The New York Herald Newspaper, January 30, 1859, Page 8

3 5 : THE CODE OF HONOR. DO YOU BITE YOUR THUMB AT US, SIR? _ ‘THE TWO PICTURES OF THE DUELLO. Satisfied. Had you proceeded one step farther, and made a gent atonement for the “insulting and igjurious: remarks” you have made about me again and again, Dy saying that, uuder the excitement of a heated contest, you had said too much, and that you withdrew them and ‘ro tted it, I could and should have expressed myself (and t, too, with pleasure, as I really and sincorely wished to avoid a difficulty with you) as fully satistled. be however, in fact repeat the insult, aud proceed to say your remarks “had reference to my qualifications as a member of Congress, and only involved my moral and in- tellectual character.” This might be excused, Dut you ssem resolved to make me pocket your !nsult whether J will or not, and further eay, ‘that your estimate of my charactor was founded on many overt acts of my life, specifica. tions of which you can refer to, and did allude to, about me.” “Overt acts of my life,” Mr. Maxwell! You knew me when I was a smali boy, not ten years of age, tho child of poverty stricken, bu! bonest parents. You knew me again as a youth—a poor store boy, earning my living atasalary of $150 per annum. You have since known mo for long, long years, in higher and moro distinguished positions, still the child of tod and honest effort, working my way ‘up in life, and building up a character I am now tenacious of sustaining. Unlike yourself, who were born in the lap of luxury, and who have been rolling in wealth, and looking down, a3 ou do, upon all who seek to attain the position you were ce to, my life-long effort has been to reach a position that such men as you could not and would not sneer at. If, by the wayside, I have now and then committed a folly, it was cruel in you (assuming that you have spoken h Ideny, for you know nothing of the things h you have spoken), to injure me, as you have done, or attempted to do, by wilfully and wantobly speak- ng of me in insulting terms. But who constivated you my judge, Mr. Maxwell? From whence do you obtain the high prerogative of sitting in judgment on other men’s characters? You have spokon in ‘vague and indefinite” terms of something in your note—it matters not what. I warn you tobe prudent, Mr, Maxwell. Tutroduce forbid som names into a correspondence of this kind at your peril. 4 You speak of ‘my previons life and conduct subjecting me to the kind of remarks’? you have made. Are you a better judge of ‘my life and Conduct’? than the great mass of those with whom I have ever lived? Does the voice of the people of Sumter district—with whom I have spent nearly all the years of my manhood—confirm your impa- Blank Shots from ‘As You Like it,» Hem- bers of Congress, ‘‘Romeo and Juliet,’ American Legislators, ‘‘The Pick- wick Papers,*? Yankee Polit clans, and ‘The RBivals,’? ae, &e., de. THE DUELLO—FANCY SKETCHES. eee THE AFFAIR OF SAMPSON AND ABRAM, [From Romeo and Juliet, Act I, Scene I.] Sampson. My naked weapon is out; quarrel, I will back thee. . How? turn thy back, and run? Sam, Fear me not. Gre. No, marry: } fear thee! Sam. Let us take the law of our sides; let them begin. Gre. I will frown, as I pass by; and let them take it as ey list. fi ‘Nay,as they dare. Iwill bite my thumb at them; which is a disgrace to them, if they bear it Abram. Do you bite your thumb at us, sir? Sam. Ido bite my thumb, sir. ‘Abr. Do you bite your thumb at us, sir? ‘Sam. Is the law on our side, if | say—ay? re. No. m. No, sir, Ido not bite my thumb at you, sir; but I ay thumb, sir. Gre. Do you quarrel, sir? Abr. Quarre}, sir? no, sir. ‘Sam. if you do, sir, I'am for you; I serve as good a man as you, tations? Did the voice of the South Carolina Legislature Abr. — (for many years) sustain your slander? Has the voice of my fellow towusmen of Anderson (where not ten persons have been found opposed to me on a recent occasion), or the overwhelming voice of the district, endorsed “your opinions of my moral character?” Haye the 7,200 Tree. men of the Congressional district—who went, as ‘inde pendent voters,” to the ballot box, and sustained me by & vote unparalleled in this State before—boistered up your slanders, which you, and those of your kidney, were circulating and sowing broadcast over ‘the Congressional district against me? No, sir; no. But to the point. You have grossly and wantonly wronged me. You made assaults upon me, calculated to, and did, injure me so far as your influence could do so. Tetated the grounds of my request, in previous notes, in polite and respectful terms. You “disavow using any ex- pression involving my integrity of character,”’ but repeat the insult, at the same time, by speaking of “my moral charucter’’ in the same offensive tone before objected to by me, and harp upon “your opinions based upon my conduct.”’ I care but little for your “opinions,” but I suggest to you the propriety of being a little more cir- cumspect in the expression of them hereafter, so far as I am concerned at least. But as you have indulged freely in yours about me, Tam going now to take the same liberty with you; and you will certainly not complain at the freedom I shall exercise, as it is only in retaliation, and following the example you have set me. ‘Well, Mr. Maxweil, J am of opinion’ that you aro.a mere boot-lick of those whom you think your superiors; a proud, haughty, overbearing, arrogant and pompous fool towards those whom you think are your inferiors; a foul- mouthed detracter and slanderer of other men’s charac- ters. Igo further, sir, and say, if you dare to assert, by your previous language, or imply by your note I am now engaged in answering, that J have ever committed a dis- honorable or dishonoring act—or that my ‘“ moral charac- ter’ is not the equal of your own, and that of a gentle- map—that you are an unmitigated liar, an unscrupulous scoundrel and an unprincipled villa. Whenever you make such reparation as a gentleman may or can reccive —change or retract “ your opinions”? of me—I may, in all probability, alter mine of you. With this, sir, I dismigs you and your slanders for the present; simply adding that the correspondence is closed on my part, and that no further notice will be taked of, or communication received from you, except throngu the hands of a third party. J. D, ASHMORE, MR. MAXWELL’S FRIEND TO COLONEL ASHMORE. Punpieron, Noy. 19, 1853. Cor. J. D. AsMore:—Yours of the 6th instant to Mr. R. A. Maxwell, Sr., together with your correspondence with that gentleman, bas been plaesd in my hands. As his friend and adviser, return your letter of the 6th. In it you assume that you have been insulted and wronged, and this in despite of his disavowal of having assailed the in- tegrity of your character. If such be your position for yourself and relation to him, no retort in words can avail You, or relieve the responsibility under which either your Social pretensions or your public position places you. But more than all, Mr, Maxwell cannot, in view of the charac- ter of the correspondence and the attitude towards each other in which it places both, coudescend to entertain a communication fout in language, improper in tone, and not within the style or tone acknowledged among gentlemen in hostile relations. H.C, MILLER. COL. ASHMORE TO MR. MILLER. ANDERSON Court Hovse, Nov. 23, 1858. Dr. H. C. Mirzer:—Sir—Yours of the 19th inat. reached me not until yesterday, Ican receive but one kind of communication from a friend of Mr. Maxwell. Distinguish- ed precedents (sanctioned by time and of recent date) for the course I have adopted can be given when the occasion demands. J return you your enclosures. J.D. ASHMORE, P.S—I shall be in the city of Columbia for the next eight or ten days. THB PASSAGE BETWE AND PIC) [From the Posthumus 1 ehaptey Mr. Buorroy (of Aldgate), ro ble Pickwickian alludi *Chair,” Yes ‘Leave off,” &e.) Mr. Pickwick would not put up to be put down by cla- mor. Hie had alluded to the honorable gentleman. (Great excitement.) Mr, Brorrox would only say, then, that he repelled the honorable gentlemal ‘and scurrilous accusation with profound contempt. (Great cheering.) ‘The honor- able gentleman was a humbug. (Iummenge confusion, and Youd cries of “Chair” and ‘Order.””) Mr. A. SNopanass roe to order. He threw himself up- on the Chair. (Hear.) He wished to know whether this disgraceful contest between two members of that club should be allowed to continue. (Hear, hear.) The CHATRMAN was quite sure the honorable Pickwickian would withdraw the expression he had just made use of. Mr. Brorros, with all possible respect for the Chair, was quite sure he would not. The CnarrMan felt it his imperative duty to demand of the honorable gentleman whether he bad used™he expression which had just escaped him, in a common Benge? Mr. Brorron had no hesitation in saying that he had not—be had used the word in its Pickwickian sense. (Hear, hear.) He was bound to acknowledge that, per- sonally, he entertained the highest regard and esteem for the honorable gentleman; he had merely considered him @ humbug in a Pickwickian point of view. (Hear, bear.) Mr. Pickwick felt much gratified by the fair, candid, and full explanation of his honorable friend. He begged it to be at once understood, that his own observations had been merely intended to bear a Pickwickian construc- ton, (Cheers.) THE JAQUES AND TOUCHSTONE AFFAIR. [From As You Like It. Act V., Scene IIL Jaques. But for the seventh cause; how did you find the quarrel on the seventh cause? ‘Jouchstme. Upon a lie seven times removed ;—Bear your body more seeming, Audrey:—as thus, sir. I did dislike the cut of a certain courtier’s beard; he sent me word, if Isaid his beard was not cut well, he was in the mind it was: This is called the retort courteous. If I sent him word again it was not well cut, he would send me word, he cut it to please himself: This is called the quip modest. Vf again, it was not well cut, he disabled my judgment: ‘This is called the reply churlish. If again, it was not well @ut, be would answer, I spake not true: This is called the reproof valiant. Ifagain, it was not well cut, he would way, lie: This is called the countercheck quarrelsome: avid 90, to the lie circumstantial, and the lie direct. Jaq. And how oft did you say his beard was not well out? Touch. 1 durst go no further than the lie circumstantial, sor he durst not give me the lie direct; and so we mea- sured swords and . Jog. Can you nominate in order now the degrees of the ? ‘o order. Did the honor- (Cries of “Order,” Touch. O, sir, we quarrel in print, by the book: as you have books for good manners: 1 will name you the de- grees. The first, the retort courteous; the second, the ip modest; the third, the reply churlish;. the fourth, the reproof valiant; the fifth, the countercleck quarrel- some; the sixth, the lie with circumstance: the seventh, the lie direct. All these you may avoid, but the lie direct; and you may avoid that too, with an if. I knew when seven justices could not take up a quarrel; but when the parties were met themselves, one of them thought but of an if,as, if you said so, then Isaid so; and they shook hands, and Swore brothers. Your if is the only peace- maker :—much virtue in if. THE DUELLO—REAL SKETCHES. THE MAXWELL AND ASHMORE DIFFICULTY. COLONEL ASHMORE, M. C. FROM SOUTH CAROLINA, TO MR. ROBERT MAXWELL. Anpenson Court House, (ct. 21, 1858 Sm—It has reached my ears that just before and ween THE ENGLISH AND MONTGOMERY AFFAIR. Mr. Montgomery, of Pennsylvania, having “cut the acquaintance of Mr. English, of Indiana, the latter gentlo- man, on meeting the former in the street, tries to cut his head with a cane. Mr. Montgomery thereupon has re- course to brick bats, and finaily both run away. The fol lowing is the official settlement of the aifair:— THE SETTLEMENT. the time of my election to Congress you made grave ‘The undersigned—Joseph C. McKibbin and G. B. Adrain, serious charges against me, involving my integrity of cha- | friend ‘he Hon. William Montgomery, and Joseph Lane racter. I regret that you did so, as youare a churchimaa | , Niblack, friends of the Hon, William H. and professor of religion; nevertheless, T feel constrained | y —having, by consent of the parties, examined fully to ask you to witheiraw all such charges, for the use of all disrespecttul terms. tion to this note is reques Rouwet Maxwait, Sr., Pendleton. MR. MAXWELL TO COL. ASHMORE. PENprEto, Oct. 23, 1858 Cot. AsHMORE:—Sin—Yours of the Zist inst. 1s received, stating “‘that grave and serious charges had been mac Dy me against you, involving your integrity of chara ter.” I must ask you to state specifically what the charges were that you allude to, for without this I am wnable t answer understandingly. On the receipt of which I will reply promptly. R. A. MAXWELL COL. ASHMORE TO MR. MAXWELL. pERsON Court House, Nov. 1, 1858. R, A. Maxwe -—SiR—I have just risen from a sicis bed, where I have been under 1 previous to the mine of the 2ist wi y my rejoinder, I will repeat, in substance, wh: said, only a little more partic , to avoid qt hereafier. I have been informed your town (whoge credibility and res any other person will question, but whose nam to use until ther y therefor), or just previons to the time of the late election grees, ‘you epoke in the most disrespectful terms of personaily, and used, in various instances, language which involved my character, or my integrity of ter, seriously.” In how many, or what particular is perfec: ly immaterial the purposes of this corr: ence, nor shall I encumber it with them, In the ment of others (disinterested persons) my character w assailed. It became my duty, receiving the infor I did, to reqnest of you a disclaimer or withdrawal of « such language, knowing, aa I did, that I had_done you no wrong or injury of any kind whatsoever. The c! nd to ap ‘our early atten- J.D, ASHMORE. and circumstances of the late difficulty bewwoen , ave come to the conclusion that while Mr, Euglish y acted under the impression that an insult had c:téred him calling for resentment, yet the evidence s uot show that any insult had bee offered which olence he used; and be, having expressed tgomery his deep regret for what he had done, k this apology suilicient, and bave mutually ac- cepted the terms as a inal adjustinent of the difficulty. Witness our hands, at Wasbington city, this 19th day of Janue A. D., 1882 FOR HON, WM. MONTGOMERY. KIBBIN, FOR HON. WM. 11. ENGL JOSEPH LANE, WM. EB, NIBLACK. SHORTER “ DIF: THE WASHBURNE Ri mt the eame time with difficulty, o the pas Messri. Washburne and Shorter in the House, as follows:— In discussing the claims of citizens ef Alabama and Georgia for Indian depredations, Mr. Washburne, of Wis ‘ousin, ridiculed the claim and made some remark ro. fleoting upon the ns of these States, when Mr. Short er, of Alabama, denounced what he said as 1 The gentlemen were called to order, und go ended. ebood. matter THE SICKLES AND TUCKER AF DR. J. C. TUCKER TO HON. MR. KL Nuw York, Dec. 4, 1858. pL. F, SICKURS:— y friend, Dr, Ogden, of California, the bearer of will verbally communicate my object in desir- ing a written correspondence with you, You will obi » by nominating a day on which it will be conven you, or any friend ‘you may authorize, to confer with of your reply fortifies my position and strengiheas the cior, either at Philadelphia or Baltimore. Respect- necessity. You neither disclaim a recollection nor make TUCKER, 41 Fast Thirteenth street the withdrawal of ineulting language used about n DIN FOREGOING NOTE, been used hy Mr. Sickles at his night of December 2, 1958, In P e remarks upon & published letter from Mr. Valentine to Hon. G. J, Tucker, giving the names of hia farnily connections who’ havé held official position, Mr, Sickles «aid something in effect conpling his family with the offensive term he bas several times applied to the Secretary of State. MR. BUTTERWORMH TO DR. OGDEN. New York, Idec. 7, 1858. Dear Stk—My friend, the Hon. D. E. Sickles, has placed inmy bands a note addressed to him by J. C. Tucker Feq., in which Mr. T. states that you will verbally com: mupicate Mr. T.’s object in desiring a written correspond- ence with him. Mr. Tucker, in this note, requests Mr. Sickles to nominate a day on which it will be convenient for him, or to confer with you either at Ph plphia or Baltimore. hostile cha. racter of this’ pote renders it impossible for Mr. 8, to respond to any verbal communication you may make. Its withdrawal ie a necessary preliminary to any such com munication. I am, with great respect, your obedies 8. T. B., 24 West Sixteenth strevt. OcpEn, of California, DR. OGDEN TO MR. BUTTERWORTH. New Yor, Dec. 8, 1958, TIERWORTH— the honor to acknowledge the, receipt 7th inst. Your proposition, at interview, to withdraw what you regard ag “hostile,’ Dr, Tucker's note addressed, through me, to the Hoa. 1. E. Sickles, is not, in my judgment, embragod in your letter. The closing sentence in that (your) letter seems to imply overtures on the part of my friend, the Doctor, rsonally, or of terms used involving my charact That you did 90, according to the understanding of other®, I can abundantly substantiate. I am, theretore, under the necessity of repeating, and insisting on the re quest made in my first note, viz.: “That you will dis- claim, or withdraw all insulting and injurious expres that you have used, or charges of a personally offensive character that you have made against me.” J. D. ASHMORE, P 8.1 deliove I was in error in eupposing you (in ny note of the 2ist) to be a member of the church. ME. MAXWELL TO COL. ASHMORI Pexpiaton, Nov, 8, 1958 Cot. J.D. AsuMone:—Sir—Yours of thé Ist inst, is re- ceived, It does not come up to note of the 28¢ of October, in which T req formed of the explicit charges which you allege have used, “involving your integrity of character asked to know what the charges are, and your ansy still vague and indefinite, reiterating protty mi game statement as was contained in your first note, 1 think I have the right to inquire, without the imputation Of ‘“quibbiing,” what the charges are, explicit i can be called on to answer tothem. It is © privilege a Jowed in all cases to the accused, to be put in posesseion of the charges he is required to answor. I have a distinct recollection of what I did say of you, and tho persons to whom my remarks wore made, ‘I think I can repeat the very expressions I used more accurately than they were communicated to you. IT do disayow using any expres sions “involving your integrity of character.” My ro- marks had reference to your qualifications as a member servant, Dr ol ress d only involved your moral and jntollectual } When none were contemplated by him. der your in- ps oy uty eauronte of your character was founded | terpretation of Dr, Tuc ker's note, verbal communication on many over? acts of your life, gpecifications of which I | could be bad only at Philadelphia or Baltimore, Awaiting can reter to, and did allude to in conversation about you, | your further pleasure, I remain, with great respect, your ‘This, I contend, I have the right to do, in canvassing your } obedient seven, L, OGDEN, claims and qualifications ag a candidato, as an indepontent MR. BUTTERWORTA TO DR. OGDEN. voter. If your previous life and conduct subjected you to : Nuw Your, Doc. 9, 1858, Drar Sin—I have this moment r hore kind of remarks, you could uot but expect they would be brought out against you inthe canvass, Ifevery voter is to be called to account for investigating the claim? and qualifications of candidates, then, indeed, we haye fallen on evil times. 4 If this explanation will not satisfy you, it is all that I can give you. I cannot change nor retract an opinion of ‘ou which your own conduct has compelled me to form. henever your charges are more specifically made, and I can know explicitly what I have to answer to, 1 shall not shrink from the avowal of Lod trath, ae from Ad Coa sibilities in which # may involve me. 1 amnot a member of any church. R. A. MAXWELL, ME. ASTIMORE TO MR. MAXWELL. Anperson Court House, Nov. 6, 1858, Rover A, MAXweLt, Sr.—I have received yours of the 3d inst, You complain that [have not explicitly stated the charges I have made against you. I stated explicitiy “that you bad used insulting and injurious expressions, or made charges of a personally offensive character against me, involving my character or intogrity of character.”’ ‘This does not seem to satisfy you, but you distinctly ‘dis vow using any expressions involving my, integrity of character.” So fur, wo good; and thus far Lean say 1 aun eived your letter of the Sth inst, I regret that the moaning ‘of iny letter Ere 7th inst, was not as clear to you as I intended and lieved it to be. To be more explicit, Sr. Sickles con- siders, and, I believe, justly, that Mr. Tucker's letter to him amounts to a challenge, and that therefore #0 long as that bea) how of the intent of Mr, T.’s letter remaing uncontradicted, he cannot, nor can I, as his (riend, re- spond to the “verbal communication” which Mr. Tucker, in his note, states you will make. I proposed that the hostile nature of the Jetter be disavowed, as a nocossary preliminary to any further communication betwoon Mr. ickles and Mr. Tucker. I am, with great respect, your obedient servant, SAMUEL T. BUTTERWORTH. Dr. L, W. Oana. DR. OGDEN TO MR, BUTTERWORTH. New York, Doo. 0, 1958. Dear Sin—The amended form of your second note, dated 9th inet., the receipt of which I have the honor to acknowledge, asking of me a withdrawal of Dr. Tncker’s note addressed to the Hon. D. E. Sickles, and which you regard as “hostile,” allords me the opportunity of raying to you that “hat note” is now withdrawn, in order that We charge on which it is based may ober be disylaimed or explained away. With great respect, obedient verve, 1. W. OGDEN. To the Hon. Sauce: T. Bermsrworra, MR. BUTTERWORTH TO DR, OGDEN. As Naw Youx, Dec. 9, 3858, Duar Sm—I have to ackn receipt of your letter of to-day,in which you wil Dr. Tucker’s let- ter of the 4th inst. to Hon. Daniel B. Sickles, The con- cluding lines of your letter, in which the word ‘‘charge’’ is unde ary to me ioc’ mprehensible, as no charge against Mr. Sickles has been communicated’ to me. Any Sartor cocummsaications whieh: 3 may desire to Lm be promptly respon . tam, with a your pociren, pial ‘SAM. T. BUTTERWOR Dr. L. W. Oapen. DR, OODEN 10 THE EDITOR OF THE BERALD, To yesterday's number of your pay my notice was called to the publication furnished by A Friend of tho Hon. D. E. Sickles,” of certain correspondence, earriod on by Hon. 8. F. Butterworth in behalf of Mr. Sickles, and myself in behalf of Dr. Tucker. ‘6 appearance of this publication at this time was cor- tainly unlooked for, and, to say the least, steuck me as being unnecessary, ‘unusual and extraordinary, It was my intention to reply to this publication instantly; but on reflection I deemed it courtesy to Mr. Butterworth, who was then absent at Washington, to wait his return to New York, and first ascertain whether this publication was made at his suggestion, before entering on explanations. Mr, Butterworth has this day assured me tat he did not advise the publication of tbe correspondence unless Mr. Sickles should find it necessary to vindicate himself from the charge, said to be extant, that “he had received a challenge aud would not accept,” and has siguified bis willingness to unite with me in mutual explanations to the public of the cause which delayed a further continu- ance of our correspondence. The last note addressed me, dated Dec. 9, in reply to mine of the same date, and which remained unanswered by letter, is explained in the tol- lowing manner:—Immediately on receipt of Mr. B.'s last note, in which he ovjects tothe term “charge,” as “incomprebensivle’’ to him, Isentfor Mr, Butterworth, believing that by a personal interview J couid enlighten him on that point. We met, when J took occasion to re- fer bim to Dr. Tucker’s written “memoranda,” containing the “charge,” which accompanied Dr. T.’s note, both of Which verbal explanations were delivered by me to Mr. Sickles. I further explained the character of the “charge” to Mr. B., and promised to give him, if necessary, a written de- tailed account. Mr, Butterworth assured me he had never seen the “memoranda,” though Mr. S. had made mention of it to him, and, therefore, it was the term ‘charge’ had appeared.to him “incomprehensible,” leaving met believe that tho promised ‘eatisfuctory explanations, or digelaimer,”” would be promptly furnished. At this state of the procedings I regarded the last note, dated December '9, from Mr. B , 8 cancelied by my yer- bal reference to the “memorania,” and awaited his fur ther pleasure. My extreme illness at the time, known to Mr. B., and his unwillingness, as I believe, to annoy mo with further communications until I was in better health, furnished me with excuses for his delay; while, on the other hand, it seems that he was expecting from me addi- tional written detail before entering upon his promised “explanations.”? Thig mutual mistake continued until he was called to Washington city. In the meantime the cor: respondence was by Mr. Butterworth delivered to Mr. Sickles, at his request, and published; thus ending, so far as Mr. B. and I were concerned, this epistolary inter- course. L. W. OGDEN. New York, Dec, 21, 1858 MR. BUTTERWORTH’S CARD. Dr. Ogden has submitted the above statement for my examinatton. I find it correct in its detail of facts. Since my return from Washington Mr. Sickles informs me that an incorrect statement of the correspondence contained in the Heratn of Saturday, and the comments of the Sunday press, made the publication of the entire correspondence, in his judgment, necessary. As to the memorandum which was handed to Mr. 8. by Dr. Ogden. T was informed of its contents; but as it was without signature, neither Mr. Sickles nor myself gave it any consi« ion, th Thave no doubt that Dr. Ogden considered his reference to it in our conversation as suflicient to produce a re from Mr. Sickles, whilst I supposed that he would furnish me with a further detailed statement of Dr. Tucker's cause of complaint. 8. T. BULTERWORTH, Dec, 21, 1858. DR. TUCKER TO MR, SICKLES. Amnoy, N. J., Dec, 22, 1858, Danse. E. SicktRs, Keq.:—Sir—An unmistakeable letter from me to you will appear in tomorrow’s New York newspapers, a copy of which Icannot send you without, perhaps, embarraseing the bearer of it. You will under- stand from this the necessity of reading to-morrow morn. ing’s papers in auother State, unless you desire legal de- tention in hig. Yours, J.C. TUCKER. Wepyespay, 1.4; 0’clock P. M. LESTER REFFRRRED 7 Dany News Buinpr New York Crry, Dec. 22, . Sickies, Fsq.—Sir—On the 4th inst. I sent you and “memoranda” of “charge” by my friend Dr, Ogden, who verbally explained to you what I re- quired. Mr. Butterworth, your appointed friend, sought to di- plomatize upon the guarded and covert phraseology neces: sary employed to avoid rendering ourselves amenable to the law; but subsequently, in his letter o f December 9, says—‘Mr. Sickles considers, and I believe justly, that Mr. Tucker’s letter to him amounts toa chalienge.”’ ' You were along time arriving at a plain conclusion, and were, even then, desirous of making “satisfactory explanations” for insulting allusions to the dead. Most men would haye fought first, and explained—afterward. My “note” of December!4, was withdrawn by my friend, to admit of such ‘‘explanations,’”’ contrary to my wishes, You have placed before the public, through the medium of the press, our differences and correspondence. I am, fore compelled to adopt the same channel of commu: nication in irrevocably renewing my ‘‘note” or ‘chal. lenge” to you, #ubjeot, in the futlest sense, to the “hos tile” construction which you place upon it, I shall ex- pect to hear from you before the 25th instant. J.C, TUCKER. It is stated that a copy of the above was subsequently forwarded through the Post Otfice to Mr. Sickles, care of 8. T. Butterwortii, Fsq, MR. SICKLES TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD. New York, Dec. 28, 1858. Lobserve in the journals of this morning a communica- tion from Dr. J. C. Tucker, addresse’ tome. Ihave no acquaintance with this person, and le has no right to claim any notice from me; first, because he bas never ro- ceived an injury at my bans, aud secondly, because he has chosen a mode of communicating a challenge (through a newspaper) never cmployed by gentlemen, While he was represented by Dr. L. W. Ogden, my respect for that gentleman induced me to confer with him through my friend S. T. Butterworth, until the correspon- dence was abruptly and unexpectedly terminated (on the 9th instant) with the inquiry propounded on my part for some information enabling me to know from De. Tucker of what he complained. Ibis true, however, that I have a controversy with Gideon J. Tucker, eq, Secretary of State, From this issue I shall not allow myself to be diverted or him to be rescued by any other member of his family, With them 1 have nothing to do, for Tam not aware that I have ever known or spoken of any of his kindred; but I bave, in three public audresse ently delivered, all of which were accurate journals of the diy, the personal and official , Secretary of State, by his integrity and honor. For the truth of these Tam amenable to him; and although Iam nota belligerent man, yet whenever he desires to hold me re- sponsible for what I have deliberately said of him, be lnay be assured of a courteous if not a cordial welcome from your most obed ryan D. E. SICKLES. DR. TUCKER TO THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD. New Yoax, Dec. 25, 1858. he cecond and last time I reluctantly intrude upon bject of my unpleagant differences with es. That person’s card in answer to challenge, and the unjust comments of a portion of the press, require of me a reply. On the evening of his banfuet at Niblo’s, Mr. Sickles made, in conversation, unmannerly and mauiting refi tions upon deceased members of my father’s fainily. ‘These remarks were reported to me in confidence by Mr. Sickles’ guest, and I hold myself respousible for the charge. Almost an entire stranger in my native city, after an absence of ten yenrs, 1 bad heard of Mr. Sickles as @ po- litician only, anid, from the honorable position he occupies, be a gentleman. His gross, low bret «werably replied to by him— and naturally irritated me; but when, on @ festive oveasion, tn the presence of ladies, choosing poli Vics for bis theme, this person again interlarded his Speech with pothouse expressions, and subsequently per- mitted his vile, slanderous tongue to utter insult to those sleeping in their graves—are there twelve men to be found in this State who would convict me for challeng- ing him? Jf there are, J will willingly ‘exile myself from Tuck other, having thus stigmatized Mr. Sickles, through the press, as ‘a “liar and a elanderer,” and he silently admitting the appropriatencss of the terms, it » Under these circumstances, doubly unpleasant for ullenge him. His friends pronounced him ro- sponsible for all he said, asserted that he was a Sighting nd his having once challenged Me. John Van Buren riaibly Warrant such conclusion, In a most re- spectful letter I gave hire tation; he preferred jet- ter writing and“ explanat h Tneither asked for or w 4. ‘© Was bo ignorance of the cause of of- fenee, which, at the firet interview, wag promptly 6x. plained, anda promptly and couyenioutly forgotten by sim. r. Sickles was based solely upon the d,and had no reference to the quarrel The Sccretary of State re- = f my intentions through the Washington correspond 1 HexaLp of December 18. ‘This person Sickles, in his card of the géth inst., de- clines to meet me, yet, in th » breath, addg insult by calling my mode of communicating with him ungentle- As he considers me entiticd to notice when re- d by Dr. Ogder Tcould still claim ft, for Dr. Ogden bas never ecased to be my friend. By refusing me a mecting, and sti sults, Mr. Sickles giv n the usual compli @ course would, however, on the partot’the publie of iis besides, torn, fhig communication has become longer than Tat first in- tended, It sball be concluded, Mr, Sicklos says he has no acquaintance with Dr. J.C. Tucker. [am gratified to say he epeaks the truth; but he bas had a chance, and Inay at any time have a similar opportunity of méoting him. J am now ratisfied that the Honorable Daniel B. Sickles, member of Congress from tho Third district, olty of New York, can write letters and tlk, but—won't hgh og ing, then, to pursue and persecute « person physically and motally incapacitated by fear to account for the tous ineulta he offers, who catentatiously parades hw valor and desire to fight anybody but the man who aska him to, I leave the chivalrous conduct of this honorable representive to the verdict of his colleagues from other ‘States, and the public generally, J. CG, TUCKER, THE DOUGLAS AND SLIDELL AFFAIR. LETTER FROM SENATOR DOUGLAS. Since my recent arrival in New York { have seen, for the first time, a publication made by the Hon. John Shidell, denying positively that he authorized or in any manner countenanced the statement published in the Press and Tribune, of Chicago, just betore the late Tli- nois etection, to the effect tmt the slaves belonging to my children, in Mississippi, were cruelly and inhumanly continuing his in- the right to ‘post’? him ic. Tho piquansy of such ready recogni character #0 describ {Js unquestionably a vulgar and bombastic cus- NEW YORK HERALD, SUNDAY, JANUARY 30, 1859. . this denial Mr. Slidell 4 feels of felicitation in tho . ting, abt a matinee | fan, Themen to eta THE MORAL Bhan vane etens nono | Koper es Sor, oa mar foundation ln eh” “In this be Hous juste tor tea fore events Roxas i perfotwraaguity and Tam wre be ae AAD MR FAULRLANDO ts the guardian of my children, Told mywelf responsi: | will earn from me to be and fool pleasant under [From the ‘Act V., Scene Il, ble for the manner in which slaves are treated. infliction. But, considering the humility of my o Mr, Acres, By my valor, then, Sir’ Lucius, not true that I have authorized or countenanced anony- mous attaeks upon Mr. Slidell. It. is true, however, that when the fact was first brought@to my notice that Dr. Brainard, a federal office holder, my enemy, bad caused to be published during my absence, in the aboli- tion organ of ), this *bage fabrication,” with the ame of the Hon. Jobn Slidell as authority for its truth, 1 denounced it as such a calumny deserved, and expressed the vey to my friends that it should be copied and circulated for the purpose of showing the base means em- ployed to defeat my election, and also with the view of drawing forth such disclogures as would expose to public contempt the real author of the calumny, which object. bas been fuily accomplished by the letter of Mr. Slidell. January 7, 1859. 8. A. DOUGLAS. SENATOR SLIDELL’S REJOINDER, Senare Cramugr, Jan. 12, 1859, In a note “dated the 7th inst., signed by the Hon. S. A. Douglas, addressed to the editor of the ‘States, and pub- lished last evening, Mr. Douglas, after quoting the follow- ing pasgage from my published statement the 18th of December last, viz: “Mr, Douglas has, by authorizing and countenancing anonymous attacks on me, through a person officiating as his private secretary, lost all claim to the expianation that I would otherwise have promptly volunteered to give him’’—makes the following remarks: “It is due to myself to publish an emphatic denial of the truth of the implication in the above paragraph. It is not true that Ihave authorized or countenanced anony- mous attacks upon Mr. Slidell.’” ‘This declaration imposes se ge ‘me the necessity of show- ing the grounds on which I made that charge, During my visit to New Orleans in November last, an editor of a paper published there, who is a friend and partisan of Mr. Douglas (but who atthe game time is not unfriendly to me), informed me that he bad received an anonymous letter ‘om Chicago for publication in his paper, comment- ing ve severely upon me, and that he did not’ intend to publisi: it, but desired me to gee it. He accordingly pro- duced the paper, and read to me certain portions of it ex- tremely vituperative. I told bim that I had heard enough of it, and insisted on knowing the name of the author, and how the paper had been forwarded to him. To this he at first demurred, but on my urgent insistance that I bad the right to know the name of the author, he said that it had been sent to him in the ordinary form of news- Paper correspondence, either without signature or with ‘an assumed one, and had been accompanied by a letter from Mr. James B. Sheridan. I requested him to give me the name in writing, which he did, [have it now in my possession. J had heard that this Mr. Sheridan acted AS amanuensis for Mr. Douglas, had accompanied him through his late canvass, reported his speeches, &c., and I aiso asked the editor whether Mr. Sheridan did not stand in this relation to Mr. Douglas. H% reply was that he so understood, having had other letters from him. I then declared to the editor, in the presence of another person, and subsequently repeated the declaration to other friends, that on my arrival in Washington, where I expected, of courge, to mect Mr. Douglass, I should call on him ‘for a categorical reply whether or not he bad suthorized this letter of his secretary, aud should be governed in my course towards him by his answer. AS soon ag | heard of the charge about the negroes, and before my departure (on the 20th November last) from New Orleans for Washington, I had written to Mr. Mc Hatton, in whose possession the slaves were, denying in the most unqualified terms the statement attributed to me by the Chicago Press and Tribune. Mr. Douglas ar- rived in New Orleans on the Ist or 2d December, saw both the editor above alluded to and Mr, McHatton, and could not have failed to know from them that I bad denied ha roes as had been faisely attributed to me. ve known, from the editor that I believed Sheridan’s letter to have been countenanced, if uot authorized, by him, and that my conviction on this point had been strengthened by the fact of the editor having received letters bearing the frank of Mr. Dougtas, thus, asI thought, connecting him directly with Sheridan’s letter; yet Mr. Douglas made no communication to me, nor disclaimed in any manner having countenanced the anonymous attack. Nay, there is a paragraph in his card of yesterday which fairly ad- mits the construction that he had denounced me in Chi- cago as a calummniator, on the authority of a statement imputed to Dr, Brainard, without ever calling on bim to learn whether there was’ any foundation for his charge, when the event proves that Dr. Brainard, if called upon, would have shown the whole story to be a fabrication. It seems to me that a sense of the common courtesies of life, and of our position as Senators, should have dictated the’ propriety of calllng on me either to deny the state- ment or to vindicate its truth; yet it never occurred to Mr. Douglas to sugyeet even a doubt of my having been capable of originating such a calumny, It was not until tho 15th or 16th of December that I heard, for the first time, that Dr. Brainard’s name had been cited as authority for the statement imputed to me. Two weeks had elapsed since Mr. Douglas had arrived in New Orleans and been apprised of the circumstances above detailed, of my denial of the truth of the statement, and of my conviction that he countenanced Sheridan’s letter. Thad received from him agsurances of his regret at having denounced the ealumny in Chicago, so far as con- nected with my name, nothing to indicate the slightest desire to undeceive me, if I had, indeed, been deceived, in relation to the letter of his secretary, and I had no op- portunity of calling on him for examination in person, nor any means of knowing when he would arrive in Washington. . Tt was under these circumstances, and in view of these facts, that I made the publication of the 18th ult. In my judgment they formed a very sufficient warrant for the declaration contained in it, Mr. Douglas hsd antho- rized and countenanced anonymous attacks on me through a person officiating as bis private secretary. Very re- spectfully, your obedient servant, JOHN SLIDELL. THE TILT BETWEEN SENATORS IVERSON AND HOUSTON. ‘The following extract from Mr. Houston's speech in the Senate, Jan. 18, will explain itself:— — * 1 would not cherish a wish of unkindness to the honora- ble Senator from Georgia; and if truthfully he can recon- cile the course which he has adopted to himself, he will meet with no rebuke from me. But rebuke and vindica- tion are different things. It is possible that I may be able to extend courtesy to the gentleman in my seclusion or retirement at home, in my humble way of life—for nove of the blaudishments of wealth or elegance have ever surrounded me in lite. Hardy and rugged in my nature, both physically and in- tellectually, 1 have always been ready w meet and com- bat the iconveniences ‘of life. Ihave known how to abound, and ] have known how to want. I have known what itis to feel exultation, and I have realized abase- ment. Whatever Providence has allotted me, that T have ‘earned to be contented with, so long as my honor is un- tarnished. ‘The honorable gentieman may find it, ere a single year ruvs out, convenient in an excursion to’ Texas, after some political events have taken place in Georgia, to cali and spend a social time with mo, realizing that fortune is a capricious jade, and that politics’ are “mighty unsar- tin.” (Laugtiten) Should the gentleman come, I pro: mise bim the bread of peace, the reception of welcome; but still he cannot indoctrinate'me with the principles of disunion, ThatTannounce. That isa subject that shall be ruled out of our social intercourse, while it meets my unqualified condemnation without attaching itto the gen- tleman himself. (Applanse in the gulleries.) ‘The Presiping Orricen—Order. Mr. Hovstox—I take the Globe, and expect to have them all filed away, and I may occasionally try to retresh my reminiscences, and regale myself by adverting to some tt have been exciting in the Senate of the United States, and throughout the nation. Ishall hope that they are things that bave been, but are not; for no sound will be so delightful to me in retirement as to hear that the Union is more closely bound together every day, cemented by affection and reciprocal kind offices; and’ that that crimination and recrimination which have existed hereto- fore have died away; that all agitation has subsided, and is forgotten; that like one great family in a grand migration to a happier condition of national existence, we are marching band in hand, and that our people feel one com- mon ennse,one common home, one common fraternity throughout the broad Union. But, Mr. President, notwith- standing the gentleman’s characteristic amenity and po- jiteness, his great amiability of disposition, and bis bland kindness of demeanor, I am satisfied that, when he gave utterance to these sentiments, he could not have been in earnest, and that they were merely an ebullition of the moment—notbing more. He says:— ‘The Senator talks abont the Union and wingé horannas in its praise. J have heard those songs sung before; and { must aay that Thave never heard them sung by 4 Southern man without muspecting at once that his eye was upon the Presidency of the United States, Sir, that would argue, if I were disposed to be snspici- ous—but 1am very unsuspecting In my nature—that the gentleman who is ready to draw deductions from the con- dinet of others, was always looking at that prize himself, and that on the least indication, ag he believed, of a similar feoling in obbers, he was ready’ to detect it and get it down to their account rather as an Offence than as a commenda- ble quality. Again:— Tt may require a great deal of charity, looking at the antece- dents of that Senator, and the remarks he has mace bere to- day, to suppose, aithongh his politien! life fs about to end, that he bas wot fout sight of that tong aud lingering hope of hua—the grent folly of his Ife. Now, sir, I might call on the gentleman for some evi dence of that, but 1 will not do it. Ido not believe it is tangible, and { do pot wish to occupy time unneeoesarily : but, really, I bave never endeavored to chalk out a course of policy in my life, with reference to the Presidency, that seemed balf £0 signifieent as to promise the dissolution of the Union and the formation of a Southern republic; for that clearly indicates ulterior views on the part of the Senator, with a mind that was suspicious—not wih mo, Again :— Bir, {t is this very intensity of feeling which the Senator from Texas bas 80 long exhibited for the Union, over and at the sa- « ¢ interests of bis own section, thet the people of his Slate have decided to pnt kim in retifement; and, for one, cannot but rejoice nt that ‘dpi. Tehould like to kaow wltat sacrifice of the interests of my country Lhave ever caused, Was it for sacrificing my country that | was immolated? or that 1 was permit- ted is a better expression, for I covsider it no sacritice ‘without some loss of life; and Tam not hurt, (Laughter. ) ‘The ery was “abolition, and the three thousand preach- ors,” because I advocated their right of petition to the Senate of the United States, These were the charges made against me:—Opposition to the Nebraska bill, voting ngainet the of the Missour! compromise, I am eure [ need not dwell apon thie subject; but I will make a further remark to the honorable gentieman, who ona former occasion classed me asa party to myself. From that I rather derived some consolation, because I knew that, according to my estimate, I could not have been in bad company if I were by myself— (\aughter)—and that no difficulty could arise between my- self and my companions. (Renewed Iaughter.) We should harmonize perfectly. I kee discord in other political par- ties; I gee a great want of harmony. I see “hards” and “gotta,” politically, in the rame party, not exactly har- monizing; fome golng @ little too far, some not going far enough; ceme going one road, and ‘some another; somo rather kind to banks, and others a little friendly to’ intor- hal imyproycments, beyoud the standard that Gen, Jackson MR. IVERSON OFFERS AN APOLOGY. Mr. Iverson—Mr. President, I heartily rejoice that the Senator fron; Texas, in the generous moderation which he ‘bas exhibited upon the present occasion, has said nothing to which I feel called upon to make any reply. That Senator's relations and mine of a personal character, he knows well, have been long friendly and cordial; and I rhaps, more than he that anything should have SS Be ee sae ween us. . wi yesterday the Senator thought wi IT considered proper to indulge in hich " ingly ungenerous and baysh towards sentiments which [ b ‘red on this floor, I could but feel that I was called upon to repel the char, he made, and to carry the war. even into Africa; but the kind personal feelings which the Senator has exhibited towards me to-day, together with the very exalted compliments he has thought proper to pay me, have disarmed me and suppressed even the tem- porary feelings into which ] was bande Fang after the speech of the Senator, I rejoice have it in my power on the pregent occasion, tu ‘ees my regrets that should yesterday, by what I red a harsh attack made on my sentiments and myself, personally, have been betrayed into any language which was calculated to wound the sensibility of the Senator from Texas. THE DOUGLAS AND FITCH DIFFICULTY. SENATOR DOUGLAS TO SENATOR FITCH. Wasuincton, Jan. 21, 1859. Sin—To-day, in secret gegeion of the Senate, you offered me an affront so wanton, unprovoked and unjustifiable, that I am obliged to infer it must have been the impulse af momentary passion and not of deliberate premedita- ton, This note is written for the purpose of affording you #n opportunity of saying whether or not my conclusion is correct; and, further, of affording you an opportunity of retracting the offensive language which you thus gratui- tously and unwarrantably applied to me. Hon, Granam N. Fircn. 8. A. DOUGLAS. SENATOR FITCH'S REPLY, ‘Wasttxcron, Jan. 22, 1859. Sm—Your note of yesterday was banded to me this morning. In reply,i have to say that you yesterday made a charge that the lately appointed federal officers in Tlinois were corrupt dishonest men—or words to that effect. You knew my son to be one of those officers, and you could not expect me to hear such a abarge with- Out prompt denial of its truth. I pronounced it to be, to ‘our knowledge, untrue. You subsequently eo modihed it as to eatisly me that you excepted my son from the general charge, although you did not name him, and I made no further iesue with you on that subject. When, at a subsequent period of your remarks, you attributed to me statements which I had not made, I requested that in quoting me you would do so truthfully. ‘These remarks were certainly not ‘deliberately premeditated,” but they cafnot be qualified correctly as the ‘impulse of momen- tary passiop.” The first was prompted by a determina- tion to defend the honor and character of my son, as dear to me as my own, againstan attack so general in its terms as necessarily to include him; and the second was the ex- ercise of my right to rectify a misrepresentation of my own remarks. G. N. FITCH. Hon. §. A. Dovaras, SENATOR DOUGLAS TO SENATOR FITCH AGAIN, Wasuxcitox, Jan, 22934 P. M. Sm—Your note of this date bas just been placed in ny hands. Tadmit, without hesitation, your right and duty to do justice to the reputation of your gon. At the same time T maintain my right, in the discharge of my duty as Senator, to comment freely and fully on the charactor of Executive appointments, especially in my own State. I deny, however, that my general remarks in relation to the list of Illinois appointees, confirmed by the Senate during my absence, could be fairly interpreted to embrace your con. When you scemed go to construe them, I promptly replied that what I had said of the Iiliuois ap- pointments was trueas a general rule, but that there were exceptions, among whom I recognized some of my own friends, Alluding particularly to vour gon, Ladded that T had nothing to say in regard to the merits of his appoint- ment, choosing to leave that question where I placed it by my remarks to the Senate during the last sessien, m your prregence, at the time of his confirmation. You now admit that you understood this explanation to exempt your son from the application of my general remarks, aud yet you have failed to withdraw the offensive language; but, on the contrary, at a subsequent stage of the debate, when apologizing fora breach of Senatorial decorum, you ex- pressly declared that you had nothing to retract, thus ap- pearing, in my apprehension, to re-aflirm the objectionable words. As to the other ground of offence admitted in your re- ply to my note, Ihave to say that I did not understand you to assume to correct me in a quotation of your lan- guage, as T was unconscious of making uay such citation, but to repeat the original offence in another form; other- wise, T would have made a proper response on the instant. This explanation, which is due alike to us both, on the points presented in your reply, affords you another op- portunity of withdrawing the offensive words which you ‘admit yon applied to me in yesterday's debate. Hon: Grauam N. Firat. 8. A. DOUGLAS. SENATOR FITCH'S SECOND REPLY. Wasnineron, Jan, 28, 1859. Sm—Your note of last evening was banded me at twelve o’clock M. today. Your explanation in regard to my son being now explicit, I have no hesitation in saying that if you bad excepted him from your charge, or not made it general, I would not have deemed myself war- ranted in repelling it in the words of which you complain as offensive, and which, in consequence of your explana- ‘ion, Inow withdraw. Iam also informed by your note ‘hat if you had not been mistaken in relation to my re- marks on the subject of your misrepresentation of my sentiments, you would at the instant have made a proper response. \is likewise enables me to say that, in my closing remarks explanatory to the Senate of my share in an exciting debate upon a subject not relevant to anything before that body, and the responsibility for the introduc- tion of which rested solely with you, 1 should have with- drawn, as I now do, the second offensive remarks, if you had made the same satisfactory explanation then you have now made. « G. N. FITCH. Hon, § A. Dovetas. SENATOR DOUGLAS TO SENATOR FITCM ONCE MORE. Wasinnotox, Jan. 24, 1559. Sin—Your note of yesterdsy has been received: and while [accept your withdrawal of the words to which I bave taken exception, I owe it to myself to protest against the idea you seem to entertain that my note of Saturday was intended as a precedent and inducing condition of the redress which I solicited, instead of being, as I certainly designed ft, merely responsive to the specifications in your reply to my first. communicati In regard to the introduction and relevancy of the mat- ter in the debate out of which this difficalty arose, I ean- not think that a proper subject of discussion in_ the pre- sent correspondence, 8. A. DOUGLAS. Hon. Granam N, Yrren, ENATOR FITCH'S THIRD REPLY, Wasinxeron, 24, 1859. Sim—Your note of to-day was received at 11's; A. M. It is not for me to judge the motives which dictated yours ofthe 22d. I can only say that my answer was pro: dicated upon the explanations it contained. If your ex. planations are disayowed, my withdrawal must likewise be disavowed. G. N. PITCH. Hon. 8. A. Dovonas. SENATOR DOUGLAS’ LAST NOTR. Wasmnxeron, Jan. 24, 1859, Sm—I am averse to prolonging this controversy afier gaining the substance of my demand; but I cannot close without responding to your last note by saying that it is immaterial to me upon what you predicate your with- crawal, since Ihave gnarded against a misapprehension of my position, 8. A. DOUGLAS, Hon, GRanaM N. Frren. THE SPINOLA AND DIVEN AFFAIR. Jn the New York State Senate, on the 28th instant, Mr. Lavin (rep.) moved for the appoitment of Mr. Foote on the Committee of Investigation of Mr. Mande- viile’s right to a seat. . Mr. Srixoia (dem.) rose and said that this affair was a dirty, mean, contemptible and a pettifogging piece of business, Mr. Diven (rep.) warmly called the Senator to order, and demanded that the words should be taken down. He called upon Mr. Spinola to explain his words. ‘Mr. Svivo.a refused, ina sharp, al manner, stat- ing he would answer to the Senate, but not to the Senator. Mr. Divey moved that the Senate call on Mr. Spinola to reply. A heated discussion then ensued, during which Mr. Piven said that be had made the motion to accommodate ‘Ube Senator, in order that he might explain to the Senate his offensive language. Mr. Srino1a. ‘k NO accommodation from the Senator, here or elsewher 4 Mr. Piven—I demand that those ‘words also be taken down. Mr. SrNoLA—The Senator has purposely misinterpreted my words. Mr. Mver—T require that this charge also be taken down by the Clerk, Mr. Mamie, amidet great excitement, moved that the Senate adjourn. Motion lost, After a lengthy and personal debate, in which Messrs. Lailin, Sloan, Willard, Piven, Ely and Spinola took part, the Jatter disclaimed any persona) disrespect to the Sonate in his first remarks. Mr. Diven then withdrew his charges, ‘The CHarm inquired whether the Senate was satiefed with the explanation. If there were no objegtions, it would be s0 entered on the minutes, THE LAST AFFAIR. MK. SPEAKER ORR AND Mite HUGHES, OF INDIANA. While the diplomatic bill was before the House on Thareday, Jan, 27, and in @ bitch in regard to Persia and Japan, Mr. Gipptvas regested his previous remarks. He would take no step in that direction. ‘The Sreaken (Mr. Orr) reminded him of the irrolevancy of the Cuban question at this time, Mr. Hvcnes, ae of Ind., said if the Speaker had noticed his objection fo the questien of Mr. Giddings this matter would not have come before the House. ‘The Seeker said Le did not hear the gentleman, Mr. Hvonss replied that he could not help that. ‘The Sr#akar—I hope the gentleman did not intend to be rude to the Chair. Mr. Hvcngs—No; but if I bad I should only have been paying, off an oid debt. ‘Sraaxex—If the gentleman has any personal quarrel with the Chair, the House is no place to settle it. Mr. Hvanm—I know that, and say the sathe to the y occasioned considerable sensation. | members on the Mr. Huones wiehed to Now gene he regretted having made the remark to-c which seemed discourteous to the Chair, and took pleasure in making this statement, ‘The SrRAKER responded to Mr. Hugher, expressing him- self exceedingly gratified at the disclaimer, and said he had no purpote to-day or at any other time than to treat Me. Hughes with the most perfect courtesy, yards ts a good distance. Odds lovels and aims! 1 say it is a g008 distance, Sar Lucius O' Trigger. It is for muskets, or small field pieces; upon my conscience, Mr. Acres, you must leave these things tome. Stay now, Pil show you. (Measures paces along the stage.] There, now, that is a very pretty digtance—a pretty gentleman’s distance, Acres. Zounds! we might as well a ig ina sentry box! I tell you, Sir Lucius, the farther he is off the cooler I shal! take my aim. . Sir Lucius, Faith, then, I suppose you would aim at him best of all if he was out of sight! ‘Acres. No, Sit Lucius, but I should think forty, or eight and thirty yards— ‘Sir Lucius, Pho! pho! nonsense! three or four feet be- tween the mouths of your er is a8 good a8 a mile. Acres. Odds bullets, no! by my valor, there is no me- rit in killing him s0 near! Do, my dear Sir Lucius, let me bring him down at a long shot; a long shot, Sir Lu- cius, if you love me. ir Lucius, Well, the gentleman’s friend and I must set- tle that, But tell me, now, Mr, Acres, in case of san aeci- dent, is there any little will or commission I could exe- cute for you? Acres, Tam much obliged to you, Sir Lucius, but I don’t understand— Sir Lucius, Why, you may think there's no being shot at without a little Fiek-—and, ifau unlucky bullet should carry a quietus with it—I say, it will be no time then to be bothering you about family mav@rs. Acres. A quietus! ir Lucius, For instance, now, if that should be the case—would you choose to be pickled, and sent home?— ‘or would it be the same to you to lie here in the Abbey?—= ’m told there is very snug lying in the Abbey. Acres. Pickled!—Snug lying in the Abbey!—Odds tre- mors! Sir Lucius, don’t talk so! Str Lucius. 1 suppose, Mr. A‘ , you never were en- gaged in an affair of this kind before. Acres. No, Sir Lucius, never before. Str Lucius. Ab, that’s a pity—-thero’s nothing like being: used 0 a thing. Pray, now, how would you receive the gentleman’s shot? Acres. Odde files! P've practised that—there, Sir Lu- cius, there-—(Puts himself into an attitude|—a side-front. hey?—Odd, 1 make myself small enough—P stand edgeways. Sir Lucius, Now, you're quite out—for if you stand so when I take my aim— {Levelling at him.] Acres, Zounds, Sir Lucius! are you sure it is nob cocked? Sir Lucius, Nover fear. Acres. But—but—you don’t know—it may go off of ite own bead! Str Lucius. Pho! be easy. Well, now, if I hit you im the body, my bullet has a double chance; for if it’ misses, a vital part on your right side, ‘twill be very hard if it. don’t suceced On the left. Acres. A vital part! Sir Lucius. But there-gix yourself so—[Placing him|— let him see the broadside Of Your full front—there—now m ball or two may pass clean through your body, and never do you any barm at all. Acres. Clean through me! a ball or two clean through me ‘Sir Lucius. Ay, may they—and it is much the genteel+ est attitude into the bargain. Acres. Look ye, Sir Luciut—I'd just as lieve be shot im an awkward posture as a genteel one—so, by my valbr? Twill stand edgeways, ‘Sir Lucius, (Looking at his watch.) Sure they don’t mean to disappoint us—hah! no, faith—I think I see them coming. Acres, Hey!—what!—coming! Ser Lucius. Ay, Who are those yonder, getting over tha stile? Acres, There are two of them indeed!—well, let them come—hey, Sir Lucius!—we—we—we—we—won’t run. Sir Lucius. Run! Acres. No, 1 say—we won't run by my valor! Sir Lucius. What the devil’s the matter with you? Acres. Nothing, nothing, my dear friead—my "dear Sip Lacius—but I—I—I don’t feel quite so bold, somehow, id, ‘Sir Lucius. Oh, fic! consider your honor. Acres. AY, true—my honor—do, Sir Lucius, edge in & ‘word or two, every now and then, about my Honor, Sir Lucius. Well, here they’re cominj [Lookiitg) Acres. Sir Lucius, if I wasn’t with you, T should almost think I was afraid—if my valor shouid leave me! vaior ‘will come and go. ‘Sir Lucius. Then, pray, keep it fast while you have it, Acres. Sir Lucius—I doubt it is going—yes, iny valor ist certainly going! it is sneaking off!—I feel it oozing out, as it were, at the palms of my hands! e “ ‘Sir Lucius. Your henor—your honor!—Here they are. Acres. Oh, that I was safe at Clod Hall! or could be shot before T was aware! Enter Faulkland and Captain Absolute, ®. v. B. Sir Lucius. Gentlemen, your most obedient—hah!— what, Captain Absolute! So, I suppose, sir, you ara come here, just like myself—to do a kind office, first for your friend—then to proceed to business on your own ac- counts Acres. What Jack!—my dear Jack!—my dear friend! Capt. Absolute. Harkye, Bob, Beverley’s at hand, Sir Lucius. Well, Mr. Acres—I don’t blame your salut- ing the gentleman civilly. 80, Mr. Beverley—[To Faulk- land]—if you choose your weapons, the Captain and I will measure the ground. Fas julkland. My weapons, sir! Acres. Odds life! Sir Lucius, I'm not going to fight Mr. Faulkland; these are my particular friends! Sir Lucius. What, sir, did not you come here to fight Mr. Acres? Faulkland, NotI, upon my word, sir! Sir Lucius. Well, now, that’s mighty provoking! But I hope, Mr. Faulkland, ag there are three of ug come on pur- powe for the game—you wou’t be so cantankerous a8 to spoil the party, by sitting out. x. Absolude, Oh, pray, Faulkland, fight to oblige Sir clus. Faulkland. Nay, if Mr. Acres isso bent on the mat- ter— Acres. No, no, Mr. Faulkland—-i'|l bear my disappoint- ment like a Christian.—Lookye, Sir Lucius, there’s no 0c- casion at ail for me to fight; and if it is the same to you, 1d as lieve let it alone. Ser Lucius. Observe me, Mr. Acres—I must not be tri- fled with! You have certainly challonged somebody, and you came here to fight him. Now, if that gentleman is willing to represent him—I can’t see, for my soul, why it. isn’t just the same thing. Acres. Why, no, Sir Lucius: I tell you, ’tis one Bever- Jey I’ve challenged—a fellow, you ser, tuat dare not show his face. If he were here, I'd make im give up his pre- tensions directly. Capt. Absolute. Hold, Bob—let mo set you right—there is no such man as Beverley in the case. “The person who assumed that name is before you; and as his pretensions are the same in both characters, he is reagy to support them in whatever way you plea Sir Lucius. Weill, this is lucky portunity-— Acres. What, quarrel with my dear friend, Jack Abso- lute!—not if he were fifty Beverieys! Zounds! Sir Lucius, You would not bave me 80 vanetaral! Sir Lucius. Upon my conscience, Mr. Acres, your valor has oozed away with a vengeance! rm . Now you have an op~ Acres, Not in the least! orids backs and abettors! be your second with ail my heart—and if yon should get a quietus, you may commanc rae entirely. Pl got you snug lying in the Abbey here: or pickle you, and send you over to Blunderbuss Hall, or auy thing of the kind, With the greatest pleasure ‘Sir Lucius. Pho! po! you aro little better than a cow- rd. Acres. Mind, gentlemen, was the word, by my valor! Sir Lucius. Wen, sir? Acres. Lookye, Sir Lucius, 'tisn’t that I mind the word coward—Coward may be sa! in a joke—But if you had called me a poltroon, odds daggers and balls! — Sir Lucius. Well, sir? Acres. I should have thought you a very ill-bred man, calls me a cowakd: coward MISCELLANEOTS. CHANGE OF AGENCY— JULES MUMM & CO.’8 CHAMPAGNE. We beg to inform the trade and yabiie fn tha the contract formerly existing betwe us and John G. &J. Voker, for the agency of our’ win! been terminated om the Bist day of December inst, and that we have appointed samen Meyer, Jr. our sole agent for the United States for owe houses at Retina, Uologne and Johannisherg. tea MUM OO CARD 70 THE TRADE AND THE PUBLIC IN GI Bince the dissolution of our old well known house of P, A: Amerie and we ure now determined, Wi all of Ser onerey m e are now. in and ample mean, to retake our position at once. We bave Wherefore chayged our agency, and will send unparalleled ines to your country. 3 ‘We wish to establish a marked distinction between our brand Jules Mumm & Co.’s, and that of a similar name, in order that exch horse han te Fely on, Sa own merits for which purpore we have slightly changed our We aro! coundent that ene winen we have jusl sent ort oe our new agent, James Meyer, Jr., will not bé surpassed any other brand, and we feel satiiied by the closest son cannot even be equalled. ‘All aint we nek tn cur favor from the public and the trade tocompare our wines with others, snd then purchase 7 they find the best. Onr brands from this date will be ‘JULES MUMM & 00.8 " VERZENAY CABINET. JULES MUMM & 00/8 “FLEUR DE BILLERY VINS DR Aud we roneatel st the propriepwot tase ore respottalty request ne proprietarvo dauranurto'print our firm's uame, Jules Mumm Corie fot, ‘on thetr bills of fare tn order to avold confusion with other a? names. ‘The first mentioned wine, “ Ve Cabinet,” is a new brand expreasly jot up to combine our Verzenay with our Ca« inet wine, in order to emtablish a quailty which will surpaag all the $14 if not equal the $14 wines have been sent ta your country by any house. With this exquisite incere hope i, that the taste of the Am drinkers: will, c any other, and make tt the leading win ‘country, e second brand, “ Ving de Dames,” we recommend as ex« jultite for Indien dinner and evening parties, a delicate ¢ flavored wine is required, Our “ imperial” ig @ favorite wine well known and needa Our former Cabinet, in consequence of 00 recommendation. the above mentioned junetion with our Vetzeuay, import Uniesn by pariieuler rogtn ceeeygronay We will Bob We beg to observe, that in order to di portionn tr mi the former ovate ibe Suttons Oe ean 0 reren james oy Wit OUF aatograp! 5 eaplpolplaep eninge ¢ will ned not on . tn ons" frat abipmenta onthe Muliow and Wilks feat ae Ong Brande, without exception, packed in cases 1 your minty ‘Our houre in Cologne Is the ino of all the, xvas, id in oe secular; our cellara there are {wn nome of the finest vineyarteof ie Tohanganes adjoining? the vineparde of Prince ch ‘ A acon patronage our old aud vo the ei bal Referring to the Jules Mi & Co,, 3 inde that T have ahipmenia’ { XCELSIOR FIRE INSURANCE SOMFANY, N.Y. 0, street, N.Y. ‘This pnpey haw declared a remi-annoal dividend of at ep cout parsble on the 110 inet Sanvany Li, 1869, KY QUACK RN BOSS, Secretary, i sacri