The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1873-10-22
The Radical Sensation.

.rnor therein. created quite stir yesterday
amongst the leaders of the party 10 th's c't!'
vne on,nious and sentiments expressed by
them were various and conh'ct'ng' oo'n.
,hsrrot there was no hope for hUaHEs, ana
No. their only recourse was to bring out
r,esh horse from their stable, 10 which no"
,eand some half.dozen steeds that were
brought before the nominating convention
as Lynchburg ready saddled for the queer
us,orial race. Others swore the charge that
Mr.. HcaHEs was inculpsted as second ana
ne,,er of the challenge from CLARKsoN to
PorrxR was lie. The various points IN
the case, and their bearing upon the Radical
rurty. were discussed most earnestly.
II was apparent that those who were OPP
posed to the nomination of HrouEs hailed
the Developments concerning the challenge
with anything but annoyance. More than
one leader was for promptly bringing out o
new man and showing HrGHEs aside. ohe
went so far as to press the running OF us.
,;nrrnished poli,ician and political General OF
she late Confederate army. The lCdhsS
men went in for proving an dhoa' ana W.
giving the lie to the charge that HUGHES was
involved as second 10 CLAEKsoS. Ihese
seem 10 have carried the day; TOR tue Ece-
nina Journal spoke out upon their slde. AUS
article upon the subject was double-ieaacu'
showing bow important the matter was re-
o,rded by the Radicals. II assumed that no
man IN Virginia was more innocent oil partl-
si,n,ion in the CLARKsoN-FowLER menacng
corre.opdence than Mr. HuGHEs. The
br,yery Of the Journals denial ana the
conplcte innocence it claimed Tor Ar.
HpeuEs of all part or lot in the matter were
admirable. Taking the boldness OF the
Journals assumptions upon the testimony
odluc.d. we cannot see how Mr.. HUGHEs
could he more completely acquitted, unless
he had been proved 10 have gone upon the
field, and bis principal falling, had taken his
place and exchanged shots with his adrer-
s.y. Tha. would have shielded him entirely
from oil ground of accusation! For thu
Journals denial Of his completely in the az
fair certainly grows stronger i'll proportion
10 the increased force Of the evidence against
him.
In The correspondence it appears that one
letter preceding the challenge is sent by Mr.
HUGHES, and toe challenge itself refers Fow-
LEa to Mr.. HUGHES, rs the friend of CLARK
SON, to arrange the terms of the fght-the
"mortal combat" Wherever Mr.. HUGHES
n, the time was, and whatever may be said
by the friends of that gentleman, they cannot
swear these passages out the correspondence.
And when thefact is remembered that CLARK
SON was the second of HUGHES in his duel
with CAMERON, who can doubt his right to
skirn similar service from HUGHES In re.
turn3 And to suppose that HUGHES could
deny the CHIN would be to cast deep and
damning stigma upon his reputation in the
hne Of chiyalzy. Whatever may be the de-
fence set up to clear him from the legal con-
sequence Of participation in the hostile CORE
spondence, we can hardly suppose that there
La single individual in all the State who
doubts tbat HUGHES was the friend. adviser,
nd second Of GARRISON in the affair.
Whether legally amenable or not, morally
Hr. HUGaEs has unquestionably violated
he spri.dueIlipg provisions of the Constitu-
tion and law framed by the Radical party,
who are now daily claiming credit for their
work in providing for the preservstioa of
public morals and Of the public welfare,
Whata commentary upon the party Is their
act il, presenting for the office Of chief ma
gistrate of the State a man who, both
before and after the Constitution was
adopted, was guilty of the offence which
they In their zeal for religion and hui
mainly (save the markD considered 30
horrible that they made it a felony, and
attached to it q felon's penalty! And what
makes the affair worse, they are now employ
ing their ingenuity to acqut their candidate
of legal culpabl,ty Of violating their law,
when they know he has morally treated it
with contempt! ...,I.-. .@,..E s..ta
We care not chincapin's value for the
afhir. 1t matters not with US whether
HroHEs is legally or only morally an
offender. We would as soon he were elected
as any other Of his party. But his election
is impossible, and therefore the question
will never be practically up for legal con-
Iteration. ...-,.~ .-H..-....
But we know Mr. HUGHES too well to sup
nose that he has not himself considered the
question of his completely in the "bloody
prrespondence" Of GARRISON (his bosom
siend) and FOWLER. He is TOO shreWd not
70 have left q back door open for his retreat.
And when he ia heard from, 1t will be seen
that he arranges bis defence as htistically as
It may be supposed he would have arranged
the terms Of the fight between CLAEKsoN
and FOWLER had their hostilities proceeded
to that dire extremity.
We expect to see the defence, whatever it
be, put forth simultaneously in the Wash
ipgton Republican and New York Times,
and then the Radical wigwam will quiet
down. But the antiHuoHEs men win de-
plore the loss Of the opportunity which yes
terday they deemed 10 propitious for getting
rid Of HUeHEs. Terminate how this episode
may, it has had the effect of creating great
stir amongst the Radical partisans. A wild
bull charging a camp-meeting could not have
created greater confusion and Illustration:
Nor can Mr.. HUGuEs make defence that
will clear bis skirts from stain and taint.' 'u7
1a5 i'ars,s---- =. = --- - taiu&1t ..'|%" q
air. M PosTscRfPTnsu .'i"t t-'t7*
The reader is referred to- our Wash
ington telegram for the version, Of yMr.
HuoHxs's defence .eiyed BY his friends, be,
refusing, to, makee q sstatement.l2 From this