Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1839-08-15

practice of duelling, nor even in any
way, 10 discountenance it. On the con
uary, it will appear ! think, that their
proceedings were calculated TO counle-
nance aud encourage that abominabo
practice. This was Mr.. Cranston's
| opinion from The first, aud the circum-
stances which gave rise To II were moi
slight ones. a month before. violent
personal quarrel had taken place in the
House, between two Of its member,
| (Gholson and Wise, each OF whom had
insulted the other so pointedly that it was
next to certain a duel between then
would be the consequence and ST
thought every member in the House. -
TO prevent such n catastrophe, Col
most respected members Of the House
moved lin resolution) that the hostile
members should be required to declare
that they would not further prosecute
the quarrel. Upon this "A motion was
made, by another member, to lay Mr..
Mercer's resolution on the table, and
this last motion was carried by vote OF
l27 to g. Here those l27 members,
without disguise, proclaimed themselves
TO be in favor of dueIling. 1t cannot be
said, that perhaps they were Indifferent,
or passive, or undecided in their opn-
ions, and did not choose TO vote agains,
it. For in that case, they would not
have acted at all as was the case with
by far too many Of The members on that
occasion. But these l27 members did
act and take decided par, in promoting
the impending duel, by preventing any
interference with 1t by the House, which
had full power to stop it. This was the
strongest evidence that could have been
given, not merely of the sentiments OF
those members, but of their characters
as promoters of duelliLg. For, among
those who are not opposed to duclllng,
or who, if opposed to it, rs a practice,
yet believe that there arc situations IN
which Il man cannot avoid 1t without
loss Of character, there are very mauy
who from feelings of humanity, are ever
ready to do oil in their power TO prevent
the shedding of blood by duels, by ci-
iecting, if possible, an amicable settle
mcnt of the quarrels between the angry
parties. But the duelling members Of
the House, had no desire 10 prevent the
shedding of blood in n duel, orig mating
I IN their own presence, between two mem
bers belonging TO the same House with
thcm,a and with one or the other of whom,
the whole l27 members were probably
a N of l,,nnJ Il, ,nl ,ntIn of
least IN the party sense of those words.
On the contrary, they in effect, spurred
them on to the mortal strife, by assuring
them in formal recorded vote, that they
would not use the power in their hands
to impede their meeting on the field OF
death, armed with their pistols, or rifles,
or bowie knives, (belicved to be Mr.
Gholson's iavoriie weapon to take each
others lives. Mr.. Cranston was not one
Of those l27. lie was anxious that the
louse should interfere and prcven, the
duel and he therefore voted against lay
ing Col. Mcrcer's resolution on the ta.
bic. Who can help feeling a shock,
when he reads on the public journal of
the House, the name of Jonathan Ciiley,
making one of the 1877 duelling mem.
bers : There also we see the names of
those dueIling and party friends of Mr.
CiIlcy, particularly THAT of Duncan,
who, but'a few weeks afterwards were
the known promoters Of the duel in which
Mr.. Ciiioy himself lost his life. Or
those l27 duel!ng members, sixty seven
took an active part IN the |
resolutions for investigation. -
Ii Is true, that many other members of
both parties, voted for those resolutions,
n the sincere, but vain hope, as it pro-
'ed, that some good might grow out OF
hem. They hoped, at least, that, that
lueI and the conduct of all those who
lad any hand in it would be Indignantly
condemned. But it soon appeared, that
he mover of the invest alton and those
Who acted in concert with him, had no
uch intention. 1T was the 67 duellng
members, with number more, who had
;hosen to lay by on the trying occasion
above mentioned. They it was who
lad the management of that inves!iga-
ion, and to suit whose purposes the In
''StS"ii'S SDu'IINtCC was pdCheu.- II
Who can be so weakly credulous as to
,elieve for moment that, the discour
lgcmont Of duclling was any part Of the
'blect OF those men, or Of their rcsolu-
ions
But let us take a look at the resolutions
The first was, "to inresii-
gate he causes which led TO The death, &C."
The second, "to inquire whether there
had been, IN Me case aiiuded TO, a breach
pf the privileges of the House" Here,
instead Of condemnng the duel,as crin-
nal in itself, and not susceptible of any
justification whatever, instead of seeking
o discover the names Of all persons in
my manner concerned in it, to the end
hat examples might be made of them as
lidcrs and abettors Of the duel: instead
If this, the House Of Representatives
vas radc to resolve itself into 4" Court
If honor" to Judge Of the merits of that
particular duel, under the circumstances
which attended it, and TO decide whcth-
'r those circumstances were such as to
make the case alluded to" to amount,
)r not 10 amount, to a breach Of the pri II
'ilcgcs Of The House. The Committee
vas not even instructed TO inquire for
he names of any of the persons who had