Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1844-09-13


the last paragraph, because, although it
does not necessarily imply the resort to a
personal combat, itadmits Of that construc-
ton; nor will | conceal that such o possi-
BILE issue was within my contemplation. |
owe 1t to the community to say that, what
ever heretofore | may have done, or, by
inevitable circumstances, might be forced
TO do, no man in it holds in deeper abhor-
renee than | do that pernicious practice.
Condemned, as it must be, by the judg-
ment and philosophy, to say nothing of the
religion, of every thinking man, it is an
affair of feeling, about which we cannot,
although we should, reason. Its true cor
rective will be found when all shall unite,
as all ought to unite, in its unqualified pro-
scription."
[.Nat. IntelHgencer, March, 1926.
These sentiments, thus frankly unfolded
to his constituents, Mr.. Clay repeated
more than ten years afterwards in the face
of the Nation, when, on the floor of the
Senate, he voted in favor of the bill for the
suppression of duelling within the District
of Columbia, On that occasion he express
ed himself to the following effect
"Mr, Clay said he had taken no part in
the discussion which had been going on in
relation to this NATTER not, however, from
any indsposition on his part to do all that
he could to aid in the very laudable objects
contemplated by the bill. No man would
be happier than himself to see the whole
barbarous system forever eradicated, Ii
was well known that, in certain quarters
of this country, public opinion was averse
to duelling, and no man could fly in the
face of that public opinion without having
his reputation sacrificed, while there were
other portions again which exacted ODE.
dience to the fatal custom The man with
high sense of honor and nice sensihilty,
when the question is whether he shall
fight or have the finger OF scorn pointed a
him, is unable to resist, and few, very few
are found willing to adopt such an alterna
tive. When public opinion was removal
ed, and chastened by reason, religion, anc
humanity, the practice of duelling woul'
at once be discOuntenanced. 1t was tn
office of legislation to do all it could tt
bring about this healthfll state of the pub
lie mind, and although it might not alto
gether effect SO desirable q result, yet h
had no doubt it would do much toward
it, and with those views he would give hi
vote to the bill
| Congressional Globe, Cd session 25th Con
gress. p, 292.
To this indisputable evidence Of Nj
Clay's hostility to the practice Of Due
ling, we may add the fact-and to his hol
or be it spoken--that perhaps no man lie
accommodated more difficulties, and cor
tributed to the preUentton of more duels
than he has. Frequent instances nigh
be mentioned. We will content omselye
with one which made particularly stron
impression on our minds.
Among our earliest recollectons of Nj
Clay was the part he took, some thlrt
years ago, in preventing duel betwee
Mr.. Calhoun, the present Secretary
State, and Mr.. Grosvenor, one of the R.
representatives. of the State of New Yor
who died too young for his fame; and tt
early for the hopes of his friends and ii
wishes of his country. These too gent
men, both frequent debaters, and disd
h guished no less by the boldness Of the
e bearing than by the power of their ell
= quence, were leading members of the o
,- posing parties in the House of Represel
: tatives at a critical period of the war
e 1912, Mr.. Clay was then Speaker Of Il
:, House, discharging the duties of that ST
It ton with dignity and propriety that chi
= lenged universal appreciation; taking pt
IF occasionally in debate in Committee of t
d Whole with confessed superiority, but
r. the greater part of the time necessari
" confined 10 the Chair, an impartial umpi
is between contending parties. The Hou
We comprised at that time an unusual numt
s. of comparatively young members of re
1T ability, as may be believed when we nal
at among them, besides the gentlemen
It, ready mentioned, such men as Lownd
lie Webster, Castor, Oakley, Eppes, Shelf
le Charles J. Ingersoll, Troup, Grundy, &
ID not to speak of considerable infusion
IL older men of great power of intellect, su
IS as Pickering, Stockton, Jonathan Rober
William Findlay, &c. In a body thus CT
at stituted, it may well be imagined that
he rules of order were in general respectful
RS, observed and the decorum of debate E
ls- dom violated. No greater contrast COZ
IN well be conceived, indeed, than that VIII
lat would result from comparison Of the p
IS ceedings in the House of Representati'
ur ut that day with those of the present. -.
to perity would yet, in the zeal of conf
ut. sometimes find its way into debate, a