Radio Script 343

Little Talks On Common Things
June 23, 1957

Did you know that a long time ago a Maine Congressman was ki lied in a duel? Wei I, that is a fact and it created a sensation, not only in Maine, but al lover the country.

In 1837 Maine had eight members in the national House of Representatives, showing how high we stood in population among the states at that time compared with our position today, for now we have on,ly three. One of ~-‘laine’s representatives in 1837 was Jonathan Ci I ley, a Thomaston lawyer.

On February 2, 1838 Ci I ley made some remarks in the House of Representatives which were uncomplimentary to Colonel J. W. Webb, editor of the New York Courier and Enquirer. Representative Wi I liam Graves of Kentucky was a close friend of Webb’s and took up his case. He tried to deliver to Ci I ley a note from \vebb – aski ng whether Ci I ley’s remarks about vJebb had been correctly quoted in the Congressional Globe. Ci I ley declined to receive the note, saying that he could not consent to get himself into personal difficulties with conductors of public journals for what he might think proper to say in debate upon the floor of the House.

On February 20 Graves wrote a letter to Ci Iley, trying to get him either to conf i rm or deny his a Ileged remarks about v/ebb. On the next day Ci I ley re’.,… plied: ~q declined to receive a note from Colonel Webb of the New York Courier and Enquirer because I chose to be drawn into no controversy with him. I neither affirmed nor denied anything in regard to his character. When you remarked that this course on my part might place you in an unpleasant situation, I stated to you that I intended by my ref usa r no di srespect to you.”

The next day, vJash i ngton ‘s birthday, Graves wrote to Ci I ley that he found the laTter’s reply unsatisfactory because it sti I I did not admit that Colonel Webb is a gent leman. tt I have therefore to i nqui re!’, wrote Graves, :’whether you declined to receive his communication on the ground of any personal exception to him as a gentleman or a man of honor.”

On the same day Cilley replied: ,., cannot admit your right to propound the question to which you ask a categorical answer, and therefore I decline any further response to it.!t

On the next day Graves wrote aga into Ci I ley: “As by your note of yesterday you have refused to yield on grounds which would exonerate me from all responsibi I ity growing out of the affair, am left no other alternative but to ask that satisfaction which is recognized among gentlemen. My friend, Honorable Henry Wise, is authori zed to make the arrangements sui tab Ie to the occas i on.!! Ci I ley immediately accepted the challenge, and named his friend, David Jones, to serve as his second to confer with Graves’ second, Henry Wise.

One hundred and twenty years after the event, when duel ling has disappeared from the Ameri can scene, it i s d iff i cu It to unde rstand what drove Graves to challenge Ci I ley to a duel. In fact Graves’ closest friends thought he was committing suicide on a very questionable point of honor. If anyone was going to challenge Cilley, it should be vJebb, the offended editor. How Graves could  consider himself personally offended by the exchange of correspondence was hard for his fr iends to see. Furthermore they cons i de red the cha Ilenge sui ci de, because Graves was a very indifferent shot, although a pretty good swordsman, whi Ie Ci Iley, as the challenged party having choice of weapons, would probably choose pistols, in the use of which he was very ski Ilful.

To everyone’s surpri se Ci Iley chose ri f les, an unusua I weapon for a due I, but one with whi ch Ci Iley was a crack shot. Ci Iley named the time as 12 noon on the next day, February 24. Because due II i ng was forb i dden in the Di stri ct of Columbia, the place was to be a field just across the Maryland line.

Ci I ley laid down the following specifications, as it was his right as the cha I lenged party to do: HThe parti es sha II be p I aced at 80 yards from each other and shall hold the rifles horizontally at arm’s length, downwards, the rifles to be cocked and triggers set; the words to be ‘Gentlemen, are you ready?’ AfTer which, neither answering ‘No’, The words shall be in regular succession, ‘Fire — one, two, three, four’. The position of the parties at each end of The 80 yard line shal I be determined by lot, and the second of the party losing The choice of position shal I have The giving of the word. Dress is to be ordinary winter clothing and subject to the examination of both parties. Each party may have at hand, besi des his second, a surgeon and two other friends. The seconds, for the execution of their respective trusts, are allowed to have a pair of pistols each, but no other person shall have any weapon. TT

For some reason Graves had d iff i cu Ity procuri ng a r if Ie, and at 10 0′ clock on the appoinTed morning, Ci I ley’s second, Jones, wrote to Graves’ second, Wise, HI have in my possessi on an exce I lent ri f Ie, in good order, wh i ch is at the servi ce of Mr. Graves. n At the same ti me Jones offered to postpone the due I unti I 3 P.M. Half an hour before noon Wise notified Jones that Graves had procured a rifle and would be ready at 3 o’clock.

It was agreed that the parties should meet at the Anacostia Bridge on the  road to Marborough in Maryland between 1:30 and 2:30, that if either got there first, he would wait for the other, and they would proceed together out of the District of Columbia. They met at the bridge about two o’clock and all proceeded  to the duel ling place. Jones and Wise marked off the ground. Wise won the position and Jones had the giving of the word. Jones was then told by vii se that two gent lemen of Kentucky, Ca Ihoun and Hawes, were sorre di stance off as spectators)’ but would not approach upon the duelling ground. Wise also told Jones that, contrary to the terms, he had brought two rifles, but would send one of them away if Jones so demanded. When Jones learned that the second rifle was unloaded, he consented to its remaining in one of the carriages. Shortly after 3 o!clock the rifle for each contesTant was loaded in the presence of the seconds. The parties were fully instructed by Jones. Jones then gave the word distincTly and the parties exchanged ShOTS. They both missed. Jones then asked ~’Ji se whether Graves was sati sf i ed. \~i se rep lied, i7Not un less Ci Iley wi II make some di sclaimer regardi ng Co lone I ~’Jebb, whi ch wi II re I ieve Graves from his posiTion.”

After consulting with Ci Iley, Jones said: !PI am authorized to say that, in declining to receive from Graves the note from Colonel Webb, Ci I ley meant no disrespect to Graves, because he entertained for him, as he does now, the highest respect and the most kindly feelings. He declined to receive the note because he chose not TO be drawn into any controversy wi th Co lone I ~Jebb.!l

Much conversation ensued between seconds and friends, but no nearer approach was made to any reconci liation. Another shot was exchanged without effect.

Jones then addressed Wi se: HMr. Ci Iley, in comi ng to thi s ground and exchanging shots with Mr. Graves, has shown to the world That, in declining to receive the note of Colonel Webb, he did not do so because he dreaded a controversy. He has shown himself a brave man, disposed to render satisfaction to Graves. th ink he has done so and that the matter shou I d end he re.”

Wise rep lied: HMr. Graves does not req ui re from r-.1r. Ci I ley any certi f i cate of character for himself. He considers, however, that he must not be left in the position of being charged with bearing the note of a man who is not a man of honor and a gent leman.

Wise and Jones Then tried hard to reach some agreement, but fai led. A th i rd shot was then ordered, before wh i ch Wi se sa i d to Jones, ‘i I f th is matter is not termi nated by th is shot, I wi II propose to shorten the di stance. tI Jones rep lied, n I have no objecti on.”

At the word l~Fi re i1, Ci Iley shot fi rst and agai n mi ssed. When Graves fi red Ci Iley fell, mortally wounded, and died before he could be rerroved from the fi e Id.

Ci I ley was no ordinary, hot-headed citizen. He was a Congressman of the United States, and he had been shot down on the duel ling field by another Congressman, just as Aaron Burr had shot down Alexander Hami Iton more than thirty years earlier. Hami Iton’s death had caused wide public resentment against duelling, and several states had outlawed it altogether. It made matters worse that duel ling was banned in the national capital, where these two 1838 contestants both represented their states.

For many years afterwards friends of Ci Iley contended that he had no intention of ki I I ing or even wounding Graves, that he deliberately missed, because he was too good a shot to fai I to hit such a target three times in succession. They felt also that, after the first shot, Cilley seemed sure that Graves also had no intention of hitting him. As for Graves, he said nothing, but his friends contended that he was so poor a shot that his hitting Ci I ley had been an unlucky accident, because indeed he had no desire to ki I I the man.

Newspaper controversy raged so violently that the two seconds, Jones and Wise, felt compelled to issue a joint statement which said: ;~This statement is made for the sole purpose of al laying excitement in the public mind and to prevent any further controversy on the subject, which is already ful I of enough woe. We fully agree to the fair and honorable manner in which the duel was conducted. We endeavored to discharge our duties according to the code under which the parties met, regulated by magnanimous principles and the laws of humanity.”

Comment in the New York Journal of Commerce was typical of that in many newspapers. It ed i tori a I i zed: perhaps a matter of acci dent.

“That the chance was Mr. Ci Iley’ s to di e was It was apparent that Ci I ley, who was a crack shot, did not intend to shoot Graves, and it is by no means clear that Graves intentionally hit Cilley. For the tragedy the two seconds are to blame. Grant- i ng that everything was conducted proper,ly , according to the laws of due II i ng? up to the first fire, after that for the seconds to press for another fire was murder, according to the code of honor. The circumstances demand an investigation by Congress.”

The funeral of Representative Jonathan Ci I ley of Maine was held in the capitol bui Iding at Washington on February 27, 1838. The hal I and the galleries of the House of Representatives were crowded with both gentlemen and ladies. IVbst members of both the Senat.e and the House attended. \lJhy Ci Iley was buried in Washington, rather than in Thomaston, Maine, is not clear, but a contemporary newspaper account says, “The body was attended to the grave by both houses of Congress, the Pres i dent of the Un i ted States, and the higher offi cers of the Government.

What did Maine folk think of this duel? What they thought is probably wei I ref lected by the Wa I do Patri ot, whi ch on March 16, 1838 pub I i shed the fo I lowi ng ed i tori a I:

“When our last paper was put to press, the pub I i c mi nd was suffering the most intense excitement; not only from the fact that one of our members of Congress had been slain in mortal combat, but from the manner of its announcement by many of the Tory papers, the distorted detai Is of the attending circumstances and the reckless assertions that this bloody tragedy was only the consummation of a diabolical conspiracy of the Bank party. That excitement is subsiding and a calmer view is now being taken concerning al I the parties engaged. The unwritten code of honor passes before the public mind with but slight examination, when unmarked by blood. But when a victim is laid upon its hallowed altar,  scruti ny is more severe. The pol i ti ca I friends of the I ate Mr. Ci I fey award to him the possess i on of high i nte Ilectua I powers, of wh i ch few can boast, and though he has left no other chronicles to his fame, we would not abate one jot from this reputation. We only hope it may fix upon al I who seek notoriety in this savage field the intolerable stigma of public resentment.

“Yet we cannot admi t that Ci I ley was compe lied to accept Graves’ cha 1- lenge. Charity requires us to believe that he broke away from the influence of his northern friends and turned to hot-headed southern counsel. All he needed  was moral courage — the same courage which has distinguished other Maine citizens — the courage to refuse the duelling field. The haste with which the challenge was accepted, the bul lying offer of weapons, and the choice of the  dead I y ri fie, ca II for unm i ti gated condemnati on. The death of Mr. Ci I ley shou I d call forth unanimous remonstrance against duel ling. Unhappi Iy, false notions of honor are not confi ned to the South. They have some foothold even in Maine.

But we must erad i cate them. Whoever goes to Congress from th is state must understand that he is not sent there to shoot or be shot by his fe I low man.

Less than four months before the Graves-Ci Iley due I, a young man from A 1- bion, Maine, a graduate of what is now Colby College, had been ki lied by a mob in Alton, I Ilinois, because he insisted upon freedom of the press. To this heroic young man the Waldo Patriot referred as it closed its editorial on the death of Congressman Ci Iley. The Patriot said: ”It is not long since Reverend Eli jah Lovejoy was shot whi Ie defendi ng hi s press. He was a citi zen of Maine, yet his high-handed murder attracted but little notice from a political party some of whose leaders would now turn the death of Ci Iley to political account. We wou I d not di stract pub I i c attenti on from the tragedy in Wash i ngton, but the sti I I blacker and more nefari ous tragedy at A Iton demands greater condemnati on.

Year: 1957