Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-12-08
NO EXCUSE FOR
DUELING NOW.
SAYS DAUDET
Man Who Engaged in Eleven
Personal COmbats Names
It Foolish Practice.
DUELS HELD IN AMERICA

learn. by the refusal Of Leon Daudet
member Of the Chamber of Deputies who
fought eleven dueIs before the war, to
accept another challenge. He declares
that dueling is a foolish practice. and
that there is no excuse for it ''since the
war"
It seems strange to Americans that in
France men still formally fight to the
death. as they do also in other Euro
pean countries and In most Of Latin
America. 1t has been more than half
century since a duel of any importance
was fought in the United States, and al
most a century since the duel here was
in its heydey.
We might claim from this that we are
a more civilized country than France.
A~kut that would be a hard claim 70 sub
stantiate by any other evidence. It
would also be hard TO claim much credit
for not dueIIing when we will have our
little lynching parties and race riots,
and in view Of the record we have made
in Haiti. a malicious critic might say
that we have given up the fair fight for
the unfair one
As a matter Of fact duels have IN
doubtedIy held a high and recognized
place in countries which were by every
other standard highly civilized. and
study Of the subject leaves one not at
all sure that combat between man and
man, strictly regulated. is a wholly bar
barous proceeding. The duel seems 10
be condemned more and more. not he
cause Il is essentially unciviiZed, but
because Il is wasteful Of human HE,
and because it tends, especially In
democracy, to degenerate into a means
of legitimizing murder.
REASON FOR DECLINE
OF DUELLING.
This seems to be the real cause Of Its
decadence in this country. Duelling Is
al ar.stocratic practice. In theory 1t Is
q combat between two peers, regulated
BY the strictest regard for fairness. But
in this country every one is peer. one
man is as good as another in theory,
and all had until a few years ago. the
right to bear arms Hence the duel be-
came a means by which a rascal skilled
with 4 gun could kill a useful man and
go free.
Long and interesting is the history OF
the duel in America, and ii makes us
realize keenly how much we have
changed. A book on dueling, written
in 1865 by an Erglishman who had traF-
eIIed extensively in this country, says
aSIhat America is the land where life is
held cheaper than anywhere else. There
He goes on to say that the walls and
furniture Of Washington hotels were
Scared by the bullets which excited
legislators and politicians had fred a
one another.
In a word, fifty years ago we were
the most cantankerOus, truculent and
self-assertive people on earth All men
went armed and were always ready to
lay down their lives in defense Of their
honor, their property and their dignity.
In those days you did NOT even Jostle
man on the street without making
elaborate apology or else lighting for
your life.
Now we are as completely disarmed as
medieval peasants. We are driven shout
like sheep in great herds. We peacefully
stand on each others toes in the subways,
while consideration for the stranger Is
rare virtue in our midst. There would
seem to be just mite Of truth In the
statement of an old writer on the subject
that 'the duel is a sharp but salutary
remedy for rude and offensive conduct
He also points out that there is little
excuse for any nation which still goes to
war TO pride itself on the abolition OF
duelling when individuals and nations
have learned TO treat each other with re-
spect." be thinks both dueling and war
nay be Unnecessary. but he does not
think that the one is either any worse
or any less necessary than the other.
s sIEN OF TODAY TRUST
HTHEIR HONOR TO POLICEMEN.
- Certainly no good brief can be made
~ out in defense Of dueling. Yet it does
s. seem undenlabIe that when a man re-
nounces all personal prOwess and en-
trusts his safety and honor to police
men, he loses something. The typical
of fols short
winded. physically unit for any kind Of
encounter. and nervously unable to face
disaster. is surely not altogether an ad-
mirabIe figure. We hark back with
pleasure to tales of men who welded
wicked sword, shot straight and faced
death calmly.
This is not argument in favor of fight
ing. but it does seem to indicate that
civilization has robbed the individual OF
something valuable. This was what VII
liam James had in mind when he said
that war N ght be abolished II we could
substitute something else strenuous and
dangerous for it. He suggested that our
young men he enlisted in armies to go
out and conquer the wilderness-tO re
claim deserts. explore rivers and forests
That might be a substitute for dueiling,
too.
The trouble seems to he that the heroic
III pulSI-Lut VIII ~ UaAC anu Su4Ltt
decadent among us. We are too com
Portable 10 fight each other or the wilder
ness. The man who Graves battle and
adventure is as much out of place among
US as a lion in a barnyard.
PUBLIC OPINION DIVIDED
IN COLONIAL TINES.
Public opinion on duelling was always
divided IN this country. even in colonial
ines. There was q feeling that men had
a right to settle their differences by com
bat. but it was also recognized that val
liable lives were lost in that way. and
much crime committed in the name of
honor. The killing of Hamilton by Burr
probably gave the duel its first serious
setback. Various laws were passed to
prevent duelling. and some of them were
strange. In New Orleans, court Of
honor" was established for the arhltra-
ton Of individual differences This ap-
parentiy WAS to 10 for individuals about
what the Hague tribunal tries to do for
nations, and it apparently succeeded about
well. Massachusetts law forbade
duelling and provided that the body Of
the man killed in q duel should be used
for dissection. A Mississippi law dealt
body blow to the practice by providing
that man who killed another in a duel
must pay his victims debts!
The famous Cilley-Graves duel, in
which one Congressman killed another.
also resulted in a great popular revuision