The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-01-04
GEN. BARLOW'S CHALLENGE
4 pROPOsTTTON ron 4 MEETING Nv
CANADA NEXT WEEh.

PcmnrknbIr Icttcr from Francis &. Bnr-
low 10 EIihu Eoot An Auoruev-t'cncrni
MS n nucIIi-f-tIov tie Intends TO Treat
Oppo-,ue ,ounss rhc Correspondence.
In reference TO IN; statement that Gen.
Francis C.. II rlow he'd challenged Mr.. Elihu
Root to a1ht duel. aud had threatened to
thoot him at sight in the event Of his refusal,
She following correspondence has been iur-
nished us for publication:
NH. aApiOw To Mr.. ROOT.
NEW YoRK. 200 BROADWAY. Dec. ~, 1870.
DEAR SIR:I have heretofore requested the
return II INV written argument in the case Of
The People Va The Bank OF North America.
make now a further and formal request. for
the purpose of basinz upon II. IL still unc"m-
Piled with, an action Of repievn, or II the atgu-
rent has been destroyed an action Of upver
coupled with the arrest Of the guilty parties.
FRANcrs c. BARLOW.
ELmu Roor, Esq.
MIR. ROOT TO Mr. BARLOW.
DEC. -, 1875.
fSdarh C. BARON. F,q
DEAR SIR: DON'T he damned fool.
Your. g.. ELIuU ROOT.
TmE CHALLENGE.
NV YoRK. % BROADWAY, Dec. 81. 1873.
KAu A"o' E'q.
SIN: | have received your letter OF this date
containing an offensive cpithet. regret that
the legal controversy betwee Us Il alude now
e. the conversion AZ my written arsumenD
should nave become ~. messed by the person.
alites winch You have choF t. bring into the
controversy. ishould have Hferred to leave
the matters Of difference between us TO the
courts. nut must ACCEPT the personal issue
whicn you h We lptcri s'trI iHtu the triir.
At me ontsetI N emh r 'sscd bv an indis-
tnctu,ss In tn writing ut your last note am
not certain whether ,he offensive word used by
you or rather one ol them. 10 speak
I'd rned." s,ne Of my friends whom /
have cpnsllt-d think that the latter
/. TIE ex re--ion weicn may possibly be less
offensive ~ ~ impli 'dtiou than the former |
81 u.d be- clad II az point couii DO settled At
tn outset: ut without dwelling longer ON this
point make the following requests ol YOU. in
ori,r to Ia, basis f"r future action:
Fat hat YOU "iil define your exact mean
All .r.se of,"Iri tier VI 10. day was damned .
>,.nJ. IT, rha, you withdraw uneouivoc,lly
thc,uit K t's-inh 1 your note Of to-dav. IL
will %. cNulch ga 4 \ "a sy simply II with
draw th' nrn "" cApr, sion, C.-inr the plural
e. Nr the "ho'e eApre-s'om of my note OF
SiDgld va decline boin the above proposl.
& u-, must G,cl ;re INV futnre coutsc--not by
way & threat. Ter "nSid"r th,t unoecomine -
hut -imili IN YOU may r. li.a exactly the
situ uNn. req lest th,t ypu wal iufrrm me on
or tcilrc 4! NJ. Of saturuav next whether You
viii meet me at a pOint TO be designated hy
ylur~,n ga Canada curing the coming week.
IN 4 We may .e,tle TINS ma ter Of difference IN
az -uii"i ~. II NDu an swer in the nirmi-
Igr. viii request friend 10 wait upon YOU
whom YOU can refer to some gentleman VINO
snonld you decline to give me this satisfac-
ton ! can onl, ask Won 10 he prepared 10 de-
lend yoIr.olf iof course | mean Nv the use OF
n,irff si whenever aud wherever | NAV meet
bCu alwGts eXceDdne. of course. the courts as
~! -cs ui rntoHuter. lppn recognition snail
leei AZ 10. riv to nrc upon YOU. rs the only
n'tnud 4 adjustment lett me II this difficulty.
VI r" the api cal t. the courts which iu-
tcnl ~ the matter Of the argument will 90 on
exclusive inns method OF setting the per
n'G-. S"c i'd Soa d-,ae the " fetraesns S nd nd
explanations. and he ntner meth Ids uf settle.
nen' which rrNp'st. and should not hap Ell
To meet NuH tcinr" Jan. q. would susscs; that
Nuu nutiib ~. stanley a our iuteuflN "a tn
he may b-ent himself froH the room uu.il Tia
rc.ut 81 our NEE I'm. l. stermiura.
iO--iul, shill toe eompelied to ave Mr.. ker-
tap siud.r hniicc Us to our meetiug iuiV uicct-
" 81 % hinL d ~ written HIN to lnp II,
v ein he - IN any W, y 'esponsible for this
f'ensive note Couis II Doc. 2'l. ~ it looks cd
re .. VI 10 were "A concerted dctlOn boz ween Won
va would relieve the case from some compli-
ra'il ty avuwiug lur-e.f alone Responsible
( roe note Of this date. an eagly answer will
FRANcIs c. BARLOW.
THE REPLY
~ PINE srHrEr. NEW YORK. Dec. ~. 1870.
si.. tpur se.lLl letter Of the 27tn inst. was
Tt'.i l -daN.
ID GO rains Il threat q a-sas ,ina.ion unless
G.. Nn wi.hN 90 ~ 'tasion.
,u.t lonc is sulicient 10 preclude me from
-irrn- Ah' tning further Ia Your 90 nmuni'
ti ELlnU ROOT.
" re authorized by Mr.. Henry L. Kuox. o
IT, laN lrm oi Fullerton, kaox Crosby. 1,
tfHfe tfat hrn. Barlow. after the receipt Of Mr.
hlut- last letter. wrote to him ~ "a friend o
Dr. II ~. M substance, that his letter to Mr.
at % Wee. ., was MT intended to be cousid
lfed ,euou,h.
mn FAcTs OF THE CASE
Tor .Ome time asst Mr. Barlow has beer
rr-.c.;ln- ANA Nr Root defending the suit o
TIE Pc 81 ~ the state OF New York a.ainst IN,
buh Aurin Americ .. on trial before WiiliAn
di,i. E-H sreferec. Senator Herman If thi
State i.as-o,ited with Mr.. Root as counsel 70
lue detuce.
b,rN iu the autumn the case was orall
summed up by the counsel before the referee
"ls greed between the counsel that writer
hi-i' 7Nll re "Ycn ing "a ana submitted.
''t lili seems cN niually 10 We taken
70 l'f' Hi~ iri-i ",r 10 be returned To hin
II Af. "a Pressed th > idea several months al, e
N. -iN- ~ lore tie referee.
d. "i. tp replied 10 hls letter c Hin.
L.. &, he was served 10y Mr. Barlow vi
nN''.'e ih't tue reference would be roceed-,
vi b lore Mr.. stanley on the 9th Of January
u" 100 eniu.l, raid no attention To the letter
Iln" % # Dec mper Mr.. Root received frutl
a. "nl ~ letter tnre tenins areplevln sli
Zee Nfi'i u IL Was not returned, and tue ar
'l sac -lniy parties II 1t md been de
ih uc guilty parties" he could scarcel
T. o. ai' one else than Mr.. Root aud senate
sIii IN UT. NOOt ana Ten. harlow Wef'
NiiNr IfOis ~ nal acquaintance. There Ia,
i'' ''rn my intimacy between them. Nh
i'unrd to tue letter Of Gen. Barlow b,
800 ~ hi- letter ut ADVICE not TO ne Id fool
va tne following day Mr.. Root received 10y
r-'rh-er from Cen Rows Office tine chal
i'N-f Bviefe replying ne submitted the cor
lt-N'Nd nrr TO number u friends. includin
al Judge Of the Court Of Appeals and som
a. thc most eminent menners Of the bil
mos were 4 one opinion IN regard to H. Surl
a 'l lnunicdtipn from man llke Gen. Barlow
tNuld uuly be regarded most seriou
ii'tl"r aud under their anVlcs NJ Root wrot
hr rcmy, declining e. take any furhe
n,,i'r a. Cen. liaruws leqle-t for an apology
H. ana untniu- furt er. Ills fTirud,. GlW
f even were unwilliug to let the matter re H. 4
va, hd they IDuittel Gen. Barlow 4 lie .ter {
tht District Attorney.
", lrnn that arrangements had been mad
hf Nt j.. eip, 10 alply - judge Davis, who wa
hpl4Ing Sunr"uc Court. Chambers, Tor "A wax
lani tp arrest Gen. Barlow, on saturday morn
~ L-ip oh tua DAY, under INC instruction
81 ~ Ponce 'nluils-iOuers. Superintendent
Nhllhg was ~ iuns & the District Altoi
No. III IN Tue brown stone building, read
l. iu kr the Cpmpllint
a,r lhrip, notiheI Judge Davis 81 his inter
u 10 dlpb lori warrant, aud informed nh
al lhe ct. IherrupOn Judge DAVIS eitht
i'li the tcf ch or aclalcd taking MS AT un II
ave hull, iur tle purpose OF seeing Gen Is Il
lnN al MS Office. lie went there, saw MN. an
u an interview with him. ! ne result Of tn