Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1856-05-14
THE /" CODE OF HONOR

THE "CODE OF HONOR"
The Fayetteville Observer, noticing the late duel
in which DR.. Vikings was killed, says:
We desire to say nothing to wound any ones feelings
out we should be wanting in the faithful performance Of
our duty II we failed to protest against any resort to the
c"de Of honor falsely called 1t is destructive of the
peace Of society," contrary to the laws of awfuy at
We entirely concur with tho Observer. We be-
lieve the highest and truest courage is exhibited in
doing what one considers to be right-in abiding by
what is thus done, at the hazard of life itself and
in Drawing awrong and depraved public sentiment,
by refusing to 60 deliberately to the field of mortal
combat. A man, for example, assails the personal
character of another man. He does so in passion,
and without due reflection; or he does so because
he honestly believes the person assailed is corrupt
and that it is his duty to SO declare. In the former
case if he has acted unjustly, he will exhibit the
highest quality Of manhood by Withdrawing his Ian
guage and expressing his regret for having used
but in the latter case if his honest belief should
dergo no change, he must abide the consequences
at the hands of the person assailed. But then, we
are answered, there are mortal wrongs which all
unite in declaring ought to be avenged in the
blood Of the wrong.doer. Granted, but let not
the innocent so far forget what is due to himself
or to his family, as to i've the wrongdoer an equal
chance with himself; for, be it remembered, this
view is based upon the assumption that the wrong.
door, in the judgment of mankind, if not in the
sight of God, has already forfeited his life. But,
we are answered again. that there are injuries, in
suits, which must be noticed, the person nsulted
will lose character and just influence in the commu
nifty. Granted, but is it not bad enough to fight
your antagonist on sight, at the risk, too, among
gentlemen, of fatal result? We counsel no one to
submit to personal insult; but we do repeat, that
in opinion, the custom of duelling is founded in
wicked princpcs-is" contrary to the laws of man"
and lawfully at war with the laws of God :" and
that the highest and truest courage is shown in do
ing right. and in resisting that erroneous ana I'M
sound public opinion which exists on this subject
We rot afraid to write thus, and to print it. 1t
is the duty of the press of the conservators
of law and morals to bear its testimony against this
"code of honor" We know that illustrious as well
as ordinary men have been and duellists but
even Mey in their heart of hearts, have deplored
the custom, and would gladly have es aped from its
iron mandates. Hamilton, jackson, Clay, Randolph
the greatest men Of their tme-bowcd to this
custom, and of them died by the pistol Of Burr
friends and to his future usefulness that he should
thus fight. On his death-bed, with his agonized
family around him, he repeated his aversion to this
practice; and so de died, depressing strong con.
fdence in the mercy of God through the interces.
sion of the Redccmer "-decarng that he wished
personal harm to his antagonist, and that in his
opinion it was the duty of all who had influence
in society to discountcnance this barbarous CUSTOM
That these not deathbed expressions is proved
by the fact, that before he went the field he had
drawn up and signed paper explanatory of his
conduct motives, and views, in which he declared
that his religious and moral principles strong
ly opposed to the practice of duclling and it would
ever give pain to be obliged to shed the blood O
fellow-creature in private combat forbidden by
the laws" Such were doubt the views and sen
timents of the other eminent men referred to. Ran
doph, it is we'll remembered, refused to fire at Clay
and Clay and jackson, it is known, died Christian
men-thus bearing witness, silently but most impress
svely, against this practice, which, in the vgor
manhood, and under the strifes and heats of per
sonal and political ambition they had sanctioned.
Our readers, We know, will bear with these ex
pressions of opinion. 1t is not exactly our province
to moralizc, and we dislike much any one tin
idea of lecturing upon matters of this kind. VIVA
we have said think but we beg to be allowed
to add, that we have written with no purpose o
making personal application of our observations
or of wounding the sensibiiities of any one.