Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1858-08-14

esz With here and there sreck
Of roam diversifying his broad back,
And, martyr.lke halter round his neck,
,gts Which bound him to the rack.
@e5-5 Mors omnibus, lat length
The hev day of his life damped by death,
So summonng all his late remaining strength.
- He drew-his final BREATH
From the Milton Chronicle]
COL. CLAY'S REPLY TO MR.. BROOKS.
A CARD.
observe, in the last Chronicle. communication
from G. W. Brooks, which it is due to myself to
notice.
On the Goth of June, when VIM: Walker was ar.
raigred, on q charge of stealing Tobacco, claimed
by Thos. Woods and myself, we appeared as prose.
c1tors and Mr. Brooks as his lawyer. We objected
to his appearing The defendant said he had
right to employ counsel, and so said Brooks-both
speaking at the same tme-when l remarked, Il
Woods then remarked to the defendant, that if We
had "known you were going to have counsel, we
would have had counsel also-but not without let.
ting YOU know it." Woods further remarked that
he once had case in which Mr.. Reade was employ
ed on the opposite side, and he objected, when Mr..
Reade as q gentleman would have nothing more to
do with it. Brooks still insisted on appearing,
but the magistrates overruled him. The magistrates
and all persons present, so far as could learn, I'M
derstood my remarks to apply to the defendant, and
Mr. Brooks took no offence apparently at the time,
bnt it appears the offence was an after thought for
heard nothing from him until the next day, Sun
day) at church. After preaching his note was
handed to me by Mr.. j. Rogers, who said that
Brooks handed it to him after getting to church the
same day. After reading his note several gentle
men being present asked me when | was going to
answer itp I remarked that I would see him on
the Wednesday following and give him a verbal ex-
PLANTATION; observing, at the same time, that in
tended my remarks for the defendant; so express
ed myself to number of persons up to the time of
meeting with him on the streets in Roxborough; The
facts that transpired then and there will appear
from the following certificate:
CERTIFICATE
We, the undersigned, do certify that we were at
Roxborough and present at the time that Col John
H. CLAY met with Mr. G. W. Brooks, and made his
explanation about the remarks that Brooks took
cepton to at the time VIM. Walker was on trial;
and he {Clsy) remarked, I" Mr.. Brooks. received
your note, and am now ready to make the explana-
tion you demanded; intended the remarks for the
Defendant the same again. Brooks
then remarked, "Who do you call the defendant?
Clay replied, "Who do you call the defendant?"
Brooks then said, II dare you to call me the defen-
dant." Clay reiterated, 81 intended them for the
defendant" Brooks then advanced two or three
steps with his hands appraised and claimed some
two or three times 81 dare you to call me the deena
dant"-thereupon Clay struck him.
- JESSE MUNDAY,
-- JOHN BARNETT,
JOHN MUNDAY,
JAS. BARNETT,
THOMAS WOODS
fully and told him had received his note, and was
ready to explain; that proceeded with my exp'a-
nation, when was met fiercely and Extensively
as to touch my feelings; and he unwilling to take
what intended as full explanation, wanted to
press me-for I knew that being lawyer. he
l. H.
he was fully aware that I knew. I therefore
swered with some feeling that meant the "defen-
dant" You will observe. also. he repeat ed his
question several tmes-I answered the same way
when, with hands appraised and shaking menacingly
at me, he said " ] dare you to say you meant mel"
At thst moment struck him. Mutual friends up
on the ground undertook the settlement of the mat.
ter, and among them I may mention Gas gentlemen
well known to the publicly Hon. E. G. Reade and
DR.. G. H. Jordan, who called Witnesses and sat.
isfying themselves to all the facts. proposed as
terms Of settlement that should say did not al
Jude to Mr. Brooks before the magistrates, and that
did not mean to offend him by word or manner
when ] offered the explanation: And then that
Mr.. Brooks should say his dare was upon the sup
position that l did-and then that should make
full apology for the blow assented to this propo-
sition. But they soon after informed me- that Mr.
Brooks refused to concur. and that thew had moth
ing further to propose. Mr. B. challenged me- and
l answered in the note which he published
Exceedingly anxious to give satisfaction, and for
other reasons to be stated, soon after wrote him
my second note, explaining that had no alluson
to him, and expressing my regret for the blow
which explanation he refused to receive because as
he says. he had forced it from me. And then he
makes his publication. This is the whole matter so
far as the main facts are concerned.
The whole matter is doubtless regarded BY the
public as ridiculous. And confess that, in some
particulars I was in error. But the whole affai,
will he better understood when some side matters
are explained
Mr.. Brooks is young man-raised in my neigh
borhood-snd we had always been friendly. l an
man advanced in years. He has no family.
have wife ard children. He is not member o.
any church. ana fact that he was not ignorant
of when he challenged me. He is a young lawyer
seeking notoriety. l am plain country farmer
Under these circumstances, l admit it was wrong t.
allow myself to be excited; it was wrong to strike
him; and It was wrong for me to oQree to fight him
But beg the public to recoect that am sul,iec
to passions like other men; that did not aude IL
him. and that the first time saw him offered hin
explanation which should have been satisfact
to gentleman. but which he pertinaciousy refused
to accept struck bin under bis "dare, !" and soor
agreed to terms Of reconciliation as proposed b,
honorable gentlemen, which he refused. then ex
planned, in answer to his challenge, (which under
stand duelists will sayI ought not to have done
indeed Mr.. Brooks himself taunts me with explain
ing under chsllenge1 l am governed by no duel
ing code. But why is it that he alludes to tina
code recognised by gentlemen and still comes s
far short Of it himself, as to challenge me withou
ever asking my views, knowing as he did that wa
a member of 4 christian church 2 II then wrot
him second note, in which manifested SO nue.
anxiety to settle the matter as to induce him I
taunt me again and cay that be had . forced me t
cxpiain did not answer his first note because
was Alter the duelng fashion, aud I knew nothin
scout sach things; i thoaght j could ;sxplsn
S more sat'slaetory to hs facs which intended I
forced from me, and was cox.rdlv' VAS write
under the following circumst.ncee: chr;st;.