USA > Missouri > Missouri the center state, 1821-1915 > Part 13
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53
Benton, the Principal.
A year and a day after his first dueling experience in St. Louis and the second year of his residence, Benton was principal in a duel. Like the rest of the Benton duels, that of August 12, 1817, had its origin in politics. Many years ago Richard Dowling wrote into the minute book of the Missouri Historical Society Benton's version of the trouble with Lucas :
"The election which was held on Monday, the 4th of August, 1817, at which members of Congress were to be chosen, John Scott and Rufus 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, Lient. Thomas F. Smith taking a con- spicuous part.
"The polling took place on the west side of Third, between Almond and Spruce, at the courthouse, the judges being inside the door, and the people coming up to votc, which they did by handing in a printed ticket, which was read aloud, each name of a voter written down at the moment and on a line with it his vote. This was the only voting precinct in the county. At this time a property qualification was the law. Col. Thomas H. Benton, living in a two- story house, frame, on the north side of Washington avenue, between Second and Third, pre- sented 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. After this explanation he offered to vote. Notwithstanding the explanation, Charles Lucas renewed his challenge. Whereupon Colonel Benton called Lucas 'an insolent puppy.' I had this account from the lips of Colonel Benton himself on our return from Manchester, where a large political meeting had been held, I think in 1842."
80
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
One of the 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-Hempstead families prompted conversation 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 Missouri 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 immediate effects did not seem serious, he was taken ill suddenly in the midst of 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 writing, 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 dis- charged I will fight, to-night, if possible; if not to-morrow morning 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."
The Statement of Lucas.
The sending of the challence 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 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, August 11, 1817, 9 o'clock at night.
"The causes of differences between T. H. Benton and me were as follows: At October 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 opposite 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 of August, 1817, I inquired whether he had paid taxes in time to entitle him to vote; he was offering his vote at the time. He applied vehement, abusive and ungentle- manly 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. I make this declaration that, let things eventuate as they may, it may be known how they originated.
"CHARLES LUCAS."
JUDGE SAMUEL TREAT
THOMAS T. GANTT
THE FIRST COURTHOUSE IN ST. LOUIS
81
DUELING IN MISSOURI
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 language 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 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. 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."
Hempstead died the night of the Ioth of August, 1817. Benton received the challenge the morning of the IIth. The copy preserved among the manuscript collections of the Missouri Historical Society reads :
"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 one gentleman to another for such an indignity. I am, CHARLES LUCAS."
Lucas-Benton, First Meeting.
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 personal interview between Thomas H. Benton and Charles Lucas, Esquires :
"I. The parties shall meet at 6 o'clock on the morning of the 12th inst, at the upper end of the island, opposite Madame Roy's.
"2. Each party shall choose and provide himself with a smoothbore pistol, not exceed- ing eleven inches in length.
"3. The pistols shall be loaded on the ground by the friends of each party in the presence 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 anything 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.
"9. The friends of the parties shall cast lots for choice of stands and for the giving of the word. Vol. 1- 6
82
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
"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.
"IT. 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.
"St. Louis, IIth August, 1817.
LAWLESS, J. BARTON."
Joshua Barton, the second of Lucas, had been out the year before as a principal. Now he was a second. Later he was to be a principal again and to fall. Im- mediately after the first Lucas-Benton meeting, Barton wrote to Judge Lucas his account :
"Charles appeared perfectly cool and collected both before and after taking his position to fire. On Colonel Benton demanding another fire or a second meeting, Charles told me to reload, that he could stand another fire. This I hesitated to do, under a belief which I have never changed, that it would be a wanton exposure of the life of a man who, to judge from the profuse discharge of blood, had already received a wound which might prove mortal. He requested me to shorten the distance, which I declined, for the same reason. It was at the earnest solicitation of Doctor Quarles and myself that he consented to adjourn the meeting. We supported him to the boat, soon after getting into which he fainted."
The second of Benton, Judge Lawless, published a statement in the Missouri Gazette :
"When the parties fired I asked by request of Colonel Benton if Mr. Lucas was satisfied, to which he answered in the negative. Upon this I was proceeding to reload when Mr. Barton, a second for Mr. Lucas, informed me that it was the opinion of Doctor Quarles that the wound which Mr. Lucas had received was more serious than he had at first imagined, and that he considered it necessary that he should quit the field. In consequence, I again demanded of Mr. Lucas if he was satisfied, and if he wished for another meeting with Colonel Benton. To this question he replied that he was satisfied, and that he did not require a second meeting. Having reported the answer to Colonel Benton, he declared aloud that he was not satisfied, and required that Mr. Lucas should continue to fight or pledge himself to come out again as soon as his wound should be in a state to permit him. This promise was accordingly given, and the parties pledged themselves by their seconds to perform it."
Efforts at Mediation.
The seconds as well as mutual friends endeavored to settle the trouble without another duel. In his statement Mr. Barton said :
"It was agreed on the ground at the first meeting that I should inform the friend of Colonel Benton as soon as Mr. Lucas was sufficiently recovered to meet Colonel Benton again. On Friday, the 22d of August, about 8 o'clock in the morning, I waited on Colonel Lawless for that purpose. After conversing on different subjects, Colonel Lawless inquired after Mr. Lucas' health, and his state of convalescence, to which I replied that he was then sufficiently recovered to meet Colonel Benton. Colonel Lawless asked when we would be ready to go out, to which I answered the next morning, or at whatever time should be thought best. Colonel Lawless then informed me that he was going that day to Herculaneum on important business of his own, and should not return before the next Sunday evening or Monday morning, and mentioned something of Colonel Benton calling in another friend in case the meeting took place next morning. I professed my willingness to postpone it until
83
DUELING IN MISSOURI
his return, if Colonel Benton was willing, Colonel Lawless not seeming disposed to agree to anything without previous consultation with him. We conversed freely on everything connected with the affair, and particularly on the prospects of peace resulting from an attempt which had been made a few days before to that end. Colonel Lawless did not know, at that time, whether his friend would drop it in the way which had been pro- posed, but said he (Colonel Lawless) would 'make another trial on him.' We parted with an understanding, as I thought, that Colonel Benton was to be informed of what had passed, who could then either withdraw his demand for a second meeting, call in another friend, or wait Colonel Lawless' return. I was surprised at not hearing from them sooner, and. afterward asked Colonel Lawless if he had not informed his friend, before going to Her- culaneum, who told me he had called for that purpose, but did not find him at home. I considered that sufficient notice was given."
Judge Lawless thought that the efforts at mediation had succeeded. He was so confident that on the 18th of September, only nine days before the fatal duel, he wrote a full account of the settlement of differences and this appeared in the Gazette on the 20th of September :
"The earnest representations of Colonel Benton's friends and his own generous dis- position had considerably weakened those indignant feelings which, on the ground, had impelled him to exact of his antagonist the promise of another interview. His cooler reflec- tion informed him, that having wounded the man who had challenged him, and who, not- withstanding his wounds, declared himself satisfied, in pursuing Mr. Lucas further his con- duct would assume an aspect of vengeance foreign from his heart, and that the sympathies and opinions of his fellow-citizens would probably be raised against him. On these con- siderations he had almost determined to withdraw the demand for a second meeting, and he did not conceal these feelings from those persons with whom he was in the habit of inter- course. Colonel Benton, in thus yielding to the entreaties of friendship and to the dic- tates of his conscience, did not imagine that he was furnishing a means of calumny to his enemies, or that the motives of his conduct could possibly be misunderstood. In this idea he found himself disappointed, and was in a very few days assailed by reports of the most offensive nature to his feelings and reputation. Colonel Benton then saw the necessity of disproving those reports either by another meeting, or by the explanation of Mr. Lucas, from whom or from whose friends he supposed them to have proceeded. He accordingly determined to await the moment when Mr. Lucas should be sufficiently recovered to come to the field, and then to give him an opportunity of justifying or contradicting the reports in circulation. About this time Mr. Barton called on me, whether in the capacity of Mr. Lucas' second or not, I cannot say, and in the course of conversation, in reply to a question of mine, informed me that Mr. Lucas was sufficiently recovered to meet Colonel Benton.
"At this moment I was on the point of leaving St. Louis, for Herculaneum, and there- fore deferred conveying the information to Colonel Benton until my return, which was two days afterward.
"On my arrival, I lost no time in stating to Colonel Benton the conversation I had with Mr. Barton, and at his request immediately called upon the latter gentleman. As I was one of those who were of opinion that he should release Mr. Lucas from the pledge he had given, I felt considerable regret that the generous intentions of my friend should be affected by reports which might have been circulated without the knowledge of Mr. Lucas, and considered it, therefore, my duty to exert myself in every way consistent with the honor of Colonel Benton to avert a result which would certainly prove more or less calamitous.
"With this view I stated to Mr. Barton the motives which might have disposed Colonel Benton to release Mr. Lucas from his promise to meet him, and the causes that counter- acted this disposition. I then proposed that Mr. Lucas should sign 'a declaration disavowing the reports in question. To this proposition Mr. Barton assented, and a declaration to the above effect was drawn up and agreed to by us. The declaration, which appeared to me sufficiently full, was submitted to Mr. Lucas, who consented to sign it. Colonel Benton, however, did not consider it sufficiently explicit, and rejected it. This decision appeared to
84
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
leave no other alternative than a meeting, which was accordingly agreed upon between Mr. Barton and me, and was fixed for the morning after the rising of the Superior Court, which was then sitting.
"It may, perhaps, be necessary to state that on Mr. Barton's suggestion that the dis- tance should be shortened, I consented on the part of my friend to any distance from ten paces to five, which latter was mentioned by Mr. Barton as best calculated to place the parties on an equality.
"In this situation matters remained for three or four days, during which my own reflec- tion and the opinions of honorable and sensible men whom I consulted, convinced me that the cause of the quarrel at present being perhaps ideal, I should omit no effort to prevent the fatal consequences of such a meeting. In this opinion the personal safety of my friend was my least consideration, as upon such occasions it ever has been.
"With this view I drew up a second declaration more explicit and full than the former, precluding all possibility of mistake as to the motives or conduct of either party, and, as it appeared to me, consistent with the honor of both. Mr. Barton, having examined and approved of it, obtained from Mr. Lucas his consent to sign it. I on my part submitted it to Colonel Benton, and, supported by his other friends, succeeded in inducing him to accept it. The terms of this declaration are as follows :
" 'In consequence of reports having reached Colonel Benton of declarations coming from me respect- ing the shortness of the distance at which I intended to bring him at our next meeting, I hereby declare that I never said anything on that subject with a view of its becoming public or of its coming to the knowledge of Colonel Benton, and that I have never said or insinuated, or caused to be said or insinuated, that Colonel Benton was not disposed and ready to meet me at any distance and at any time whatsoever.
" 'CHAS. LUCAS.'
"Having now stated the transactions between these gentlemen as accurately as I am able without entering into details of minute particulars, or a report of expressions used by the one party or the other-details which might irritate, without answering any useful purpose- I submit the whole to the fellow-citizens of Colonel Benton, in the perfect persuasion that if the reports to which I have referred, and which have drawn from me this statement, should have produced an impression injurious to the reputation of my friend, the facts which I have thus detailed will disabuse the public and will convince them that those reports are false and absurd, and that the authors of them, whoever they may be, are deserving of the contempt and execration of every man of generosity or sense of honor.
"L. E. LAWLESS.
"St. Louis, September 18, 1817."
Lucas-Benton, Second Meeting.
Three days after the publication of the statement of Judge Lawless on the 20th of September, Benton repudiated it and demanded the second meeting, giving his reasons :
"St. Louis, September 23, 1817.
"Sir-When I released you from your engagement to return to the island, I yielded to a feeling of generosity in my own bosom, and to a sentiment of deference to the judgment of others. From the reports which now fill the country it would seem that yourself and some of your friends have placed my conduct to very different motives. The object of this is to bring these calumnies to an end and to give you an opportunity of justifying the great expectations which have been excited. Colonel Lawless will receive your terms, and I expect your distance not to exceed nine feet.
"T. H. BENTON."
Lucas was attending superior court at Jackson. As soon as he returned to St. Louis he accepted the challenge but denied any responsibility for the reports on which Benton based his challenge.
85
DUELING IN MISSOURI
"St. Louis, September 26, 1817.
"Sir-I received your note of the 23d inst. this morning on my arrival from below. Although I am conscious that a respectable man cannot be found who will say he has heard any of these reports from me, and that I think it more than probable they have been fabricated by your own friends than circulated by any who call themselves mine; yet, with- out even knowing what reports you have heard, I shall give you an opportunity of gratifying your wishes and the wishes of your news-carriers. My friend, Mr. Barton, has full authority to act for me.
"CHARLES LUCAS."
They met the next morning. The seconds made the distance ten feet. The ball from Benton's pistol went through the right arm of Lucas and entered the body near the heart. Barton said of his principal :
"At the last interview he appeared equally cool and deliberate. Both presented and fired so nearly together that I could not distinguish two reports. Others, who stood on the shore, state that they heard two echoes. It was remarked that Mr. Lucas raised his weapon in good intention; hence it is to be supposed that the ball of his adversary struck his arm before or at the moment his pistol exploded, and destroyed the effect of his shot."
A Father's Lament.
Judge J. B. C. Lucas mourned the death of his son. He wished that he might have died on the battlefield. Charles Lucas enlisted as a private in the war of 1812. He was promoted to captaincy but did not have the opportunity to do actual fighting. Some time after the duel Judge Lucas wrote feelingly, regretting that his son had not been in battle: "O that he had had the good fortune to meet the enemy ! He would, I am persuaded, have willingly died fighting for his country, at the head of his little band; or if having done his duty his life had been spared, then, being conscious that his courage could not be questioned, he would probably have had fortitude enough to have been still more forbearing, and being contented to act only on principles of self-defense, he would not have descended to the level of the professional duelist, and staked a valuable life against-nothing."
Benton was challenged repeatedly in after life, once, it is said, by Judge J. B. C. Lucas, father of Charles Lucas. He declined to go out again as principal. He said he had made a promise to Mrs. Benton that he would not fight another duel. But he had several fistic affairs. Mayor John F. Darby told of seeing Benton engaged with two men at one time. The Senator got the best of them, using brickbats. When he had a personal affair with Senator Foote upon the floor of the Senate, Benton declared that he never carried weapons.
Henry S. Geyer and George H. Kennerly exchanged shots on Bloody Island. Their meeting took place in 1817. The terms were pistols at twelve paces. Ken- nerly was wounded in the leg so severely that he was lame the rest of his life. Both Geyer and Kennerly were quite young when their duel occurred. They became close friends afterwards, living to be among the foremost citizens of St. Louis. For both of them avenues were named. According to the late Judge T. T. Gantt, of St. Louis, who had the circumstances from the best possible source, Geyer withheld his fire. When Kennerly had fired and Geyer found himself un- harmed, the latter pointed his pistol upward and discharged it. In this case the other principal demanded a second interchange. Geyer aimed to disable, but not to kill. He inflicted a not fatal wound. After Geyer's death Judge Gantt told the story
86
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
of the duel and of the subsequent relations between the principals. "I have heard Mr. Geyer, without reference to his former relations of hostility to his opponent, speak of him as not only a man of high honor, but one of whom he cherished high regards."
Army officers stationed at or near St. Louis occasionally resorted to Bloody Island to settle differences. Captain Martin and Captain Ramsay, of the First United States Rifles, met on the cross marks in August, 1818. Ramsay was mor- tally wounded.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.