The Taber and Magrath Duel.

*

405

*

that I had but urged my real convictions. Up to this time we had acted and conferred only together and alone. Finding that we could not agree, and when we were about to separate, I expressed a wish, as I had observed that he consulted with some invited gentlemen on the ground, to know who were his advising friends, and to explain to and confer with them on my views. He replied that they were Messrs. J. B. Campbell, J. J. Pettigrew, and J. H. Wilson, and went from me to present my request to them. He returned, declining to accede to it-I presume by their concurrence or direction. At this moment Dr. Bellinger advanced to us and expressed a desire to intervene between the parties. He urged that as there had been two exchanges of shots, and each party had had sufficient chances at each other, the difficulty should be adjusted and terminated. His intervention was cordially accepted; and as I understood Dr. Bellinger to make, by his remarks, the proposition that there should be a mutual declaration of satisfaction, in view of two exchanges of shots, I intimated my assent to it. The basis of the discussion on both sides was as I have previously stated. At length I succeeded, as I thought, in turning their views in the direction of the written propositions which I made on the field. At least, finding discussion would be uselessly prolonged, I offered those propositions as the best and all that I could do; and with the concurrence of Mr. Conner, I reduced them on the spot into writing, and to the effect that, as simultaneous declarations, Mr. Taber disclaim the intent, as editor of the Mercury, to have made by the publication of the articles an attack on the private character of Judge Magrath, and Mr. Ed. Magrath disclaim the intent to insult Mr. Taber by the language of his challenge. I would here state that in every previous instance where terms of adjustment were proposed by either side, Mr. Conner and Dr. Bellinger insisted that those on the part of Mr. Taber should be the condition of those on the part of Mr. Magrath. To this I steadily objected, on the ground that gentlemen seeking to place themselves in their true positions should declare those positions independently of, yet simultaneously with each other, and the other mode was either distrustful or humiliating. Mr. Conner carried my propositions to his group of friends for advisement. After a time Mr. Conner returned to me, bringing, as the sine qua non of their acceptance, the proposition that Mr. Taber should also express regret for the publication of the articles. Mild and harmless as it may seem, it was too palpable to me that it amounted not only to an identification of Mr. Taber with the whole responsibility for those articles, but as a disclaimer of and apology for them. It would have been a stultification of him as an editor, and a humiliation of him as a man, and so I stated to Mr. Conner. I not only rejected it, but regarded it as the index to the whole meaning of that hostile meeting. It must rest on the head of those or him who made it.

I then inquired of Mr. Conner whether I must proceed to load for another shot, and he bowed his head in assent and requirement.

Near an hour had been consumed after the second shot in discussion, and the third shot took place with its fatal result.

1. That Mr. Heart, co-editor of the Mercury, had also been challenged, and had accepted.

2. That satisfaction in behalf of the Mercury, although to be deemed a unity, was to be rendered by Mr. Taber or Mr. Heart, or both; and that, if rendered complete, in entirety, by Mr. Taber, Mr. Heart should not be called upon; if not, Mr. Heart could be.

3. That Mr. Heart's meeting had been appointed at the same ground, at a time immediately following that of Mr. Taber, and that he was actually at the place long before the third shot, waiting to respond in satisfaction.

I can now give my reasons for not withdrawing Mr. Taber, and not declining a third shot.

I. I was satisfied that Mr. Taber would not have been willing.

2. I would have assumed a responsibility contrary to all precedent, in face of the demand of the challenging party. I might have assumed it in despite of these considerations, but for the reason,

3. That if Mr. Taber had been withdrawn, the other party could have insisted, on the pretext of a failure of satisfaction on the part of the Mercury, upon Mr.

Heart taking his place and making it complete. If Mr.Heart, in such event, had fallen, what would have been the position of my friend and myself? Mr. Taber had assumed to render satisfaction in full, and nothing but the admission of his opponent or the decree of an intervention could have availed.

It is but justice to Mr. Edmund Rhett, Jr., who promptly avowed himself the author of the article signed "A Nullifier," and who instantly endeavored to prevent the duel by challenging Judge Magrath with that object, to state that Mr. Taber's meeting with Mr. Ed. Magrath took place on grounds entirely distinct from his, had no reference to his position, and could not have been arrested by his action. I therefore refused to permit him to be on the field, and would not have suffered his interference. He was, however, near it, ready to interpose and assume all responsibility, in the event Judge Magrath had appeared and intervened. Thus the death of Mr. Taber prevented two other duels between parties already on the ground, and "the liberty and independence of the Press" was vindicated!

Now we have another affair which occurred only three months after that between Messrs. Taber and Magrath, and in which a member of the Rhett family challenged the editor of the Charleston (S. C.) Standard for a communication furnished by one of the actors in the previous tragedy, and, in a word, for precisely the same reason. These two journalistic affairs were so curious in their causes and effects as to make us sometimes wonder at the eccentricities of man. We give the correspondence between Alfred Rhett and L. W. Spratt, of the Standard:

THE INSULT AND THE DEMAND FOR REPARATION.

Tuesday Evening, Jan. 6, 1857. SIR,-You thought proper to publish in your paper of the 27th of November a communication, in which I was gratuitously and unjustly assailed by Dr. Bellinger, who, in the very piece, declared that he was not responsible under the laws of honor, and argued that editors of newspapers were more accountable for what they published than the writers of their articles. In deference to the prevailing sentiment of the community against further strife, and in hope that you also would forbear additional wrong, I let this pass, and published an explanation and defense, in which I denied the facts as false inferences alleged against me. You also published in a subsequent communication, on the 1st of January, from the same irresponsible source, a reiteration of the offensive and insulting imputations previously made against me, with additional remarks more offensive than any already published, and this in the teeth of my published statement. You have thus made yourself responsible for the articles, and have left me no other alternative than to meet the responsibility you have assumed. I am under the necessity of requesting that you make a suitable amende to me for the injury you have done Your obedient servant, ALFRED RHETT.

me.

CHARLESTON, Jan. 7, 1857.

SIR,-Your note of the 6th instant was handed to me by Mr. —, and has received the earliest attention consistent with my engagements. It does not appear, from the tenor of your note, what atonement it is in my power to render you. If it will consist in disclaiming any purpose on my part of wounding your feelings, or of injuring your character, you will confer a favor by stating the terms in which such a disclaimer would be agreeable, and I can scarcely apprehend the possibility of not being able to make it in accordance with your wishes.

Respectfully yours,

ALFRED RHETT, Esq.

THE ATONEMENT REQUIRED.

L.W. SPRATT.

CHARLESTON, Jan. 8, 1857.

SIR,-I take pleasure in expressing my gratification at your disposition to dis

The End of the Charleston Mercury.

407

claim any purpose of wounding my feelings or injuring my character by the publication of the communications alluded to in my note. You desire me to state what atonement or disclaimer would be agreeable. I can but presume that your reflection has shown you that, in publishing the articles of Dr. Bellinger, in view of his declared non-amenability, and of my being a private citizen, and of the fact that I had not assailed him through your columns, you have inflicted, in fact, a wound upon my feelings and an injury upon my character, and that you have become unavoidably responsible for this wrong. Your candor will therefore, no doubt, induce you to perceive the wrong, and to express regret for the consequences which have ensued from your acts.

Respectfully yours,

To L.W. SPRATT, Esq.

THE AMENDE.

ALFRED RHETT.

CHARLESTON, Jan. 8, 1857.

SIR,-Your note of to-day has been received. In permitting the appearance, in the columns of the Standard, of the articles referred to, I certainly had no intention to injure or to offend any one; and I readily acknowledge my regret that any wound was thereby occasioned to your feelings, or any injury to your characRespectfully yours, L. W. SPRATT.

ter.

ALFRED RHETT, Esq.

SATISFACTORY.

CHARLESTON, Jan. 8, 1857.

L. W. SPRATT, ESQ.-SIR,-It gives me pleasure to state that your note of today has been received, and is satisfactory.

Very respectfully,

ALFRED RHETT.

But the days of duels are rapidly passing away, and the days of the Mercury have been numbered. Its career is at an end. It ceased to exist in November, 1868. Ninety-one volumes of the paper had been published, fuller of the brilliant sophistries of the South than can be found any where else. Messrs. R. B. Rhett, Jr., and Brother, with Roswell T. Logan for an assistant, were its last editors and conductors. Why its publication should have been suspended is a mystery, when we take into view the following announcements, which appeared in the Mercury in August, 1868, and which seemed to be standing notices in that remarkable paper:

THE CHARLESTON MERCURY HAS NOW A LARGER BONA FIDE COUNTRY CIRCULATION THAN ANY OTHER PAPER PUBLISHED IN CHARLESTON.

THE CHARLESTON MERCURY HAS THE LARGEST NUMBER OF PERMANENT ANNUAL AND SEMI-ANNUAL Subscribers of any Journal in South Carolina. What are reminiscences? The records of the past. The Mercury of March 26, 1832, contained this notice:

MARK!

Monday, March 19, 1832. The Senate of the U. States, by a vote of 23 to 18, five majority, adopted Mr. Clay's proposition to remodel and aggravate the tariff.

ARE WE READY?

TOCSIN.

In his valedictory in 1868, Editor Rhett, in lamentations over the result of the fruitless efforts of the leaders of the South, declared his intention "to take his place among her ruined children-better so than to be the proudest and most honored of her successful enemies —and to wait, hoping, praying, expecting the bright coming of her final deliverance, the independence and prosperity of the South." Sic transit gloria mundi.

THE FIFTH EPOCH.

1832-1835.

JOURNALISM IN A TRANSITION STATE.

CHAPTER XXV.

THE BEGINNING OF THE NEWSPAPER REVOLUTION.

SIZE OF NEWSPAPERS IN 1832.-WASTE OF SPACE.-SMALLER PAPERS.-THE NEW YORK GLOBE.-James GORDON BENNETT.-THE PENNSYLVANIAN.— THE HOYT, VAN BUREN, AND BENNETT CORRESPONDENCE.-BLAIR'S OPINION OF BENNETT.-OPPOSITION OF POLITICIANS. INCOMING OF THE INDEPENDENT PRESS.-Seward, Weed, and GREELEY.

It was now necessary to have a revolution in the Press. Those in existence were too large, and too much under the influence and control of politics. Something new was needed. Something fresh and vigorous.

Newspapers, beginning with the News-Letter in 1704, on sheets 8 by 12 inches in size, run up, with the Journal of Commerce and Courier and Enquirer in 1827, to 24 by 35 inches; and these comparatively large papers, in their competition, as we have shown, increased their dimensions to 35 by 583 inches in 1853. Size seemed to have absorbed most of the other qualities that make up a first-class journal. Such large folio sheets, when we consider their form, circulation, and advertising patronage, were beyond the legitimate requirements of newspapers at that time. Space for advertisements in the "blanket sheets" was not only sold at very low rates, but was thrown away. Their publishers were compelled to allow as many lines as a grasping advertiser chose to take for $32 per year or $40, including the daily paper. Many advertisements would appear day after day till long after they had accomplished their object. One or more pages would thus frequently become old or stereotyped matter, continually staring the reader in the face, and appearing worse even than a thrice-told tale. It was admitted that these stale business notices seriously damaged the fresh advertisements, and the newspapers generally, as a matter of course, with nothing but politics besides, and without a new idea, became heavy and uninteresting when compared with the vigorous sheets of the present day.

James Gordon Bennett and the Globe.

409

It was necessary to change all this. But how? It required time, money, courage, tact, persistency, talent, industry, and enterprise to effect a revolution. Were they to be had? All these elements, barring the main one-money, began to develop themselves in 1832 or a little earlier. Smaller and cheaper, and more independent papers, with fresh matter, fresh arrangements, and fresh ideas, began to be thought of and projected. With what result?

On the 29th of October, 1832, about the time Emile de Girardin was making arrangements to start La Presse, at half price, in Paris, there was issued in New York City an evening paper called the New York Globe. Its size was 12 by 17-half that of the ten dollar papers, or "respectable sixpennies" then in existence. Its price was eight dollars, which was also a reduction in the right direction, but not sufficient. Its prospectus, as it appeared in the first number, intelligently tells its own story, and is a concise and curious history in itself:

TO THE PUBLIC.

I publish this evening, at No. 20 William Street, the first number of a new daily journal called the New York Globe, price eight dollars a year. Early arrangements will be made to issue a weekly and a semi-weekly paper from the same office.

Since my withdrawal in August last from the Courier and Enquirer, I have been taking measures for the establishment of a new paper, but unavoidable obstacles have hitherto prevented its appearance. I am now in the field, sword in hand, with unfurled banner, resolved to aid the great cause of Jackson and Democracy-the Union of the States, and the rights of the States. My politics are well known. I was one of the first in this state to put the names of Jackson and Van Buren before the people in 1827-I fought through the great conflict of 1828, and again in June, 1829, I was the first to bring the name of our venerable President up for a re-election. I have always supported the principles and nominations of the Democratic Party, and shall continue in that course. Opposed to nullification, I adhere to Jefferson's doctrines of State Rights-equal legislation— economy in public expenditures-reduction of unnecessary taxes-and the advancement of human liberty and human happiness.

Up to the next election, politics will be the staple article of the Globe; but after that event I shall give it all the variety which makes a daily paper the welcome visiter of the tea-table or counting-room. And if industry, experience, and resolution are any warrant for success, I entertain no doubt that, in less than two years, I shall count, without affidavits, at least five thousand good subscribers to the New York Globe.

A word on the size of my paper. For years past the public has been cloyed with immense sheets-bunglingly made up without concert of action or individuality of character-the reservoirs of crude thoughts from different persons who were continually knocking their heads against each other, without knocking any thing remarkably good out of them. I have avoided this inconvenience. I shall give my readers the cream of foreign and domestic events. My sheet is moderate in size, but neat and manageable, printed on fine paper and with beautiful type. When an overflow of patronage shall demand more room, as it soon will, I may enlarge a little, but I shall avoid, as I would a pestilence, those enormous sheets-the pine barrens of intelligence and taste, which have been undoubtedly sent into the world as a punishment for its growing wickedness.

In taking my position as the editor of a daily paper in this community, I am no new recruit-no undisciplined soldier. I have acted in this capacity for twelve years past, eight of which I have been associated with the National Advocate, the New York Enquirer, and latterly the Courier and Enquirer, all of this city. I