The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1856-07-31
mEssRs. BROOKS AND BuRL1xGAME.

pondence which has grown out of the personal
difference between Mr.. Burlingame and Mr..
Brooks, even if we could spare the space, since
our issue will be anticipated by the daily press
of the entire country. Nevertheless, as the
public undoubtedly feel deep interest in the
matter, we purpose to make a brief statement
of the case.
On the lst of July, Mr.. Bocock, of Virginia,
as the friend of Mr.. Brooks, called on MIR. Bur
lingame for the purpose of making a verbal
communication to him. Mr.. Brooks, in short,
wished to know if Mr.. Burlingame would "ac-
cept call from him to answer for the offence
he had given him." The offence was, that Mr..
Burlingame had charged in his speech, in the
House, on the 2lst June, that Mr. Brooks "stole
into the Senate, that place which had hitherto
been held sacred against violence, and smote
him, (Mr. Sumner,) as Cain smote his brother"
A conversation ensued, in which Mr.. Burlin-
game stated to Mr.. Bocock "that he had no
unkind feelings whatsoever for you, Brooks; j
on the contrary, regarded you as a man OF
courage and a man of honor that while he
disapproved of the assault on Mr.. Sumner, and
felt bound, as Massachusetts man, to condemn
it, he had designed to discriminate between the
man and the act" This is the report which
Mr.. Bocock made to his friend Brooks, of the
affair. He says, further, that Mr.. Burlingane
disclaimed the boasts which had been thrown
out in his name, and said that they had never
been thrown out by him, but met his condem-
nation; "and if, after all this, you were not sat
is6ed, and wanted his blood, he stated that he
| could do nothing less than accept, and would
do So" "Describe me to him as you see me.
Do justice to my kind feelings to him, and do
justice also to my manhood"
Mr.. Burlingame states that this conversation
| was reduced to writing long after it occurred !;
and, without controverting its substantial truth,
he says: "However much it might be to my
| advantage to state the whole conversation as
1 understood it, still, inasmuch as it was 'pri-
vate,' at Mr. Bocock's own request, l refrain
from doing so.' He further says:
"When examined, the statement discloses
| what is to me now a source of satisfaction. 1t
appears 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 l would not admit myself violator
| of the rules of personal or parliamentary pro-
priety, as should have DONE had stated to
| him that / intended to insult Mr.. Brooks or
| ANYBODY else on the floor of the House: that
| disavowed the character of a boaster that l
| retracted none of my language, and was ready
| to give him satisfaction. l may well rest my
| self on this statement of Mr.. Bocock, leaving a
generous public to view it in the light in which
| It was made. 1t will be remembered by Mr..
| Bocock that expressly refused, in our subse-
quent interviews, to permit the word honor J
| to be placed in the statement written by my
| friends, and that because of such refusal, he
| thought Mr.. Brooks would deem it unsatis.
| factory"
Contrary to Mr. Bocock's opinion, Mr.. Brooks
| was satisfied, and "was impressed with the be-
| lief" that Mr.. Burlingame "was an elevated
| gentleman"
Two weeks afterwards, Mr.. Bocock called
again on Mr.. Burlingame, and requested that
their former conversation might be reduced to
writing, and placed in the hands of Mr.. Brooks
| Mr.. Bocock submitted such statement, which
was unsatisfactory. The next day, he address
| ed letter to Mr.. Burlingame, in which, among
other things, 1--WE quote the account of it given
| ~ NJ Rnrl;npama.) he saws:
"'The real point of the matter is, that you
| did not intend to reflect on Mr.. Brooks person
ally After suggesting number of ways by
| which this could be stated, he writes 1t NAV
| be done by your saying, in reply to this note,
| that you did not intend to reflect on Mr. Brooks
personally Again Il am sure you ought not
to object to the latter course These few words
disclose the desire of Mr.. Brooks, through per-.
| suasion, to get something which might satisfy
his friends for neglecting me in his liberal calls
on gentlemen for personal satisfaction"
Mr.. Burlingame referred the matter to his
friends, Messrs. George Ashmun and Speaker
Banks, who agreed upon the statement append
ed to the speech of Mr.. Brooks, as it appeared
in the Union. 1t was not embodied in the
| speech, and no reference was made to the affair
in it. This statement is guarded admission
of the substance of the conversations with Mr..
Bocock, batting the word "honor." So, after
all, it was Hamlet, without the part of Hamlet.
But the card proved unsatisfactory to the
friends of Mr.. Burlingame, and Mr.. Brooks and
his friends are reported to have boosted of
"backing him down" and of conquering Massa-
chusetts. Mr.. Burlingame consequently grew
sensitive, and could not rest under such imputa.
tons, as was natural in a man of honor placed
in his situation. He therefore publicly with
drew the memorandum, or explanation, by
note in the InteUigencer of July LIST; where.
upon, the following correspondence ensued:
WASHINGTON, July 81.
"SR: Will you do me the kindness to ind.
cate some place outside of this District where
it will be convenient to you to negotiate in ref.
erence to the difference between us?
avery respectfully, &C.,
P. s. Books.
"Hon. 4. Burlingame."
WARRINGTON, July FL, 1856.
SIR: Your note of this date was placedain
my hands by General Lane this afternoon. In
reply, have to say that will be at the Clifton
House, ON the Canada side of Niagara Falls.
on Saturday next, at IL o'clock, M, to snego,
tiate' in reference to any difference between
us which, in your Judgment, may require set.
Element outside of this District
~ have the honor to be your ob't serv't,
"a. BURLINGAME.
"Hon. r. S. Brooks.''
Mr.. Brooks, Immediately on the receipt of
this answer, instead of repairing to the place
suggested, publishes the whole affair to the
world, and declines to have any further to do
with the matter. He thinks that he could not
60 to Canada without imminent risk to his life.
He regards the North as hostile country.
through which it would be dangerous for him
to pass and his friends here suggest, as an ad-
ditional objection to the place chosen, that he
would have been murdered by the fugitive
slaves. They forget that the poor fugitives are a
miserable set of starvelinos who ara s;ob;nr to