed and, I may say, without
doing injustice to Mr.. Bocock that a request
was made that l should keep the transaction
secret.
Nearly two weeks after this, Mr.. Bocock, as
Mr.. Brooks states, came to me with the sin.
gular request that would permit statement
OF the conversation we had together to be
placed in the hands of Mr.. Brooks. l am
confident it was request which could not
have been willingly made by Mr.. Bocock. 1t
Is not necessary to disclose the reason given
for this remarkable proceeding ! looked at
his statement, and when L had read the first
part thought it did me injustice, but when
l>had read the paper more carefully saw that
whatever may have been Mr. Bocock's inten-
tons, 1t would do me injury, and refused to
given consent to it.
Thus things remlned until the following
day, when Mr.. B. addressed me letter from
which. it not being private, extract the fol-
lowing, having reference to my refusal to en-
dorse the statement in a previous interview :;
"Ihe real point Of the matter is, that you
did not intend to reflect on Mr.. Brooks per-
sonally." After suggesting number of ways
by which this could be stayed, he writes: 1t
may be done by our saying, in reply to this
note, that you did not intend TO reflect on Mr..
Brooks personally" Again-'1I 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 satisfy his friends for neglecting
me in his liberal calls on gentlemen for person.
al satisfaction. did not reply to the letter
in writing, but stated to Mr.. Bocock that, as
the matter seemed complicated, it might be
better tor both of us 10 hold our future con-
versatlons in the presence of others.
consulted the Hon. George Ashmun, and
Mr. Speaker Banks. l stated to them, as near
ly as can remember, that l observed in nv
speech the rules of personal and parliamentary
decorum, that l could not qualify or retract
any portion of it, and that | held myself re-
sponsble to any gentleman aggrieved by it.
To avoid misunderstanding, desired my
friend, Mr.. Ashmun, 10 reduce my views to
writing, which he did, approving the position
folyo bx,D oil IL