We expressed our regret, that Mr. Brooks did not . . .

 . . . give notice to Mr. Sumner of his intention to chastise him for his foul defamation of his absent kinsman and the people of his State. We do not know that such a notice was due. The speech itself justified brooks in any line of conduct—and Sumner expected and was prepared for an attack.

We now learn from the Washington correspondent of the Charleston Mercury, that Sumner was informed of Mr. Brooks’ intention to chastise him. The writer says:

“In deciding upon the craven conduct of Sumner, it must be recollected that he is physically of fine proportions and weighs of least twenty or thirty pounds more than Brooks, and that he was duly informed by the latter of his intention to administer the chastisement.”

SOURCE: Richmond Daily Whig, Richmond Virginia, Wednesday Morning, June 4, 1856, p. 2