The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-08-27
NEW YORK HERALD, SATURDAY, AUGUST 27, 1859.


ANOTHER Tilt OF Tue VIRGINIA CnIvALnY-
NOBODY KnLED-EvERi.sOD SArIsgIEps--We
are constantly receiving accounts ia the South
ern papers of challenges and duels between editors
occupying, with the statements of all the parties
concerned whole pages of those journals To
us in the North this seems somewhat asular,
for we do not settle our differences in this way;
and it is little strange that after the many RI
diculous affairs of this kind which have termi-
mated in miserable yfasco Southern gentlemen
should continue to re.enact them almost every
week. An editor writes something which another
editor deems a slight upon bib honor and int
gritty, and he forthwith demands to know if the
aforesaid editor is the author of the article, and
if he u.s. he asks for explanation and satisfaction,
which is peremptorily refused, and challenge
to mortal combat ensues. The parties " go out"
and make three or four attempts to kill each
other, sometimes with effect, but oftener not. In
the latter case the seconds then step in the prin-
cipals shake hands, and they both take back
everything that has been published, and rush of
to the newspaper Office to bore the public with
endless columns of " statements" alike childish
and absurd. This is curious and silly withal; but
t is nevertheless quite common in the chivalry
at the South.
By reference to an account from the Richmond
Enquirer, which we publish in another column, it
will be seen that another affair of this character
has just come off between two Virginia edi-
tors Messrs. Wise and Old, both of whom,
nj vhk ho xusao
and old enough, to know better. Mr.. Wise pub
fishes an article which Mr. Old considers insult
ing to himself He acknowledges the authorship,
but refuses to take it back or explain. Mr.. Old
sends friend, and the friend conveys chal-
lepge to the field. They fire at each other two
or three times at an uncomfortably short dis
lance, and, neither having succeeded in killing
the other, they commence to parley for half an
hour, like schoolboys, each complaining that
he is the aggrieved party, and the affair ends by
everybody taking back everything. Mr.. Wise
did bite his thumb, but he did not bite his thumb
at Mr.. Old, Mr.. Old did say hard things of Mr..
Wise's father, and Of himself, but they were said
in Pickwickian sense.
This is the upshot of the business on the field;
but it is followed by seven columns of state
ments' in the Richmond Enquirer, from which
we learn that all parties are mutually satisfied.
If the offensive statements were true, and If
the truth is worth fighting and risking ones life
for, why not fight it out or, if they were to be
taken back at all, why not do so before the par
ties failed in the attempt to kill each other, in
stead of afterwards? Either of these modes
would have been consistent way, at least, of
settling the business; but be Southern mode
seems to be to make charge first, then fight
to maintain it, and subsequently acknowledge its
authors folly. Had the Virginia editors acted
sensibly, they would have saved the ex-
pense Of four charges of powder and four ounces
Of lead, besides saving the public from great
bore and themselves from fair share of ridicule.
However, such Jfascos will have the effect of
establishing the absurdity Of the duelling code
as plaster to ones wounded honor.