The Newspaper
Newspaper Literature of America.

221

as yet

be

Wutoosta aik Jødt duim be much excited, but how the affray may end cannot as We hear Hen more of itd 513 onion shoq Soon after this date, according to the correspondence of The New York Journal of Commerce, a Mr. Arnold, of Tennessee, was addressing the House of Representatives, when Mr. Raynor called Mr. Arnold to order, peremptorily several times. Mr. Arnold said it was a malignant interruption. Mr. Raynor replied: You are a blackguard. Mr. Arnold went on and said: You and said; & Yout see, Mr. Speaker, they call me a blackguard; and that is no more than what they have said of you this morning. Words continued continuat to pass between Mr. Arnold and Mr. Raynor. Mr. Raynor at length said, if the blackguard wants to attack me, let him do it in the street instead of making a scene here for the diversion of the galleries." Arnold

1

ΠΗ

en In Eng as one of the heroes of an equally

pleasing scene which occurred somewhat more lately, in which General Dawson, of Louisiana ("tall, and thin but muscular," as his

party paper descritos me of the most graceful and gentlemanly

1

him

men in Congress, for no man is uniformly more courteous, better bred, or more observant of the rules"), told Mr. Arnold that he was a coward, and a blustering fellow; in short, rising into his most graceful and gentlemanly elevation, that he was add blackguard, and a d-d scoundrel, and if he didn't behave himself better, he would cut his d-d throat from ear to ear." Of which we afterwards hear no more than that Mr. Arnold happens to be an extremely patient man, and only replied, we think very sensibly, that he had no taste for fighting, and that his complimentary friends might “ go and fight the Seminoles if they liked, or somebody who was fonder of it than he was."a

Our last instance, as our first, shall be of Mr. Wise. This gentleman is Chairman of the committee of Naval Affairs, and his adversary polite encounter we are about to relate, was Mr. in the Stanley, Chairman of the committee of Military Affairs; as highly appropriate representatives of quarrel, therefore, as our Secretary at War and First Lord of the Admiralty would be. Mr. Stanley began. Being an anti-administration man, he was talking of beheading Captain Tyler (politically), and then (we quote the correspondent of the American) gracefully compared him to an "ass," which "resting on a railroad may overthrow the locomotive cars, passengers and all." "Mr. Stanley added that Mr. Wise had bull-dogged Mr. Whitney, referring to a statement of Mr. Wise's, that if Mr. Whitney's arm had moved an inch he should have died on the spot. Mr. Wise: Does the gentleman say I bull-dogged Mr. Whitney. Mr. Stanley: I made the remark in reply to what you said about dogging the commissioners. Mr. Wise: I ask the gentleman from North Carolina again if he meant to say I bull-dogged Mr. Whit

ney before the committee. Mr. Stanley: I say again distinctly I made the reply about bull-dogging for the gentleman from Virginia, and intended it for him and him alone: let him take it. Mr. Wise: That is exactly such a reply as I should have expected from a COWARD. Mr. Stanley: I expected all that. It is an old trick. This seat will testify who was a coward at the extra session; we all know who got the worst of that. Let the gentleman try me. He shall see who is a coward. He has mistaken his man. I was not born yesterday. I know his unworthy acts to get the advantage, but he will not succeed. The question" simply adds the Ame rican's correspondent, " now naturally arises: if a duel is to ensue, who is to send the challenge?"

But no duel ensued. Mr. Stanley was quite quiet, and went to make himself merry at the Washington races, some few days after. Mr. Wise went there too, and then occurred the following notable scene. We derive it from the respectable authority, already quoted, of a few days later date. Mr. Stanley, who was on horseback, in riding by Mr. Wise (also mounted), jostled him: accidentally, Mr. Stanley says, in consequence of the refractoriness of his horse. As soon as Mr. Wise recovered his seat, he rode after Mr. Stanley and struck him over the head with a rattan with such force as to break the rattan in pieces. Mr. Stanley said I brushed against you unintentionally. Then you are excused,' answered Mr. Wise. Do you strike a gentleman behind his back,' asked Mr. Stanley. Damn you!' was the reply of Mr. Wise: Take the blow with the coward I gave you the other day and make the most of them.' Persons then interfered and separated them, telling them that was no place to settle the quarrel: and they went home. Mr. Stanley's face was badly cut. THIS AFFAIR MUST RESULT IN A DUEL." No, no! Again this simple correspondent prophesied badly. No duel has yet taken place. Friends met, and, as it is said, arranged' the matter: and very probably, for the thing occurred as far back as May, Mr. Wise and Mr. Stanley, at this moment, while we lay down our pen, are on terms of renewed and affectionate intimacy.

6

SHORT REVIEWS

OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS.

Das Untersuchungsrecht. (The Right of Search.) Von FRANCIS J. GRUND. Leipsic. 1842.

We notice this publication, only that we may quote from it one passage in illustration of what we remarked in our last number of the General Cass tribe of American politicians. The author is already known by two shallow and declamatory volumes about America, published in this country four or five years ago; in return for which, and to reward the loathsome puffery they contained, the American government appointed Mr. Grund Consul for the States at Bremen. The man's argument is beneath contempt, and if it were possible to say a worse thing of his style, it ought to be said: but we quote the passage purposely without a word, to show the impudence and baseness that now recommend themselves to our brethren across the Atlantic.

After briefly depicting the dangerous maritime supremacy of England, and passing a few highly-coloured encomiums in the Bunker's-hill style of declamation on the American War of Independence, he annalyzes the motives which actuated England in her 'humane' policy of slave liberation, proves her to be false and hollow in every one of them, and then undertakes to show what a lively interest Germany should take in this question.

"Should America be forced to embrace any side in Europe, ITS NATURAL ALLIES ARE FRANCE AND RUSSIA. With a French alliance are associated the recollections of the War of Independence. The flags of France waved on the battlements of Yorktown conjointly with those of the Union. France, in a word, is the old, tried, chivalrous ally of the Union, and its material interests are identical with those of the Free States. Russia possesses, it is true, no sympathies in America, and cannot, therefore, easily work upon the legislative body or public opinion; but Russia and America are nowhere opposed to one another, and both lands are from their greatness and power elevated above all petty jealousies; and as regards the principles of government in both, their very diametrical opposition, as in physical nature, forms the strongest means of attraction. It is not in the principles which the French have at various times preached, but in the national character of Frenchmen that the Propaganda exists. England has inculcated the same principles for the last two centuries, but has as yet made but few proselytes. Russia whose moral power IS BASED ON RELIGION [nothing of the murder of Poland, O republican and liberty-loving Grund ?] and Sclavonian nationality needs as little to shun contact with American democracy [that is true!!] as America the influence of Imperial Ukases; every thing depends on the common end in view; and we can easily conceive a case in which this common object might be for both lands a national one. But whether Germany-or rather its two great representatives Austria and Prussia-act wisely in precipitating this natural gravitation of America towards France and Russia, instead of severing the United States from the two latter empires, is a question which we of course leave diplomatists to decide."

Modest M. Grund! And oh, happy republic that is so served, and that will be only too glad yet further to reward such service!

Ueber das Schielen un die Heilung desselben durch dei Operation. (On Squinting, and the Manner of its Cure by Operation.) By J. F. DIEFFENBACH. Berlin. 1842.

Ir is not often that we are tempted to extend our notice to foreign medical works, but the operations of Dieffenbach for the cure of squinting have obtained so universal a fame, that we cannot allow the appearance of a work like the present to pass, without briefly apprizing our readers of the nature of its contents.

Dieffenbach, as many of our readers, are no doubt aware, is the inventor of an operation for the cure or relief of squinting (strabismus is the new and more learned word); and that this operation consists in dividing the internal rectus muscle of the eyeball, which is done by a proper scissors, without externally wounding the eyelid. The subject has been much written and talked of within the last two or three years, but this is the first time that Dieffenbach himself has deemed it proper to favour the world with a work on his discovery.

Since the 26th of October, 1839, Dieffenbach has performed 1200 operations on squinting patients, and in most cases with perfect success. Considering that, while the great master has been thus busy with the ocular obliquities of the good people of Berlin, his disciples have not been idle in other parts of Europe, the marvel is that there should still remain a phenomenon of the kind to work upon.

Dieffenbach throws out a hint, towards the close of his preface, that some of his disciples have carried the operation too far; but he is not apprehensive that the failures that have ensued, in consequence of the "immoderate exercise" of his system, can bring any permanent discredit upon it. He opens his work by some general remarks on squinting, its causes, its kinds, and its degrees. The theoretrical portion of his treatise is disposed of with exceeding brevity; but the author, even before he applied himself to the cutting the eyestrings of his friends, was famed as a man of few words, and one much more ready with his knife than his speech. He gives a minute description of the instruments he makes use of, and of the nature of the operation, with its relation to the six muscles of the eyeball. The subcutaneous incision recommended by Guerin, is rejected altogether by Dieffenbach. Accidents during and after the operation are detailed, and illustrated by various anecdotes of patients, including the case of the Countess Hahn Hahn. Our author is decidedly opposed to any operation on a child of less than six years old, and decides in the negative the question whether the operation ought ever to be performed on both eyes at once.

་་་་

Any thing like an analysis of a work like this, lies altogether beyond our sphere. We only wish to apprize the English public of its appearance, leaving to others the task of a critical investigation of its merits.

Seyffarth's Letters from London.

225

Briefe aus London. (Letters from London.) By DR. WOLDEMAR SEYFFARTH. 2 vols. Altenburg. 1842.

THESE letters were originally written for a German periodical (Das Morgenblatt); and, though far from faultless, were quite good enough

to deserve to be published d in a more permanent form. They were written at brief intervals from August, 1884, to June, 1836, and furnish a deal of amusing gossip of the doings and sayings that occupied public attention in England in the course of those years. The author speaks of every thing as if he had seen it himself, yet he describes scenes of which very thing as if he probable è he never was a witness. Often he misunderstands what he sees or hears," rs, and sometimes has either been has eit misinformed, or has not exactly understood what has been told him. The consequence is, that, though his descriptions of London manners are in substance tolerably correct, in detail they are at times ludicrously inaccurate.

1

At the Custom-house, on his first arrival, this adventure occurs to him nobi Housutad

•In my trunk," he says, "was a lady's cap in a small box. I had bought the unsubstantial article in Berlin for six dollars, and had brought it with me by way of a joke, intending it as a present for I had no idea that the thing was liable to duty, and was astonished to hear the officer dictate fifteen shillings' to the man who was writing down an inventory of my possessions. Fifteen shillings! I exclaimed. According to the tariff,' said he. This I thought would be rather too much for my joke, which, to say truth, had seemed dear to me, when I gave six dollars for it in Berlin, so I refused to pay. Then we must keep the article,' said he of the Customs. I can't help it, was my answer. Hereupon he proposed that I should pay twelve shillings, and in the end he came down to three, which I offered him, when he had met me at the intermediate station of nine. As I cannot suppose that the officer made this reduction of duty on his own responsibility, I blush in my soul for those who empowered him to make it."

Now, any one at all acquainted with the Custom-house formalities on these occasions, will be at no loss to understand the whole affair. The cap was liable to an ad valorem duty, and it was the doctor's business to say what he considered his cap worth. If it cost him six dollars in Berlin, the duty in London in 1834 ought to have been about six shillings; and had he valued his cap at the Berlin price, that would have been the duty demanded of him. If he paid only three shillings duty, the officers must have adopted a valuation equal to about half the cost of the article at Berlin. The whole was evidently a misunderstanding, owing to the doctor's ignorance of the formalities of the place. We grieve to admit at the same time that it is a place from which courtesy and decency are too often banished basi

Many of the doctor's stories are, avowedly, little more than transcripts from the newspapers of the day, and our criminal trials and police reports afford abundant opportunities to interweave specimens of the horrible into his kaleidoscopical picture of English manners. But the book has clever touches. The description of a public charity dinner.

VOL. XXX. NO. LIX. ›

Q