Kanawha Valley star. [volume] (Charleston, Va. [W. Va.]) 1856-1861, 1858-09-28

ing TO have been Wrltten hy the Hon
sherrard Clemens just previous 70 his go
ing out on. the ground tb fight MT. Wise
(aa account of which IS given in another
place, we take from the Richmond South
IT appeared in chat paper simultaneously
with It's armour cement Iof the duel, and
whenitwas known that there was no ne.
cessity fon a .'s4last will and testament. I
Under the circumstances, We presumed
is intended that the Public shall give
it all ne solemnity ofa "#dying deelara.
tom and believe thattthe Hon Sherrard
gothimself into this difficulty throughthe
pnrest motives and tie most DISTINGUISHED
friendship, But weHpresume tie Public
will Ray, the Hon. Sherrard has 4 very
easy way Of getting himself into difficult
ty, and avery awkward way Of account
ing for it, Fl, when the Enquirer called
h upon Mr.. Clemens to explain his position,
and stated thatiif he did not, he would be
considered as having trahscended his au-
tthorilys and'as having imposed upon them
we say If lie had made his 'f dying
statement then, this unpleasant affair
would probably have been avoided, for
The would have throws The ofats elsewhere
the issue would have been between him
and Judge peterborough. But lie did
notdotso, and, after having waited 4 suit
able length Of tifae,. the Eaqaife, pub
Ilisled some very severe Structures ontbe
treaehefg 81 his !eoufse Il a challenge.
followed. duel ensued, and he lies.
wounded in Richmond. t
But, has he- relieved himself, by his
duel, and his own dnts-nadrten examina.-
lion Of his motives apd his t.censcience?"
Let US examine his 7 statement" and see
III, The first place, let us examine the
third paragraph Of his statemert,n' ii
WHICH ne undertakes to give the substance
tlafrr
,J;s s,,a H. &, psa .,.s 81 %
anywhere find the assertion he made in
His first letter, tllas Judge 3. would not,
III e,,,fs,.rdr ii AZ As, fad
] ,,,.sabasso 4 H. ..d,l; statoroent j,
n5 }5dt.;l az 9,t;on ,batI
I'LL; I'D ,s,,,. j
f. ~; - i, &, \
z ;a1, t,,s.,,s : : sl,z.,osss
ta,h. r. c,al;xossof a,,3n'Ion,an I, ! IS slEI
g.,.. I'M, Ia Iasaa O. nat.aa i
fss 1sests,-.ETbo did esiret,o ofliog
y ts.it taa, ;,t,oo5sf;.a,I MI, frT;;an al
''.y,. H. IL. 4 r,1,st IN / .avn,oss
I'd :. rt,,-ebI r1bo lad "a
! III, a;ro,, ii! enbsantlta Ill mama be.J
- I'll i 5ba-s anvttipo
ma, III il nross.3d III s.. ~ MOE
': lt.r; M(,r,Ia,.,'a.s,
coap ' sven ''AA'i4 = E {. 5yi0ttohs
statement as.true !? 8
But there is one other point 10 which
We wish to refer, before leaving this Mtra |
paragraph, aud i'll referred to in Tie
last sentence, which speaks of the !" zeal'
manifested towards Judge B. From our
knowledge Of the facts, we feel & author
ized III saying that this Remark orisina-
ted with Mr Clemens himself, and not
with Judge Z. that the parties So dslklyi
limited 1T IN Mr.. Clemens & dying state
ment,'' were then distinctly mentioned,
byehim. AS collateral propf, We Mill give /
paragraph pf his letter to /
Judge b., alluded toFin biz statement :
I've extract from II, although a private
letter. because Mr.. Clemens, broad allu-
sion to It, makes itpubIie. In tl,at letter
Mr. Clemens saws:
5e.srbera II nj si;dceritv VI All j. IN
your name BY certain parties connected +
with the ERgevdr. lf yoI are hat sails
hedInoW oH tl&t seore, You VIII be before
'a ! ysafs
poes ny tAf Il Clemens own language
eohYfct nm Does l't Y l not show that he
~ an 81 not Judge Ba was the party that |.
na r tne aiips lg ~ the sassaferafy Of
lilbfS lEiatS f7efs#