The New York herald., 1874-08-03
THE AMENITIES OF JOURNALISM
A Great Western Editor Expounds the
Law-When an Editor Should Fight.

A Great Western Editor Expounds the
Law-When an Editor Should Fight.
From the Louicville Courier-Journal
We have laid before our readers all the publica'
tions relating to the difficulty between MIR. Cock
erill, the managing editor OF the Cincinnati En-
Quiyer, on the one side. and Judge P. U. Major and
General George B. Hodge on the other, and with.
out going into the merits Of the origin Of the trou-
bic, we have just criticism to make the face
OF the papers. The laws OF this Commonwealth
forbid not only dueing, but they forbid the send
ing and the carrying OF challenge to fight duel.
The law not only denounces penalty for a viola
tion of Its provisions. but our constitution endeay'
Ors to make the offence peculiarly Odlous
asauayng ncn f and the or om s hoGng enr
to accomplish this the constitution has even gone
to the length OF requiring test oath from every
ssSesy sSet n Tins eT f q cheees iSSs pass bs
tween citlzens OF Kentucky, either within or with
out the state. 1t Is possible The prohlbltlOn was
thus restricted under false and foolish apprehen-
sion that IL IL were otherwise some outsider might
question the chivalry OF .'this side OF the river
and door ought to be left open to vlndlcate Ken
lucky courage. The constitu utiOnal provision was
compromise in It's terms. but its general parpose
was to ssiRmatize the practice OF duelIing and
sending, carrying and accepting challenges and
its moral If not It's legal denuncauon extends to
the whole world.
Judge Major is one of the circuit judges of this
State, and is specially charged with the admins
tation OF the criminal laws in his judicial district.
Bar, and thereby specially brought under the test
oath requirement, and candidate for the Office of
Governor. The letter which General hodge finally
delivered to Mr.. Cockerlll was an invitation from
Judge Major to MIR. Cockerill to meet him
municate with him in Canada. That letter could
have but one meaning. 1t was a challenge. No
gentleman versed in the code and no dsinterested
man OF ordinary intelligence and no court having
any knowledge OF the provisions OF our law would
construe 1t otherwise. II was an invitation to go
to Canada outside the territorial limits OF the
United States in order to evade the criminal laws
"a
difficulty after the manner customary among
gentlemen. Judge Major was not, techni-
sending challenge to citizen OF another State,
and he was not subject to the laws of Ohio. There
was no need OF gong to Canada In order to send
served the right # all his efforts at adjustment
failed to retire and 'leave the management OF Iur-
ther proceedings to some other friend OF Judge
Major - but General Hodge committed the error
OF going oAe step beyond the ground OF amicable
adjustment to which he purp0sed confinlng HIM
selL He presented letter not referring to ad-
justment but clearly pointing to hostile meet
"not q challenge but a request to know where a
letter could reach him in Canada" We apprehend,
however, that there could be no receding after
the parties had gone to Canada they would
have gone prepared, not to negotiate, but to meet
In mortal combat. Neither General Hodge nor
Judge Major Is placed In position to subject him
self to the penalties OF the law but they have by
their course impaired the spirit Of the law. and
the influence OF their present positions makes
others violation Of the letter Of the law. 1t is
better to have no law on such a subject than to
have one that may be violated with impunlty.
There can be no enforcement of the letter or law
and take care only to keep themselves within it's
letter. What we have said here we have intended
to say kindly but the occasion is one, In our opn-
ion. demanding such view OF the case as we have
g1Veu IL.