Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1860-04-25
THE CODE OF HONOR"

the affair between Messrs Pryor and Potter,
expounds the code of honor as follows:
zone would suppose really that tythe of
Mr. Pryor's mpugners understood something
about the code of honor, and position OF gen
tlemen with respect to it. 1t would be wei,
however for these amateur critics OF duellng,
to keep in mind thing or two beyond their
ideas Dueling is a preventive remedy. Its
rules are not ordained to produce lighting, bnt
to avoid fighting, and enforce justice and re-
spect between gentlemen. Instead of imme-
diate and brutal violence, mediators are inter
posed, between parties differing in the form of
seconds who are responsible Tor the result, to
obtain peaceful redress. Then the weapons,
distances, &C., are all ordained to produce
equality, and secure an honorable adjustment.
To talk OF settling an affair of honor by sitting
on powder barrels, using bowie knives,
&c, is to turn savages, or worse than saw.
ages - to become backguards and DULLES,
without the first conceptions OF either the
intention of the code of honor or the usages
of gentlemen. No gentlemen would make
such a proposition-and no gentleman should
heed it. Mr.. Pryor committed a great mis-
take, for which he cannot easily atone to the
country (ot the south at least) i'll having au-
thOrized his second to accept of Mr.. Potter's
terms to fight with bowie knives. In butch
ers pen, or low groggery, such system OF
settling a difficulty might be expected, al
though deSpised as brutal and vulgar; but for
one pretending to be a gentleman to propose
such a method of fighting, is TO disro6e INN
self at once Of the attributes OF a gentleman.
He is only coward or blackguard, or both;
for either, he knows, gentleman would com
promise his position by fighting in such way,
and therefore must propose it,eXpecungi 1t to be
declined or he SO little understands the feel
ings of a gentleman and his motive in tight
in, as to be beneath notice In our opinion, no
gentleman has right to violate the code OF
honor He breaks down, by his example,
those safeguards which gentleman have de-
vised to produce equality in contests, and to
obtain redress without the last alternative of
blood. He makes quarrels, tights-and fights,
fatal. He exposes the weak to the insults of
the strong. Civilized forbearance is substitute
cd by brutal violence, and society itself loses
its courtesy its peace, its purity. Honor,
which is only high sensibility to indignlty,
loses its grace and lustre when indicated at
ter the fashion OF beasts and backwards.
We should like to have a frank and full eX
preston of the Mercury's opinion on some
points connected with this matter. a. Does
the "code of horror" allow one gentleman in
Congress to force duel upon another who
cannot give or accept a challenge without set
ting at defiance, the laws, usages, and opinions
of his constituents We suppose Mr.. Pryor
would gain popularity at home by showing
himself an accomplished duellist. But, with
Mr. Potter the case is different, for, in him, the
cultivation of that accomplishment could prom
Use nothing bat political and social ruin. A
man with Mr. Potter's education, social rela-
lions, and constituency cannot allow himself
to become duellist, although he may possibly
under some circumstances, be provoked and
maddened to eight for funeral" Will
gentleman" seek to drive such man into
duel :! Does not "honor," as well as the spirit
of modern civilization, require gentleman, in
such case, to adopt some other method of
settling dispute that may arise. If he
know VS. that man "wilI not compromise his
position by fighting" as duellist, how can he,
as gentleman, challenge that man!
2 Was it really in accordance with the
"code of honor" as the Mercury understands
it, for Mr.. Pryor to force a quarrel upon Mr.
Potter, with no more provocatiou than had
been given, and then challenge him without
allowing opportunity for explanation, retrac-
ton, or apology How does it appear in this
proceeding of Mr.. Pryor, that "duelling is
preventive remedy % We can find in it moth
ing but the self-confdent insolence of bully.
Mr. Pryor evidently believed that Mr.. Potter
was poltroon, and he was more intent on dis.
grazing that gentleman with the public, than
on observing strictly either the rules of the
doO tIa 4t,I 4
ances that belong to the true gentleman. If
all this was strictly correct" tits evident that
the Mercury's theory of the "code" will need
considerable revision.
Fighting with bowie knives is very savage
business anywhere, and it is much more dan.
gerous than any "hostile correspondence"
which means nothing but words. There is in
it startling reality of butcherng barbarism
which is likely to shock weak nerves, as it
certainly will offend our ideal of civilized man.
hood. But wherein is it more civilized or re-
spectacle to fight with swords, or pistols, or
rifles, or to fight at all ? In most civilized com
munities the whole business of duelng is
justly deemed barbarous. 1t is so in the esti
nation of Mr. Potter, and why is it not Just as
improper for Pryor to challenge him at ALL as
for him to propose to that gentleman bout
with bowie knives. We can see no difference
save that Potter was acting in selfdefence If
the Mercury can see difference, we shall be
happy to see its statement of the case, with
the reasons that justify it.
Duelling, as managed at Washington, be-
comes every day more and more contemplate
in the eyes of men why reject all such bar.
barism; and it seems to us high lime for the
patrons of the "code" to inquire whether it is
not ITSELF under some circumstances, an insult
to propriety, even when tried by its own rules.