New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1859-03-08
TIE CODE or HONOR.


face in crest sgoDy, snd that after hearing from
HIN the cause Of his distress, hs tried to console
bin with the dcs that Keys alleged invasion Of
his marital rights might be hushed up and kept
from the public Sickles ia represented IS answer
inc that he wshed il could, but that it wss impos-
siole, as the story was already known 70 all tho
niseers" in Washington. To which Mr. Batter
worth represents himself IS replying that if so
SickIes needed no advice; as man of honor he
knew what TO do.
Itissvery interesting question in social and
moral pOia. Of view, and it may yet become very
grave one in legal point Of view, wha. did Mr..
Butterworth in tend by this answeri Mr. Sickles,
it appears, in bis agony and distress Of mind, very
properly distrusted his own Judgment and appears
to h,ve appealed to Butterworth, not so much for
sympathy as in reliance on his sound judgment and
COO! command of mis- feelings. That Buterworth
wss not carried away by sympathy and con-
Germ for his agonized friend, and that hs
was entirely sblo to command bis feel
ngs is eviden. from his interview with Key,
immediately after, whom he appears to have met
a, usual, interchanging with him the compliments
of the day with perfect equsnimity. Now, is it
possible to suppose that the coolheaded friend aP-
peaed to By man suffering under the highest
pitch of agonizing passion, intended BY his answer
above quoted to stimulate his excited friend to
saly forth and to assnate Key From the fact
that almost instantly after receiving this answer
Sckles, instead of asking Butter worth to carry
challenge for him, rose up aud armed himself With
three pistols, it would seem as though he so under
stood il; and from the fact that Butterworth
stood by and saw Sickes FIRE three times, hit
ting Key who was unarmed each time, beside
holding his pistol at his head aud snapping it st
him as be lay wounded on the ground-from these
fsots the conclusion can hardly be avoided
that Butterworth considered Sickes as do
ing as of honor should. If
Sickles had totally mistaken Butterworth, it
is hardly TO be supposed that Butterworth would
have stood by so quietly. He might, perhaps,
have allowed the frs. shOt, partly because he was
taken by surprise, partly because from Keys put
ting bis hand in bis coat he might suppose him
armed But after Key had thrown his opera glass
at Sickles there was room for any such supposi-
ton, and the perfect quietness with which this
selected guardian of Mr. Sckles's honor continued
to look on and to allow the man who had just con-
suited him as to what be ought to do, to shoot at
an unarmed man lying wounded on the ground asd
begging for mercy-this conduct seems to show
conclusion which Butterworth has never said any
thing to avoid or rebut-tbat he considered his
friend Sickles to be acting asa man OF honor
should.
Now, THE TRIBUNE as everybody knows, is no
partisan of the code of honor, as it is commonly
called. Yet we wish to DO justice to all men, and
to all systems; and, surely, the so-caled code of
honor has crimes enough Of its own to answer for,
without being made responsible for those which, 80
far from sanctioning, it utterly abhors and repudi
ate, The code of honor, so far from ever de-
mandpg asssssinstoD-that is to say, the act Of
killing by surprise, and without any opportunity
for defense-regsrds with icorn and losthing, as
the hight both Of meanness and cowardice any at.
tack upon an unsrmed man, or AM thing in the
slightest degree approaching to encounter upon
unequal terms, so far as relates to weapons, po-
sition or notice. Nr. Sickes, in his high state Of
mental excitement, might have overlooked this.
The code Of honor, though il utterly repudiates
Assassination does sometimes excuse the killing OF
grievous offender taken in the fact, and possibly
Mr.. Sickles, from the excitement under which he
was laboriDg, might, under the code of honor be
allowed TO escape the two brands above specified;
but this is an excuse which will not avail the man.
if such there be. who first stimulates to assassns-
ton under the idea that honor demands it, and then
cooly stands by and sees that assassination COM
mitted.
There are two reasons why the code of honor
viii not tolerate assassination, nor even an attack
upon IN unarmed man no matter what the provo
cation may be. The duel as is well known had,
however it has been abused, respectable origin. It
was continuation Of the ancient feudal custom Of
settling certain disputed qlestonsin civil aud GRIM
insl trials by wager of battle. The wager of bat
tie was based on the natural AID popular, and we
may even say religious, however mistaken, idea tina
God thus appealed 10 would defend the right He
who believed himself 10 have right and who trusted
that he had God on bis hide, would scOrn TO take
any private or human advantage, ouch as might
give cauie to say that his triumph had been Sc
cured not by the decision Of Providence in his
favor, but by his own act and continuance.
Now, it may be said that this is an obsolete and,
with cur present lights, an absurd idea. No doubt
it is so. But so is the whole code Of honor so far
as relates to the use of the duel at alan appeal
only kept up BY tradition which is Just &c impers-
tive TO this point of notice and perfect equality of
arms and position, as it is as to any point Of the
whole procedure. But this il not all The
uufv 81 fa;-