1 WT< '■ i j i . 52- THE GIFT OF fttog Aswma 2041 Cornell University Library F 474S2 S84 Brown-Reynolds ^^^ll.fS!l^™lMlllSSSMlB en, 3 1924 028 846 892 olin uvers The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924028846892 tt.l IbI' 1 ' ■■ Passenger Office and Taxicab Concourse, Union Station. Stable No. 2, East St. Louis, 111. 8S»»ffi?J3fe',-»«^, / ^^*r-z^s-z^> /g*2 /zJr. u*-<4ft^sy THE FIRST CONTROVERSY 1$ THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Nowhere in the correspondence did he make any reference to this serious re- flection upon his honor. The prompt avowal of Brown that ' ' I am the author of the articles to which you allude" established personal responsibility. It put a cheek on any theory Reynolds may have entertained that Benton could be drawn into the controversy, though it may not have met the sus- picion in his mind. The change of tone from the district attorney's note of the 24th to that of the 25th was marked. Reynolds, at that time, was seek- ing no quarrel with Brown. The second and stronger editorial contained the phrase, "a sarsaparilla ad- vertisement. ' ' Benton had made some time before what had become famous as his "sarsaparilla speech." His purpose was to kill with sarcasm Henry Clay's compromise of 1850 for the political ills of the country. Advertise- ments of the wonderful virtues of a sarsaparilla compound were read to the Senate by Benton and applied to the Clay proposition so effectively that the expression "a sarsaparilla advertisement" conveyed to the public mind the idea of a ridiculous humbug. The Democrat's editorial A s ^ rsa " suggested that the grand jury's complimentary report on the work of Adver- the district attorney might have been written by Reynolds himself, tisement in which case it would be classed as " a sarsaparilla advertisement." Reynolds ignored the "sarsaparilla" reference, as he did the diplomatic scandal. His readiness to drop the controversy is shown further in the change he made from the original draft of his letter expressing satisfaction. He wrote first : ' ' Your note of to-day is received and it gives me pleasure to accept as satisfactory your withdrawal therein stated." Upon consideration Reynolds revised the draft by writing "the same" be- fore "satisfactory" and running a line through the words following, so that the note read : "Your note of to-day is received and it gives me pleasure to accept the same as satisfactory. The intimate relationship of Benton, the Democrat and Brown was illus- trated in the State campaign of that sarne year, 1854. The Missouri Demo- crat carried a ticket under the caption of "Democratic Nominations." The top of the ticket was "For Congress, Thomas H. Benton." The Daily Evening Pilot, "five cents a week, payable to the car- ^he . rier, ' ' displayed at the top of the editorial page, ' ' Democratic ticket, f a ^4 Sn for Congress, Trusten Polk of St. Louis. " The Intelligencer headed its ticket "Nominations by the Whig Conven- tion.' ' The first nomination was, ' ' For Congress, Luther M. Kennett. The election was the 1 ith of August. The returns gave Kennett, 6,251 ; Benton, 5,394; Polk, 370. Benton was beaten. But upon the local ticket with Benton were D. M. Frost for State Senator; Francis P. Blair, Jr., and B. Gratz Brown, for Representatives. They were avowed supporters of Benton 26 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE VI THE "FRIENDS" CONSIDER PUBLICITY St. Louis, Mo., April 26th, 1854 Dear Sir: Enclosed is a note from Mr. Brown and below you have the form of a paragraph, the publication of which in the Democrat would, it occurs to me, supersede the necessity of making publick the correspondence be- tween Messrs. Reynolds and Brown. I have drawn it with strict regard to an impartial disclosure of the facts of the case; and I can but hope that it will meet the approbation of yourself and Mr. Brown. You will of course not understand me as presuming to dictate any- thing. I merely suggest the following: CARD In consequence of our editorial of Monday last concerning Mr. Thomas C. Reynolds, U. S. Attorney, a correspondence was commenced by Mr. Reynolds in regard thereto, which has resulted in our being satisfied that we were under a misapprehension as to the tone and design of Mr. Reynolds' published communication in our paper of that date. It therefore gives us pleasure to withdraw all language in said editorial which is personally offensive to Mr. Reynolds. It seems to me that the foregoing is a fair and unexceptionable expose and will have the effect of placing the parties properly before the pub- lick, and this without unnecessary prolixity. Hoping for your concurrence in the above, I remain, in haste. Very truly, Your friend, etc., G. W. Goode. [Endorsed: "Delivered by me to Col. Renick same day — T. C. R."] THE FIRST CONTROVERSY 27 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE for United States Senator and voted for him at the session of the Legislature the following January. The code was passing at St. Louis. Possibly that may explain the mildness which characterized the first controversy of Brown and Reynolds. There had been no duel between citizens of St. Louis for several years. The most recent affair was that of Francis P. Blair, Jr., and Lorenzo Pickering, about 1849. Pickering was conducting the Union. He assailed Blair so savagely that the latter, although opposed to the code, sent a challenge. Blair's "friend" in the transaction was Thomas T. Gantt, afterwards judge of the Court of Appeals . I n his acceptance Pickering exercised the right of the chal- lenged to name the time and place ; he did it in such a manner as to make the duel impossible. His stipulation was that the meeting must take place at Fourth and Pine Streets; that the hour must be twelve o'clock, noon. Blair "posted" Pickering. That is to say, he denounced him as a coward. A few days later the men met on Chestnut Street. The sidewalk was narrow. Pickering stepped off into the roadway. He either drew a knife or made a motion as if to do so. Blair thrust his umbrella forward into Pickering's face, making a mark which was noticeable several days. A short time afterwards there was held a Free Soil meeting in the rotunda of the court house, then a favorite place for political gatherings. Blair made a speech. He started to leave by the Fourth Street front. As he stepped through the door out on the portico, which was semi-circu- The Blair- lar instead of the present form of architecture, a man greeted him Pickering with — "Good evening, Mr. Blair." Affair The words were spoken loudly. Acknowledging the salutation, Blair continued across the portico to the steps leading down to the street. Another man standing at the bottom of the steps fired and ran. The ball went by. Blair drew his pistol and fired. He ran down the steps, and fired again, but without effect. At the inquiry, which followed, suspicion pointed to Dr. Prefontaine, a writer on the Union, as the one who had given the loud greeting. It was supposed that this was done to give notice to the person standing at the bottom of the steps that Blair was coming. There was no positive identification of the one who fired . Street lamps were not lighted that night because, as one witness explained, it was a "corporation moonlight' ' night. Pickering was arrested on suspicion, but was discharged. The proof against him was not positive, but the real reason why the case was not pushed was a secret agreement or understanding that he would leave Missouri. Pickering went to California with the gold-seekers, started a paper in San Francisco and became widely known and wealthy. Blair and Gantt were summoned to court for participating in a challenge to fight a duel. They pleaded guilty and were fined one dollar each. The district attorney who prosecuted was 28 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE VII EX-MAYOR JOHN M. KRUM AS ADVISER T. C. Reynolds, Esq. DV Sir: After I saw you last evening, I went to Col. Renick's house, but could not find him there nor anywhere else. His family did not know where he had gone. On my return, I called at the stable where he usually keeps his horse in hopes to get his track, but his horse, too, was away. Will you have a copy of these documents made this morning, and I will see Col. R.? Yours, Ap. 29. Jno. M. Krum. [Endorsed: "J. M. Krum, St. Louis, 29 April, 1854." in the handwriting of Mr. Reynolds.] THE FIRST CONTROVERSY 2Q THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Samuel T. Glover, who became one of the leaders of the St. Louis bar twenty years later. The judge who imposed the fine was James B. Colt, a brother of the maker of Colt's revolvers. The Blair-Pickering affair was far-reaching in its relationship to newspaper destinies in St. Louis. With the departure of Pickering the Union not only changed hands, but entered upon a new political course. It took up the fight for Benton in his appeal from pro-slavery resolutions of the legislature. Blair and Brown contributed most of the editorials. Brown found news- paper work to his liking. When, in the summer of 1852, Giles F. and O. D. Filley, John How and a few others thought the time was opportune for a dis- tinctively Free Soil paper in St. Louis, Blair and Brown joined them. The business men furnished the capital. Blair and Brown contributed the polit- ical and editorial talent. William McKee, who had a large job printing establishment, supplied the plant, for which he was given a half interest in the venture. The Signal, which had been conducted as a morning paper by a group of printers on a kind of co-operative plan, was purchased. The name of ' ' Missouri Democrat' ' was chosen. The Union was absorbed. The "card" which Reynolds and Goode prepared for publication in the Democrat did not appear. It was given to Renick, the "friend" of Brown, by Reynolds personally on the 26th of April, the indorsement in Reynolds' hand- writing would indicate. Reynolds and Goode preferred this brief public notice that the incident was closed rather than the publication of the whole correspondence. Brown, however, seems to have felt Brown differently. Examination of the Democrat files for several days R e J ects following the delivery of the card to Renick does not show that any R eyno id s use was made of the suggestion from Reynolds and his "friend." Card Two or three days passed. John M. Krum, the ex-mayor and the author of "Missouri Justice," undertook to find Renick and reach an agree- ment as to what kind of publication should be made. Evidently from Krum's letter to Reynolds, dated April 29th, Brown preferred that the correspondence in full be printed without comment. Two days later, on the morning of the 1 st of May, the correspondence, with the exception of Goode's letter containing the proposed "card, "was printed on the editorial page of the Democrat. It was given no heading whatever, and was introduced in the briefest possible manner: "We have been requested to give publication to the following cor- respondence." This ended the first controversy. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY [1855] Newspaper Articles and Correspondence Result- ing in Challenge and Acceptance, but no Duel 32 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE I BOERNSTEIN REYNOLDS AND THE KNOW NOTHINGS [Local article preserved by Reynolds and credited in his handwriting, "Democrat, 17 March, '}; ] -&£to\it-c>n>j~ ly %AOurs~k ss Bogus Meeting of the Know Nothings! Bceriistein &UIitchell! ■BAM" IN GREAT SPIRITS!!! Citizens enjoying the Fun! The hybrid meeting which was gotten up by Ibe bogus Republican and Bcemstein came otf last night, and notwithstanding the "reclemency of the weather," the performance was gone through with after the most approved fashion. The assembled multitude (300 strong) were called to order in accordance with the programme by Mr. Mitchell of the Intelligencer, the avowed organ of the Know Nothings, who stated some- what briefly the object intended, and moved that Mr. David Woods, a youn; barrister unknown to fame, take the chair, which motion was cariied without a dissenting voice. After this a gentle- man in german, got up and proposed a list of six vice presidents, not one of whom were pres- ent. His utterance was a little thick, and his motions somewhat on the see-saw order, but the list was cariied — the meeting going it blind. So soon as the preliminaries ware through with, ■« vociferous call for Dr. Boernstein was nude, which In due time was responded to by the spectacled Doctor in all the ominous conse- quence of his own person. He began by siying " that be was not used to the English language, that this was his first (we hope it will be bis last) attempt to speak in public in tfc at tongue. He then went on to compliment the Know Nothings, to say that he was satisfied that their organization arose In a true republican sen- timent, that it was the same feeling which bad at different times pervaded every Stats of Europe, and that be had not the slightest disposition now to abuse them. He further ad- ded that be came not there to speak aught against any one, much less the Whigs or the anti-Bentons, or the so-called Democrats. He had, lately teen attempted to be read out of the Democratic party by their organ, but this was not necessary. Was it of use to kill a dead man, or drive ore out of the party who was already out? He bad stated in bis paper some months since, that be bad abandoned that party, and it was, therefore, labor lost now to read him out of the ranks. He came there for a free meeting of all the people, (Here Sam cheered largely,) to have a ticket of Whigs and Democrats, and Bentuns and anti-Bentons, Jews and Gtntiles, against the Know Nothings. (Hush that, or we'll turn you out — came from the crowd.) Ha would say that he was for abandoning all other parties, an'd breaking them up, and having none but this party here to-night (dies of "good," "good," f rum the Know Nothings all around.) For his own part he would say, that if any thought tbat the German citizens would submit to any exclusion, they were much mistaken — he would shed the last drop of the blood in bis veins first. (" You better get your pay first" from the gallery.) I 1 was not his desire to say much this evening for even if the Know Nothings should carry the piesent election, : what would it amount to — merely excluding a few Germans and Irish frcm office, and in a few years it would be all over, and if they did not get their rights In this country, why they could' go back again, (voci- ferous cheers from the. meeting — gieat sensation amongst the claqnert. ) Tba Doctor concluded his remarks by saying) that be had every re gard for the Catholics, and since some months had said nothing against them. Tbat he want- ed to join with them this time in the municipal canvass, and would say nothing against them until it was all over. (His appeal to Catholics was very touching at this point, and be gave them plainly to know tbat hereafter be might take them up again for want of some better subject to abuse.) Great applause followed this speech of Dr. Boernstein which was ad- mirably tempered to the feelings of his new Know Nothing allies, and it was e\i THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 33 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Politics in St. Louis, from 1850 to i860, was a continuous performance. At the time of the Brown-Reynolds controversies a mayor and a city ticket were elected annually. In August, 1 854, Benton was defeated for the House of Representatives at Washington by Kennett, the ex-mayor of St. Louis. At that same election members of the legislature were elected on Benton and Anti-Benton tickets, but when the legislature met in the winter of 1855, the Benton men could poll only forty votes. The other candidates were Atchi- son and Doniphan. The Benton men would not go to either. So bitter was the personal feeling between the Democratic factions that the legislature was allowed to deadlock until final adjournment. When Atchison's term expired, Missouri was represented by only one senator. In March, 1855, came the municipal campaign. The ' 'off year' ' in politics was unknown in that period . The election of August, 1854, had been carried against Benton by a combination of Anti-Benton Democrats, Know Nothings and The Whigs. And now, for the municipal election of 1855, another com- Boernstein bination was forming to beat the local Benton party in the election w 10 ^. of a mayor. Boernstein was in it. Against the alliance of the Combina- German boss and the Know Nothings, the Democrat opened war. tion The attempt to coalesce the Native American and the German vote gave fine opportunity for ridicule. The Democrat was unsparing in its local, as well as its editorial columns. Reynolds had entered into a business enter- prise with Boernstein. The two were partners in a brewery. Boernstein was the chief object of attack; the opportunity to hold Reynolds up to public scorn was not overlooked. His second controversy with Brown, as Reynolds preserved it in documen- tary form, opened with a local account in the Democrat of a meeting held to unite the various elements on an Anti-Benton municipal ticket. Speakers failed to harmonize and auditors were free with their interruptions. The Democrat reporter, in his "story" of the speeches and the scenes produced about two columns of what a later generation in journalism would have pro- nounced ' 'hot stuff. ' ' Reynolds did not appear in the report of the meeting, but in the very next column of the Democrat was a letter Mysteries devoted to him and his brewery association with Boernstein. The °[ the correspondence which followed between Reynolds and Brown was H r o 6r altogether different in tone from that of the first controversy, eleven months before. It led quickly to the challenge. Know Nothings were active in St. Louis about 1854—6. They had many lodges. Along Fourth Street, in the court house rotunda, on 'change, where- ever men most congregated, bits of white paper cut in triangular form were scattered frequently. They bore not a word in print, not a mark of any kind. The St. Louisan leaving home for business in the morning saw these 34 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE dent .at a glance that it was a pre-arranged coalition between them, only the latter could uot sufficiently master their feelings to play out the ruse with serious countenances. A deadly pause beie ensued. Who i«», batlWUy pitched in with a vengeance. He apologised for the absence of Sum on the occasion, (tremendous cbeeis) but be thought a few words in such a meeting, in Sam't behalf, might meet with some applause, (cries of " go on, go on— keep dark— modi's the word.") For his own part he had helped, to or- ganise the meeting, but he now spoke as an in- dependent man, and he felt that some of the remarks of Dr. fioernstein were very ill-judged anil rhetorical, although upon the whole be liked his spteW). It was well gotten up, and the gentleman deserved, credit for the manner in which he attributed honest and sincere, and patriotic motives to those belonging to the Ame- rican party — sometimes called Know Nothing", but better known as Sam. He bad been struck with consternation however at one remark of the Doctor's, to the effect that if things went on as they now promised in the United States, he would not submit. Not submit — he would have to submit — he >hou)d submit — he had alrerdy f~bmitted. (Deafening cheers.) Mr. Mitchell then w«c, f on to make a most effective speech, in which it was apparent oil all sides that the sentiment of the meeting was clearly right so far as be was concerned. He dipcoucsed ex- ceedingly well, and we must do him the justice to say that he made the only shrewd and sensi- ble speech on tbe occasion. He took up the Cuban question, and abused tbe Admiiiistiation handsomely, for its insensate course in regard to Cuba, and concluded by hoping that it would na longer permit tbe Ameiican flag to be insulted upon every sea. We cannot pretend to give eitbtt the wit, humor, sarcasm, or eloquent ap- peal upon t_ .iban annexation, of the accomplish- ed editor of tbe lnUlliFencer, but those who heard him will no' soon forgot the inimitable lashing, »n a genteel way, which be admiuister- ed to tbe editor of the Anzeiger des Westers, for going out of his. role and speaking disre- spectfully of the Know Nothings, when such language, was not in tbe bond, Mr. Mitchell was followed by Mr. Woods, the chairman of tbe meeting, and strange to say bis first sentence was one promising briefness, wbicb we regret to record was not fulhlled. His re- marks upon the whole were *o erratic, so re- eimif/rf so unique, so opaque, that an ordinary intellect ecOi not keep pace with tbe brilliant scintillations of bis genius. We beard many of bu admirers exclaim, "that it was a pity that one tfbo spoke so well should ever speak in vain." ' ■' He undoubtedly has tbe ears of Midas without bis jsrslns," observed another. While a third insisted that "fae .had the honey of Nestor upon his lips, without bis sepse." Be this as it may Mr. Wood delivered an oration, suitable for such an occasion, and for such an occasion alone. It was full of tropes and figures, ibetorical graces and eloquent pe- riods — particularly tbe concluding one, where he exclaimed, "God forbid, that ever the cagjg ppon tbe star-spangled banner should suck ongtsas in Cuba." Our reporter will do justice to Air- tif. st some future period. It must satisfy our readers *., i>i>oit' that be enter- ed paradise with " Adam ardJiis c-.Hewiisrsries," slightly noticed Julius Cesar, at tbe crossing of tbe Rubieon, passed through Greece on tbe back of Demosthenes ; went with tbe Pbceni- cans into England ; was with tbe Barons at Runnymede and banded tbe pen to King John when he signed Magna Charter ; crossed the At- lantic with Christopher Columbus; fought at E'unker Hill ; signed the Decla ration of Inde- pendence j invoked the spirit of General Jackson from ihe Hermitage ; and concluded by a remarkable peionii'in j n which only tbe sounds ok Adam, Napoieoj, wars, ra- CJS, sects, Mr. Mitchell and the news-bsys could be Mully beard amid the tumultuous applause wbicb £cllo»'*;l. So coon as this was paded,, f/»r everything must have an end, even speeches, Mi. Mitchell insisted upon being heard in reply— which Dr. Bcernstein was equally desirous of having an- other hearing. Mr. M. got tbe stand, and after ten minutes of tbe most confused noises and sounds iraa a steam whistle to a suppressed "giteout" obtain a hearing, and gave tbe chairman of his own eeie.'iijn and nomlnstion oneof tbe roost unparralled dressings duwnever THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 35 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE pieces of paper lying about, seemingly without purpose. If he was a Know Nothing he knew at once that a meeting of the order was called for that even- ing. Recognizing a fellow member of the order and wishing to learn what was going on, he asked, "Have you seen Sam to-day?" That paved the way to the most confidential communications among mem- bers of the order. If the inquirer was a new member and not certain about the status of the one addressed, he asked, in a casual tone, "What time?" If the other looked at the sun or consulted his watch and made the answer which the question seemed to invite, the interview ended. But the answer might be, "Time to work." Then the first St. Louisan, dropping his voice so that he might The Know not be overheard, asked, "Are you?" Nothing "We are," was the proper and assuring reply. After that the Passwords conversation proceeded on safe ground. Sometimes the triangular pieces of paper were not white, but red. That meant danger. It prompted, on the part of those who had not been in- formed, more than ordinary curiosity about "Sam." When St. Louisans went to lodge on the red notices they carried stout canes or some form of weapon for emergency. One rule of instruction given to new members directed them, when asked by outsiders about the principles and purposes of the order, to say, " I know nothing." From this form came the name commonly applied to the movement and to the membership. TheKnow Nothings were Native Americans. Their political watchword was : "Put none but Americans on guard." The American party became strong enough in St. Louis to carry, two or three times, the municipal elections. The turbulent members of the order started anti-foreign V 1 - Order and anti-Catholic riots . For several years the lodges and the party Maximum organization devoted most of their attention to local politics. In 1854, the year of the first controversy between Brown and Reynolds, the movement had gained strength in all parts of the United States. Several State elections were carried by the Native Americans. In 1855 a national organization was effected. In 1 856 eight of the thirty-two States had Native American governments. But when the Know Nothings attempted to make a nomination for President, a division among them on the slavery question occurred. The Southern Know Nothings nominated Fillmore. Many of the Northern Know Nothings seceded and indorsed Fremont. After that national campaign. Know Nothingism dwindled and disappeared. In 1855 the order attained its greatest strength in St. Louis. Thousands joined, taking the first degree of "Sam." The candidate was sworn to 36 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE recorded in ancient or modern history. He as 9itKilsteJ him — but we will not attempt descrip- tion, for description would fail to " do justice to the occasion"— sumco it to say that he gave a short drill muster to the rc- trait which brought him to the music all standing, anJ V7hen Mr. Woods attempted to explain, he was drewnsi amid the noise and confusion prevalent, noth- ing more was heard or said, but just at this mo- ment Gen. Ranney was seen coming up the stair, and was barely in time (as we are informed) to move an adjournment. Comment is perhaps useless upon such an assemblage. It was a contrivance in the first place to cheat the Democratic paity — to buy Over the Anzeigei— and to secure the success of the Know Nothings. In every respect it has been a failire— a most miserable failure in num- bers, in spirit, in execution, and in effect. The se- cret coalition between the Anzeiger and the Know Noihings, leaked out at the very outset, when Mr. Mitchell of the Intelligencer, the avowed and recognized organ of the Know Nothings took the lead in opening the meeting, and rhoosing its president. It was further de- veloped in the speech of Boernsnstein, so com pliintMitary to Know Nothingism, and so excul- patory of all (heir actions and intentions. It wa9 finally proven by the action of the meet- ing Itself, which greeted with its loudest plaudits those sentiments which were most hostile to the proclaimed object of the meeting. Resolutions were adopted by the as- semblage, to appoint a committee of twenty to select candidates, and yet the meeting adjourned without their appointment. Motions were made to meet again, but were never acted upon, and the finale was that it all broke up in the most ridiculons farce ever yet enacted in St. Louis. There was fun everywhere— fun in the beginning at its being called to order by the Edi- tor of the Know Nothing organ in St. Louis- fun in seeing one presumed to bo a Know No- thing, appointed President— fun in seeing an evident Know Knothing attempt to read the list of Vice Presidents— fun in the manner in which Boernstein attempted to make an anti-Know Nothing speech without of- fending the Know Nothings— his principal auditors and claquers— fun in Mitchell's choice ca9t)gation of Boernstein for not speaking In character without offending the omnipotent Sam— fun even in the voluminous remarks of the President of the meeting— fun in the re- joinders, and last of all fun in the confused ad- journment which seemed to have foi gotten al- together the object for which the mixed multi- tude was called together. One thing, however, stands out in very bold relief, and that is the BARGAIN AND SALE by which the Anzieger is expected to help to elect tha Know Nothing ticket ; and another tbing is also plain, which is that the trick is being now fully understood and made manifest to all eyes, it will not loose the Democracy a single vote in the election, but will add to its strength. Mr. Boernstein was seen in consultation with Mr. Paschall, of the Republican, at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and there the matter was all ar- ranged; but Paschall was sly — did not attend — the meeting miscarried — and he will now be the first to denounce the whole thing, and try to get up a clean Whig ticket by way of retreat, and to keep Whigs from coalescing against the Know Nothings. There may be even a dying effort made on the p»rt x>f the Chairman to appoint and publish a committee of nomination — as an after thought, but even thi* will not now do. The failure was too immense, too PRODIGIOUS to be gotten over by such sUndar contrivances. Peace to its remains. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 37 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE secrecy and then examined. To be eligible he must make oath that he was twenty-one years old ; that he was born in the United States ; that he believed in God; that his parents were not Roman Catholics; that he was reared a Protestant; that neither his wife nor he was a Roman Catholic. Having shown that he was eligible, the candidate was taken into another room and sworn into the order. He placed his right hand on the Bible and raised his left. He swore he would vote for Protestants only. Native Americans and those who stood on the platform of America ruled by Americans. Then the password, the sign of recognition and the grip were given. There was a second degree, into which the candidate was initiated when he had proven that he was loyal and deeply interested. This was conferred with much ceremony. At the conclusion the presiding officer declared solemnly : "Brother, you are a member in full fellowship of the Supreme Order of the Star Spangled Banner." A third degree was added after the success in the State elections of 1 854. It was called the order of the American Union. It pledged the mem- bership to stand against any division of the States. It aimed to Order of suppress the agitation of the slavery question by either the North ~ ^ r , or the South. In six months 1,500,000 candidates had taken the Banner third degree. At this time, 1855, Henry Boernstein was the most conspicuous of the "acht-und-vierzigers" in St. Louis. That was the name bestowed locally on the forty-eighters — the participants in the revolution of '48. Boernstein came to St. Louis with a great variety of experiences. And he proceeded to enlarge upon them rapidly by his career in this country. He had received a university education in Germany, had served five years in the Austrian army, had written plays, which were produced in European capitals, had managed grand opera in Paris, had been a newspaper correspondent. When the uprising occurred in Germany, Boernstein joined the revolution- ists. He was forced to flee to America and after a short time became editor of the Anzeiger. Almost immediately he introduced sensational methods. Again and again mobs formed to " clean out" the An- Boerri - zeiger. Boernstein was daring. He did not confine his activities to y e J."j the newspaper. He carried on a theatre, a hotel and a brewery . He Activities wrote a book which he called ' ' The Mysteries of St. Louis. ' ' In the organization of the German militia during the winter of 1 860-1, months before President Lincoln was inaugurated, Boernstein was so aggressive that he was made colonel of one of the five regiments. He marched with Lyon to the capture of Camp Jackson. Soon tiring of war, Boernstein obtained a consulship and went to Europe. He remained abroad and for many years was European correspondent for American papers. 38 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE II ANTI-KNOW NOTHING COMMUNICATION [Published the 17th of March, 18}}, immediately following the "Bogus Meeting" article; preserved by Reynolds] For tbe Missouri Democrat. A Carious Document Fraught with Useful Information and Disclos- ing a Tale. Below we present to our readers a document which reflects light on certain transactions tbe full significance of which have not heretofore been understood. Tbe document discloses tbe fact that a gentle- man, but lately arrived in St. Louis, a Virginian by birth, a sprout of one of the first fami lies of tbe '•Mother of Presidents," and hence a fit compeer and particular friend of tbe Honorable George W. Goode, who speaks of mechanics, artizans and laborers generally, as white slaves, we say this document discloses tbe fact that tlm gen- tleman, late Secretary of Legation, and in spite of his brief residence amonst us, already District Attorney of Hie United States, so appointed by Mr. Pierce under Atchison influences, and Attoi- ney of the Iron Mountain railroad, so appointed under the auspices of Hon. Luther M. Kennett, lbe president of that road, has seen fit to add to tbe chaplet of political and juridical laurels Hut adorn his brow, a civic crown of plain, old fash- ioned brewers' hops. The barrister, after tbe mental fatigues of the Jay .following on the mijnight lucubrations of the preceding niftbt.the eminent counsel.wo say,steps from the library, the studio, tbe sanctum of lore and science, into the beer vats of the Salvator (our Savior's) brewery, — inhales the aroma of tbe sweltering malt, to strengthen his lungs, guages the beer casks, to keep up a knowledge of spherical trigonometry, and tastes the liquor .0 pteseive a lively remembrance of tbe prime- val babil9 of Nounan chivalry It cannot be that siuh an officeholder, soaring in the ambro- rial vicinity Presidential favor, would become a beer brewer for the sake of five-cent glasses, that are tolled out in the adjunct beer shops of that **> tsbltshment. It cannot be that ifiis'represenla- tiva of the federal government, would incur tbe risk Ot being Orawa up lit the Criminal couit for keeping open beer house on Sunday, or in the Calaboose court for telling beer without city license. — all for mere filthy tuns. Who, then, can tell us wby this barrister brews beer and provides for two or three retail bars? Whilst suspending our remarks to hear an answer, we will here introduce the document : The undersigned hereby certify that under the act of the ueural Assembly or ibe Slate or Missouri, approved March IS, 1849, entitled "An act 10 authorize tlie formation of cor- porations for manufacturing, mining, mechanical or chemi- cal puiyoaes," We Lave this (lay, the 4th r the nurpose of de- feating Benton. The lawyer set the trigger*, tbe scribbler put them in his paper, the brewery served as the cloak and bond of union, mid (he Uutrict attorney then eaused the firebrands to be translated and served up iu the CepuhUcan. Thus Mr. Reynolds subserved the desires of his two employers, L. M , Kennett and Bourbon Atchison, whilst the Anzel^er des Westens did- dled Binton's constituency out of their dearest rights, and contributed largely in conjunction with the Republican to produce the mob and bloodshed in the city. Benton was defeated by the Know Nothings, antics and Whigs. Boein- stein sew wants to lead the anti- Know Nothing onslaught, ::. crdsr to deliver the city government over to the' Know Hotlines by the same artifices he practised so successfully ift t-uguai Ia9t.;- No one ean doubt that Mr. EeyooJ.ds, the attcr. ney for the Iron Mountain railroad, tjje striker and employee of Mr. Kennett, isstigajed his partner Boernstein to assail the Catholics, and then translated the assaults for the columns of the Republican, in order to drive tbe Catholics from Benton, whilst professing to support him. Boernstein and Reynold* are partners in brewing mischief, as well as beer. Anti-Ksow-Nothing. Ill BOERNSTEIN AND RELIGION [Published the 17th of March, i8}}. following the Anti-Know Nothing letter] (For the Missouri Democrat.) Rivalry between the Parisian and Amer- ican Know Nothings. Ma. Editor : You showed in your paper of yesterday, how Boernstein had suddenly, from a constant derider of the Catholic religion, en- deavored to place himself at the head" of the Catholic voters of this city, by suggesting a m-ule ticket, headed by, and containing a major- ity of Catholic candidate — a plan which was evidently gotten up by the Know Nothings, as the most convenient mode of ensuring their victo- ry. Now, let me -show to you how the traitor wants to wind out of this just charge. He says in his morning's paper : "The Democrat endeavors to bring the Anzei- (,tt Into disrepute," (you jdainly denounced biai as a traitor,) "and, to set the Catholics in particular against us. Vain trouble I Every rea- der of ours knows that Irom the moment when the Know Nothings labored for the anihilation of religious liberty, we entered the lists against them, and at the same time labored with all our power to concentrate all opponents of Nativism to a common resist- ance against the Know Nothings." What a new born zeal on behalf of the Anzel- gei ! It claims not only the monopoly of natu- ralization, and of making mule tickets for 11s, but it also claims tbe sole light of persecuting the Roman Catholics, and to soon as any Ainei- iean Know Nothing undertakes to interfere with this monopoly of the Anzelgei's, It turns around and joins its persecuted enemies, to beat tbe rivals on the head. Of course, so soon as the Know Nothing rival is beaten, the Jinzfiger will return to if* vomit, in other worda, it will lecom- mence the persecution of the defenseless victims. The war will then be more bitter than ever. This is surely a just inference of the Anzeigei's remarks, and of its past conduct. But Boern- stein plainly points to his future course in this rttpett : "True it is, we aie still unconverted to the doctrine of the holy lgns.ee of Loyola, but we are too much occupied with other cares, as that we (now) could or would grant them our foiiner attention. We demand of the leaders of the so called tiue Democracy, and of the Demptrat, their organ, that they wi I imitate our example, and will fight out their nullifier war at a more suitable opportunity .V Thus it is plain that the war against the Cath- olics is to be fought out to the bitter mi so soon as Boernstein is otherwise disengaged. He wilj then dress up the Roman Catholics Cceuf a ia mode. What a fine hint of conciliation the traitor throws out to us : *'I stop my war against the Catholics, so you stop your war against the huliifiers ; and then, whan we have won tbe vic- tory, you gjve it to your Jew as I give it to ray Jew." A precipus good and charitable bargain ! What a line schooling Boernstein has gone through with his new allies i Cc. traitor, be- gone forever, infamous apostate ! A DmioiH it. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 41 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Reynolds translated these anti-Catholic articles and furnished them to the Republican. Benton was beaten, but the appeals to religious prejudices resulted in the worst election riots St. Louis had experienced. At the Fifth Ward polls an Irishman stabbed a boy and ran into the Mechanics' boarding house. A Know Nothing mob followed, smashed the windows and broke the furniture. Shots were fired^ Other boarding houses in the neighborhood were attacked. The mob, increased to a thousand or more, marched to Cherry Street and continued the wrecking of boarding houses. It headed for the Levee and met a body of Irishmen. In the fight two men were killed. The mob stormed and stoned buildings known as Battle Row, ' ' on the Levee. Doors were broken in and furniture destroyed. Thence the mob proceeded up town, wrecking Irish boarding houses on Morgan, Cherry and Green Streets. At Drayman's Hall, on Eighth Street and Franklin Avenue, the mob divided into squads and gutted several saloons, continuing this until the militia arrived. Rioting was resumed the next day. The Continentals, while marching along Green Street on guard duty, were fired on. Two of the militia, Spore and Holliday, were wounded. Near Seventh and Biddle Streets E. R. Violet, a well known and popular citizen, attempting to dis- St - Louis arm a man who was flourishing a pistol, was killed. At Broadway ^f 10 ^. and Ashley there was a battle in which a saloon keeper named R ° ' ng Snyder was killed. Three men were wounded. The rioting went f x ^ 4 on in various parts of the city until late that night. The third day citizens responded to a mass meeting call by the mayor. From the Mer- chants' Exchange they adjourned to the court house. A law and order movement was organized by popular expression and Norman J. Eaton was made the head of it. Before the day passed an armed force of seven hundred citizens had been formed under command of Major Meriwether Lewis Clark. The force was divided into thirty-three companies, each under a captain. It was composed of the best elements in the community. These companies went on patrol duty, covering the whole city. The regular police were withdrawn from the streets. Rioting ceased, but the memory of the disorder was fresh the following March. "Anti-Know Nothing" held Reynolds and Boernstein largely responsible for the August reign of terror. "A Democrat," in a letter to the Democrat, followed with the charge that Boernstein was plotting more treachery to the Benton party in the municipal campaign. The Democrat, editorially, while not touching on the main points of the two communications, arraigned Boern- stein for an alleged false oath in the Salvator Brewing Company's application for incorporation. The next day "A Naturalized German," in a letter to the Democrat, assailed Boernstein's course as traitorous in politics. The Demo- 42 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE IV EDITORIAL COMMENT ON THE BREWING CHARTER [From the Missouri Democrat, March 20, 18$}] IS IT PERJURY OR IS IT NOT? The beer brewery charter of Messrs. Reynolds, Boernstein and Schaffer, a true copy of which was published in the Democrat of Saturday last, contained the following language: Henry Boernstein, Frederick Schaffer and Thomas C.Reynolds, all citizens of the State and of the United States. This was sworn to by the three above-named beer brewers on the 4th day of March, 1854, as is attested by the notarial seal and certificate of Charles G. Mauro. Mr. Boernstein, upon oath, swore that he was a citizen of Missouri and of the United States of America on the 4th day of March last. By referring to another document, which was published in the Democrat of yesterday, being the final naturalization papers of Henry Boernstein, it will be seen that he there swore that he was not only a "native of France," but that he also renounced all allegiance to the Emperor of France, "of whom he is at present (April 3d, 1854) a subject." This, we say, was also given under oath before the criminal judge in the criminal court and just one month after he had sworn that he was already a citizen of the State of Missouri and of the United States. Verily, fools rush in where angels fear to tread and no one but Boernstein would have dared to take such lessons in conflicting oaths in the very presence itself of the first criminal court of the county. V THE SALVATOR BREWERY ISSUE [Communication clipped from Democrat and credited in handwriting of Reynolds, "Dem., 21 March, 'ss"] T" 71 (Par (he Misioufl Democmt.Tr Boerneteln and Reynolds, the Beer and Mlachlef Brewers. - The new temperance I aw la tile lait retort to which that would be umpire of this common!! r, the Anzelger, li reduc- ed. Henry Boeraateln, who started with the tttentt- ble plan of slaying the Know Nothings, has dwindled down to bis true level; he uow-a-days only 'discusses ibe new temperance law, and endeavors to undermine the Ben- ton Democracy) because the Know Nothing* smuggled a restriction on public houses tbrooMb the Legislature. Indeed, so Ignorant Is the Aastelger o( nieo and mailers and thlogs, THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 43 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE crat headed the communication "Boernstein and Reynolds, the Beer and Mischief Brewers," although Reynolds was not mentioned in the article. While Boernstein was apparently the chief object of attack in these news- paper communications, Reynolds demanded an apology, and the second con- troversy was begun. Nowhere in the correspondence between Brown and Reynolds does Benton appear as advising or taking an active interest. But the controversies grew out of the intensity of feeling between the Benton and Anti-Benton factions. They were Benton controversies. More frequently than any other, the name of Benton had been connected with practice under the code at St. Louis. Benton had been a principal in one fatal duel. He had been an adviser in another fatal duel. He had been second in a duel. As a lawyer he had de- fended duellists. He had been the historian of duels. And now duelling was going out of fashion at St. Louis with Benton's personality the inspiration for the last of the long series of duels. Forty years previously Benton had come to St. Louis to live. The year after his coming he instructed St. Louisans in the code. He was second in a duel as early as 18 16 and drew with punctilious nicety the rules for the meet- ing and later the official report upon it. Although not the first of the St. Louis duels, this was one of the earliest and it established forms and prece- dents which were followed, even down to the controversies of Brown and Reynolds. These are the documents preserved by the Missouri Historical Society, which show the activity of Thomas H. Benton as a second the year after he took up his residence in St. Louis: Rules of the meeting between Mr. J.Barton demanding and Mr.T. Hempstead answering : 1 .—The ground will be measured off to six paces. 2. — The gentlemen will stand back to back at the distance of six paces from Rules each other. of the -At the word ' ' March' ' the gentlemen will instantly step off three paces Barton- and turn and fire without further order. Hempstead -If either party reserves his fire, and continues to take aim after the Meeting other has fired, he shall be shot instantly by the adverse second. 5. — The seconds shall decide by lot which gives the word. 6. — The only words shall be ' 'Are you ready ?" and being answered in the affirmative, the word "March" shall be the order for stepping off and turning and firing, as above stated. 7. — The meeting at 5.00 o'clock this evening on the island in the Mississippi, opposite LeRoy, on the upper end of the island. 8. — The weapons, smooth bore pistols, q. — The pistols to be delivered cocked to the gentlemen after they have taken their places, and to be held hanging down by the side until after the word "March." Signed in duplicate, August 10th, 1816, at St. Louis. T. H. Benton for Mr. Hempstead, Edward Bates for Mr. Barton. 44 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE true be enumerates In one of hie late beer pblllplcHa our worth? fellow.ctlties, the Know Nutbtng Whig, M r. Holmes, as a Benton Senator la the Legislature. I am fond of a slasa of beer, or ale, or wine. 1 think these wholesome drinks for all those who exercise. I think lhjt.aH sumptuary laws are tyrannical; but, surely, I am ashamed of a German press which, by Its dally publications, leads the unwary public Into the belief that the Germans would sell their American franchises for the privilege of keeping coffee houses on Sun- day. That Is the precise position now of the traitor Boern- steln; be endeavors to place the Enow Nothings Into the administration of the city and of the whole country, by tell- ing his readers that they ought to v ote a straw ticket rather than the Democratic one, because the Know Nothings had smuggled the temperance resolutions through the legisla- ture. So re are to forego our rights as American citizens, because we cannot drink beer on Sunday In one of the three Salvator.beer shops. I presume that Mr. Boernsteln has an understanding with the Enow Nothing*, that they, when arrived at full sway In the councils of the natbn, wl 1 1 atop every other beer shop In the whole country, week days as well as Sundays; but that the beer shops of the Salvator brewery may pour forth uninterrupted streams to the thirsty people at all Unas, without hindrance or redemption of a license. I can tell you, Mr. Editor, that the Germans of this county have helped to tend the Benton Democrats to Jefferson city, not merely to watch the Interests of the Salvator brewery, and not merely to please the dreggy, muddled understandings of such as Bocrusteln, At the same time, the Germans know that the Benton Democracy, whilst they are just as -temperate as any alass of the comnsuslty, are not in favor of any sumptuary laws whatever. But I think, that Mr. Boernsteln Is so much engaged with his (Saviour) Salvator brewery, that he nearly neglected h/s newspaper, exception as an engine of periodical distraction, now on one, then on the other side. He saya that tha An- telgerhad no correspondent at Jefferson City. Aud why not t Vta that traitor But boast every no\v an then of having the largest' circulation of any paper In the city 1 Then was he certainly well able tn send a correspondent to Jefferson Oily during the brief session of the Legislature, day he hod spent $100 or $150 for a correspondent, srbo had placed himself In correspondence with the Democra- tic representation, and drawn their attention to anything that seemed to need more attention. Boernsteln might then have saved Infinite trouble to many of bis much more legiti- mate fellow believers, but tbst never entered bis mind. The long and the ehort of tbe matter Is this, that Boern- stem Is a mtichief brewer, and he cares mere for the sale of hit mischief than for »n the beer and beer drinkers, and Maine and antl-Malne llo.uor men tn the world. A NATUHaXlltD arnaiAM. VI REYNOLDS DEMANDS AN APOLOGY St. Louis, Mo., 20 March, 1855 B. Gratz Brown, Esqr. Sir: Your editorial of this morning I consider an adoption of the com- munication in your paper of the 17th inst., signed "Anti-Know Noth- ing." I call on your sense of gentlemanly propriety, and ask a withdrawal of your editorial of to-day , a disavowal and repudiation of the commu- nication of the 17th, and an apology for their insertion in your columns. I am, sir. Your obedient servant, [Delivered at 4 p. m., „. 20 March, 'fs—w. a. Linn.] 1 nomas C. Reynolds. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 45 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE The undersigned, present at the meeting between Mr. Thomas Hempstead and Mr. Joshua Barton on the evening of Saturday, the 10th instant, state: That as soon as the parties met, the ground was measured off by the undersigned and the pistols loaded in each other's presence. The choice of position and the right of giving the word was decided by lot. The gentlemen immediately took their station and fired as nearly as could be in the same instant, and exactly comformable to the rules agreed upon ; each conducted himself in a firm, cool and collected manner. After the first fire the party demanding satisfaction declared that it had been given, and no explanation, concession or even mention of the cause of difference was made upon the ground, but the gentlemen shook hands as friends, upon a mutual declaration that they owed each other no ill will, and upon the unanimous declaration of the friends and surgeons present that the affair ought not to proceed any further. The undersigned state it as their opinion that the conduct of both gentlemen was per- fectly honorable and correct. Signed in duplicate, August 13th, 1816. Thomas H. Benton, Edward Bates. Reynolds' demand of an apology, sent by his "friend" Linn, on the 20th of March, 1855, was quite different from the original draft which Reynolds re- tained. The latter version was : St. Louis, Mo., 20 March, 1855. B. Gratz Brown, Esq. Sir: Your editorial of this morning I consider an adoption of the communication in your paper of the 17th inst., signed "Anti-Know Nothing." I call on your sense of gentlemanly propriety, and ask a withdrawal of your editorial of to-day, a disavowal and repudiation of the communication The of the 1 7th, and an apology for their insertion in your columns ; and also a Original pledge on your part that the columns of the Democrat shall no longer be Draft used for the mention of my private affairs or of my political course except in of the a decent and temperate tone for the discussion of my political or official Demand actions. I am, sir. Your obedient servant, [Delivered at 4 p. m.. THOMAS C. REYNOLDS. 20 March, '$$. W. A. Linn.] By comparison, it will be seen that the request for a pledge binding the editor of the Democrat to refrain from further publications of objectionable character was omitted in the letter "officially" delivered. But there was no erasure — nothing to show that the change had been made. In the letters coming from Reynolds' side of the controversies, both those written by the principal and those emanating from his seconds, many alterations were made. First drafts were not copied exactly, as the two sets of papers in the Bixby collection show. Seemingly, Reynolds framed his letters and then submitted them to advisers of experience in the technicalities of the code. Words, phrases 46 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE VII BROWN HAS "NO APOLOGIES TO MAKE" St. Louis, March 21st, 1855 Thos. C. Reynolds, Esq. Sir: In reply to your note, handed to me yesterday morning byW.A. Linn, Esq., I desire to state that the assumption that my editorial of yesterday was an adoption of the communication in the Democrat of the 17th inst. , signed "Anti-Know Nothing," is totally unwarranted by the facts and I cannot consider it in any other light than as an attempt, by making an unfounded assumption, to avoid proceeding in the usual manner to ascertain the name of the author of the communication by which you consider yourself to be aggrieved. Your demand proceeding upon this incorrect basis, I consider an attempt to dictate and bully, which I shall treat as it deserves. I will not allow you to make a false issue with me, nor to dictate to me what I shall or shall not repudiate and disavow in my journal. I must therefore decline any withdrawal of my editorials until first satisfied of their inaccuracy or injustice, and consequently have no apologies to make. I am, sir, Yours very respectfully, [Reed 12%, March 2/— W. A. Linn.] B. GmtZ Brown. VIII A VERBAL CHALLENGE TRANSMITTED St. Louis, Mo., 21st March, 1855 B. Gratz Brown, Esq. Sir: Your note of yesterday is received. Whether there is any attempt to "dictate and bully" on my part, I am willing to leave to the impartial decision of all who may read my note of yesterday and the matters which gave rise to it. There is nothing in my note which entitles you to say that I consider myself "aggrieved" by the communication itself apart from your obvious endorsement of it in your editorial. But independent of the question whether a gentleman is called on to notice anonymous scrib- blers in a newspaper, I have the universally recognized right to pass by THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 47 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE and even whole sentences were substituted for those first chosen. The proba- bility of publication evidently was kept in view by Reynolds and his anti- Benton friends. The effect upon politics was considered at every step taken in this correspondence. Unwritten rules of the code were observed in the com- position. Every sentence was scrutinized and passed upon by men who were experts in duelling practice. If Brown wrote first drafts of his letters and then made revised B copies to be sent to Reynolds, the correspondence as preserved in p reS erved the Bixby collection does not establish it. Brown's letters contain No very few alterations. They were written upon blue note paper in Original a fine hand and usually on both sides of the sheet, when of con- Drafts siderable length. The rather surprising fact about the original draft of the demand of apology by Reynolds is that the endorsement by Linn, with the hour of delivery, appears at the bottom of the page. As a rule Reynolds crossed out and inter- lined the original draft so that it showed exactly the text of what his seconds delivered. In this case he did not do so, but the endorsement of Linn was placed upon the imperfect draft the same as on the amended "official" copy. Under the code a "friend," in delivering a communication to the opposing principal, had authority to represent his principal in any modification of the text. If the other principal objected to some part of the letter handed to him, and gave what, to the second, seemed a good reason for the suggested change, the second had power to ' 'withdraw' ' the word, or phrase, or sentence, without taking the letter back to his own principal. This power was exercised in the course of the Brown-Reynolds controversies. A memorandum was made on the bottom of the page by the second to the effect that certain words quoted had been withdrawn. No such note, however, appears on the demand of apology. The omission of part of the original draft is left without explanation. The letter of March 21st, in which Reynolds transmitted his "verbal" challenge, illustrates the extent to which revision was carried in the corres- pondence on his part. Reynolds first wrote : Whether there is any attempt to "dictate and bully" on my part, I am willing to leave to the impartial decision of all who may read my note of yesterday and the matters which gave rise to it. As to "avoiding proceeding in the usual How manner to ascertain the name of the author of the communication by which Reynolds I conceive myself to be aggrieved," I will only remark that there is nothing Revised in my note which entitled you to say that I considered myself " aggrieved " His First by the communication universally attributed to and evidently written or Drafts suggested by a person who, whatever the intercourse permissible with him in business or in politics, has long ago placed himself beyond the pale of gentlemen, by suffering himself on one occasion to be called a coward to his face, on another has been knocked down and on a third (to my own knowledge) has been given the lie to his face without ever having in any way resented any of these insults. 48 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE the coward (whoever he may be in this case) who conceals his lies under the garb of an anonymous libeller, and hold to his responsibility, the editor, who alone has given effect to the venom of the correspondent, by publishing his remarks. In this case you have done more; you have based your editorial of yesterday on an assumption of their truthfulness. You "decline any withdrawal of your editorials until first satisfied of their inaccuracy or injustice." You thus clearly intimate you still deem them ' ' accurate ' ' and ' 'just ' ' and refuse reparation. It only remains for me to send you a message which the bearer of this, Mr. W. A. Linn, will verbally deliver to your friend, Capt. Frost, and he has full authority to act for me in the matter. I am, sir. Your obedient servant, Thomas C. Reynolds. IX BROWN INVITES THE CHALLENGE "IN WRITING" St. Louis, March 22nd, 1855 Thos. C. Reynolds, Esq. Sir: Your note of the 21st inst. has been received, to which I have the follow- ing reply to make: In your first letter to me you saw proper to make a false issue by assuming that I had adopted a certain communication published in the Democrat of the 17th inst. In your second note, you assume addition- ally what you cannot know to be true, that the author of that communica- tion is a coward and therefore you have the right to pass him by and hold me responsible as the editor of the paper in which the communica- tion appeared. I do not intend to permit you to make a false issue with me; nor do I intend to permit you to bully me with impunity. I have therefore taken the trouble to expose your attempt to rest your demand upon an untruthful assumption in order that I may be justified in repelling your evident bravado. Having put this matter in its proper light and shown up the manner in which you have sought to force a difficulty upon me as well as to place me in a false attitude, I now stand ready to meet you upon the real issue in this case, and I assure you that I have no more intention of permitting you to browbeat me than I have of permitting you to place me in the wrong, and therefore whenever you desire to make a further communication in writing, you will not find me unwilling to respond to your satisfaction. [Endorsed: Reed. 25 minutes YoUrS ver y respectfully, after 12 o'clock, 2zd March, 'sf.] B. GratZ Brown. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 49 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE All of this reference to the "Anti-Know Nothing" correspondent of the Democrat was cut out. The letter giving notice of the ' ' verbal ' ' challenge was confined strictly to Brown as editor of the Democrat. It is altogether prob- able that Reynolds' friends advised him to pay no more attention to "Anti- Know Nothing" and to bring his controversy with Brown to an immediate issue. In order to make the letter read as officially delivered, Reynolds had to erase and interline the original draft until it could be read only with difficulty. Seconds had varied functions. They were more than messengers and wit- nesses. Their powers extended far beyond the arrangement of minor details. This is seen in the correspondence of the three con- Functions troversies between Brown and Reynolds. The challenge having ^ ec ? n s , been sent and accepted, the next "friends" became the managers of i mport ant the affair. They disputed and argued about terms. In the second controversy, the seconds took up and carried through the discussion on the important question of distance. The letters exchanged by D. M. Frost and W. A. Linn are among the most interesting of the series. They were written with earnestness and emphasis . They brought out precedents which had been established, they developed the fine points in the practice of the code up to that time. Captain Frost was of New York nativity, a graduate of West Point, having been a student at the Military Academy when Grant was there. After the Mexican war. Frost resigned his commission in the regular army. He married a daughter of Major Graham, a granddaughter of John Mullanphy, and made his residence in St. Louis. About 1853 he began to take an active part in St. Louis politics. In 1854, the year before he was second to Brown, Captain Frost was elected to the State Senate. He identified himself with the Benton Democrats, but advanced and supported with vigor a policy of his own. He saw the political situation from a military Captain point of view. It was his belief that trouble of serious character j S L- between the North and the South was impending, that with thorough Peace militia organization in the border States the balance of military Policy power could be maintained sufficiently effective to prevent armed conflict between the North and the South. In a certain sense this military view of Frost harmonized with Benton's political policy to keep down slavery agitation. Frost devoted his time and experience and influence in the legisla- ture to obtain measures which would organize extensively the militia of the State. Brown aided Frost not a little in this legislation. Frost corresponded with former army officers and others in the border States to bring about action similar to that of Missouri. He hoped to create along the length of Mason and Dixon's line a military barrier which neither section could pass to attack the other. 5o THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE X REYNOLDS DENOUNCES THE CORRESPONDENT St. Louis, Mo., 22d March, 1855 B. Gratz Brown, Esq. Sir: Your note of to-day is received. I disavow any design other than to obtain legitimate and fair redress for the wrong of attributing a false oath to a man of (as I feel I can justly claim to be) unblemished character, and further insulting me; which of us has commenced or adopted the "bullying" tone in this controversy, I am content that others shall determine. My terming your correspondent a "coward" is a cap which you can hand over to him to try on, if you choose; but my right to pass him by and call on you, is independent of the fact whether he is one or not. Did not internal and external evidence clearly point out as its author, a notorious poltroon of this city, I should suppose him otherwise from the anxiety you show to avoid your own responsibility, perhaps forever, by fastening on him a quarrel with me. There is, I will remark, noth- ing to preclude my noticing him, after the more important controversy with yourself is disposed of. I have not objected (though I had a right so to do), to the extraordinary use to which you have put this correspondence, in framing your notes in an offensive style. I shall leave them to "show up" whichever of the parties may have failed in his duty as a gentleman, to himself and to others, and to disclose whether you have not given unprovoked and uncalled for insults, and on a mild and courteous demand of redress, first endeavor to fix a quarrel on another and, foiled in that design, now add insults to those already given, and in a clap-trap editorial style, with false premises and falser logic, endeavor to make yourself appear an "injured innocent," pursued by a bully of a man, who yet has lived five years in this community without even a passing difference with any one, except yourself. As you are so punctilious as to object to receiving verbally the mes- sage sent you through Mr. Linn on yesterday, I now send it in writing, but for obvious reasons, in a separate note. I am, sir. Your obedient servant, Thomas C. Reynolds. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 51 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE After the enactment of the legislation in which he was largely instrumental, Frost was made brigadier-general and commander of the first military district of Missouri. In compliance with this militia law annual encampments were held. In i860 the camping place for the first military district was the Fair Grounds at St. Louis. In 1861 Frost assembled the militia organizations of the district near the intersection of Pine Street and Grand Avenue. The place was named Camp Jackson, in honor of the governor of Missouri . On the 1 oth of May Captain Lyon, with a small force of regulars and several regiments of volunteers recruited in St. Louis, marched from the arsenal, surrounded Camp Jackson and compelled surrender of the State troops to the United States authority. Brown was active on the Federal side in that affair. Frost sub- sequently went into the Confederate army. W. A. Linn was known among intimate friends as "Gus." Linn. He was a relative of Dr. Linn, who, some years before, had been a United States Senator from Missouri. For a considerable period W. A. Linn held the Federal office of surveyor and inspector of customs. He resided at the Planters ; he was active in Democratic politics. Dr. Linn was called "the model senator." He was the handsomest Mis- sourian of his day, according to his friends . His manners were con- sidered perfect. The impression which he made upon his fellow The senators at Washington is illustrated by the story told that when Model Senator Linn arose one time in the Senate with a roll of bills which Senator he wished to present, Senator Buchanan interrupted with, ' ' Doctor, of we will save you the trouble if you recommend them; we will pass Miss °u" the whole bundle." At another time Senator Linn arose in the midst of a heated political dis- cussion and proceeded with all of his splendid dignity to correct a statement made by Henry Clay. The latter listened with deference and accepted the correction with, " It is sufficient that it comes from the senator from Missouri . ' ' Upon the monument which marks the grave of Linn in the Ste. Genevieve cemetery is graven, "Here lie the remains of Lewis F. Linn, the model senator of Missouri." Dr. Linn was not without experience in the code. As a surgeon he was present when Biddle and Pettis inflicted fatal wounds upon each other. As senator he took a prominent part in the debate upon the legislation suggested by the death of Cilley. What he said was especially interesting because he cited Missouri illustrations to sustain his arguments. Senator Linn urged that too drastic legislation would defeat the purpose. What community could be found, he asked, that would pronounce a man either a murderer or a felon, who might have chanced to kill another in fair and equal combat? No man, he was persuaded, who came to act on his responsibility as a juror, would be 52 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE XI THE CHALLENGE IN WRITING St. Louis, March zid, 1855 B. Gratz Brown, Esq. Sir: Your notes are not only insufficient, but offensive. I ask the proper atonement. My friend, Mr. W. A. Linn, is authorized to act for me. I am, sir. Your obedient servant, Thomas C. Reynolds. XII BROWN ACCEPTS AND NAMES HIS SECOND St. Louis, March 22nd, 1855 Thos. C. Reynolds, Esq. Sir: Your two notes of this date have been received, one containing a chal- lenge and the other an attempt at its justification. I shall certainly accede to your demand for satisfaction, although I shall not permit you to place that demand upon false ground and therefore see proper to expose the positions which you have chosen, first to assume, and then to abandon in the progress of this correspondence. Whether or not you can rightly appreciate the feelings with which a gentleman enters into a controversy of this nature, and whether you have mistaken my motives in not permitting you to falsify my position or to place me in the wrong, when you urge in your note, as one of your pretexts, my anxiety to avoid my own responsibility "perhaps forever" by fastening upon you a quarrel with another, is a matter that I must leave to your own calm con- sideration. I have no disposition to take issue with you upon that point, and therefore have nothing further to say in regard to it. It is sufficient that I first place myself right: consequences are matters of secondary consideration. In your first note, you saw proper to assign as the basis of your hostile communication that I had adopted in an editorial in my paper. THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 53 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE prepared to render such a verdict. Many of the States had passed severe penal enact- ments in relation to this matter, and yet where was the State where such laws had been carried into effect? Other legislatures had sought milder remedies, such as punishing duelling by disfranchising their citizens, rendering them forever Missouri after incapable of holding offices of profit or trust, honor or emolument; Duels such laws, he maintained, had a more wholesome action than those unjust Cited and cruel enactments, because the one was generally carried into effect, to the while the other was little better than a dead letter. To illustrate the effect Senate of public opinion on this subject, Mr. Linn instanced a case in his own State, where the people were as much averse to fighting as those of any other in the Union (though he was aware that a contrary opinion prevailed among many in relation to Missouri), where a small man, for a supposed offense, was cruelly lashed by a large one, the result of which was a challenge on the part of the small one to fight, in which duel the large man was shot twice, the last wound mortal. The survivor was found guilty under the laws of Missouri, when a petition was gotten up, signed almost unanimously by the people, and presented to the legislature, which body remitted the penalties almost by acclamation; and so, Mr. Linn said, it would be in all like cases — either the legislature or the executive would step in to counteract the law. If such a bill could be introduced as would strike at the root of the evil, it would cheerfully have his support. He was aware that duelling was not defensible on principles of Christianity. All the legislatures of the Union have concurred in denouncing the practice of duelling as evil in itself, and yet have we not seen them come in to stay the law? From what little he had seen it ap- peared to him that fighting was like marrying — the more barriers that were erected against it, the surer were they to come together. Farther along in the debate, Mr. Linn again held up Missouri experience A for the enlightenment of the United States Senate. He said they had now a Missouri law in his State which was more effectual for the prevention of duelling than Lesson any other law that had ever been passed. In cases of assault, all abusive for the words and defamatory language went to the jury in mitigation of the offense. Nation Mr. Benton — As a justification? Mr. Linn — Yes sir, as a justification; and if that abusive member, the tongue, was permitted to have too free a license, the same license was permitted to the individual to redress his grievance. He thought if the same law was applied to the Senate of the United States, there would be a little more decorum than he had sometimes witnessed. This law, of which he had spoken, had had a better effect in the prevention of duelling than any other that had ever been passed, and he thought it would be better for the peace and harmony of society if such a law was more generally prevalent throughout the United States. The reference in Senator Linn's remarks to a Missouri case was undoubtedly to the Leonard-Berry fatality. In i8iq a slender Vermont youth walked from St. Charles to Old Franklin, near Boonville. He carried all that he pos- sessed in a bundle at the end of a stick. One of these possessions was a license to practice law. While the young New Englander was gaining a professional foothold in Missouri he had a difficulty with Major Taylor Berry, who struck him with a whip. The impression in the community was that the Yankee would not fight a duel. Leonard wrote at once to Berry : "Sir, I demand a 54 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE an article which was communicated to the same on the 17th inst. That assumption was shown to be groundless. In your second note, you saw proper to assume that the author of the communication at which you took offense, was a coward. My reply very justly pointed out to you that that assumption was unwarranted, and yet you now take it upon yourself to characterize the author of that communication as a "pol- troon" without ever having demanded the name in order to inform yourself as to the fact of his responsibility. In your third note you see proper to state that I have charged you with having taken a false oath, and you also disavow any design other than to obtain redress for this last grievance. This assumption is equally as unwarranted as any which has preceded it, and the tardiness with which the discovery of this last assumed cause of complaint has been made, sufficiently proves such to be the case. From all these circumstances, as well as from the language and general tenor of your letters, I am convinced of your determination to force a collision with me, and am therefore constrained to gratify your unjustifiable caprice. I will refer you for all further arrangements to my friend, Capt. D. M. Frost, who is authorized to act for me in the premises. Yours very respectfully, B. Gratz Brown. XIII RIFLES, AT EIGHTY YARDS St. Louis, Mo., March 23d, 1855 W. A. Linn, Esqr. D> Sir: I have the honor to inform you that my principal, Mr. B. Gratz Brown, in accepting the challenge of Thos. C. Reynolds, Esqr., has chosen as the weapons to be used in settling the difficulty between them, the Com- mon American Rifle with open sights, round ball, not over one ounce. Each gentleman to select his own weapon of the kind above named. He has also chosen eighty yards as the distance, and will on Sunday next arrange as to time and place. I am, sir. Very respectfully, Your ob't servt, D. M. Frost. [Endorsed: Rec'd 2 o'clock, March 25, ';;.] fc > \« o q- a>c/»Ji a. it P ^ THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 55 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE personal interview with you. My friend, Mr. Boggs, will make the necessary arrangements." The challenge was sent on the 26th of June, 1 824. Berry ac- Tn cepted. He named Major A. L. Langham as his friend. In accept- Leonard- ing, he wrote: "My business, which embraces many duties to Berry others, will require my personal attention until after the 1st of Fatal September, next, after which time any further delay will be asked Meeting from you only." The principals and their seconds traveled down the Missouri to St. Louis and thence to New Madrid. The time set for the duel was the first of September. Berry was mortally wounded. Under the constitution of Missouri Leonard was disfranchised and disbarred. Long petitions for the removal of his dis- abilities were signed and sent to the legislature. At the next session Leonard was restored to all of his rights. Ten years later he was elected to the legisla- ture. Subsequently he became a justice of the Supreme Court of Missouri. Frost's letter to Linn on the 23 d of March, giving the conditions to govern in the meeting, underwent change after being written. ' ' The com- mon American rifle with open sights' ' was the original composition. "R OU nd After the letter was written the words "round ball, not over one Ball, not ounce," were interlined. Both Reynolds and his second. in subse- Over One quent correspondence declared the rifle was "barbarous" and gen- Ounce erally excluded under the code. Weapons and distance which Brown chose in accepting the challenge of Reynolds were almost identical with the terms in the Cilley-Graves case. Next to the fatal meeting between Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton no other duel so shocked the American nation as that between the two Congress- men in 1 838. Cilley was from Maine ; Graves was from Kentucky. Cilley's offending was a speech reflecting upon Webb, the editor of the New York Courier. Graves carried a challenge from Webb. Cilley refused to accept it. Graves concluded that the code required him to take up the quarrel of his principal. Cilley accepted the challenge of Graves and made the condi- tions rifles at eighty yards. On the fourth exchange of shots Cilley was shot through the heart. The meeting took place a few miles out of Washington at the hour of the usual daily assembling of Congress. The seconds Reynolds gave out a statement that the meeting was ' ' regulated by magnan- Appre- imous principles and laws of humanity." hended The "obvious reasons" which prompted Reynolds to send the Inter- challenge in verbal form to Brown had reference to the Missouri feren ce law against duelling, as the letter of March 23d explained. That letter was sent through Linn and Frost to Brown and then returned through the seconds to the writer of it. 56 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE XIV MEMORANDUM IN HANDWRITING OF REYNOLDS We wish no unnecessary delay. Capt. Frost can choose the time of departure, giving reasonable notice; if Monday selected, pledge not to practice rifles will be given; rifles objected to; Mr. Reynolds unused to the weapon and near-sighted; if insisted on, we exercise our right of shortening distance to twenty paces, if Captain Frost will take the responsibility of insisting on rifles. XV REYNOLDS DEMANDS SHORTER DISTANCE St. Louis, Mo., 23d March, 1855 B. Gratz Brown, Esq. Sir: Had your note, received to-day, been confined to an acceptance, it would have closed this correspondence, but I cannot leave unnoticed your gratuitous assertion that I am "forcing a collision" with you. The facts of the case are simply these and all your declamation cannot change them. Without the slightest provocation, you permitted my private affairs to be discussed in a highly improper tone, in your paper. I passed that by, as I usually do anonymous communications. You then noticed, in an editorial headed, "Is it perjury or is it not!" those same private affairs, asserted your correspondent to have furnished "a true copy' of a public record, and that in it I "swore" to a statement, which you informed your readers you had editorially published evidence to prove untrue. I considered this an adoption of your correspondent's statements, and (the offensiveness of your editorial being so plain as to dispense with any inquiry), I called on "your sense of gentlemanly propriety" for redress. You answered by denying that my assump- tion was warranted by the facts, and, instead of resting your defense on that, you coupled it with the highly offensive charge that the assumption was not an error, but a pretext, in bad faith, to avoid calling on your correspondent. To this new insult, you added a clearly implied and offensively expressed re-assertion of the accuracy and justice of your editorial, and perverted my call on your sense of propriety into an attempt to "dictate" and "bully" and make a "false issue," and this THE SECOND CONTROVERSY $7 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE According to an English writer," the first notorious duel that was fought in America" was among the Puritans. It occurred in 1630. The principals were Edward Doty and Edward Leinster. Each was armed with a sword in the right hand and a dagger in the left. Both were wounded, one in the hand, the other in the thigh. Sentiment in Plymouth Colony strongly condemned duelling. Governor Bradford made an example of Doty and Leinster. He condemned them to have their hands and feet tied together and to lie in that condition a day and a night without food or drink. In an hour the duellists begged so piteously for relief that on promise of good behavior they were released. Massachusetts began to legislate in 1 7^7 against duelling, depriving any principal of all his political rights for twenty years. Tennessee, New York and other States adopted anti-duelling laws. Virginia required all officials to take oath they would not engage in duelling during their terms. Missouri was not a laggard in this respect, as perhaps might be supposed from the frequency of the meetings on Bloody I sland . As early as 1 8 1 4 the Territory of Missouri legislated against duelling. The State legislature of 1822 passed an act making death from a duel murder and prohibiting from office holding all who engaged in it. The preamble to this law declared : "Experience has evinced that the existing remedy for the sup- Missouri pression of the barbarous custom of duelling is inadequate to the Legisla- purpose and the progress and consequences of the evil have become Against so destructive as to require an effort on the part of the general as- Duelling sembly to arrest a vice, the result of ignorance and barbarism, justified neither by the precepts of morality nor by the dictates of reason." Three fatal duels within a year prompted this strong expression by the law- making body of the new State of Missouri. During the administration of Governor Frederick Bates, 1824-5, the Mis- souri legislature made another attempt to stop the practice of duelling. A bill was passed providing that duellists be punished at the whipping post. Governor Bates exercised the veto power, it is said, for the first time in the history of the State. His message was a denunciation of the code, but he ob- jected to the form of punishment : "I am happy to record my utter detesta- tion and abhorrence of duelling. My duty to my neighbors and myself would compel me, if possible, to put down so barbarous and so impious a practice." The legislature did not pass the bill over the veto. Illinois put a stop to duelling between citizens of that State at an early day, but did not seriously interfere with Missourians. In 1 8 iq, Alonzo C. Stuart and William Bennett fought at Belleville. The seconds conspired to pre- vent bloodshed and loaded the rifles without bullets. As his weapon was handed to Bennett he slipped in a bullet. Stuart was mortally wounded. 58 THE BROWN REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE you did in a tone calculated, if not designed, to lead to anything, but explanations from me. In reply, I referred to my previous letter to show I had no design to "bully" or "dictate. " / placed on grounds well known to every gentleman and unquestionably tenable, my refusal to notice your correspondent in the way you desired, and, without in any way recriminating on you for your imputations on my motives, asked that redress, which was to be resorted to only after a call on your sense of propriety had failed. In answer, you misrepresented my position, dodged the fact that I asked of you redress, not only for your endorsement of your correspondent (not for his article itself), but also for your editorial, which is still, neither explained nor withdrawn, and in doing this, you again attacked my motives in the most offensive manner. I therefore distinctly disavowed all intention to bully or dictate, and in repelling your extraordinary charges, used language, which was, at least, not more unusual than your own. To this you now reply with a re-hash of your former charges and additional insults, and you plainly disclose the character of the invitation, which you insisted on having in writing. Your motives for so insisting, and then disclos- ing, I cannot fathom; I trust they have no connection with the "obvious reasons," stated by Mr. Linn to your friend, Capt. Frost, for a different course, and which are easy to be surmised by any one familiar with the Revised Statutes of Missouri. You have defined your position, but you are careful to omit all men- tion of the main fact in this correspondence, and one which throws light on your motives in inviting this controversy, viz., that in none of your notes have you offered to confront me or my friend with even the slightest shade of proof that the oath you mention ever was taken, although you have asserted it to be a public record, accessible to all, and that you had a "true copy" of it before you. These plain statements constitute my rejoinder to your last note. Whether I am a "bully" can be judged of from my whole course of life, by this community, which also may have noticed with what forbearance (out of respect to that freedom, and even license, of the press which is a wholesome check on public officers) I treated, perhaps unwisely, your attacks last spring on my official conduct, as U. S. District Attorney, as long as you did not extend your strictures to my private or political con- duct. My motives on the present occasion I leave to be judged of by others, from your whole course and mine; perhaps the only feeling which I am anxious they should not attribute to me is a disposition tamely to submit to the arrogance of a man who seems to think that when he rakes up private affairs, and charges false oaths, the party aggrieved must THE SECOND CONTROVERSY 59 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Bennett was tried for murder and convicted. Appeals to Governor Bond for clemency were without avail. Bennett was hung. Some Illinois historians have claimed that that was the first and last duel fought within the State by its citizens and that the execution of Bennett made the practice unpopular. But Illinois did not consider that its jurisdiction extended to Bloody Island. Thomas H. Benton was concerned in the affair at Belleville. He defended the two seconds. Public sentiment was so strongly aroused that indictments were returned against the seconds, who were Jacob Short and Nathan Fike. The duel took place in February, at a time when there was a large gathering in Belleville from the surrounding country. It was Be nton arranged apparently to test the courage of Bennett. The testi- D ef ^" ded mony went to show an understanding on the part of all but Bennett at e that the duel was a sham. The place selected was a lot just north Belleville of the main street of the town. The weapons were rifles and the loading was done by the seconds. The principals were stationed forty yards apart. Stuart did not fire. After he fell his rifle was picked up by one of the seconds and discharged. Stuart was a man of some prominence in St. Clair County. Benton secured the acquittal of Short and Fike. The trial brought out testimony to the effect that Bennett had put a bullet in his gun after receiving it from the second. Bennett had been arrested and was in jail. When the sheriff went to bring him to court for trial he could not be found. In some manner he had escaped from the jail and had reached the Missouri side of the river. Two years later he was caught, tried, convicted and executed. Judge John R. Reynolds, before whom the three men were tried, in an account of the affair, wrote that it "was considered the result of a wild, drunken frolic; and it never did assume the character of a regular and honorable duel." The Rev. Timothy Flint in one of his letters to his brother in Massachu- setts gave a different version of the Belleville duel. His account was written not long after the tragedy : A young gentleman, a respectable attorney, had just commenced business. He had been bullied by a man who was indeed an officer in rank, but a dubious character. The young gentleman had been cautioned against being drawn into the contest, and had been assured, that, according to the orthodox canons of honor, the Another character of the man did not justify fighting him. But an idea was enter- Version tained that he had not sufficient nerve to stand a challenge. It was agreed of the by his friends that the next time the man insulted him, he should send him Bennett a challenge and that the seconds should load both rifles— for they were to Affair fight with rifles— with blank cartridges. The oppositeparty was not to be in the secret and the joke was to watch his eye and see if it did not blench. The challenge was sent and the seconds on both sides made a solemn contract with each other that both guns should be loaded with blank cartridges. The young attorney went out to watch 60 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE humbly bow before his editorial tripod and beg for the withdrawal of the accusation; and who, when respectfully approached, answers only with insults, and at every step "writes himself" deeper and deeper into a col- lision, which a sense of common decency might have prevented all occa- sion for. I consider the rifle, which you have named as the weapon, to be unusual and barbarous, and generally excluded by gentlemen; with this protest, as you leave me no choice, I accept it and exercise the right (which I have absolutely) to shorten the distance from eighty paces to twenty. To show you that I do so, not from caprice, but necessity, I assure you, and it is a notorious fact, that I am so near-sighted that I am unable, even with my glasses, in ordinary weather to recognize any person except an intimate friend, at a greater distance than thirty paces; and as you have the right to name the time of day for the meeting, I can- not safely consent to a greater distance than twenty. I hope that in selecting a distance of eighty paces, you were ignorant of my defective eyesight, and that you did not knowingly propose terms on which you, ac- customed to the rifle, could shoot me down with perfect safety to yourself. I am, sir, ... r, a* c- -ii. Your obedient servant, [Returned fry Capt. D. M. Frost at 2 o clock, rr; /~> n t 1 March 2j, 18;;— w. a. Linn.] I homas C. Reynolds. XVI A CONFIDENTIAL WARNING (Private) Monday morning. I called this morning, hoping to see Mr. L. and yourself, as he called to see me last evening. It is highly important to your friend that you now pursue a proper, dignified and gentlemanly course. A violent one will lead to an O'Blenis scene, and will result, you may rest assured, most inevitably in involving Mr. L. and Capt. F. in difficulty. But all I wish to say now is that you should restrain your own impulses and not decide on any course until {after) a free and full consultation with all yr friends. Your present position is impregnable and you should do nothing to show a want of confidence in it. I am compelled to be at my office this morning, but w'd be able to see you and Mr. L. there, or if it will answer, I will be at yr office at half past one o'clock. Yours truly, [Mr. Reynolds (present).] T. P. A. /f? f«~r . (VTrf r-^-^^^g- r^y, irr^- rr i^ ^ ' i f -*£ - i^>i> * — «-»-<_■ <^^^-tf—^ s> i *xf~ -?>T-e^ -/\ SLA-^£-e-^7~^ y^ts^f^c^Cy /c~~^^^*^l. situ, ing unable to agree upon the point, ijt wis reieircl by us to Mr. Clircnoi Coch- r-.n, iTr'umf.irX' wtio decides 'that the rub? laid «!• by Wilnon, in his Code of Honor, shall govern, and the pistols bo held muzzles ijown and barrels perpendicular. ■ Alfred Rhf.tt, James Conner. Charleston, July 28, 1856. I desire to enter my protest against the de ci-siorj, of this reference, upon' this ground, that the recent usage 01 the State has been against to., rule laid down by Wilson, and therefore tbe drop shot is admissable. Alfbkd Rhett." THE THIRD CONTROVERSY 8q THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE morning Biddle went to the hotel where Pettis was stopping. He found the congressman in bed, pulled off the cover and used a whip. There could be but one outcome for such an insult. The condition of short-sightedness entered into the Pettis-Biddle duel. One account of the circumstances leading to the duel is that Pettis, anticipating a hostile meeting, went before Judge Peter Ferguson Biddle and made a sworn statement about the attack upon him in the ™as Short- hotel. He proceeded from Ferguson's office to the printer to have lg the statement put in type. Ferguson, made aware of what had taken place, issued a writ against Biddle to keep the peace. Biddle met Pettis and told him that if challenged he would accept. This was after the election, between three and four weeks. Pettis challenged at once. Biddle being the chal- lenged principal, made the terms. He set the next day for the duel and made the distance five feet, because of short-sightedness. The meeting took place at three o'clock in the afternoon. Old inhabitants, eighty years after the occurrence, point out a spot on the Illinois side, almost exactly opposite the foot of Biddle Street, St. Louis, as the location of the cross-marks for the Pettis-Biddle meeting. v Benton's intimate relationship with the Pettis-Biddle duel is told in these personal recollections of Edward Dobyns, preserved by the Missouri Histori- cal Society : Upon the attack on one of the parties at the City Hotel in July, 183 1, Mrs. Benton having heard a difficulty or noise about daybreak suggested to Mr. Benton the probable cause. He at once arose and went over and found that her suspicions were true. Mr. Benton spent about five minutes in which a masterly stroke of policy was exhibited, rarely ever seen in connection with an event of such magnitude. All political historians will remember that the party attacked was a candidate for re-election to a seat in Congress from Missouri, and that the occurrence took place just be- Benton fore the day of election. In that five minutes' interview Mr. Benton said : Secured "Let there be no definite action taken in this matter until this election is Postpone- over. And then, sir, I leave you to vindicate your honor in such manner as ment you may deem most consistent with the principles that govern gentlemen." This suggestion was yielded to with much reluctance on the part of the attacked, and all that are acquainted with the history of that day, remember the political result. It was my privilege to have enjoyed the personal acquaintance of all of the parties in the tragical affair, and I honored them all, enjoying their friendship. During the days just preceding the fatal meeting I often met Mr. Benton at his residence, having been re- quested by him to call every day as he did not often go out amongst the people. Upon one occasion when I called. Dr. Lewis F. Linn, the surgeon of one of the parties, was just coming out of the parlor. It was the day before the fatal duel. Mr. Benton said, with evident deep feeling and seriousness, ' 'There will be no child's play in the meeting." I suppose Dr. Linn had informed him that the distance was only five feet apart. There was not much said; a deep seriousness seemed to pervade the mind of Mr. Benton. The fatal meeting took place on the next day, August 27th, 1 83 1 , at 3 p. m. And now 90 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL Tfae foregoing shows the consequence at- tache! tu seemingly trivil 'points in Caroli- na, where the Code Chivalraqve is practiced with the strictest regard to technical Tules and obsei varices. It establishes the import- ant fact about which great mieapprebensioD now prevails at the Nor'h and elsewhere, where the dutllo is not so generally recog- nized as an existing, social institution, that the challenged party has not an unqualified and unrestricted option in the dictation of THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE terms to his adversary ; but that, in settling arrangements for a hostile meeting, the chal- lenger has certain rights and privileges inthe premises. It is, perhaps, needless to say, that in tbe present instance the parties are all of the highest respectability. The pre- cedent of their example, therefore, in similar cases, may be cited as of the best authority. X "A PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE" Sir: St. Louis, August 18th, 1856 Understanding that you were absent from the city I contented myself with stating publicly that I would defer any consideration of your letter published in the "Republican" until your return. Hearing of your arrival I take this the earliest opportunity of demand- ing from you that satisfaction, for the same, which is due from one gentleman to another. You will please consider this a peremptory challenge. [Crossed out in pencil.] B. Gratz Brown. Thomas C. Reynolds, Esq. [N. B. — The last sentence, being considered to be offensive, both by Col. F. Kennelt and myself, was erased by Mr. Brown. — T. C. R.] XI THE UNQUALIFIED ACCEPTANCE St. Louis, August 24, 1856 B. G. Brown, Esq. Ur Sir: Thos. C. Reynolds, Esq., requests me to inform you that he holds himself ready to render you the satisfaction asked for in your note of the 1 8th inst. Resp'y, Ferd. Kennett. ^ sPxftOit^/Tb yWt*. jtA&a^-*- t&CCc/ &SZC^ CY^t C^c*J CY/Cta) /^fca^fi yfc^O Aex-^^Z^^ , /V>"~ /£i) t^a^tZit) ■ /?^A^r^ ' 1^7 &CcaJD fz^tnstsd Sz C s /C^L^, ^z^o—tfc/Z/ C*r/7 , THE THIRD CONTROVERSY QI THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE we come to the historic error. After the fatal meeting, the parties, with their friends, crossed back to the St. Louis side of the river, and the immense collection of people that had assembled on the river bank, at the hour of the meeting, separated and the friends of one went up and the friends of the other went down to meet their friend at the foot of Vine Street. As the yawl appproached the shore The Mr. Pettis was leaning on the breast of his surgeon. Dr. Linn, who sup- Return ported him in his arms. Captain Martin Thomas, his second, was hold- From ing a vial from which the wounded man was inhaling to keep up life. It Bloody was my privilege to have been the first to meet the party, as they neared Island the shore, and know of my own knowledge what occurred, and am, there- fore, prepared to correct the error of a distinguished writer who has said that when Mr. Pettis was brought back from the duelling ground. Judge Peck was among the first to meet him and offer sympathy; that Mr. Pettis said to him, "Did I vindicate my honor?" "Yes," said the judge, "you have vindicated your honor like a man — a man of bravery, sir." This is an error. Judge Peck was not present at the landing of the party. When the skiff neared the shore, Mr. Pettis, in his reclining position, in the arms of his surgeon, looked up and caught the eye of Mr. Benton and said, "Colonel Benton, have I acted the poltroon?" To which Colonel Benton replied: "No, sir; you have shown yourself to be the bravest of the brave." These were the words of Mr. Benton, not of Judge Peck. Judge Peck came to the room of the dying statesman the night after the fatal meeting and stayed by his bedside until his death, and exhibited great sympathy and showed profound interest for him. Just before his death Mr. Pettis gave a deep moan. The judge, seeing that death was rapidly approaching, said : "Mr. Pettis, you have proved yourself to be a brave man; now, die like a man." Mr. Pettis said: "Yes, sir," and in a few moments passed away. Considering that Mr. Pettis "Now, Die was a political opponent of the party to which Judge Peck belonged, I have Like a often thought and said that Judge Peck deserved great praise for his sym- Man" pathy and interest shown to Mr. Pettis. Mr. Benton's whole course was calm, collected and dignified, never uttering a harsh word, or giving expression to a feeling of unkindness to any party. He presided at the meeting of the friends of Mr .Pettis, who met to give expression to their regrets ; wrote the account of the duel in a calm, dignified and impartial style, which Dr. Linn and I took from his residence down to the St. Louis Beacon, a paper published by Colonel Charles Keemle. This notice was copied into almost all of the papers of the United States. One of the earliest accounts of this duel, thought to be from the description written by Benton, is given : The pistols were then loaded, and put in the hands of the principals, who were sta- tioned at the distance of five feet apart. The seconds then stood at right angles between the principals. The seconds then cocked their pistols, keeping their eyes on each other and on their principals. They had thrown up for positions, Benton's when Pettis had won the choice. Everything being ready, the pistols hav- Account ing been loaded, cocked and primed, and put into the hands of the princi- of the pals, the words were pronounced, according to the rule of duelling — "Are Duel you ready?" Both answered, "We are." The seconds then counted— "One — two — three." After the word was given both principals fired with outstretched arms. The pistols were twelve or fifteen inches in length and they lapped and Q2 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE XII CONDITIONS OF THE "HOSTILE MEETING" ARTICLES OF AGREEMENT Entered into between David D. Mitchell, Esqr., and Ferdinand Kennett (parties second), in view of a hostile meeting between B. Gratz Brown, Esqr., and Thomas C. Reynolds, Esqr., parties principal. Article ist — The meeting shall be at the island near Selma, Mo., on the day of 1856, at o'clock. Article zd — Each principal may be accompanied by two (and no more) friends, surgeons excepted. Article 3d — Each principal may dress in the usual men's walk- ing dress, divesting himself of any unusual appendage or contents of pockets. Article 4th — The principals shall be placed in positions as nearly as possible equally advantageous and with the sun or light to one side. Article 5th — The choice of position shall be decided by lot between the seconds, and the second who loses the choice of position shall have the giving of the word. Article 6th — The weapons to be used by the principals shall be the ordinary percussion cap duelling pistol, with single or double sights, smooth bore of not over half inch diameter and not exceeding ten and three-fourths inches long from the nipple to the muzzle. Each pistol shall be loaded with a single round ball, with or without a patch, in the presence of both seconds. Article 7th — The distance between the principals shall be twelve yards, English, or thirty-six feet. Article 8th — Each principal shall stand with his right side facing the other; shall hold his pistol in his right hand, the barrel perpendicular and the muzzle upwards, the hand not to be held lower than the elbow. Article qth — The second who shall win the giving of the word, shall cry out audibly: Gentlemen, are you ready? and when both parties shall have answered: Ready! he shall give the word: Fire! — One — Stop! in a deliberate manner with an interval not exceeding one second between each word. Article 10th — The parties principal may fire at any time after the word Fire! and before the word Stop! — and either party principal firing before the word Fire! or after the word Stop! shall forfeit his life at the discretion of the second of the opposite party. " /£*- ^/£~~ ,-* f^e**^ &**, /££^ j^%- £ £*. t^i <£*Z*^ £ C-tr-t^^r *£^- 0*^& <&£■*£- - ^CtJ* C < ^^ <^^ eZ>o*^f tft^ ^f^^ss*^' ^7>^^e>^^^<^ 0^ . ^/^ &7-SI J-r-ZsC l^v-i^ Hy^ S*Z^/*~ ^t^t^z^ £a^£ *«^& t^C^~^ £Z~ 4Z~~ erf /^^ £^<^^**£~^ ^v< >^/£ ^-^ J^L /U^^ /Z-Z /? ^* ^ - >. . — --- -■-- , ' «A»" THE THIRD CONTROVERSY 93 THE EXLANATORY NARRATIVE struck against each other, as they were discharged. There was scarcely any chance for either to escape instant death. They both fired so simultaneously, that the people on the shore heard only one report, and both men fell at the same time. The seconds in this duel were Captain Thomas and Major Ben O'Fallon. Brown sent his challenge on the 1 8th of August. He made it strong. He not only demanded "that satisfaction which is due one gentleman from an- other," but he added, rather gratuitously, "you will please consider this a peremptory challenge. ' ' Reynolds objected to the addition and Brown drew a pencil through the words. The acceptance was withheld until the 24th, just before departure for the rendezvous, because Reynolds was apprehensive of arrest. His statement to Isaac H. Sturgeon, given elsewhere, is interesting in this connection. Preparations for the meeting went on before the formal acceptance. On the 1 6th of August Reynolds cut from Reynolds' a St. Louis paper the expert opinion of Alfred Rhett of South Caro- Original lina that "the drop shot is admissible." This was the style of Draft shooting which Reynolds preferred and which he embodied in a first draft of an agreement to govern the duel. This draft, which is preserved in the Bixby collection, is in the handwriting of Reynolds. On the back of it Reynolds indorsed : Brown v. Reynolds Articles as drawn by me and modified by Col. Kennett, Saturday, 23 Aug't, 1856. The first article in this original draft left a blank for the place of meeting, which was filled in with pencil, "the island near Ste. Genevieve." The day and hour of meeting were left blank. It appears that the intention was to seek an island near Ste. Genevieve and that the sandbar opposite Kennett's home at Selma was a later suggestion. The second article Colonel Kennett did not change from the form in which Reynolds drafted it. The third article as at first written provided that "each principal may dress in such material as he may prefer and in the usual men's walking dress." To this, Kennett, having in mind the niceties of the code, added, "divesting him- self of any unusual appendage or contents of pockets." This addition is made in pencil. Kennett made no changes in the fourth and fifth articles. In ^ the sixth Reynolds left blank places for some of the details of the Kenn f tt weapons to be used. In the description of the pistols "nipple" was Made substituted for ' 'touch-hole. " I n the matter of loading the pistols the words "with or without a patch" over the ball were interlined with pencil. In the ninth article Kennett exercised his judgment in a way that prob- 04 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE Article nth — A principal who shall not have fired before the word Stop! shall, as soon as the second commences to pronounce it, lower his pistol and return it undischarged to his second — a snap or misfire to be counted a fire. Article 12th — From and after the presentation of these proposals, neither party principal shall practice in firing. Article 13th — With the view of enforcing these articles, each party second shall be armed with an ordinary duelling pistol loaded with one ball. Signed in duplicate, this 23d day of August, 1856. D. D. Mitchell, Ferd. Kennett. [Endorsed: "Agreement signed. 23d Aug't. '56, for meeting between T. C. Reynolds andB. G. Brown."] XIII THE CALIBER OF THE PISTOLS Selma, 26 August, 1856 Col. Mitchell. D'r Sir: I have submitted to Mr. Reynolds the difference in caliber of pistols proposed to be used, and although Mr. Reynolds and myself both think it is clearly our right to object to the very large bore of Mr. Browns weapon, we are willing to waive all objection on that score, and are now ready to proceed to the sandbar as agreed between us. Resp'y, F. Kennett. [Copy, Thos. B. Hudson.] [Endorsed: "Col. F. Kennett to Col. D. D. Mitchell. Selma, 26th Aug., 1856," with a penciled memorandum in parenthesis: ' {Duel was fought 27th Aug., '}6.)"] THE THIRD CONTROVERSY 95 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE ably prevented a fatal ending of the duel. As Reynolds drew the agreement, the firing was to have been deliberate. He wrote this article : "The second to whom shall fall the giving of the word shall cry out au- dibly, 'Are you ready ?' and when both principals shall have answered 'Ready, ' he shall say 'Fire — one — stop, 'in a deliberate manner with an interval not ex- ceeding one minute between each word." Two changes were made in the firing conditions before Kennett was satis- fied. Between the words "one" and "minute" was written in pencil the word "half," so that the reading was "one-half minute." Then the words "half minute" were scratched out and the word "second" was written above in pencil. The final change limited the time of firing to the enunciation of three monosyllables and two seconds. Within that brief space the pistol must be lowered, the aim taken and the fire delivered. Kennett made one other change in this article, but it was only observance of etiquette. He inserted ' 'Gentlemen ' ' before ' ' Are you ready ?" Having made the time of firing as brief as possible Kennett penciled this warning as a part of the tenth article to impress the principals with the neces- sity for quick action : "Either party principal firing before the word 'fire' or after the word 'stop' shall forfeit his life at the discretion of the second of the opposite principal." Q uick Two articles were added to the original draft made by Reynolds. «^' S E er One provided that ' ' from and after the presentation of these propo- Enforced sals neither party shall practice in firing." The last new article, which was designated the thirteenth, read : "With the view of enforcing these articles each party second shall be armed with an or- dinary duelling pistol loaded with one ball." Reynolds' original draft was amended by his second, was accepted by Mitchell and was signed by both seconds on the 23d, the day before Reynolds' formal acceptance of the challenge was delivered to Brown. Only one serious question arose afterwards, that was in relation to the size of the pistols. Brown had a larger weapon than Reynolds and Kennett thought he ought to use, under the terms of the agreement, but they waived objection. In drafting the articles of agreement, Reynolds followed closely these rules of the code established in France : "In pistol duels the nearest distance should be fifteen paces. Reynolds ' ' The stand of each combatant to be decided by lot. Followed " It is desirable that the same pair of pistols be used by both Precedents parties. "The seconds shall load the pistols with the most scrupulous care and in the presence of each other. q6 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE XIV THE SECONDS SATISFIED Aug. 27th, 1856 Mr. F. Kennett. Sir: The meeting which has just taken place between Mr. Brown and Mr. Reynolds brings conviction to my mind that they are both brave and honorable gentlemen. Mr. Brown from his wound is unable to prosecute the matter further, even if he were so disposed. I therefore say to you that I, as the friend of Mr. Brown, am satisfied with the result of the meeting. I would sug- gest the propriety of the withdrawal of all communications between the parties of an offensive character, and that they shall hereafter meet and recognize each other as gentlemen. D.D.Mitchell. I concur in the above suggestion. Ferd. Kennett. [Written on half a sheet of letter paper in pencil. Endorsed: "Correspondence of Col. Mitchell and Col. Kennett, on the Island opposite Selma, 27 Aug't. i8;6."\ THE THIRD CONTROVERSY 97 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE "The seconds have a right to ascertain that the principals do not carry any defense about their persons." Kennett must have had strong reason for cutting down the time between the words "Fire — one — stop" from one minute to one second. That reason undoubtedly was the discovery by the second that his principal did not mean to shoot to kill, but had formed the deliberate intention to hit his adversary in the leg. Mr. Reynolds had practised at a mark and had confided his purpose to maim, but not to kill. The quicker the words were given the less danger there would be in Reynolds' plan. Reynolds followed a not infrequent but a dangerous precedent when he de- termined to inflict a crippling but not mortal wound. Before Commodore Stephen Decatur went out to Bladensburg, a few miles from Washington, to meet Captain James Barron, also a naval officer, he confided to friends his pur- pose to lame only. He said he would shoot Barron in the hip. He did so, but he received Barron's bullet in the abdomen and died that night. Decatur was much averse to duelling. He endeavored to avoid the meeting, but Barron insisted. The difficulty was of thirteen years' standing. It began with the court-martial of Barron for surrendering his ship to permit a British frigate to search and take off deserters. Decatur was in the board which tried Barron. The Brown-Reynolds duel occurred on the 26th of August. For some reason the indorsement in the official correspondence twice reads "27th August," although in one case it appears upon a note which is dated the 26th and which was sent just as the parties were proceeding "to the sandbar." Rather curiously the boat which stopped and brought the party from the sandbar to St. Louis was the "Editor." THE DUEL IN THE PAPERS Clippings of Local Reports and Comments Credited and Preserved by Reynolds IOO THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE [Credited in pencil to the "Leader, 23 Aug't, 1856"] 1 Re&otoed uvgl. — An exciting report has been oar- rent for the laot twenty-four hours that Thomas C. Reynolds, Esq., and B. Qratz Brown, Es^., of the De- mocrat, had a hostile meeting yesterday morning, in which the latter was, according- to various versions, Wounded or killed. Mr. Reynolds was walking about town' yesterday as if nothing had happened, and his friends,, according to a morning paper, had no definite Tesponse to give* to anxious enquirers, while' their air was mysterious and surmise-provoking. For ourselves, we did not test their reticence by interrogation. The tumour is nearly as defunct as one of the principals was stated to be. The Democrat has preserved a dig- nified silence.. II [Credited in pencil to the "Herald, 23 Aug't, ~;6"} HmtLMJksits$ Uoported Duel between Reyffalds and Brown I On the street yesterday, the mast intense ex- citement prevailed, occasioned by reports of a duel between Thomas C. Reynolds and B. Gratz Brown. Tarious conflicting accounts' were given, but no one could be found who had been an eye witness to the meeting. Several of the personal friends of Mr. Reynolds were besieged by crowds of anxious individuals, eagerly in quiring for particulars 5 but no satisfaction was given — nothing but winks, shrugs and evasions of the most tantalizing character. Post office corner, the Custom House and the Herald office were thronged, and tho excitement arose to fever heat.'*' The murder of Thursday night ceased to be talked about — Kansas outrages were not listened to, and the Heron and Gihon quarrel was forgotten. The questions were— ''When did they fight?" "Is Brown dead yet ?»— "Where was he hit?" "Has Reynolds been ar- rested yet ?" — and a thousand others, some of them exceedingly silly. Reynolds bad been seen on the street, dressed in dueling costume, and looking da^gerS^-Lyttleton Cooke vi as also bobbing around with the air and pantaloons 'of a duello — Capt. Linn appeared to be harboring a deep secret, and Major Bryant put on his old Florida aspect, and appeared to have his eye skinned for Indian "sign." Local reporters were dodging around with ears wide open, and pencil in hand, ready to "take down" the first authentic narrative of the bloody encounter. The most prevalent report was, that the com- batants had crossed over to Bloody Island at 4 o'clock yesterday morning, and at the first fire Brown had fallen, badly wounded. He bad been left on the Illinois shoro in charge of sev- eral physicians, and his recovery was consid- ered extremely doubtful. How these reports originated, or whether there is any truth in them, we are unable to s iy. It Is to be hoped that the difficulty known to exist between the two gentlemen has not terminated fatally to either party A hostile meeting was certainly anticipated, but w» cannot state positively that it has taken place. THE DUEL IN THE PAPERS 101 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Reynolds clipped from the papers of St. Louis all that was printed about the duel. On each clipping he marked the date of publication, and unless the printed matter showed the name of the paper he marked that also on the clipping. These newspaper scraps were preserved by Reynolds with the same care as the letters and all other writing having relation to the three controversies. They constitute not the least interesting exhibits of the duel embraced in the collection of Mr. Bixby. In one respect the newspaper policy toward the duel was uniform. That was in space. This hostile meeting between the editor of one of the principal papers and a defeated candidate for Congress was treated with surprising brevity. Some of the reporters saw humor in the situation. Others were sympathetic to the extent of congratulations that Newspaper results were not worse. There were premature announcements PoIic y Tcws/Pi vci that the duel had taken place several days before the meeting. the r^j Rumor of a fatal ending was given currency. Editorial comment inclined to the view that duelling was to be condemned on general principles, but that public opinion of that day made it impossible to avoid an occasional resort to the code. Taken all together, the press notices of the duel serve to illustrate rather impressively how times have changed in journalism. The earliest newspaper rumors were that Brown and Reynolds were to meet on Bloody Island. This hazard by the St. Louis reporters was reason- able. Three fatalities on the cross marks gave Bloody Island the grewsome name it bore for more than fifty years. The sandbar opposite the northern end of the settlement of St. Louis showed above the river's surface at low water about 1799. It grew steadily, dividing the current. An increasing proportion of the river's volume each succeeding year passed down to the eastward of the sandbar. That part of the channel between the St. Louis water front and the western edge of the bar became narrower and shallower as time went on. The human voice carried across r 5 , J 1 c jo fi/H ^ easily. Willows sprouted and grew in clumps and fringes. The Beginning new made strip of ground became known as "the Island." When there was need to distinguish it from others, St. Louisans of that generation spoke of "the island opposite Roy." On the St. Louis bank of the river near the foot of what afterwards became Ashley Street, named in honor of the fur trader and Congressman, a man named Roy built a large stone tower in which he operated a windmill. The tower stood on a curve of the shore line where it caught all of the breeze blowing up the river. Long after steam power came into use the dismantled stone tower was a conspicuous landmark. For twenty years or more "the island" so divided the current that neither side of the river claimed possession or exercised jurisdiction over it. This condition of no man's land favored the selection of ' 'the island' ' for duels. And after three lives had 102 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE III [Credited in pencil to the "Leader, August 2}th, '}(>"] Awu». « HosWR?— A report U ctfrtent and very generally credited to-day that Messrs. Thos. C Rey- nolds and B. Grata Brown left the oity yesterday- eve- ning for the purpose of a hostile meeting. The former gentleman is stated to be accompanied by Col. Mitchell and Col. P. Kennett, the latter by Mr. Leo Walker and Oapt. Frost. The attendance of Dr. Shore as sargeon, is also said to be included in the arrangements. The scene selected for combat is variously stated as Devil's Island, St. Genevieve Island, and others, all agreeing that the locality is some one of the islands in the river below. ' There is also a rumour relative to the weapons and distance, viz., rifles at twenty yards } this is con- sidered less reliable than the general fact. We have o definite information to communioate beyond the ex- istence of the report. IV [Credited in pencil to the "Leader, 26 Aug't, ';6"\ total jfatelltgsttce. The Rtoored Duel — Little doubt appears to be en- tertained that Messrs. Reynolds and Brown left the city for the purpose of fighting a duel at some point below. Selma, Ste. Genevieve, Devil's Island, and other points have been mentioned as the contemplated scene of ac- tion ; and this morning is believed to have been the time of meeting ; pistols the weapons ; the distanoe twelve paces. No definite information has or could have yet reached this City as to the particulars or the result, but a very improbable rumour to whioh no credence attaches, is that both principals are killed. We stated yesterday that Capt. Frost was reported to be one of the seconds. That gentleman is in town to- day, and his recent admission into the Oatholio Ohurcb would be quite sufficient reason for discrediting the re- port of his being engaged in an affair of this kin/h*>fr7 OQ XII [Credited in pencil to the Anzeiger, "27 Aug't, '}&'] (3)ai Due 1 1. DaS »iel&efi>rotbent gtojje, blntiae SueB, wtldjtd in ben If gun Xagtn iclt, i% wit »ir oufl gntrt Quelle setrntbmen, cnblio) auggefoebten woibcn unb vie Ijafcen bie anatnebm<9flltit melbtn ju ffinntn, bujj t$ o$ue nrojjtn ©<6aben abaelaufeu ift. SRon fibjhta f«* ouf eiuer 3nfrl in bee 9labe »ca ©ollna, ber ©eftfjunfl sou Qru. g«e. fttnattt, etwa SOSReileu »on @t. Soute, balbracfltf eciffet 00m 26. Slufluj} ison 3. JBlaUner. Ubr. 9Biirt. Bfttomctw. $:&etmoinrttt. 9 ftorb 29.66 8.64.31.14 12 „ 29 66 „ 72. „ 18 3 Worbog 29.66 ,, 77. „ 20 jtarSBorgeflern bewitg fptorfi man Don eiium Dm II, weld)e$ wabrfrfjetnitdt balb jroifd)en©ra8 93ro*»n, bent SRebaFteur* beg „?Kiffourt £emo> frat," unb SlljomaS 3. SRepnolbg, Sief. ©taaten Sluroalt unb bcmofratifdjem (SongrefSfonbibaten ocn ©t. ?oui« (iottftnben foKte. bod) nnirbe all* gemetit gehofft, bag fid) bie j»i(d)cn beibett iperrn fdraanfenben ©freftfragen oljne biefeS ertreme SKtttel beilegen liefjen. Seiber mat bie3 nid)t D« gall, ©eftern Kadmtittag trafen bie genannten £e«n mit itjten ©efunbanten auf bem gbitor »on ©elma bier em, wo fie (id) flcfiern 9Korg«n ntit n tturbe brim e rf?t n f eunn an bent red>ttn Snit w fpunbet, wdbttnb$«r SKetonoJt* untof*. lUfet Mifb. gferauf gelang t« ben btlbt r- friiigeM ©elmibanten bte ft inblidjen r.3©bn ©bore war alt 9punbarjt witatMnioien ^orben.2^ THE DUEL IN THE PAPERS Il£ THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE April i , 1 887, two days after the death of Reynolds, Oscar W. Collet, a writer of local history, penned his personal recollection of circumstances closely re- lated to the meeting thirty-one years before : The duel grew out of a statement in the Democrat, a paper edited by Brown, which Reynolds considered a reflection on his personal integrity. Brown, called upon to retract or justify the publication, gave as his authority a person living in the interior of the State. This gentleman was hunted up and like demand made of him. He denied having furnished the statement circulated by the Democrat. Brown, deserted by his informant, had to assume the responsibility, though I really believe he received from someone what he published. "I do not see," said the late William McKee, who managed the Democrat, to me, "how under the circumstances Brown can avoid Reynolds' demand for satisfaction." And he did not, naming rifles as the weapon, which Reynolds refused point blank to accept on account of his near-sightedness, a notorious fact. Some little time passed and a second challenge was sent, this time by Brown. The duel was not fought with rifles, but with pistols, the antagonists, contrary to what I believe is the custom, firing on the drop, not the rise. It did not take place on Bloody Island, which had ceased to be an island, but on a sandbar opposite Selma. The party went from St. Louis to Ferd. Kennett's and thence crossed the river in skiffs. Reynolds was dressed in ashy gray colored clothes ; Brown, unwisely, in black, which, strongly relieved by a background of sand, made him a conspicuous, sharply denned Brown's mark. Reynolds was a remarkably good and quick shot. He had been Mistake concerned in a duel in Virginia, which was the cause of his removal to St. in Dress Louis, he being disbarred by the act. Gus Linn, who went out to practice with him, told me at the time that Reynolds could put a ball inside of the ring of a tin cup at every fire without missing once, and that he, Linn, was sure Gratz Brown would be killed. There was no practising at dummy's legs, nor was a dummy used for any purpose, as far as I know. The wounding in the leg was premeditated. Reynolds ap- plied to Armstrong to act as his second. Armstrong declined on the ground that being a United States officer it was improper, but referred him to Ferd. Kennett. Reynolds then told Armstrong that he did not intend to kill Brown, but mark Reynolds' him in such a way that it would be a lesson for life. He was the only person Marks- to whom this intention was made known. Armstrong remonstrated with him manship. on the folly of such an intention, but Reynolds replied that he meant to take care of himself and was fully satisfied of his competency to do so; but if a second shot was required his antagonist must take the consequences. Brown fell on his back, and as he lay on the sand demanded a second shot. His second, D. D. Mitchell, would not listen to the demand, which he termed preposterous. Brown did not send the chal- lenge of his own accord; that is, he was egged on to it by others. What relates to D. H. Armstrong in the above I have from himself; also what relates to D. D. Mitchell. He tells me that Mitchell told him at the time that Brown was forced into challenging Reynolds and that the ground was a foolish one. A contribution by William H. Swift to the reminiscences of the duel indi- cates the origin of the tradition that Reynolds practised on a dummy : I was told by Colonel Dave Armstrong that he was selected as the second for Rey- nolds However, passing a pistol gallery, he sawReynolds being coached by Captain Paul, then the most expert pistol shot in the West. Reynolds was practising upon a sketch of a man on the blackboard of about the size of Brown, aiming at his leg below the knee. n6 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE DOCUMENTARY CHRONICLE XVII [Credited in pencil "Revue de VOuest, 30 Aug., ";6"] C'est tres beau , disait un geometfe en sonant de l'Opera ; roaia qu'est ce que oela prouve ? •- C'est horrible , djroM* nous a notre tour en parlanl du duel, et qu'est-ce que cela prouve ? Le bruit d'une affairt d'honneur entre deux citoyena de St Louis a 6te Tun desprincipaux snjett de conversation pendant cette. semaine. M. Reynolds , attorney de district des Etats-Unis , et M. Brown , editeur du Democrat, sent alle vider une vieille querelle a trenie milles deceits ville. L'arme £tait le p istolet ; la distance, quinze pas. M. Brown a recu la balle de son adversarre un peu aa-dessoua dugs* nou, et I'atTaire s'eat terminie la. Maintenant , nous nous permettons encore de le demander : qu'est-ce que eela prouve ? Cette balle tog&e par'M. Reynolds dans la jambe de M. Brown demontre-t-elle qu'il a ration et que son systeme politique est le meilleur 7 Elle montre tout au plus qu'il l'emporte en adresse ou qu'il a la main un pen plus ferine. Mais qui voudrait e'exposer a tuer son semblable ou a se faire luer simplement pour mettre en Evidence one superiorile aussi puerile ? It faut qu'il y ait dans le duel une philosophic bien pro- fonde pour que despeuples aussi avanc.es en civilisation et des hommes aussi £cIai-> res maintiennent cette coutume en hon- neur. Mais nous avouons notre impuis- sance a decouvrir ce sens cached: Qu.e lea malheureux soumis aux seules loisde la force brulale et de la ruse soient entrai- ns par leurs passions a s*entre»dechiier, c'est tout naturel. Mais il nous a toujours sembleque des hommes voueo au cuke de ('intelligence et du progres social pou- vaient vider leurs differends d'une ma- niere plus rationnelle , en Ics soumettant au grand jury de 1'opinion publique. Nous nous trompons sans doute, et la raetaphy- sique du pistolet a des mysteres que notre esprit ne peui sender. THE DUEL IN THE PAPERS 117 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE and hitting it every shot. Colonel Dave asked Reynolds why he did not shoot at the heart instead of the leg. Reynolds replied that he wanted to make Brown limp the rest of his life and that he didn't desire to kill him. Armstrong told Reynolds that he would not go out with him on the field unless he shot to kill; that he wasn't going to have a friend stand up with a chance of being killed unless he took the same precaution for him- self. As Reynolds would not consent, Armstrong refused to act further as second. To Brown the duel was an incident in a strenuous editorial and political career. To Reynolds it was an event of his life. The preparation of the correspondence, the practice with the pistol, the consultations with friends, the consideration of every detail, the preservation of these newspaper clip- pings — all go to show how much more the three controversies meant to Rey- nolds than they did to Brown. AFTER THE DUEL The Career of Brown and Reynolds — Benton's Lament for Lucas and for "All of These Scenes.' no THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE RECOLLECTIONS OF AN ADVISER Isaac H. Sturgeon was one of the friends with whom Reynolds consulted during the controversies with Brown. A few years before his death, Mr. Sturgeon, at the request of William Vincent Byars, wrote his reminiscences of the affair. His manuscript is included in the Bixby collection. Mr. Stur- geon's memory was at fault only in regard to the distance condition in the second controversy. Brown prescribed eighty, not sixty, paces. A sharp and bitter newspaper controversy had been going on for some time [1854-6] between Governor Brown and Governor Reynolds (both warm personal friends of Isaac H. Sturgeon), when Governor Reynolds challenged Governor Brown. Brown selected rifles — at sixty paces, as I recollect. Reynolds refused to fight on these terms as he was near-sighted, and at this distance could not see his antagonist. So the duel was off, for the time ; but Reynolds kept up his attacks on Brown until Brown challenged Reynolds. As soon as Reynolds got the challenge from Brown, he hunted me up and said : "I have a great favor to ask of you." I at once said: "I shall be glad to serve you if lean." Then he related how he had to decline fighting on the terms made when he challenged Brown. "Now," said he, "I have just received a challenge from Brown and I am afraid of being arrested, and if the duel is prevented by my being arrested, it will ruin me. As I did not fight when I challenged, many might charge cowardice and think that I had got myself arrested. So to avert this probability of arrest, I felt that if you would grant me the hos- pitality of your house while negotiations went on for arranging the fight, no one would suspect my being at your house and thus I would be secure from arrest." I told him to come and that with my brother, Thomas L. Sturgeon, we would do all we could for the comfort of himself and his seconds, who I think, were Captain Thomas B. Hudson and Colonel Ferd. Kennett. I do not with certainty recollect Governor Brown's seconds. I and Colonel D. H. Armstrong acted somewhat as counselors to Governor Reynolds and his seconds. The duel was fought at sunrise on the Mississippi River, opposite Colonel Ferd. Kennett 's home. Governor Reynolds slept at my house the night before he was to go down to fight. Governor Reynolds slept soundly, for I had to knock twice to arouse him, and after the fight he reminded me of how well he had slept the night before. Governor Reynolds arranged with me that I should be at the telegraph office at sun- rise on the morning of the fight to get the first news and convey it to Mrs. Reynolds. The home of Governor and Mrs. Reynolds was then on Olive Street, near where the Ex- position building stands. I was at the office of the telegraph company, then on the northeast corner of Olive and Third Streets, by sunrise, and then I waited until eight o'clock a. m, or a little later and no news came. So I quickly ran up to see Mrs. Rey- nolds, fearing she would think the news bad and that kept me from coming. I told her to be composed, that I would certainly come to her at once, no matter what the news was, as soon as any came. I got back to the office and had not long to wait until Gov- ernor Reynolds telegraphed me: "The duel has been fought; Brown slightly wounded just below the knee; I am not hurt." Governor Brown insisted on a second fire which his seconds refused to allow. Through the intervention of the seconds on both sides. Brown and Reynolds made friends on the ground and were ever thereafter good friends. When I got back to Mrs. Reynolds to tell her the result of the fight, I lost no time. AFTER THE DUEL 121 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE She was sitting composed, but under a fearful strain, and I said at once: "The news is good ; the duel has been fought ; your husband is unhurt andMr. Brown slightly wounded below the knee." Her heart was at once overwhelmed with gratitude to God and she wept tears of joy for a long time. It was most touching and I could not help shedding tears in sympathy with her. I think I also told her that Governor Brown and her husband became friends before they left the field, which was a comfort to her. In after years when this good Christian Catholic wife died (she was a Spanish lady of great refinement) I was one of her pall- bearers. When the Civil War came on. Governor Reynolds and all the Federal office- holders [in St. Louis] took the Southern side. I alone remained loyal to the Union, and my letters to President Buchanan and General Winfield Scott brought the first troops to St. Louis to protect the arms at the arsenal and the treasure in my hands as United States Assistant Treasurer. When the war was over and Governor Reynolds returned to St. Louis, our old friend- ship was renewed. I never allowed any difference in politics to mar or disturb my per- sonal regard for friends, and when my friend, Governor Reynolds, died, I was one of his pallbearers. He was buried at the side of his first wife. He married late in life a second time. Isaac H. Sturgeon. 122 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE PASSING OF BENTON AND THE CODE The passing of the code at St. Louis and the passing of Benton in St. Louis politics were coincident. The last duel, with bloodshed, between St. Louis- ans was fought in the month that Benton went down to final defeat at the polls. The term "Bentonites" was applied commonly to the men who created the Missouri Democrat. It became a misnomer following the last duel and the last defeat. Senator Benton had made his fight to suppress the issue of slavery. He had lost. The question of slavery extension into the territories would not down. By the Missouri Legislature it had been raised squarely in the winter of 1849. "The Jackson Resolutions" had been adopted. "The Softs," as the Anti-Benton wing of the Democratic party in Missouri was called, had shown that they were in the large majority of that party. They had declared that their sympathies and their interests were with the Southern States on the slavery question. Benton had appealed from the legislature to the people, had campaigned the State as never before and had been beaten at the polls. In 1 85 1 Benton was denied re-election to the Senate. He received fifty votes in the legislature ; the Anti-Benton Democrats permitted the elec- tion of a Whig after prolonged balloting, rather than vote for Benton. In 1852 Benton offered himself for the House of Representatives and was elected. But two years later he was defeated for that position. In 1855 Benton received for senator only forty votes in the Missouri Legislature. There was a deadlock and the legislature adjourned, leaving the State with only one senator. In 1856 Benton was so badly beaten for governor that it was evident even to him that his following had scattered. In those successive campaigns the men who had supported Benton were drifting farther and farther from his policy, even while they went through the forms of loyalty to his personality. They were realizing and recognizing that the slavery issue could not be ignored in discussion, or kept out of political campaigns. Benton clung to the hope of continued compromise. Blair and Brown regarded it as forlorn. The Missouri Democrat grew more and more pronounced in its Free Soil declarations. Even while Benton contributed editorials, the paper discussed, on the editorial page, gradual emancipation, and pointed out that slavery was an increasing handicap to the industrial development of St. Louis. The political vision of the young men who were conducting the Democrat was more accurate than that of Benton. The great personality of Benton, and his long, aggressive service in public life, made him interesting, but of decreasing force in politics after 1850. A period of six years with three defeats at the polls brought the complete collapse of that domination through personal leadership. AFTER THE DUEL 123 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Blair and Brown had not only foreseen, but were welcoming the issue raised by the pro-slavery wing of their party. Benton's eyes were finally opened with his defeat for governor in 1 856. He not only realized the strength of the "milliners," as he called the pro-slavery Democrats, but he saw that there was no longer a Benton party and a Benton organ. He wrote from Washing- ton to a personal friend in St. Louis, under February date, 1857 : Many friends told me that these persons (Blair & Co.) would turn out for Abolition in the State as soon as the election was over ; but I would not believe such a thing. For per- sons calling themselves my friends to attack the whole policy of my life, which was to keep slavery agitation out of the State, and get my support in the canvass by keeping me ignorant of what they intended to do, is the greatest outrage that I have ever expe- rienced. Those who have done it have never communicated one word to me in justi- fication or explanation of their conduct; for it is something they can neither explain nor justify. I wish you to get the St. Louis Democrat, change its name and character — for no use- ful paper can now ever be made out of it. I will be in St. Louis in April and assist you. The paper is given up to the slavery subject, agitating State emancipation against my established and known policy. They ought to have told me before the election what they intended to do ; if they had I should not have supported their ticket. They had no right to make me, by concealing that fact, a supporter of an emancipation ticket (the same in effect as Abolition) against the known policy of my life, and it will produce a complete separation between us. 114 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE BENTON DIED REGRETTING DUELS Bound into some copies of the "Thirty Years' View" issued after his death, was an autobiographical sketch of Benton, written by him, a note said, "while he was suffering excruciating pain from the disease that, a few weeks later, closed his earthly career." In that sketch, referring to himself in the third person, as was his custom, Benton wrote this of the Lucas affair : "A duel at St. Louis ended fatally, of which Colonel Benton has not been heard to speak except among intimate friends, and to tell of the pang which went through his heart when he saw the young man fall, and would have given the world to see him restored to life. As the proof of the manner in which he looks upon all these scenes and his desire to bury all remembrances of them forever, he has had all his papers burned which related to them, that no future curiosity or industry should bring to light what he wished had never happened." One of the few occasions on which Benton talked of the Lucas duel was in 1856, the year of the Brown-Reynolds affair. Elihu B. Washburne was in Washington as a member of Congress from Illinois. His wife was Adele Gratiot, a daughter of Henry Gratiot and Susan Hempstead. Benton was a close personal friend of the Hempsteads. Washburne was making a call upon Benton. His alliance with the Gratiot and Hempstead families prompted con- versation upon the pioneer days of St. Louis. Washburne was so impressed with what Benton said that when he returned home he made a memorandum of it. Years afterwards, while on a visit to Jefferson City to present to Mis- souri the portrait of Edward Hempstead, who had been the first delegate in Congress, he referred to this written statement. Benton told Washburne that Hempstead would have been the first Senator from Missouri if he had lived. Hempstead received an ugly fall from his horse, and although the im- mediate effects did not seem serious, he was taken ill suddenly in the midst of a trial and died in a short time. Benton was with Hempstead when he died and recalled the circumstances as he talked with Washburne. Then he went on : "Sir, how we did things in those days ! After being up with my dead friend all night, I went to my office in the morning to refresh myself a little before going out to bury him five miles from town. While sitting at my table writ- ing a man brought me a challenge to fight a duel. I told the bearer instanter, 'I accept, but I must now go and bury a dead friend; that is my first duty. After that is discharged I will fight to-night, if possible; if not, to-morrow morn- ing at daybreak. I accept your challenge, sir, and Colonel Lawless will write the acceptance and fix the terms for me. ' I was outraged, sir, that the challenge should have been sent when I was burying a friend. I thought it might have been kept a few days, but when it came I was ready for it." AFTER THE DUEL 125 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Hempstead died the night of the 10th of August, 1817. Benton received the challenge the morning of the 1 1 th. The copy preserved among the manu- script collections of the Missouri Historical Society reads : St. Louis, August 11, 181 7. Thomas H. Benton, Esq. Sir: I am informed you applied to me on the day of the election the epithet of "puppy." If so I shall expect that satisfaction which is due from one gentleman to another for such an indignity. I am, Charles Lucas, Another document preserved by the Missouri Historical Society reveals the expedition with which "personal interviews" on the island were arranged in those days. Before night of that same day the terms had been arranged. At six o'clock the next morning the duel was fought in accordance with the following : Articles regulating the terms of a personal interview between Thomas H. Benton and Charles Lucas, Esquires : 1. — The parties shall meet at 6 o'clock on the morning of the 12th inst., at the upper end of the island, opposite to Madame Roy's. -Each party shall choose and provide himself with a smoothbore pistol, not exceed- ing eleven inches in length. -The pistols shall be loaded on the ground by the friends of each party in the pres- ence of both friends and parties if the latter shall require it. 4. — The friends of each party shall have the liberty of being armed with two loaded pistols on the ground if they please. 5. — The parties respectively shall be examined by the friends of each other on the ground to see that they shall have no personal defence of any kind about them, or any thing that can prevent the penetration of a ball. 6. — The parties previously to taking their ground shall strip off their coats and waist- coats to their shirts respectively, and shall fire in that situation. 7. — Each party to have leave to take a surgeon with them if they please, to the grounds. 8. — The parties shall stand at the distance of thirty feet, and after being asked if they are ready, and each having answered in the affirmative they shall receive the word to "Fire," after which the parties may present and fire when they please, q. — The friends of the parties shall cast lots for choice of stands and for the giving of the word. 10 —The friends of the parties shall pledge themselves to each other that there are no persons on the island to their knowledge except those seen. 11. — If either party shall fire before the word "Fire" is given it shall be the duty of the friend of the opposite party to shoot him who has so fired. 12. — The parties by their undersigned friends pledge themselves on their honor for the strict observance of the above articles. Lawless, St. Louis, nth Augt., 181 7. J. Barton. 126 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE The sending of the challenge by Lucas, the acceptance by Benton, the funeral of Hempstead, the agreement upon terms and the arrangements for the "personal interview" the next morning, all took place in one day. More than that, Lucas wrote in the evening of the same day and left for publicity this paper : Origin of state of differences between Thomas H. Benton and Charles Lucas. St. Louis, Aug. n, 1817, 9 o'clock at night. The causes of differences between T. H. Benton and me were as follows : At Octo- ber court of last year, Mr. Benton and I were employed on adverse sides in a cause. At the close of the evidence, he stated that the evidence being so and so he requested the court to instruct the jury to find accordingly. I stated in reply that there was no such evidence to my remembrance. He replied, "I contradict you, sir." I answered, "I contradict you, sir." He then said, "If you deny that, you deny the truth." I replied, "If you assert that, you assert what is not true." He immediately sent a challenge, which I declined accepting, for causes stated in my correspondence. The jury in a few moments returned a verdict for me, and in opposition to his statement. He never even moved for a new trial. Since that time we have had no intercourse except on business. On the day of the election at St. Louis, 4th August, 181 7, I enquired whether he had paid taxes in time to entitle him to vote; he was offering his vote at the time. He ap- plied vehement, abusive and ungentlemanly language to me, and I believe some of it behind my back, all of which he declined to recant, to give me any satisfaction other than by the greatest extremities. This is the state of the dispute between T. H. Benton and myself. I make this declaration that, let things eventuate as they may, it may be known how they originated. Charles Lucas. The challenge, which Benton sent after the trial, Lucas declined on the ground that he had simply done his duty as a lawyer to his clients and the verdict of the jury had sustained his view of the evidence, justifying the lan- guage he had used. Lucas added : "I will not for supporting that truth be in any way bound to give the redress or satisfaction you ask for, or to any person who may feel wounded by such exposure of the truth." Besides putting on paper the origin of the state of differences, Lucas wrote this personal note : St. Louis, August 11, 1817. Dear Father: Embarked as I am in a hazardous enterprise, the issue of which you will know before you see this, I am under the necessity of bidding you, my brothers, sister, friends, adieu. May my brothers and sister procure to you that consolation which I cannot. I request my brothers, William and James, to pursue their studies with assiduity, preserving peace and good-will with all good men. Father, sister, brothers and friends — farewell. Charles Lucas. AFTER THE DUEL 127 THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Inscribed upon the minute book of the Missouri Historical Society, under date of September 27th, 1887, is a contribution to the history of the Lucas- Benton duel by Richard Dowling. It contains some details not found in the published accounts. Dowling wrote : The election, which was held on the first Monday in August, 1 8 1 7, at which members of Congress were to be chosen, John Scott and Ruf us Easton being the candidates and the former receiving the nomination, was known as "the military election." The United States officers stationed at Bellefontaine, then the western post, were quite active on the occasion, going through the streets with drum, fife and flag, Lieutenant Thomas F. Smith taking a conspicuous part. The polling took place on the west side of Third, between Almond and Spruce, at the court house, the judges being inside the door, and the people coming up to vote, which they did by handing in a printed ticket, which was read aloud, each name written down at the moment, and on a line with it his vote. This was the only voting precinct for the county. At this time a property qualification was the law. Colonel Thomas H. Benton, liv- ing in a two-story house, frame, on the north side of Washington Avenue, between Second and Third, presented himself to vote. As he handed in his ticket, his right to vote was challenged by Charles Lucas. Colonel Benton explained to the judge that he owned slaves in St. Louis, on which he paid taxes. And after this explanation offered to vote. Notwithstanding the explanation, Charles Lucas renewed his challenge. Where- upon Colonel Benton called Lucas an insolent puppy. This was the origin of the difficulty. I had this account from the lips of Colonel Ben- ton himself on our return from Manchester, where a large political meeting had been held, in 1842, I think. There were four in the carriage — Colonel Benton, his son, an Iowa gentleman, whose name I forget, and myself . Colonel Benton told us what I have stated. At the meeting on the 1 2th of August Lucas was severely wounded. A few weeks later Benton insisted upon another exchange of shots, which resulted fatally to Lucas. 128 THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE BROWN AND REYNOLDS Political honors and official duties came to both Brown and Reynolds after their duel. Brown distinguished himself at the following session of the legis- lature by the boldness of his utterances on the anti-slavery side. He was in the councils of Blair and Lyon and the other unconditional Union men before the capture of Camp Jackson at St. Louis. He was made colonel of one of the Union regiments raised at St. Louis in the spring of 1861 . Reynolds took the nomination for lieutenant-governor on the "regular" Democratic ticket in i860 and was elected. He presided over the State Senate in the session of 1861 and shared with Governor Claiborne F. Jackson in the planning for the secession of Missouri. He published a notable letter against Federal coercion of the sovereign State of Missouri. When Jackson left Jefferson City to take Missouri into the Confederacy, Reynolds accom- panied him. The convention of Union men, which met after the departure of Jackson and Reynolds and the others to join their fortunes with the South, organized a new State government. Jackson and Reynolds, moving from place to place with the State troops under Sterling Price, organized a travel- ing legislature and went through the forms of election of Senators and Repre- sentatives to the Confederate Congress at Richmond. Jackson died. Rey- nolds became the Confederate Governor of Missouri without a capital. Part of the time he marched with the army, and part of the time he was in Rich- mond, issuing occasional proclamations and messages. Brown became a brigadier general. In 1863 he was made United States Senator. Before the convention of 1864 he supported the ordinance for emancipation in Missouri. Toward the close of the war Reynolds did staff duty with General Shelby. After the war he went with Shelby and a considerable force of Missouri Confederates to Mexico and remained there several years. In 1868 he re- turned to St. Louis. Two years later the Liberal Republican movement was inaugurated with Brown as the nominee for governor. The platform was restoration of civil rights to Confederates. The Democrats made no nomi- nations. Brown was elected and served the term of two years. In 1872 he was nominated for Vice-President on the Liberal Republican ticket with Horace Greeley. While Brown's personality was of national interest, during the Presidential campaign of 1872, there appeared a graphic newspaper description of the duel with Reynolds. The authorship was attributed to John N. Edwards, who, at the time, was editor of the paper in which the article first appeared. Be- tween Reynolds and Edwards there was close personal relationship. The two had been together in the Confederate army and had accompanied Shelby AFTER THE DUEL I2Q THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE to Mexico. The publication was without bias for either principal. It gave some details of the duel, presumably furnished by Reynolds to Edwards, which had never before been printed. According to that account, it was quite well understood in St. Louis, during the three controversies, that Ben- ton and Blair were sympathizing and advising with Brown. Brown and his party went down to Selma Hall on Saturday, the 23d of August. Reynolds passed the night, before he signed the acceptance and before he was to leave the city, at the home of Isaac H. Sturgeon in the upper part of the city. He slept so soundly that Mr. Sturgeon had to call him loudly in the morning. With his party, Reynolds crossed to the Illinois side by the upper ferry. The Reynolds party reached the Illinois shore opposite Selma Hall on Monday, the 25th of August, crossed over and became the guests of G. W. Chadbourne, the lead man, who had a country home near Selma Hall. The next morning, the 26th, two skiffs conveyed the two parties to a little island about midstream, out of jurisdiction of either State. The time was soon after sunrise. In fact, the sun was not high enough to give much ad- vantage in the choice of position, which Kennett won for Reynolds by the toss of half a dollar. The toss also gave "the word" to Kennett. While Ken- nett and Mitchell settled these preliminaries, Walker and Hudson looked on and in a few words wondered if Reynolds' luck would last until the fire was delivered. The distance was twelve paces. When Kennett and Mitchell had paced it, the nearness seemed deadly. Brown and Reynolds were placed by their seconds, facing each other, at the twelve paces. The pistols were loaded in the presence of all. They were of English manufacture, with "London" engraved on the barrels and with mahogany stocks, so shaped as to give a firm grip. They had hair triggers and double sights, and they car- ried ounce balls. The powder was measured with care. Cartridges came at a later day. The pistols were placed in the raised hands, with the muzzles upward, for the drop shot had been named in the terms. That meant the weapons were to be held pointing upward until the word was given when they were to be lowered and fired. Every detail was arranged with scrupulous exactness by men familiar all of their lives with the code. While the weapons were being made ready the surgeons opened their cases, laid out instruments and unfolded bandages. The seconds, as soon as the pistols had been handed to the principals, stepped into their places. Kennett called out : ' 'Gentlemen, are you ready?" "Ready," the answer came back, as if from one voice. "Fire!" cried Kennett. Presumably he finished, but nobody took note of the remaining words. Reynolds had lowered and fired instantly after the word "fire" and before the word "one." Brown had followed so quickly that there was scarcely an interval to mark two shots. But Brown was hit. I3Q THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE Reynolds stood perfectly still, holding his smoking pistol. Brown changed position to relieve one leg. Hudson walked up to Reynolds and said: "I fear Brown is wounded in the groin." ' 'You must be mistaken, ' ' said Reynolds ; " I aimed at his knee. ' ' Reynolds was correct. Brown had been shot in the right leg, the heavy ball splitting the bone near the knee joint. Brown insisted he was able to go on and de- manded another fire. The surgeons took him to one side and administered temporary treatment and declared his condition would not permit of pro- ceeding. The seconds conferred and decided that the duel must stop. They gave their decision to the principals. Reynolds walked over to where Brown was lying and offered his hand. There was a frank interchange of expres- sions of esteem. Kennett always insisted that Brown's shot passed close to Reynolds' breast, and that if it had not been for the rapidity of Reynolds' firing and the wound in the knee, Brown would have hit Reynolds and prob- ably would have inflicted a fatal wound. It became known that Reynolds had planned just what occurred. He had practised in the presence of William A. Linn, at a retired spot on the marine hospital grounds, schooling himself with the drop shot to fire with rapidity and with low aim. He had explained to Linn that his purpose was to get in the first fire and aim so that the ball might hit Brown about the knee. Linn said this was a dangerous chance in view of Brown's expertness with the pistol. "I am sure of my quickness," Reynolds said, "and were it otherwise, I would never consent to take any man's life for a mere political quarrel. If I can disturb Brown's aim by shooting him first in the knee, it will be all I desire." The first boat up the river after the duel was the "Editor." Brown was carried on board and placed in a stateroom. His wound was very painful. The hemorrhage was considerable. When the "Editor" reached St. Louis in the afternoon, the mayor and a squad of police were on the levee with an im- mense crowd drawn there by rumors of a fatal result of the meeting. When the mayor ascertained that the duel had not taken place on Missouri soil, he made no arrests. Brown was carried to his lodgings. The others scattered. St. Louis talked that day and the next of nothing but the duel. John N. Edwards had occasion to put in practice what he learned of the code from his friend Reynolds. Late in the decade, 1 870-80, an editorial con- troversy occurred between the St. Louis Times and the St. Louis Journal. The editor of the latter was Emory S. Foster. Edwards was editor of the Times. The managers of a county fair on the northern border of Illinois conceived the enterprising idea that the presence of Jefferson Davis would be a drawing card. They extended the invitation and made public their action. The press of the country commented vigorously. Davis declined the invita- THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE AFTER THE DUEL 131 tion. The ex-Confederate editor of the Times and the ex-Federal editor of the Journal kept up the fire. On one side it was intimated that Davis' de- clination was probably just as well, as it might have been embarrassing to have the ex-President of the Confederacy discover in the North some of the silverware carried home by returning Union soldiers. Foster denounced the insinuation in words that reflected upon the editor of the Times. Edwards challenged. Foster accepted and chose for the place of meeting Winnebago County, the Illinois locality where the invitation to Davis had been extended. And to Winnebago County the principals journeyed, attended by Morrison Munford and P. S. O'Reilly for Edwards and by Harrison Branch and W. D. W. Barnard for Foster. The party reached the appointed locality, drove out into the country a few miles and exchanged shots. The duel was bloodless. The dignity of Illinois was outraged and for some time there was much talk of prosecution under the anti-duelling statute, but it died down. In 1874 Reynolds, with his civil rights restored through the movement headed by Brown, was elected to the Missouri legislature. During the ad- ministration of President Arthur he was appointed the Democratic member of a commission sent to investigate commercial relations between the United States and the Central and South American countries. Brown and Reynolds were on friendly terms after the war. From having been as far apart politically as was possible, they came to have common polit- ical purposes. During the last few years of their lives their professional work was much the same. They performed such duties as masters in chancery, commissioners and referees. Brown and Reynolds gave the best of their years and talents to politics. When age came on, neither felt that his career had yielded a satisfying degree of success. Brown thought he should have devoted himself to mathematics. His natural bent was in that direction. A treatise on algebra, which he wrote, attracted much notice. "Governor Brown," said Enos Clarke, who knew him long and intimately, "should have been a college professor. He would have done honor to a chair of mathematics at Harvard or Yale." Reynolds was a man of much sentiment. At the time of the death of his first wife he wrote a biographical sketch, had it printed on black bordered pages and sent copies to intimate friends. Reynolds was a linguist. He was gifted with natural aptitude for learning languages. In some of his earlier political campaigns, during the high tide of German immigration to St. Louis, he made many speeches in German. William E. Curtis, the traveler and writer, who was one of his colleagues, tells of the surprise which Reynolds oc- casioned as the commission to investigate commercial relations with Central and South American countries went from capital to capital. Reynolds was chosen frequently by his colleagues to respond to addresses of welcome. He 132- THE BROWN-REYNOLDS DUEL THE EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE would speak first in the language of the country where the commission was being received, and then translate his address into other languages until every- body present understood him. He spoke other languages apparently with the readiness he did his own. In the spring of 1887, Reynolds went to the Federal building ostensibly on legal business. He was found at the bottom of an elevator shaft. A short time before his death he wrote : " I am troubled with insomnia and frequent nervousness. I suffer from persistent melancholy. My mind is beginning to wander. I have hallucinations and even visions, when I am awake, of mate- rialized spirits of deceased ancestors, urging me to join them in another world. Life has become a burden to me. I am now still sound of mind and I write down this statement so that should I do anything rash, my friends may feel assured it was done in some temporary disorder of the mind. In that event I commend myself to the mercy of God and the charitable judgment of men, soliciting for my excellent and devoted wife the sympathy of my friends."