Litchfield enquirer. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1829-current, 1838-03-15
THE LATE DUEL.

| Inc Tory presses, Win an cdScTlleSS WHICH
exposes at once the hypocrisy of their lam
entations, are endeavoring to turn to political
account the recent unfortunate affair between
Messrs. Cilley and Graves. 1t shows the
desperate shifts to which our opponents are
driven to sustain their cause, when, for polit-
ical effect, they would seize upon an occur
renee so untitled for the ends to which they
would peryert it.
Every rejecting person must see the gross
improperly and indecency of such course.
All the denunciation and abuse which is
heaped upon the opponent of Mr.. Cilley and
his seconds, might with much force and APP
plicabiity be directed against Mr.. Cilley
himself. Coming from among community
among whom the practice of duelling is de-
servedly abhorred, there was every induce
ment, human and divine, to dissuade him
from engaging in this sanguinary affair
He is, we believe, the first member of Con-
gress from New England, who has ever fall
aware that the arbitrament to which he re-
sorted, was totally repugnant to the princi-
pies of our social organization, and in utter
violation of the feelings and sentiments of the
people whom he in part represented.
Far different was the case of Mr.. Graves.
Public opinion in the section of the country
to which he belongs regards the practice of
duelling, hateful as it is, as necessary evil
"a check upon the more brutal tendencies
of our nature-and a regulator of the inter-
course between gentlemen. Ofthe morality
or propriety of this doctrine, it is unnecessa-
nv for us, for our present purpose, to say a
word. But certainly the inducements which
could lead MIR. Cil1ey to engage in duel,
must have operated with infinitely more ur-
gency than upon his antagonist. The one
violated the public sentiments of the commu-
! nifty in which he lived-and the other acted
in conformity with it.
In consenting to fight a duel, Mr.. Cilley
and his seconds subjected themselves to be
judged by the laws of the duello. 1t was the
fortune Of war that he fell the victim. How
inconsistent then and unjust is it to attempt
to exculpate Nj. cilley at the expense of his
antagonist. Both were equally guilty and
one cannot DO condemned without the impli.
cation of the other.
Mr.. Cilley had the choice of weapons-oi
time and place. He chose the most deadly
of weapons, the rifle, and for the simple rea.
son that he was we'll acquainted with its use
! 1t was notorious among his friends that he
was considered good shot with this instru
ment, and had occasionally boosted of his
skill. A pistol shot would have been far less
likely to prove mortal. The instances are
rare in which deadly wound has been in.
flicted by pistol at the customary distance
But Mr.. Cilley chose the weapon at which
he was most expert. He put into the hands
of his antagonist the Instrument of his death
while he and his friends thought he was Sc.
curing his own success. If the retribution
has fallen on him alone, let not his antago.
mist be regarded the more guilty on that &C.
count. II the survivor is to be blamed, il
| L e Al
"he died as the fool dieth."
| We are not disposed to defend or assail
any Of the parties engaged in this affair, for
political considerations merely. Our cause
can neither be injured or advanced by such
extraneous agitations. 1t is dependent on the
strength of great and abiding principles, and
not on the character and conduct of any per-
son or persons connected with it. II is moi
the example of Mr.. Cilley or of MIR. Graves
OF Mr.. Duncan or Mr.. Wise, which can affect
those principles. They are based upon the
Constitution-and with the constitution onl,
can they be shaken or overthrown.
Boston Atlas.