Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1861-02-20
eminent.
The Duel.

An unusual Tress of matter upon our columns,
yesterdf.,. lTevenrei US from directing attention
to the rnisstatemssss of the Journal, made inref-
erence to the late iiculty between Messrs. HFF-
FRES and McorY. BY emitting to publish the
correspondence in the case, in full, and by con-
tradiction of even the terms of what it did pub
lish, that paper seeks to shield Mr.. MooDY from
the full measure Of his misfortunes incurred in
connection with this affair. 1t publishes the edi-
tOrial comments Of the Cincinnati Gazette upon
the subject. and passing over the correspondence,
adds only the propositions of the mediators for,
snd the terms Ga settlement, prefAcing them with
the following remarks:
"The correspondence from the beginning to the
end of the affair follows this narrative in the Ga
rette but we have space for it. and, as the adj
justmeaf on the field made By a complete era
sure Of Il TO start cth il Is not material to an I'M
Outstanding of the attitude of the parties in the
reconciliation
The Gazettes article, as published by the Jour
nal. speaking of the action of the mediators,
says: "Thsy soon agreed upon plan Of settle
rlent; TIE correspondence to be published as rim
dication 10 both parties"
And again:-in the official statement of the
mediators. by which they prefaced the terms of
settlement when prepared for publication, and as
published in the Journal, the following language
is used:
'sThe correspondence was thereupon placed in
the hands of Col. Jones and Mr.. Terrell. They
first proposed that all the correspondence should
be withdrawn, and that proceedings should begin
De nouo, and in a different mode from that which
had Int do
clined."
We have authority for stating that when the
proposition was proposed, as stated in the above
language Of the mediators, it was peremptorily
refused by Col. WALKER, who, in making the re-
fusal. stated that Mr.. HEFFRES had been required
TO leave his own State to render satisfaction to
Mr. MooDr for farcied injury, in the usual way
when peaceful measures have been exhausted
and if, at that late period, the affair was to bS
settled in any other manner, the circumstances
transpiring previous to the settlement, as shown
by the correspondence. should be given to the
public.
This is not all: The terms Of settlement, finally
agreed upon, were submitted first to Col MrLRoY
who, after consultation with Mr. MooDY, signed
them on behalf of his principal. They were ther
presented to Col WALKER, who signed them, OF
behalf Of Mr.. HEFFRES, with the distinctly ex.
pressed understanding, made in the presence o
Col MILRoY and Of the mediators, that the,
should be published with, and as an addendum to
the correspondence which had previously passed
If additional evidence upon this point were re
quired, it could be shown in the fact that, in com
plianee with the understanding here referred to
the correspondence, and the explanatory state
ment of the mediators, well as the terms o
settlement, were published by the authority an'
under the direction of the said mediators.
We have said this much to show that the Jour
nal was mistaken when il stated that "the adjust
mens On the field was madeby complete erasur
of it 1.-THE correspondence at the start" and tia
the correspondence was "not material to an un
derstanding of the attitude of the parties in tn
reconciliation" The correspondence was no
erased eat the start" Its publication was re
garded by the parties concerned as necessary to al
understanding Of the terms Of reconciliation, ant
the Journals partial publication, and its misstate
ments Of the facts, can only be attributed to de
sire to shield its partisan friend from the conse
quences Of his own acts.