Mr. Clay's Duels

We find it very difficult to please our Whig brethren of the Press. They seem to regard us wilh a jealou?, distrustful eye. Our frank, opon and straight forwnrd course they cannot comprehend . They surmise that we are plotting their destruction in some underhanded way in concert with the Locoa. Then our political action the pretend to consider os pohlical folly. But thesorest point wilh these gentlemen is the quolifications of Mr. Cky ( for the Presidency. Here we are compelled to diner from them, nnd they fly off the handle in a moment. Sometime since our neighbor of the Journal snapped us np for saying Mr. Clay advertised his slaves vvhen they ran awny. If slaveholding and breeding be a righteouf?,genteel, respectable, republican business, why such a morbid sensibility on this point? He is called "the Ishland Farmer." What farmer would think it disgraceful to have it said he adverlised his 6tray oxen or horses? But to advertise human cattíe - why it looks too bad - too barefaced, even heie in the woods, among the VVolverines. A few weeks since we ventured to advise the Christian voters of this Stole not to support Mr. Clay for a President. We gave just one reason for this advice, which was substantially that he was a man of bad moráis, having commilted acts, which, if done in this State, would cause him to be incarcerated in the State Prison. The Detroit Advertiser und the Marshall Statesman were down upon us in great wrath for this simple statement. But our near neighbor of the Journal has been stil!. He has sagacity enough lo know that the less that is said on that matter, the better for Jus side of the question. We make f a rule in our controversies i for such we have, and they seem to be ' ening upon us- we make it a rule to adhere to our positions as correct, or retract them at j once when convinced we are in error. In i cordance with this principie, we do retract so much of the aforesnid article as affirms that c "br these acts Mr. Clay would be in our State 'rison sbould the acts be committed in this i State. Crime does not nlways receive its 3ens ornong ns. He might bo imprisoned or he might not. Such things depend on contingentes. The article was written in haste, and what we meant to say was, that he would be Hable by our Jaws to such impris - onment ehould he commit the same neis here which he has committed elsewhere. The gentlemen of the Advertiser and Statesman may think the omendment mmateria!, but we wish to have our position rightJy understood. These Whig gentlemen, instead of calhng for the proof of our assertior, or even formally denying it, have cnlled down upon us "the deep indignation of the public," c. &c. The Advertiser is out upon us in this wise: "Friends of Henry Clay, what think vou ot this? Do you ndmit liiat yonr nobie leader is 'a man of bad moral character" a fit candidale for the State Prison for lus ' 'crimvsV- What think honest nnd decent men of everv party? It s nght that one of his lofty an'd generoiiB character, who has done his coiintry service, however you may regard his political Bentiments-is it right that such a man should be 6o assailed?"Wow, we are willing to have our case g before the readers of cvery paper in the State and we will abide all the decp indignation they may heap upon ug, aftsr reding our defence. And f our Whig brethren of th Press mll publish it, they shall be wolcomt to say as much against it as they please. First, then we suppose these gentlemen willnot deny that Mr. CJay has Leen engaged in at. least two duels. One of these vww witli Humphrey Marshall, when he and Mr. Clay were members of the Kentucky Legisialure. Mr. Clay had introduced a resoluüon recommending that every member should clolhe himself in garmeats ofdomeslic manufacture. Mr. Marshall thought this was the project of a demagogue. Mr. Clay retorted, and pureued the quarrel, till he met him in a duel,and shot at hira with intention to kill or wound him, we suppose. Mr. Marshall waa slihtly wounded by the first fire, but this was not iifficicnt. They took aim at each other again, anü Mr. Clay was wounded. In 1826, he had a quarrel w:th John Randolph, because John had said that the harmon existing betweea Mr. Secretary Clay and President Adarns was a "coalition of Blitil nnt Black George" - a combination of the Puri tan with the Black-leg For this unpardonable ofience. Mr. Clcy fired at him twice but not fiuceceding in disabling or killing him and Mr. Randolph manifesting that he has ei ther insane, or not far removed from insanity a reconciliaron took Dlace.No intelligent Whig ynü deny that Mr Clay has fought two duels- -shot twice nt each antagonist, and wounded one of them. Next, we procced to show that this is an offence against the laws of Michigan. Any person who will take the trouble to turn to ihe Revised Statutes, page G21, will find a chapter entitlcd, QJ Of Ofle:)ce8 against the Lives and Persons of Individuals, CQ the third section of which reads thus: Sec. S. Every person who ehall engase ina duel, with any deadly wenpon, nlthoti"h no hoimcido ensue, or phnll challenge another to fight such duel, or hall eend or deliver any wrUten or verbal messnge, purportintr Or intended to be such challenge, alihough no duel ensue, shall be punished hy imprisonment in n tlie díale Pnsnn, not more than twentu lears, or by fine not exceeding one thousand ioJlare, nn.l ímprisonmcnt in the Connty jnil, íot more than three years, and sha.'l also be ncapable of holding-, or of beingelecled or ao)oinied to any place of honor, profit or trut, mder the conatitution and Iaw3 of this átate." , Thue we see that Duelling is not only punbhable in the State Frwon, bul the offender '■ iis made (L incapable of holding, or of being elected or nppointed to any place of honor profit,or trust, under the Constitutionand laws of this State. ,L0 Such is the judgment our lau-s pass upon the Duellist; and vet you nre trying to make a man of the same charucter your President.' And yoü are calling down "deep indigtiatwv? on our devoled heads, hecause we simply nnannounced this fact, in the fewest words we could use! You do not deny tho facts. ant vet would have U3 regarded as calumniators for stating them! Secondly, by the laws of this State, pagt 022, every person akling in a due! or "advising, encouraging, or promoting euch duel,1' shall be punished by imprisonment in the County jail, or by fine, and (t53 by incapacity for holding office for five years. fj We charge pon Mr. Clay that according to tho testimony of Mr. Wise, who is well kfjown as "a man of honor," he "advised, encouraged and promoted" the duel in which Cilley was murdered. About ejghtecii monlhs since, Mr. Wise implicated Mr. Clay as being concerned in the bloody transaction. A statement appeared in the Nntionnl Intelligencer designed fo show the injustice of this charge. To this Mr. Wise rejoined as follows: (No one feit at liberty, or bound, at the time, to state the names or advice of all the private friends who knew of the matter, and who were consulted about t. Mr. Clav's friends were very anxious, for obvious reasons, not to involve lus name, especial!}-, in thu affair. Thus many confidential facts remaineil iinknovvn on both sides. J)r. Clay hirnself, it is trae, whUslaU Msjriendawere trembling wühfear lest the part he took in il éhónld be disclosed, boldly carne to me nnd said: "Sir! Itisa nine days' bubble! Ifthtytoant to knoio u-hat I did in (he maller, teil 'them to cali me bef ore them, and I icill Uil them." This excited my ad.niration at the time, and was ( fioctual to prevent me from unnecessarily bringing his name bofore the committee. It was not my wisli that he should bo cal 'cd' and he was not called.'' When the form of the challenge was under ! consideration, Mr. Wi.se sovs:"We dwcpssed the question snme time, and jou nt last insisted that I shunld accompnnv youtoMr. Clay's room, nnd he guided by hïs counsel ui the matter." I went with vou to lus room about 1 1 o'cloclc, A. M. on Fridav Ihe 23rd, nnd we foond him alono. Yon submitted to him, in tny presence, whetber thére wasonyalternative then foryou but to challenge Mr. Cilley. He promptly responded that yon had no other coursc lejt. Yon then Bubmitted to him the form of the challenge yo had drawn. He read it, and did not approve il, and said that yonr Irue point of cliallenrre was that Mr. Cilley liad relusod to receive the note of Col. Webb which you had borne, anJ had reCused ako töaèsign Ëuch rëarona as ould exonérate yon froCm responsibilily. l immodiately dobated this point with him as lo the (me cause of dispute; bnt he persieted in his opinión, took the challenge you had drawn, threw it widè, nnd with kis oicn hand and pen icroie. thefnllotctng. to wit : Washington City, Feb. 23, 1868 As you bare declined ácceptinfr a communicrntion wluch I bore to you from Col Webb cml ae by your note of yesterdny, you refusèd to dechne on pronnds wiiich would exonérate "I' trem all responsibiJity gronij out of the affiiir, I am left no other alternative but to ask that satiefaction which is recofrnize( amonn. gentlemen. My frien Hon. Henry A. Wise ïsauthonzod by me to make the arrranements suitable the occasion. Your obedient servnnf, L t W.J. GRAVES.ijwn. J. lILLEY." You Bccepted iliis form, adopfed it n üei ot yoiir owii, copied it in yoiir hand -writiin destroyed tlie mnmtscrpt of Mr. Clay, an Hien inPisted llttt I should immcdiatelv "bear i toMr. Ciiley. Mn. Clay addrd ihs'pfrsü 8IONSTO yoürs, nucll was prëvaiiéd on to bea It to Mr. Cüley, which I did a lilllc before S uclock on that day." VVhf-n they had selectcd rifles as their vveap ons, Mr. Wise says: "As soon ns Icould, pabont 6 o'clock P. M ) 1 wem to Mr. Clay'sroom, and suhmhled the term to him. I think you vvere present J protested that they were ünusunl, bnrbarous and should not bo nccepled. Mr. C!av ssid that you were a Kentuckian, and no Krx - ÏUCKIAN COULD BACK OUTFROM A Ihat the distance was grreat, and that ïf the terms were unusual and barbarous, the parly propofingr sn=h was most likely to fly from th'em himself." Herc we see Mr. Clay'o agency in the matter: 1. He told Mr. Graves there was no alternative but to challenge Cilley. 2. He wrote the challenge with his own hand. 3. He persuaded Mr. Wise to carry it against his convictions of propriety. 4. He was consiilted by Graves and Wis as counsel in the matter. 5. He overruled Mr. Wise's plea that th terms were "unvsval" and "barbarovs." 6. After the murder was consummatrd,and the whole nation was deeply shocked at the atrocity, Mr. Clay cardcssly remarked, (t?3 Its o.vly a ninií days' Bübblh! q And because we teil the Christian voters of Michigan that such a Man of Blood is unworthy of their suffrngesfor the highest office in their gift, we are to be scouted as calumniators ar.d libellers! But it oppeirs that a part of the atrociousness of ourguilt was in attributing these duels to Mr. Clay as "crimesV Is it a crime to rVht a duel, ór is it not? Webster defines a crime to be an offensc, or violation ot public law, of a deep and atrocious nature; a public wrong; as treason, robiory, murder, theft, aron, hc" The Revis?d Statutes of Michigan place the "engaging n a duel" in the catalogue of offencesoainst he Livea and Persons of Individuals," imme liately after the crime of Murdkr, the highesl )n the liat. Blackstone speaks of duelling as indicatina 'oxpress malice," & mentions it as a "crime." The passage readá thus: ' L Express malice is when one with a sédate, ehberate mind and formed deeign, doth kiil ' nanoïher; which foimed design is evidencod h external circumslances, discovering tlmt J wardinlention; aa lying m wait, anteceden menaces, former grndgesconcerted scherm, to do liim some bodily harm. This takes ' the case of delibérate duelling-, (L3 tL); ' buth par lies mett avnwedly with anintent murder; „LQ thinking it titeit duty, s aCn tiemen, nnd c'nimmg. it as their right to wan Ion with llieir own lives and those o( the fellow creatures; without any warrant orau" thoiity frotn any powrr.either human or divino" but in direct contrndiction to Ihe laws both of God and mnn; and therefore the law has jUsí lyficed the { crime a.nd pumshment op siüRDER, on thkm, Jj) and on their scconds " Commenlary.voL 4. p. 199. This extract shows in what light duelliri s regarded by the laws of Erfland. We suppose that in most cizilized countries thera are lavvs against it, by which it is pnnishetl as crime. Even in France, where mi]itory customs give tone lo society, this salutnry reIbrm has reached. At the Jate Penco Coni venlion in Lonaon, the Marquig De La Lian court said: Duellinnr had received a great check in France. The Court of Cassation had deter mmed it was now to be considered an at tempt to murdiïr, and all dneJHstP, howevet hili their station, were now obliged to appcar atllinbarof the courts of juslice, as cVU, nals. Most of the States of this Union, we believe, have enactments ogainst duelling, and if our memory serves us, Mr. Clay's native Stote has a law on this subject whose severity wil! weJl compare with lhat of Michtgan.- But we cnnnot now lay our hands on it. We might muüiply teslimony from divines, vritera on Moral Science, and from legal auhorities. showing that duelling is a crime; ut we s'ioll content ourselve3 with the lesimony of Mr. Clay himself, as given by him n anaddress lo his constituents, written in s maturer j-ears. Ueeays: "I owo it lo the communily to Fay, that vliatever hcreiofore I may haro done, or by ïevitable cncumslonccs might be furred to do, no man in it holda in deeper abliorrcncfe Uizn 1 do, Uva penücious pmcHce. Condemn ed as it must be by the judnent and philosophi, to say notbing of the religión, oí'evcry thinking man, it is an affiiir of reelinir, abont wh.ch we cannot, nlthough weshoujdfreason Jts true corree; i ve will be fbimd when ail shn} unite, ns all ought lo unite, in üs vnqualified pioscnption." JHcre, then, we have Mr. Clay's declnration that Ihis practice of his is "pernicious"-that it is condemned by reason, philosophy, and religión"- tliat it ought to be rejarded by everyonewith "the deepest abhorrence," and receive "unqualified proscription." In thesa sentiments of Mr. Clay we cordially soncur, and to 'proscribe' the pernicious practice,' and show our 'deep abhorrence' of it, wc penned the brief nolice of Mr. Clay's practice,' which so much excited our brethren of the Press. It wil] be noticed lliat some of the circurastances under which Mr. Clay hos been concerned in duellins ttre strongly ngninst him. In the two cases in which encounters took plnce, the cause wns ft r words spoken in the heat of debate, and those contained mere persona] imputations. In both cases, he fircd twiceat his antngonisfs, and unce after his adversary had been woundcd. His oflbnco bas heen repeated, ond that too in mature i-ears, when age should bríhg reflectan and .visdorn. Had the mere husty impulses of roinhful passion led him to ïhis excess onca r twice, the pnb'ic would readily overlook hose Bodden ebullitions of feehn, provided heaged man rpgretted the error of his youngr days. But sucli is Har frem being the case. Ü the ge of sixty ycars, we find himsultod in a duel then in progress, ns a veterun ndviser in sucl) matters; and his powerful inj flucncc, ns wc have seen, was most decidedly anti effc'ually given Tor porpetunting the bloody nnd infernal practico. It resnlted m a trogédy' whicn ehocked the mora] sense of' the entire nation, wlnlst to the caüous mind of the arred Duellist, it appeured onfy as a 'no day 's bubble!" About the same time, he and Senator King, had a public quarrel, which it was expected, would be (erminated by a similar catastrophe, bul which was prevented by circumsances from resulting in a fatal issue. When we consider all these focts- when we reflect that wharevor may be his diameter in other respects, Mr. Ciay is nn unrepenting, veteran Duellist- that duelling s deservedíy accounted, omong civilized nationen a crime of no ordinary that his exaraplë through his and distinguished life hns operated lo encoumcre the savage and inhuman practice, thus virtually decbring to every nobJe rniuded young man in the United States, that it is honorable to wipo off an affront in the blood of his adversary- in view of these things, we ask the moral and Christian voters of Michigan, if they cao conscientiously aid in elevating to the highest office in their gift, a man who sets sach a penicious example before his counirymen, and thus defies the moral eensO of communify, and the express command of the great Crea tor? On the contrary, if this practice be condemned, os Mr. Clay eays it i?, by Judgment, Philoflophj and Religión, ought they not to take his advice, and "all unite ii ts anqualified prüscription." And let society proscribe and difcountonanco this crime as it does others; not by clevating him to lucrative honoru ble offices; but by the couree pointed 3ut in our own statute- by refusing our sufVages for any situaljon of public confidence. Thus, as in the case of other crimes, we shall isit this "pernicious practice" with "unqualfied prosciiption'' by showing a marked ond eserved disapprobation of the character of the nrepenting criminal.CT On the first page will bo found a long letir frora Mr. Wcat. Ilis anieles have been read 'ith eonie attention, as will be ecen by the comïunicntionB of our correspondenta,