The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-08-17
THE FOLLY OF DUELING.

The savage fight between the Count of
Turin and Prince Henri of Orleans shows
that Europe has not outgrown the senseless
practice of dueling as this country has
In that regard, at least American civiiza-
ton is more advanced than European, for
whereas in Europe the duel is still regarded
as the highest court of honor it is now
universally condemned in this country by
public opinion and made penal offense
by the laws of most of the States. 1t was
not always so, however. The so-called
code of honor" prevailed for a long time
in the Southern States and to some extent
in the North. There have been some furious
duels in this country, some growing out OF
personal quarrels or domestic scandals and
others out of politics. Among the famous
duels between public men was that be-
tween Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamil-
ton, in which the latter was killed. And,
by the way Hamilton's eldest son was
killed in a duel in 1902. two years before
his father was. Another noted duel was
that between Jonathan Cilley, member of
Congress from Maine, and William j..
lucky. This duel was fought with rifles
and resulted in the killing of Mr.. Cilley on
the third fire. Another famous duel was
that between Henry Clay and John Ran
dolph, which was compromised after two
shots in which neither was hurt. Andrew
jackson, Thomas H. Benton and other
statesmen of chat day were pronounced
and fought several others. Colonel Bissen
of Illinois, accepted a challenge from JEFF
ferson Davis in 1850 and named as the
weapon the army musket to be loaded with
a ball and three buckshot, and the combat
ants to be stationed at forty PAGES, with
liberty to advance to ten. These terms had
a very pacifying effect on Davis, and the
duel never came Off Somewhat similar
was the effect when, in 1856, Arson Burlin-
game member of Congress from Massachu-
sets, accepted a challenge from Preston
S. Brooks, member from South Carolina
and named rifles as the weapons. T@le duel
never occurred. Dozens of duels between
public men have been fought at the village
of Bladensburg, near Washington, and
Happily these days are past, and public
opinion in the United States no longer JUS
titles the sending or acceptance of a chal-
lenge.
The absurd thing about dueling, aside
from the moral aspect is that it does not
decide anything. 1t never did and never
could settle a question of veracity or point
reputation. If the world is not large enough
for two rivals or enemies to live in together
the duel is rather a more manly way for
one to get rid of the other than assassina-
tion yet it is none the less criminal The
only rational duel is one between deadly
which one succeeds. Even then, however,
nothing is settled except one of the COM
batants.
The duel which has just been fought near
Paris was peculiar in that it had a dis
tincty international aspect. A French no
bleman was challenged by an Italian officer
and member of the royal family for utter
ances rejecting on the entire Italian army
The combatants had never met before
but they fought like bitter personal enc
mics. Both seem to have been expert
swordsmen, and both fought to kill The
affair seems to have been conducted with
the strictest regard for the code" and to
have been in all respects a high-class en-
gagement. The result seems to have been
accepted in Italy as a vindication of the
entire army from the charge Of cowardice
popular idol. Really, however, it was a
very foolish proceeding, and the result set
ties nothing, except, perhaps, that the
Count of Turin is better swordsman than
Prince Henri of Orleans