Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1873-07-25
THE DUEL.

The fatal duel at New Orleans has re-
opened the discussion about duelling, which
began with the fatal affair in Virginia. In
nearly every article that we read we find the
assertion that duel ''settles nothing.
There cannot well be a greater mistake
It settles everything, certainly, what the
parties engaged were most anxious to settle.
It is doubtful whether either Of the combat
ants in duel goes on field with the bru
tai desire Of revenge in his heart. The fire
of passion has pretty well worn off during
the preliminaries to the meeting. and the
man who goes out, goes to satisfy public
opinion-and himself When he pulls trlg-
ger, he fires, not 60 much ct his antagonist
as at the community which stands behind
him. It is pretty well understood in the
affairs of this world, that when it is safe to
insult man be will not have to 60 begging
for sights. 1t is the baser side of human
nature. There are any number OF people
in q community who are ready to treat him
contemptuously, even though they DO not
overflow with courage themselves, and to
man of sensitiveness, life led under that
burthen, is little worse than no life at all.
1t is in this respect that duel may fought
in the interest OF peace and as measure ct
self defense, so that when man goes out
for meeting, he goes out to defend himself
against, not so much his fellow man as his
fellow men, He goes out with desire to
make it so dangerous, or at the least so in
convenient, to wrong him that he may live
in peace. He who goes not thirsting for the
life Of his adversary, merely because it is
has life, is brute, and we doubt whether
one duelist in hundred appears on field
with that feeling. 1t is too grave NC
ment for himself, to admit of room for meap
passions towards another. 1t is rathe'
puzzling to understand why nearly all agree
that a campaign between 500, 600 men
side, where all strategy may be used, and
every advantage taken, is righteous, thoue b
seven.eights of the men don't understand
what they are fighting for, and are slaugE +.
teredslike sheep, while single combat foug'
for the reason of self defence under present.
ed conditions Of fairness, is murder TIE
real culprit in a duel, it would seem is the
man who gives offence, for it is impossible that
right minded gentleman would causeless-
ly insult another without apologizing for bis
lapse, but by some strange reasoning, the
very community that eggs on the fight cries
out at the challenger as the murderer. Duel
ling stops the strength Of the rowdy; it
puts upon his good behavior, the black
guard who would be willing to meet the
harmless, street fsticuf, but has not cour-
age toa put his life on the cast, and it is a
preventative Of the dangerous street fights
that often cause the innocent to suffer. All
this much may be said 10 favor of the code.
And here is the browning argument against
its use There is no necessity for it
There CAP be no necessity for man to
wrong another, and the man who perpetrates
it should be willing, nay, anxious to atone
for it, and if he is not willing to do that,
then he ought to be willing to accept the
gravest responsibility that attaches to it
perpetration.