THE FURTHER EXPOSURE

OF

JAMES P. HEATH AND JOHN H. SOTHORON












BALTIMORE, 1839



Library of Congress Call Number C4595.U6 S7

------

 TO THE PUBLIC.

------

    He who once resorts to fraud to save the reputation of a friend from merited disgrace, will naturally repeat the expedient to pre-serve his own character. And he, who, with this disposition, has the indecency to invest the vice before the Public, in puerile boastings and vulgar vituperation, defines for himself a miserable character of mental and moral weakness.
    This distinction Major James P. Heath of Baltimore, has obtained for himself in his publication, entitled his "reply to a pamphlet published by Henry May, of Washington City."
    It is with extreme reluctance I notice that production. The only apology that I can offer to the public for this condescention, I find in that duty, which requires me further to expose the deformities of character in the author and his confederates in that pamphlet, in order that they may for the future be deterred from ever again attempting their impositions on the community.
    Writhing under the chastisement, that, with the lash of truth, I inflicted on him, in my published statement of the facts in the recent quarrel between Dr. Young and Col. Sothoron, Major Heath, in the anguish of his torture, has forgotten the dictates of his usual cunning and address, and suffered his passion to prevail and vent itself in low abuse and scurrility. And it has weakened only himself and his cause, and brought upon him and it, the, public disgust.
    I should but contaminate myself by replying to that part of his publication. But there is a part of it that I must expose. It is the foundation of his defence.
    Major Heath has charged me with having made “two statements, at total variance with each other. "He prints one, that with a shameless trick of words, he charges me in one line with having "sent to Dr. Waring, "and in the next, styles it as "a statement written by Dr. Waring to a friend in St. Marys."
    The following letters will show, firstly—That, that statement did not proceed either directly or indirectly from me--and secondly, That Major Heath and his "obliged friend, "Col. Sothoron, knew that fact when they printed it—both by express information contained in the statement itself, and by intelligence from other sources. I here present a letter from Dr. Waring on the subject:--

SOUTHAMPTON, August 20th, 1839.

With high respect,
                    Your obedient servant,
                    J. WARING.

To HENRY MAY, Esq. Washington.

    The following is a letter from Mr. Causin. The unavoidable delay in the reception of this communication, and the letter from Dr. Waring, has prevented the earlier appearance of this publication. When Mr Causin saw Major Heath's pamphlet, he immediately volunteered of his own motive, and without my request, a statement to the public in justice to me, of his agency in the transaction. The newspapers declined to publish it, because of its connexion with a personal, and purely private affair; and it was returned to him, He then transmitted it to me with the request, that I would have it published. I returned it to him with a view that it might be fashioned by him in a suitable form, for me to present it to the public in this way. It was the only method left to effect that purpose; which is the chief motive of this publication.

LEONARDTOWN, August 16th, 1839.

    DEAR SIR: In answer to your enquiry into the facts attending the communication of Dr. Waring's statement to Major Heath, I have to reply :
    That the statement was received by me on the 29th of June, and made public by Dr. Waring's request. That it was on the same day submitted entire to the inspection of some of Col. Sothoron's friends resident in this village—that upon their solicitation I gave, on the 30th of June, to Mr. H. G. S. Key, who had seen the original, a copy of its details ; with the exception of some prefatory remarks, and the postscript, which designated the authority upon which Dr. Waring's statement was made. Subsequently, on the 9th of July, I received a letter from Dr. Waring, correcting, in some particulars, his first statement, and containing a request that I would communicate those corrections to the individuals who had been made acquainted with the original. In commencing this letter, Dr. Waring says "When I made you the statement of Young's and Sothoron's affair on Friday week, I drew it up entirely from recollection, not having the letters at the moment in my possession."—He then proceeds “on looking over the copy you furnished me, I find there are one or two unimportant points which I have misstated, and as I am anxious to be perfectly correct in the matter, I will point them out to your notice. "After noticing the errors in the original statement, his letter concludes thus “the phraseology of this statement was entirely my own, and it was not intended to be a copy but I merely professed to give a statement of the facts. I stated them as I have said before, from recollection, in a great hurry, not having the letters to refer to, and having in fact only read them once; this will account for the inaccuracies I have pointed out, and which do not differ in any material point of view from the facts as stated in the sources from which I got them. As I am anxious to be perfectly correct, however, you will oblige me by correcting my former statement as far as it may be in your power, and should you have furnished a copy of it to any one, or made a statement from it in writing, either furnish this correction or inform me to whom it was given, that I may do it myself."
    The copy of the first statement given by me to Mr. Key was forwarded by him to Col. Sothoron prior to the publication of Major Heath's first card. And in compliance with the request contained in the letter I have quoted; on the 12th of July, (if I am not in error as to the precise date) the mail succeeding that by which I received it, I sent to Col. Sothoron a copy of the corrections furnished by Dr. Waring's letter.
    To the first letter received by me from Dr. Waring, was attached the following postscript: “I have drawn up this statement partly from May's letter, and partly from another source, which is perfectly authentic; May did not go so much into particulars, but the facts in both are precisely the same. "This postcript was omitted in the copy furnished by me to Col. Sothoron. My own act of curtailing the original statement in the copy sent, has involved you in the charge of "discrepancies, "and it is essentially proper that so far as my agency may have tended to this result, it should be fully under-stood.
    The reason that governed me in not submitting the first statement entire, to Col. Sothoron, was, that my object was merely to apprise him of the material facts made public through me. It was not necessarily subservient to this object, that a reference to the authorities upon which the original statement rested should be made, and I therefore confined myself to the circumstantial detail without professing to copy literally the communication I had received. Had I at the time supposed, that this copy was to be made a test of critical accuracy, I should certainly have rendered it exact.
    In conclusion, I will say, that the assertion in Major Heath's last pamphlet, that you were the author of the statement made to Dr. Waring is an inference of his own, not a fact appearing by the copy sent to Col. Sothoron. In that copy, neither your own name, nor that of Dr. Waring was mentioned, as authority for the statement.
    It is due to Col. Sothoron to state, that he has informed me that my letter to him, containing corrections of the original statement was not received by him, until subsequent to the publication of Major Heath's last pamphlet.

Yours respectfully,
                    JOHN M. S. CAUSIN.

To HENRY MAY, Esq.

    I now present my letter to Dr. Waring, with an apology to the public, and the request, that as it was a private communication to a friend, written in great haste, and was not intended for public view, it may be excused for whatever coarseness of expression it contains. These reasons would have restrained me from publishing it; but there is a necessary propriety in the act.

WASHINGTON, June 28th, 1839.

    DEAR DOCTOR: I received your letter yesterday, not in time however to reply by yesterday's mail. Sothoron most disgracefully backed out, and old James P. Heath, of Baltimore, has shamefully twice to shield his cowardice by saying that there was a misunderstanding. Heath says he thought that 2 o'clock on Monday, in all the rain, was the time agreed on by him and myself for the fight. It is a barefaced falsehood, and I authorize you to say so on my responsibility—no place or time was fixed. But there was an agreement between Heath and I, that I should meet him at a certain tavern, in Virginia, for the purpose of selecting a place for the duel. Our understanding was, that I should be there by 1 o'clock if I could; if I was not there then, that he should wait for me until I came, as I twice distinctly told him, I would be certain not to disappoint him.
    By a few minutes after two, I arrived within a few yards of the tavern, and I met there three carriages approaching me. I was on horseback, and accosting Heath, I said where are you going. He said back home, that he thought the fight was to take place at two. I then distinctly repeated to him what was the understanding between us. Heath left it to Sothoron to say whether he would go back, and he basely declined to do so. But Heath said the police at the tavern knew all about it, and that he would have an interview with me at Brown's Hotel at 4 o'clock. Thus leading me to believe that the duel would still take place on the next day, and that they were going back to escape the police. At four, at Brown's (where I expected we would make the arrangements then for a meeting next day) Heath told me the affair was ended. I denied that any time was appointed for the duel--affirmed that Young was ready to fight any time, in any way, was anxious for it, and that Sothoron had evaded his responsibility. He said we could not be blamed, that it was a misunderstanding—that he believed Young to be a very brave man, and that Col. Sothoron did not doubt it. That Sothoron would say nothing about it, and that he and I could say it was honorably adjusted. That Sothoron had left Washington to keep an engagement with his wife twenty-five miles distant. I told him Young would publish him. Let Heath come out and sustain Sothoron in a publication if he dare, and if I do not completely disgrace him (H) and falsify his story, then "there is no virtue extant. "Heath has behaved badly and he knows it, and knows that I can prove it—so he will be silent. He tried to over-reach me in the affair, but is as completely caught in his own trap, as was ever a thieving rat.
    Circulate the handbills—Young and I are responsible for their truth absolutely. I desire you to pronounce their story about the time being fixed wherever you may hear it, and from whomever, to be a d—d lie, unqualifiedly, on my authority and responsibility.
    The whole details are a "long story." You shall have them all in time. Our object now is, to inform the public of the truth of the matter—we must be quick or they will forestall us, and that will be a bad predicament for us.
    Besides they had all prepared warrants for the whole party. Bob Beale, against informing whom, I had particularly cautioned Heath, was told all about it, and accompanied the party to Virginia, where he told it for the purpose of having it arrested. We can prove every word of this. It is upon the whole the most disgraceful and base transaction that I have ever known, and every honorable man in the district thinks so.
    It was conceived in rascality and ended in villiany. Sothoron is forever lost to all reputation among gentlemen here.

In great haste, I am truly yours,
With the highest respect,
HENRY MAY.

    Note.—The above is an exact copy of Mr. May's letter to me (the only one have received from him on the subject) word for word. The words that are italicised are underscored in the original.

JAMES WARING.

    Dr. Waring has stated that the above letter “is the only communication on the subject he has received from me either directly or indirectly."
    I will now make a few extracts from Major Heath's pamphlet.
    First. "It is stated in May's letter to Dr. Waring when Heath requested May to withdraw the challenge in order to give Sothoron an opportunity to make an apology, which he stated would be such as could not fail of being satisfactory."
    Second. "In the letter to Dr. Waring it is represented that May immediately protested against the terms, as unusual, sanguinary, and butcherly."
    Third. "In the letter to Dr. Waring it is stated Heath requested May to meet him at the appointed place, on Monday, between 12 and 2 o'clock."
    Fourth. "In the letter to Dr. Waring it is stated “in the terms first handed to May the time of meeting of the parties was specified. But when the previous meeting of the seconds was agreed upon, Heath with his own hand erased that part of it."
    The public has seen my letter to Dr. Waring, and I submit whether all or either of the above extracts are therein contained.
    These "extracts" contain the whole strength of Major Heath's pamphlet. They are the foundation of it and the only "discrepancies" he has charged upon me in the “two statements" he has invented.
    So much for the falsehood of his publication. I will now proceed to expose the fraud of it.
    Dr. Waring has stated in his communication, that he showed my letter (before printed) "to several of Colonel Sothoron's friends," and "that he publicly read it on several occasions and was careful in designating the information that I had furnished him in that letter." He did this "as speedily as possible, in order to correct false statements." He received my letter on the 29th of June. Mr. Causin has stated in his communication, that "on the same day (29th June,) he submitted to the inspection of some of Col. Sothoron's friends," the entire written statement he had received from Dr. Waring. That on the 30th of June, Col. Sothoron's friend who procured from him a partial copy of that statement, and sent it to Col. S. "had seen the original." That that statement contained the following postcript written by Dr. Waring. "I have drawn up this statement partly from May's letter and partly from another source which is perfectly authentic, May did not go so much into particulars—but the facts in both are precisely the same." Mr. Causin further states, that in the copy he furnished for Col. Sothoron "neither my name nor that of Dr. Waring was mentioned as authority for the statement." Major Heath's pamphlet bears date the 19th of July.
    Now I will enquire if from the above facts, it is not evident that Col. Sothoron's friends, and consequently both himself and Major Heath, well knew that the statement was not mine, at the time they published it as such, and long prior thereto. If they deny their guilty knowledge of the fact, on what ground I will then ask, have they charged upon me the authorship and responsibility of that statement? Allowing them the benefit of choosing between these alternative positions, do they not in either case stand convicted of an abominable fraud and deceit upon the public and myself? And more than this, giving them the grace of admitting that they were honest in their belief, that the statement proceeded from me, how can they acquit themselves in the sight of honorable men from the guilt of now sanctioning by their names and veracity, a false-hood and a fraud. Mr. Causin has stated that Col. Sothoron has confessed to him, that he received the copy of Dr. Waring's letter of corrections. And yet they have since then, and doubtless are now, widely circulating, (if they have not become ashamed of it) their corrupt production. I assert the fact, that Col. S. has circulated it since he received the letter of corrections, on the authority of several gentlemen of his county.
    I have now, in the first place, proved that the statement they have charged upon me was not mine. In the second place, I have shown that they knew it was not mine when they published it as such; and in the third place, I have proved that they have not only obstinately persisted in the disgraceful fraud, after being convinced that it was such, but that they have since propagated it. I leave the public to form its conclusions as to the honorable character of such men.
    It will also appear by reference to Major Heath's pamphlet, that he still persists in his attempt to palm off on the community another deceit, in printing a paper that he asserts to contain the "terms of the duel," when he well knew that those terms never were accepted, and the public plainly sees they were not, because my name is not signed to them. I have already published the true terms over his signature to that effect; he had a copy of these last mentioned, with my written acceptance signed to them. Thus "the above terms are accepted in behalf of Dr. Young."

"HENRY MAY."

    I presume that he has destroyed these terms, as he makes no mention of them. And how he could have ever expected to cheat the public with this stupid contrivance, after I had presented the real terms with his name signed to them, is somewhat unaccountable. For the reasons I have before stated, I am forbidden to notice the residue of Major Heath's production. I leave him in the undisputed enjoyment of all that part of it wherein he recounts the peculiar intrepidity and fortitude with which " he has ever toed the mark both as principal and second," in the multitude of affairs of honor in which he has figured. And wherein he states " that his arm is not paralysed by either age or affliction, whenever his character is implicated, and that no man is too old to sustain it." And wherein he recites "the consolation" that he has enjoyed "through a long and perilous life," from " the reflection that he has never raised his arm or pulled a trigger against the life of his fellow-man, in the several duels he has fought."
    The subject next in order for my notice in Major Heath's pamphlet, is the letter of Mr. Robert Beale.
    The obscurity of this person is the only mischievous circumstance about him, and is the only reason why I notice him. Where he is known he is perfectly harmless. His capacity for their service, easily accounts for his connexion with Major Heath and Col. Sothoron in their affair of honor. But after the indisputable disgrace that Beale's agency in their behalf plainly brought upon them, together with their knowledge of the proverbial worthlessness of his testimony before the public, the stupidity and folly of making him a witness for their defence, is somewhat difficult of explanation. And any one who has seen the contradictory stories he told to Commodore Jones, (as has been stated by the Commodore in his letter, published in my former pamphlet,) and who notices the contradictions between his (Beale's) letter, and Major Heath's statement, will be the more surprised at their temerity in having published that letter. Mr. Beale states several important facts, that Major Heath does not mention; and he locates an interesting conversation to have happened between Major Heath and myself in the carriage, which Major Heath places at Brown's Hotel. With this sufficient notice, I now gladly drop this person, and for a further description and estimate of his character, refer the public to the citizens of Washington generally, where he is notoriously held to be a most trifling and contemptible man, and utterly destitute of veracity.
    The next person that appears in Major Heath's pamphlet, is Dr. John H. Briscoe, of Baltimore. Of his letter I have only to observe, that it proves nothing but what Major Heath told him, and is in the concluding sentence, wanting in the usual candor that characterizes a gentleman. I asserted in my former publication, that I stopped the carriage in which was Major Heath and Mr. Beale, twice. Dr. Briscoe states, that he has "no recollection of any further stoppage" (than the first one) "on the way to Washington." He and Col. Sothoron were in the second carriage, that was some distance behind the first one, at the time I stopped it. I have not stated, that I arrested Dr. B's. carriage. The first one halted, as I have stated, only for a moment, while I made a single remark to Major Heath. Probably Dr. Briscoe did not, and could not have observed the fact. He was some distance in the rear—it was raining violently at the time—their carriage was a close one, and in all probability with the windows closed. The noise of the wheels over the rough and stony paved road, would have prevented his hearing the pause of Major Heath's carriage.
    Candor would have dictated his silence on this point, or required this explanation by him. A disinterested witness would not have left it to the public to form an inference from his statement, that he was either unwilling or unable to make from it himself.
    I will now conclude my observations on the pamphlet, by a notice of Col. Sothoron's letter.
    He says "it is not necessary to detail the circumstances of the meeting between Dr. Young and myself on the 1st of June."
    I will detail those circumstances, which do, of themselves, furnish the reasons for his silence on the subject. The suggestions of shame control in the man the confession of his outrage.
    Many months prior to that meeting, Dr. Young, while administering his medical services to a servant of Col. Sothoron's, received from him an insideous incivility towards his professional character. The attendance and nostrums of a quack old woman were applied by Col. S. to the Dr's. patient without his knowledge and consent. This act of course put an end to the Dr's. visits. But believing that it had proceeded as much from ignorance as caprice and rudeness, the Dr. did not allow it to interrupt their personal acquaintance and intercourse, though it naturally cooled these relations. In due course of time the Dr. gave his medical account into the hands of a proper person in Charles county to have it collected, with directions that if S. disputed the account to compel him by the law to pay it. This person transferred the account to a constable of St. Mary's county, who took out and served a warrant upon S. for the money. For this act, S. states that he "then determined to disgrace" the Dr. But being disappointed in his plans for " waylaying" him, he proceeds in two or three days to Benedict (about two miles distant from his house,) where Dr. Young resided. The Dr. was passing an evening visit at Mr. Locke's (a cousin of Col. S.); thither, S. proceeded. He entered the house, and approaching, the Dr. cordially offered him his hand, which was accepted. Mr. Locke, and two gentlemen, one of them a friend who had accompanied S. were present. After they had generally conversed for some time, S. desired a private interview with the Dr. They went together (S. carrying in his hand a large and heavy stick) out of, and around the house to a place where they were private and unobserved. S. then enquired of the Dr. if he had authorized the constable to warrant him. The Dr. (who was ignorant that he had been warranted) replied ; " No sir, not unless you disputed my account." S. then said ; "the constable says you did and there is a lie between you."" The Dr. replied, "what do you mean sir." The words were scarcely uttered when S. blew a mouthful of tobacco spittle directly in the Dr's. eyes and completely blinded him. (This account of the meeting I repeated to S. at his house, as he has confessed, and he said it was true.) As soon as the Dr. recovered his sight he perceived that S. had retreated a few steps and was standing with the bludgeon raised to prevent his attack. The Dr. then quietly turned round and went into the house. S. followed after him bragging in the coarsest language of what he had done. The Dr. presently mounted his horse, left Mr. Locke's and proceeded to his home at Benedict. He left there the same day and came to Washington with despatch. I have in my former pamphlet stated all the particulars that transpired in the affair after the Dr's. arrival in Washington. I have then explained how the delay in delivering the challenge occurred—that it was owing to my indispensable engagements. The public can now form its conclusions as to the causes of the quarrel between Dr. Young and Col. Sothoron, and the propriety of their conduct.
    Col. Sothoron remarks in his letter, that he is not informed whether "my reception at his house was otherwise than agreeable to me." I am free to confess, for his satisfaction, that my reception and entertainment by him, was both hospitable, and in every way agreeable to me, excepting only the levity of his conduct and conversation, on the subject of my visit to him. But after parading his hospitable disposition towards me, he insinuates in his letter that I should, "according to the nice etiquette of such affairs," have departed from his house in a half hour. The inconsistency of this remark is manifest, and it impairs his desirable claim even to the quality of hospitality. For by his invitation, I had travelled through the rain, which had wetted both myself and the servants who attended the carriage, over a very rough and difficult road, a distance of some fifteen miles, and intended returning that evening, which I did. It was within a half hour after my arrival at his house, that I had despatched my business with him, and took my hat to depart–(I had directed the servants to remain at his door with the carriage and horses, for I intended immediately to return) I was detained by his most urgent and pressing request, that I would remain to dinner, for he observed, "that he had expected me to stay to dinner, and insisted on it." I made excuses and reasons why I should go, but yielded to his strong solicitation, upon his telling me that he had ordered my horses to his stable, and servants to his kitchen. This was done without my knowledge and against my directions. And to show further, that he has underrated his hospitable intentions, after dinner he strenuously urged me to pass the night at his house, and as I as entering my carriage, gave me a most polite invitation to repeat my visit in the autumn and winter, and enjoy with him the pleasures of hunting and shooting, and the luxuries of the table that the Patuxent river in those seasons afforded.
    The circumstance of my being related to a family in Alexandria, that he mentions as having occurred to him after dinner, was in truth, almost the first remark that he made to me, after my entering his house. "I mention that circumstance to show," that at least he was not wholly ignorant who I was, as he pretends to have been. And any one would have concluded, from the manner, in which he accosted and conversed with me, (calling me familiarly " May" all the time) that he had known me intimately for years.
    He states in his letter, that "the next day," (the day after I delivered to him the challenge,) "he applied to two friends, and was advised to consult you," (meaning Major Heath.) One of these advising friends, has since publicly declared in Leonardtown, the reason for his advice. The following paragraph that I have received from a friend in St. Mary's, contains the substance of that declaration.
    "That Sothoron came to Leonardtown, having received the challenge, to consult his nearest friends. He proposed an officer in the Navy, as his friend; they opposed the person named, on the ground, that with such a choice he would be compelled to fight; and instead, recommended Major Heath of Baltimore, as being an old diplomatist in such matters ; one who would manoeuvre him out of the difficulty, without a resort to a fight."
    The fact that this declaration was made, can be easily proved by gentlemen of the highest respectability. Comment on this circumstance is unnecessary. The public will see in it what the settled design and intentions of Col. Sothoron and his friends, in the affair, was from the first suggestion of Major Heath as his second.
    In regard to his sensitive solicitude, about my having reported “his conversation of the most social character," I have only to say, that I repeated in my former pamphlet, none of his conversation, but what referred to the business of my visit to him. This, I had a perfect right to do; the public has seen the propriety of it. The sacred duty of vindicating a friend required it, and the obligations of hospitality did not forbid it.
    I have now done with Col. Sothoron's letter, and leave it with this remark : that the counsel who wrote it had a bad cause for his ingenuity, though a good client for his reward.
I will conclude this publication with a summary and recapitulation of the whole quarrel and controversy, between Dr. Young and Col. Sothoron, that the public may again see it in its true light and dimensions.
    Col. Sothoron believed that Dr. Young "had deliberately insulted him in a manner the most mortifying to the feelings of a gentleman." Instead of making the call of a gentleman, he applied personally to the Doctor, in order to be informed whether he had authorised the indignity complained off. The Dr. disavowed the act. Mistaking the motives of Dr. Young to be such as would have actuated himself, S. inflicted a most cowardly and ruffian insult on him. Dr. Y. adopted the only course known to gentlemen and challenged him. He receives the second of Dr. Y. with the most anxious show of hospitality, and entertains him with a corresponding familiarity and friendship. The challenge is delivered; he repeatedly intimates in very brave language his intention to accept it, and as often, "with altered phrase," changes his mind. He employs a second, the Hero of seventy affairs of Honor, large and small and a great negotiator in them. His second offers, "upon his own responsibility," as he says, an ample, and to his principal, degrading apology—and still hoping that Dr. Young's feelings might be like his; as an inducement to its acceptance, declares that muskets at fifteen paces, would be the fearful consequence of a refusal—and this too to a gentleman of sedentary habits, unused to gun shooting and disabled in his left wrist—and from a man accustomed to field sports and of sound limbs. The apology is indignantly refused, and his own weapon and terms accepted, after a proper protest, by myself, as to their unusual and ungentlemanlike character. They then urge a compromise by the abitration of Gen. Jones, which is also rejected. Then having failed in their plans of bragging the Dr. off, by the terror of their musketry, or of coaxing him off by the apology or an arbitration, no hope is left to them, but of bringing the affair, by the management of their cunning negotiator, to A SQUABBLE before the public. His experienced second, therefore leaves the time and place for the duel undetermined by the terms—but arranges with me to meet him at a supposed convenient place to determine them. He desires me to meet him at a tavern in Virginia, situated, as he was informed, about two miles beyond the Little Fall's bridge—he tries to mislead me, in the direction he gave as to the road leading to the tavern—telling me to take the left hand road after passing the bridge; (which fortunately I did not pursue, for if I had, I should not have met them on their retreat. The tavern was situated on the right hand road.) Well knowing that I would not expose my friend to the chance of an arrest, by taking him to a preliminary meeting; he takes his principal there, contemplating the double chances of an arrest, or if that failed, of letting him run "to his wife," on an alledged misunderstanding as to the time, place and purpose of the meeting. He took with him the very man, (Beale) who he was informed was a notorious babbler, and against informing whom of the affair, he had been especially cautioned. And Beale's capacity was well calculated by them, and was most successfully exercised by himself; he well performed his part, and had fully provided the means for the arrest. This being done and the whole party collected at the Virginia tavern, they then appoint it to be the place for the duel, (for they have not pretended that any other place was appointed) and fix two o'clock as the hour for the fight. The moment that hour is passed by the watch, they precipitately hurry into their carriages and fly to Washington, the whole being "under the direction of Major Heath," as Col. S. states. And here it is appropriate to notice, the speech that Major Heath made to Col. S. in the tavern and which gave the immediate impulse to their retreat. Dr. Briscoe has reported it thus—"Col. you have waited beyond the time to meet your adversary; you now stand absolved from your obligation to him—we will return home." In connection with this I will here repeat, and recall to Major Heath's recollection, the substance of another speech, that he once made to his principal on a similar occasion. They had waited some three or four hours after the time appointed for the duel. Their adversaries did not appear. His principal then enquired of Major H. if he was not at liberty to leave the ground? He replied "no, and that he would consider any friend of his who should depart from the duelling ground before sun down, because the adversary party did not appear, no matter what hour had been fixed on for the fight, as a disgraced man." Let Major Heath deny this fact, and I here promise to prove it upon him, by the testimony of a gentleman of the highest standing and respectability.
    It may here be proper for me to explain to the public the reasons why the preliminary meeting between Major Heath and myself was arranged. In the first place, it is usual, where a particular place cannot be designated for a duel, for the seconds to go and select one. Major H. in this case insisted that the duel should take place in Virginia, near the district line. I preferred Maryland, because as I told him duels were most frequently fought there, and I knew where the boundary stones between that State and the District were, and neither of us knew where the boundaries ran between the District and Virginia, and it would not be safe to make enquiries on the subject. He objected on the ground, that he held an office under the government of Maryland, and it would be forfeited if he engaged in a violation of its laws on the subject of duelling. I informed him that that section of the law had been repealed. Nevertheless he preferred Virginia, and I made no further objection to it. The preliminary meeting between us was necessary in the second place because it was publicly rumored in Washington, that a duel was to take place between Dr. Young and Col. Sothoron. Mr. Beale had taken the utmost pains to spread the report—besides it was known that Major Heath was Col. S's. second, and that they were both in Washington. And Major H's confession in my former pamphlet shows that the fact of his presence in Washington, was sufficient of itself to convince the public that there was a duel on foot. Col. S. and his friend Mr. Beale were seen publicly walking and riding together—while Dr. Young all the time kept himself concealed out of of the district.
    Now the public knowledge of these facts would have almost insured an arrest, if the parties had left the district together, or had proceeded from it in the same direction, and after having met, had then to go and hunt for the Virginia line, and a suitable place to fight at. I believed from the first, that they would make an effort to have Dr. Young arrested, as the best way for Col. Sothoron to avoid the duel with him, and I had determined to prevent it. It was my intention after the ground had been selected, to have conveyed the Dr. to it by a road leading from where he was concealed, to the neighborhood of the Virginia tavern, a distance of not more than six, notwithstanding Major Heath states, that " it was not less than fifteen miles," without passing into the district. Another reason for that preliminary meeting is found in the trouble and vexation, and perhaps peril, that the recent rigorous act of Congress might bring upon all concerned in a duel, the arrangements for which, could be proved to have been made in the District of Columbia.
    I have heard of gentlemen remaining on a field of honor, on a point of honor too long, but this is the first instance, within my knowledge, of a person flying from a field of honor, on a point of honor. Major Heath's "experience" on this point, however, is infinitely greater than mine, and he may be able to cite other cases in which he may have recommended such a course. But I imagine his friend on this occasion was the first that ever availed himself of the suggestion.
    To conclude: I cheerfully concede to Col. Sothoron and Major Heath the signal triumph they have gained—that of having performed an engagement that was never entered into by Dr. Young or myself, and which I have before proved conclusively, by disinterested testimony, they had taken the most certain and effectual means of preventing.
    True courage is not dependent upon time or place. Its motions in the breast of an honorable man, continue so long as the pulsations of his heart. If Col. Sothoron had been willing to meet Dr. Young on the field of honor, he would not have taken the shield of time, and been borne away on it, from his just accountability. A brave man would scorn such means of proving his honor, and wait a week or a month, aye, his whole lifetime in readiness to vindicate it.
    Dr. Young with a magnanimity, that no one could expect from his adversary, (for the Dr. had no further satisfaction to demand of him,) has, allowing that there was a misunderstanding between Major Heath and myself, as to the time and place of the duel, since in the hearing of Col. Sothoron's friends, offered to give him an opportunity of retrieving his lost character, and reinstating himself among gentlemen, by meeting him at any time in a duel; and at the time that Major Heath informed me that the affair was ended, I made in Dr. Young's behalf, the declaration, "that he would meet Sothoron, on his (Sothoron's,) own terms, at any place, on any day, between daylight and dark." How do these propositions result? In the recent arrest of Dr. Young, and his being required to enter the security of the peace, for Col. Sothoron's protection. This was the only expedient left, to shun the Dr.'s proposition, that was daily bearding him. Dr. Young made a strong written protest before the court in St. Mary's, against the procedure. But it did not prevail. If' Dr. Young had been inclined to patch up the affair, had he not a colorable chance of doing so, by accepting the apology tendered? And if Dr. Young and myself had been "wanting," had we not a capital opportunity of saving our credit and honor, by agreeing to Major Heath's ridiculous proposition, "to say nothing about the affair," except that it had been "honorably adjusted."
    I consign Major Heath and Col. Sothoron, to the tender mercies and compassion of the public. They are fit objects of its charity.

HENRY MAY.

Washington, August 31st, 1839.