Southern sentinel. [volume] (Plaquemine, Parish of Iberville [La.]) 1848-1858, 1857-03-14
The Late Duel.

Cured between Mr.. Nixon, of the New Orr
leans Crescent, and Mr.. BRECKENRIDGE, of the
Courier. 1t seems that the affair came off
near Mobile, and the Tribune of that city
gives the following particulars relative to it:
The Late DueL-The Mobile Tribune, of
Sunday, states: A duel was fought yesteF~
day evening near the new race-track on the
bay road. The parties TO it were Mr. Nixon,
of the New Orleans Daily Crescent, and Mr..
Breckenridge, of the New Orleans Courier
both newspaper men. There were two shots.
The first did no harm. In the second, Mr..
Breckenridge was struck high up in the thigh.
The ball fractured one leg and passed through
the 1eshy part of the other. The m is
that it is a very dangerous wound, and may
result in death. Both parties, we are Informed,
exhibited the greatest GOODNESS during the
fight. The weapons were pistols at ten PAGES.
1t appears that the duel originated thus:
In an article in the Crescent of the 9th ult.,
relative to the election bill, the following
parag raph occurred:
we shall consider it very extraordinary, if
the Coroner does not make a large number OF
fees out of those who act as " extraordinary
deputies {" during election times. Well, it IS a
poor breeze that watts good to no one! The
Coroner's income will be swelled by holding
inouests. while the Attorney General will reap
a glorious golden harvest, by prosecuting de-
Iinquents deprived of the privilege of trial
before q jury of their peers. In sOoth, it is a
delectabIy arranged affair all round, fOr--the
Coroner and Attorney General"
The Courier (Mr. BREeKENRIDGE) quotes
this paragraph, and in its comments upon it
uses the following language:
w will refrain from an expression of the
feelings which would be aroused by such a
declaration, made seriously and in earnest
until we know whether that journal means
what it says or is only joking. For our own
part we are ready to obey the call of the Off,
GERS constituted by this bill, and we are not
disposed to become subjects of a Coroner's
inquest without knowing whether or not the
scoundrels who would make us so, do their
helIish work from their own impulses, or by
the instigation of a h~eartless, b~rainIess, soul
less, senseless partiZan sheet.
Do you mean to say that those who lawful
ly obey a legally constituted officer, in pur.
suance of a duty prescribed by law, will
render themselves liable to assassination by
the members of the party you represent? II
such is your meaning, you represent a party
consisting of rascals and cut -thrOats, and in
expressing such an opinion, if in earnest, you
class yourselves in the SAINT category. Are
you in earnest! g
The above was answered by the following
retort in the Crescent (Mr. ADAMS of the Cd
inst, which provoked the challenge from Mr..
BRECKENRIDGE:
THE NEW ORLEANS COURIER.
This paper. in its issue of Saturday morning
last, contained some illusions to the CreScen
which were alike causeless, ungentlemanly
contemplate and false. We notice them, not
because they are worthy Of notice in them~
selves, but because the conductors of that
ribald sheet have vented their b~illingsgate
upon gentlemen uninterruptedIy, until it
clear they think they can throw their moral
filth in any direction they choose, and besmear
the garments of honorable men with impuni-
ty. They mistook their appropriate vocation
when they presumed to aIlude disrespectfuliy
to the editors of this journal. We make it a
point to kick the dog out of our way, instead
of going out of the way of the dog. In this
manner do we treat the Courier. Perhaps the
philosophy of the idea may not be considered
good, as the world goes, but it's our own,
and we have always found it to work we'll
when properly enforced.
The whole scope and tenor of the Courier's
article is at war with truth, at variance with
gentlemanly dignity, and in conflict with all
the rules of decency. Starting out by taking
a portion of a paragraph from it's appropriate
context, in order 10 put upon it an Legitimate
meaning, the editors of that sheet proceed to
criticise, assume, falsely and calumniate. Their
criticisms are Enthusiastically weak; their
assumptions as miserable as are those of a
courtesan when assuming v~irtuous airs; their
falsifcations only disgrace themselves, if that
be possible and their would be calumnies are
not worth the consideration of a work-house
hGbitue.
With shameless and lying audacity the
Courier speaks of being "prone to inflict "
" serious and pointed censure upon the
Crescent! What are the facts? Why, the
last time we had a controversy with the
Courier, we took the rod of truth and dashed
its corrupt and pensioned sides until it retired
crouchingIy and whiningly from a field to
which it never ventured to return until last
Saturday.
The Courier wants to know whether we
were in " earnest " in regard 10 what we said
about the Election bill. Although not exactly
in place in an article like this, we will stOop
to answer: We opposed, denounced and
deprecated that bill. because we believed it
would lead to rioting, revolution and blood
shed. Our motives were pure, upright and
patriotic-deVoid of any partizan proclivitt
whatever-and consequently beyond the cons
prehension of the Courier.