Produced by Holly Ingraham
THE CODE OF HONOR;
or
RULES FOR THE GOVERNMENT
of
PRINCIPALS AND SECONDS
in
DUELLING
by John Lyde Wilson
Summary:
Originally this was published by the author (1784-1849), a
former governor of South Carolina, as a 22-page booklet, in 1838. Before
his death he added an appendix of the 1777 Irish duelling code, but
this second edition was not printed until 1858, as a 46-page small book,
still sized to fit in the case with one's duelling pistols. This code
is far less blood-thirsty than many might suppose, but built on a closed
social caste and standards of behavior quite alien to today.
Transcriber's Note: In the appendix the term "rencontre" is used. In
British law (then covering Ireland) this refers to an immediate fight in
the heat of offense. A duel would be undertaken in "cold blood" if not
cool temper. Killing a man in a rencontre counted as manslaughter; in a
duel, as murder.
On more than one occasion, the author refers to "posting" an offender.
This refers to posting to the public a notice as to his behavior in some
central club or business spot frequented by all men of that level of
society; exactly where varied from town to town. It was the ultimate
sanction, making the challengee's refusal to either apologize or fight a
public stain upon his character.
TO THE PUBLIC
The man who adds in any way to the sum of human happiness is strictly in
the discharge of a moral duty. When Howard visited the victims of
crime and licentiousness, to reform their habits and ameliorate their
condition, the question was never asked whether he had been guilty
of like excesses or not? The only question the philanthropist would
propound, should be, has the deed been done in the true spirit of
Christian benevolence? Those who know me, can well attest the motive
which has caused the publication of the following sheets, to which they
for a long time urged me in vain. Those who do not know me, have no
right to impute a wrong motive; and if they do, I had rather be the
object, than the authors of condemnation. To publish a CODE OF HONOR,
to govern in cases of individual combat, might seem to imply, that the
publisher was an advocate of duelling, and wished to introduce it as the
proper mode of deciding all personal difficulties and misunderstandings.
Such implication would do me great injustice. But if the question be
directly put to me, whether there are not cases where duels are right
and proper, I would unhesitatingly answer, there are. If an oppressed
nation has a right to appeal to arms in defence of its liberty and the
happiness of its people, there can be no argument used in support of
such appeal, which will not apply with equal force to individuals.
How many cases are there, that might be enumerated, where there is no
tribunal to do justice to an oppressed and deeply wronged individual?
If he be subjected to a tame submission to insult and disgrace, where no
power can shield him from its effects, then indeed it would seem, that
the first law of nature, self-preservation, points out the only remedy
for his wrongs. The history of all animated nature exhibits a determined
resistance to encroachments upon natural rights,--nay, I might
add, inanimate nature, for it also exhibits a continual warfare for
supremacy. Plants of the same kind, as well as trees, do not stop
their vigorous growth because they overshadow their kind; but, on the
contrary, flourish with greater vigor as the more weak and delicate
decline and die. Those of different species are at perpetual warfare.
The sweetest rose tree will sicken and waste on the near approach of
the noxious bramble, and the most promising fields of wheat yield a
miserable harvest if choked up with tares and thistles. The elements
themselves war together, and the angels of heaven have met in fierce
encounter. The principle of self-preservation is co-extensive with
creation; and when by education we make character and moral worth a part
of ourselves, we guard these possessions with more watchful zeal than
life itself, and would go farther for their protection. When one finds
himself avoided in society, his friends shunning his approach, his
substance wasting, his wife and children in want around him, and
traces all his misfortunes and misery to the slanderous tongue of the
calumniator, who, by secret whisper or artful innuendo, has sapped and
undermined his reputation, he must be more or less than man to submit in
silence.
The indiscriminate and frequent appeal to arms, to settle trivial
disputes and misunderstandings, cannot be too severely censured and
deprecated. I am no advocate of such duelling. But in cases where the
laws of the country give no redress for injuries received, where public
opinion not only authorizes, but enjoins resistance, it is needless and
a waste of time to denounce the practice. It will be persisted in as
long as a manly independence, and a lofty personal pride in all that
dignifies and ennobles the human character, shall continue to exist. If
a man be smote on one cheek in public, and he turns the other, which
is also smitten, and he offers no resistance, but blesses him that so
despitefully used him, I am aware that he is in the exercise of great
Christian forbearance, highly recommended and enjoined by many very good
men, but utterly repugnant to those feelings which nature and education
have implanted in the human character. If it was possible to enact
laws so severe and impossible to be evaded, as to enforce such rule of
behavior, all that is honorable in the community would quit the country
and inhabit the wilderness with the Indians. If such a course of conduct
was infused by education into the minds of our youth, and it became
praiseworthy and honorable to a man to submit to insult and indignity,
then indeed the forbearance might be borne without disgrace. Those,
therefore, who condemn all who do not denounce duelling in every case,
should establish schools where a passive submission to force would be
the exercise of a commendable virtue. I have not the least doubt, that
if I had been educated in such a school, and lived in such a society,
I would have proved a very good member of it. But I much doubt, if a
seminary of learning was established, where this Christian forbearance
was inculcated and enforced, whether there would be many scholars.
I would not wish to be understood to say, that I do not desire to see
duelling to cease to exist entirely, in society. But my plan for doing
it away, is essentially different from the one which teaches a passive
forbearance to insult and indignity. I would inculcate in the rising
generation a spirit of lofty independence; I would have them taught that
nothing was more derogatory to the honor of a gentleman, than to wound
the feelings of any one, however humble. That if wrong be done to
another, it was more an act of heroism and bravery to repair the injury,
than to persist in error, and enter into mortal combat with the injured
party. This would be an aggravation of that which was already odious,
and would put him without the pale of all decent society and honorable
men. I would strongly inculcate the propriety of being tender of the
feelings, as well as the failings, of those around him. I would teach
immutable integrity, and uniform urbanity of manners. Scrupulously
to guard individual honor, by a high personal self respect, and
the practice of every commendable virtue. Once let such a system of
education be universal, and we should seldom hear, if ever, of any more
duelling.
The severest penal enactments cannot restrain the practice of duelling,
and their extreme severity in this State, the more effectually shields
the offenders. The teaching and preaching of our eloquent Clergy, may
do some service, but is wholly inadequate to suppress it. Under these
circumstances, the following rules are given to the public, and if I can
save the life of one useful member of society, I will be compensated.
I have restored to the bosoms of many, their sons, by my timely
interference, who are ignorant of the misery I have averted from them. I
believe that nine duels out of ten, if not ninety-nine out of a hundred,
originate in the want of experience in the seconds. A book of authority,
to which they can refer in matters where they are uninformed, will
therefore be a desideratum. How far this code will be that book, the
public will decide.
THE AUTHOR
RULES FOR PRINCIPALS AND SECONDS IN DUELLING.
CHAPTER I. The Person Insulted, Before Challenge Sent
1. Whenever you believe that you are insulted, if the insult be in
public and by words or behavior, never resent it there, if you have
self-command enough to avoid noticing it. If resented there, you offer
an indignity to the company, which you should not.
2. If the insult be by blows or any personal indignity, it may be
resented at the moment, for the insult to the company did not originate
with you. But although resented at the moment, you are bound still to
have satisfaction, and must therefore make the demand.
3. When you believe yourself aggrieved, be silent on the subject, speak
to no one about the matter, and see your friend, who is to act for you,
as soon as possible.
4. Never send a challenge in the first instance, for that precludes all
negotiation. Let your note be in the language of a gentleman, and
let the subject matter of complaint be truly and fairly set forth,
cautiously avoiding attributing to the adverse party any improper
motive.
5. When your second is in full possession of the facts, leave the whole
matter to his judgment, and avoid any consultation with him unless
he seeks it. He has the custody of your honor, and by obeying him you
cannot be compromitted.
6. Let the time of demand upon your adversary after the insult, be as
short as possible, for he has the right to double that time in replying
to you, unless you give him some good reason for your delay. Each
party is entitled to reasonable time, to make the necessary domestic
arrangements, by will or otherwise, before fighting.
7. To a written communication you are entitled to a written reply, and
it is the business of your friend to require it.
SECOND'S DUTY BEFORE CHALLENGE SENT.
1. Whenever you are applied to by a friend to act as his second, before
you agree to do so, state distinctly to your principal that you will be
governed only by your own judgment,--that he will not be consulted after
you are in full possession of the facts, unless it becomes necessary
to make or accept the amende honorable, or send a challenge. You are
supposed to be cool and collected, and your friend's feelings are more
or less irritated.
2. Use every effort to soothe and tranquilize your principal; do not see
things in the same aggravated light in which he views them; extenuate
the conduct of his adversary whenever you see clearly an opportunity to
do so, without doing violence to your friend's irritated mind. Endeavor
to persuade him that there must have been some misunderstanding in the
matter. Check him if he uses opprobrious epithet towards his adversary,
and never permit improper or insulting words in the note you carry.
3. To the note you carry in writing to the party complained of, you are
entitled to a written answer, which will be directed to your principal
and will be delivered to you by his adversary's friend. If this be not
written in the style of a gentleman, refuse to receive it, and assign
your reason for such refusal. If there be a question made as to the
character of the note, require the second presenting it to you, who
considers it respectful, to endorse upon it these words: "I consider the
note of my friend respectful, and would not have been the bearer of it,
if I believed otherwise."
4. If the party called on, refuses to receive the note you bear, you are
entitled to demand a reason for such refusal. If he refuses to give
you any reason, and persists in such refusal, he treats, not only your
friend, but yourself, with indignity, and you must then make yourself
the actor, by sending a respectful note, requiring a proper explanation
of the course he has pursued towards you and your friend; and if he
still adheres to his determination, you are to challenge or post him.
5. If the person to whom you deliver the note of your friend, declines
meeting him on the ground of inequality, you are bound to tender
yourself in his stead, by a note directed to him from yourself; and if
he refuses to meet you, you are to post him.
6. In all cases of the substitution of the second for the principal,
the seconds should interpose and adjust the matter, if the party
substituting avows he does not make the quarrel of his principal
his own. The true reason for substitution, is the supposed insult of
imputing to you the like inequality which if charged upon your friend,
and when the contrary is declared, there should be no fight, for
individuals may well differ in their estimate of an individual's
character and standing in society. In case of substitution and a
satisfactory arrangement, you are then to inform your friend of all the
facts, whose duty it will be to post in person.
7. If the party, to whom you present a note, employ a son, father or
brother, as a second, you may decline acting with either on the ground
of consanguinity.
8. If a minor wishes you to take a note to an adult, decline doing so,
on the ground of his minority. But if the adult complained of, had made
a companion of the minor in society, you may bear the note.
9. When an accommodation is tendered, never require too much; and if
the party offering the amende honorable, wishes to give a reason for his
conduct in the matter, do not, unless offensive to your friend, refuse
to receive it; by so doing you may heal the breach more effectually.
10. If a stranger wishes you to bear a note for him, be well satisfied
before you do so, that he is on an equality with you; and in presenting
the note state to the party the relationship you stand towards him,
and what you know and believe about him; for strangers are entitled
to redress for wrongs, as well as others, and the rules of honor and
hospitality should protect him.