The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-08-02
The Last Duel.


The Last Duel.
| THE AFFAIR BETWEEN EDITORS CUNNINGHAM AND
| HATCH OF CHARLEsToN, 8. 9.
We publish the annexed voluninoGs bicose CORES
pondenoe because OF the lively interest that is Just
now felt in this description Of literature, and because
il win enable the eager ior the iray to take the held
fully posted up important points laid down by
| Wilson in has Code of Honor
| (Fron the Charleston Marcury, July 30)
Statement.
The undersigned, respectively the friends Of COL John
Cunningham and j. l. Hatch, Esq, submit to the pubic
the following statement Of the recent affair Of honor be-
tween them. W. r. TABER, JR.
| s. LORD JR.
In the Erein9 Neics Of July 81, there appeared
article which was commented on in the Standard OF the
following morning The article in the Standard was re-
piled the Evening Neus OF July % and this, in arn,
was replied to the Standard Of the next morning.
| CHARLESTON, July %, 1850
SlRs-An article appears in this mornings Stan dard
purpcrtDg to be editorial and entitled The Evening
News and the South Caro- ina Delegation in Congress
As that article has relation TO myself and 10 personal N
its Character IImust require Of you the conductors
the name Of its author Respe fully -,,,,>,,r,
| Messrs L. W. srRArT & Co.
STANDARD oFrlcK,
CHARLESTON July %, 1855 I
SIR Az the editor Of the Standard | have received
your note Of date of TO- day and hereby acknowledge
myself the author of the article therein alluded TO- Your
obediept servant. j. l.. HATCH
To Col. JOIN CUNNINGHAM
/ EVENING News OFFICE
SR-Your note, avowDg yourself the author OF the
ticle in the Standard, has been received That article
myself, and shall accordingly expect q retra OF
whatever is offensive in it, Respectfully;
]. L. HATcH, Esq JOHN CUNNINGHAM
STANDARD CrrIcE CHARLESTON
July %, 1853.
Sill have received your note Of 70 DAY, calling Tor
retracton Of whatever s offensive" 10 my editorial
Whatever that editorial is OF personal nature was 70
response to what consider grataous and unjus'idao'
personal attack myself IN the fleming Nets OF yes
| terdsy therefore decline making The retrac,,on.
Your obedient servant j. l.. HhCH.
To col. JOHN CUNNINGHAM.
CHARIrsroy July "a, 1858.
SIR-Your note Ct last night has been received. ] de
nv in reply tba; the article in the Ereniq Neis which
you refer was "a gratutous and urushaole personal
attack, and repudiae your attempt I, make It's Lao
guagt the justification Of your studied and wantoa per
sonsl insult TO myself" therefore repeat nay demen
- ToJ. |. HAiol, Esq .'eN''' JOHN CUNNINGHAM
STANDARD OFFICE
CHARLESTON, July 25, 1856
slE-I am in receipt Of your OF the 2lth, in VIII
you deny that the article in the Eoening Neos was
'.graiuous and unjus tabe personal attack regret
that the denial sufficiently full and precise to
able decide whether is denial Of any intention
make personal attack whether it is restricted
its beng gratuiieus and uIustiiable point fat
the latter the construction Of your denial
constrained to differ from you ami TO rep at tina. con
sid the article gratuous and njusablegrG,utols
as can perceive no provccaon for the attack and an
usfable from the tone, temper and lang age ofthe
editorial.
The article TO which you take exception neiih"'
studied in lang nor wsnton in INTENT but was smp
in response To the editorial OF the Ne,rs.
Hav ing thus acted strictly on the defensive have nut
felt that any Justification OF my course was necessary
nor have attempted ary beyond the simple statement
the pIovocaiion. therefore respectfully decline
ing TO your 'demand for retraction y
feel IL however due TO myself and TO propriety, 10
make an exception TO my neral refusal TO reirac In
the article OF the Standard the folio wing language
The Journal which can be grataoisly abusive "
anony correspondent Of another paper i'll that
correspondent makes good ms positions vito his name
AS the alluson i 10 matters which occurring between
yourself others, have been adjusted 10 the saiisac
ton CT the parties interested feel that any reference
thereto by third persons improper: and therefore
willingly withdraw that portion Of the article Your ODE
dent servant, j. l.. HATCH.
CHARLESTON, July Is, 1856.
sR-Yohrs Of this morning has been received. In
ply have say that your aric bore its iaes
the intent TO embroil me 10 direct personal conf'c'
with Tie hole delegation Ia Congress from South Caro-
Ina and 10 array me in nvdioas opposition 70 the sent
ment Of the community This intent patent IN your FIRST
article Is pontcdy developed 10 your second article i
which you-a New Esgland and a recent conner.
the responsible editor OF the Standard no, in pub
poson-scek 10 infame the popular feeling against IA"
a. lacking IN Xoai for the State and for the soh ara
hating in support of Mr.. Brooks
The intent i still nore manifest by your naming
yon did, the gentlemen with whom you expected 70 brls
me into conflict That intent the legitimate parent q
the article IN the Frong N.is which YOU consirue into
"a gritgsous ana GnJusttabe personal attack" 49,
claim rs the Justification Of your studied and w'rt'
personal Insult 10 me-
AMER my denial that the article In the Ersnisg Nsie.
gratu'ors and Uni suitable personal attack yol
st decline 10 reract acccp, the alternative, and Dc
msnd sn,isfaction due 70 me. Ny fricn-Mr. Taber
is authorized TO make tie necessary arrangements
Your obedient servant, JOHN CUNNINGHAM.
srASnAxp orrcr
CHsuTSToN, July 20, 1856
sr-l beg 10 acknowledge the receipt Of your note OF
the 18th.
oanrot, without surrcndering the right TO discuss,
within proper limits journalist, important questions Of
public policy, admit that the first article in the sta --d
the "s Ultimate parent Of the editorial of the A
but upon that point there seems 10 be between rs an r
rcobcilahle difference Of opinion and the close OF your
letter prccludcs all further discussion
Had your note simply contained a challenge, woull
have been as simply replied to but appended TO i ~
Introduction Of new matter, 10 which must tor momer
refer. That am q New highlander by birth, Il admittei
but II south Caroinan, an adopted 900 Of The
SOIL bound 70 the state by every tie Or interest and ale
ton that felt called uTon, both journalist and ctizca
To aDmadvert upon your cenEure OF the entire state dele
CATION cannot and will not admit that the accident
birth l. 10 deprive me Of the right freely express
opinion. Here, too regret that there seems to be b.
tween VS. an rTeooncilsble difference Of opxios
IN the absence Of the senior editor OF the Standard h~
management Of that Journal devolved upon me. J be
came, and am responsible for ~ course. and Wa y
The discharge Of my duty as editor that ihs dihcu'y
iaocep, your challenge. Ny friend Samuel Lord, Ir
ESQ. authorised 20 make the necessary arrangemer
Your obcdlent servant, j. l.. HATCH.
To Col. IoHN CUNNINGHAM
Mr. Taber and Mr.. lord met Of . o'clock on the geit
to arrange the preminarics but falling 70 agree - 7"
the mode holding the weapon-Mr lord proposing the
rise shot and Mr. Taber 'the drop shot or that both
parties should FIRE they severaly preferredreerred
the point, which was decided as follows
Mr.. Taber acting The part Of Col cunningham, and
Mr. lord the part Of Mr. Hatch have submitted 10
a. referees the point whether the pistols shall be held
muzzes down and barrels perpendicular or whether
they shall be held muzzes up, whether either party
shall be Of liberty 10 hold his weapon muzze mp down
a pleasure Being unable TO agree upon the point was
referred ny 70 Mr. Clarence Cochran umpire, who
decides that the rule laid down by Wilson 10 bis Code o.
Honor shall govern, and the pistols be held muzzes
down and barrels perpendicular. ALFRED RHEff,
CHArfrroS, July ~, 1856. JAMES CONNER
desire enter my protest against the decision 81 ills
reference upon this ground that the recent usage Of the
State has been against the rule laid down by wilson,
therefore, the drop shot 10 admissible.
ALFRED RTIETT
Accordingly the parties met the afternoon Of the
2sh. After exchange Of Shots without injury 10
either party Mr. Iaber the part Of Col Gum nrham,
repeated his demand Tor retraction, which Me- 10
the part OF Mr. Hatch, refused but rendered the following
proposition. whish accepted by Mr.. Taber
Mr. Hatch rteracg that his article responsive ~
Col. Cununrhams article, Immediately preceding a,
which he considered personally insulting 10 himself II
Col Cunningham will discam any intention personally 70
Insult Mr.. Hatch by that article, Mr.. Hatch, snua
neousy with this statement consents TO the Withdraw
Of both articles.