The New York Herald

The Opera House Affair.

Richmond, Saturday, November 10, 1849.

Mr. Editor:--I have just perused a letter, in the Herald of this morning, dated Delmonico's Hotel, from an officer of artillery, wherein it is stated that the writer was the only officer of that service in New York on the evening in question, and that he was not at the Opera. This is possible; for it will be recollected that I did not assume the fact from myself, but stated that the gentleman who had so properly reproved an impertinence had remarked to his friend his belief that he belonged to that service, and that the other had endorsed his opinion--adding, that he had seen the parties, a day or two before, lounging near the Astor House, seemingly recognising him as he thought he did them. Under these circumstances, as there appeared to be so little doubt with them, I thought I could not be far wrong in repeating the words used by the elder stranger, when explaining the subject to his friend--namely, that he, whom he had particularly remarked, was an officer of artillery, from Montreal, whose name he did not know, but whose person he was familiar with, as he had not the slightest doubt the other was with his.

How two men could be mistaken in the same individual, it is rather difficult to understand: but, as the gentleman writing from Delmonico's states positively that there was no officer of artillery besides himself in New York, on Monday evening, the question that now arises is, Who was the party? For, it must be recollected no opinion was expressed in regard to his companion. It shall be my care, Mr. Editor, to set myself right in this matter, before you put forth your Tuesday's number; for I am not desirous that anything of mine, intended for your columns, should be otherwise based than upon indisputable facts; nor can I have any object in continuing an imputation of wrong, where it is distinctly shown that imputation is undeserved.

It is to be regretted, for his own sake, that the writer of the letter from Delmonico's should not earlier have noticed the communication of "Observer." This appeared in the columns of the Herald on the 7th. On the 8th he replies to it, instead of the same day; and so contrives--possibly by placing it in the Post Office, instead of immediately handing it in at the office of the paper--that it does not appear until the 10th (this morning). When waited upon by the parties desiring to identify him, he is found to have embarked and sailed for England. All this, I repeat, is unfortunate. An officer, tenacious of the honor of his corps, ought, it seems to me, to have called upon the editor, promptly demanded the address of "Observer," and known his authority for imputing to a member of the service to which he belonged, the misconduct charged against him. Perhaps I do not correctly judge these matters, but it seems to me that this is the course which should have been pursued.

In justice to myself I hope you will do me the favor to insert this letter in your issue of to-morrow. On Monday, the mystery shall be solved.

OBSERVER.