PHI LOS 0 P H Y . - Classic Works of Apologetics Online

Duel/ing. 18:5
1n return, I forbear from applying to the case of
duelling the Christian principle of the forgiveness of .
injuries ; because it is possible to suppose the injury
to be forgiven, and the duellist to act entirely from a
concern for his own reputation : where this is Dot
the case, the guilt of duelling is manifest, and is
greater.
In this view it seems unnecessary to distinguish between
him who giYes, and him who accepts a chal.
lenge : for, on the one hand, they incur an equal
hazard of destrO)ling life; and, on the other, both
act upon the same persuasion, that \\.. hat they do is
necessary, in order to recover or preserve the good
opinion of the \vorld.
Public opinion is not easily controlled by ~ivil
institutions
: . for which reason I question whether any
regulations can be contrived of sufficient force to
suppress or change the rule of honour, which stigmatizes
all scruples about duelling with the reproach of
co\vardice.
1'he insufficiency of the }-edress which the law of
the land affords, for those injuries which chiefly affect
a man in his sensibility and ruputation, tempts
many to redress themselves. Prosecutions for such
offences, by the trifling damages that are recovered,
serve only to make the sufferer nlore ridic·ulouso
Thi~ ought to be remedied.
For the arnlY, where the pointof honour isculti.
,\'atcd with exquisite attention and refinement, I
would establish a Court oj H01JOUr, with a power of
awarding those submissions and acknowledgments,
which it IS geneally the purpose of a challenge to
obtain; and it might grow into a fashion, with per ..
~ons of rank of all professions, to refer their quarrels
to this tribunal.
Duelling, as the law now stands, can seldom be
overtaken hy legal punishment. The challenge, appointmem,
dnd othe; previous circumstances, which
~~ndicat~ the jllt.cntion with which the conlbatants