Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1861-05-18

fefSOnaI.L
The State Journal publishes the correspondence
between Mr.. Syme and ourse'f and endeavors to
show that previous to that correspondence, we had
recognized the socaled code of honor" ....,
Our reply IS, that some years ago we were chal-
ienged by Col Richard l. wynne, and that we re-
fused to meet him, stating that we did so for Urea
sons satisfactory" to ourself So far as John Spell
man is concerned, we will state that we told the
gentleman who bore US the challenge from him that
we did not regard him fit person to correspond
with on any subject and that we could not receive
letter from him. Not regarding his friend in this
light we frankly stated at the same time that We
did not mean nor wish to offend him by treating
Spelman in this way but the friend referred to af
forwards challenged us, as matter of form as we
understood, and to comply with the rules of "the
code" Our reply to him was that we had no cause
of personal quarrel with him, and there the matter
was dropped. Afterwards another gentleman
quite young man-challenged us. We declined
to receive his letter. and informed his friend that
had no reply to make to him.
This is the extent therefore, to which we have
subscribed to the so-called "code of honor" We
leave it to an impartial public to say, upon this
statement of facts, whether we duellist not
We have nothing to say against those who fight
dues, or who send and accept challenges, and after
wards, upon the ground, arrive at an "amicable
and satisfactory settlement" of all their differences
Formerly there was some knghtly courtesy and
knightly valor in this form of hattie; and in old
times, and even now in some countries, when chal
lenge is sent and accepted hostile meeting or
is inevitable. But 1.-The code" nova days is farce
1t required more of moral courage in former times
to refuse to fight in this way than it did of physical
courage to go upon the field; but it makes little
difference now so far as any species of courage is
concerned, how the code" is regarded. We think
| proper not to recognize it. We think proper to
show ourself law>ahidng citizen as long as we
honorably cam and the law provides that ''if any
person fight duel, in consequence of challenge
sent or received, and either of the parties shall be
killed then the survivor conviction thereof shall
suffer DEATH and all their aders and abettors shall
be considered accessories before the fact" And the
law also provides that if any person seEd, accept,
or bear a challenge to fight duel though no death
ensue he and all such as counsel aid and abet him
shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor; and on
conviction thereof, shall be punished accordingly,
and moreover. be ineligible to any Office of trust
honor profit in the State, any pardon repreve
notwithstanding"
| Far be it from to invoke this law against any
! one. We would not do that under any circum-
stances; but we have right to refer to the law to
sustain us in our view that the So-called "code Of
honor" is barbarons and unchristan. 1t is bar.
barous because it is relic of the dark ages of man.
kind; it is unchristian, because the killing of an
adversary is murder, and is punishable with death.
And if murder in the eye of human law, what must
it be in the eye of God?
IF the person who wrote the article in the State
Journal which noticing, thinks we will not
fight, or that we are destitute of personal courage
| let him try