The Griswold-Headley Controversy...Day Two.

Readers of the New York Courier & Enquirer for November 3rd, 1847 were treated to the following rejoinder to Headley's attack of the previous day, from the pen of my friend Charles Fenno Hoffman:

                The very offensive paragraph in relation to our friend HOFFMAN, contained in the letter from Mr. HEADLEY in yesterday’s paper, escaped our notice; or most assuredly, the whole letter would have been denied a place in our columns.  It is hardly necessary to add, that we do not believe one word of the charges against Mr. HOFFMAN; and the sooner Mr. HEADLEY publicly retracts these outrageous aspersions upon Mr. HOFFMAN, the sooner will he place himself in a more favorable position before the public.—Ed.

To the Editor of the Courier and Enquirer;--

DEAR SIR:--Permit me to call your attention to an extraordinary attack upon me by the Rev. Mr. Headley, in your columns of this morning.  The following is the paragraph to which I allude:--

“Mr. Hoffman has lent the Literary World to this interested person, and while he has given him his columns, has made the proprietors pay him also for his articles.  Mr. Hoffman, also wrote, I am credibly informed, a portion of the work himself, and a portion too, which in a recent number of his paper, was declared to be written with ‘spirit, judgement and grace.’”

                Knowing me, as you do from my boyhood, it is sufficient for me to say that the above charges are absolutely and unqualifiedly false.  There is not a syllable of truth in them.  As to the work in controversy I did not write one word of it.  I never saw a line of the M.S., nor did I ever take any part, directly or indirectly, in the publishing squabbles of this reckless defamer.

                                                                Very truly yours,

                                                                                CHAS. F. HOFFMAN

                                                                                                Murray st., Tuesday.

I had also prepared a statement in reply to Headley's letter, but I, alas, was too busy assisting that ungrateful cow Elizabeth F. Ellet in the procurement of research materials for her vastly overrated "Women of the American Revolution" to get it to the Courier in time for publication..it would appear in that paper the following day...

TO BE CONTINUED.