meet you, I will not now consider this to be your case, although many think so; and if I had not pledged myself, I might reconsider the case." p. 9. Com. Barron is still more decided. Upon the subject of duelling," says he, "I perfectly coincide with the opinions you have expressed. I consider it as a barbarous practice, which ought to be exploded from civilized society; but, Sir, there may be cases of such aggravated insult and injury, received by an individual, as to render an appeal to arms, on his part, absolutely necessary. Mine I conceive to be a case of that description; and I feel myself constrained, by every tie that binds me to society,-by all that can make life desirable to me, -to resort to this mode of obtaining that redress due to me at your hands, as the only alternative, which now seems to present itself for the preservation of my honor." pp. 17, 18.

There is something so monstrously absurd and preposterous in the whole conduct of a duel;--in its plan, progress, and termination;-in the reasons assigned for it, and the excuses by which it is palliated, that few persons can have patience to examine it deliberately. Argument seems totally useless; the authority of the wise and good has no weight; the sanctions of law human and divine are contemned. What can be said on such a subject? With the duellist himself nothing can avail. With others the case is too plain to admit of statement or illustration. If we had patience to take up all the absurdities of the practice, and to analyze them one after another, who would have patience to read?

Yet we cannot but advert to one clause of the code of honor, as it was understood by Com. Decatur, which puts it in the power of any rash man, who has become expert in the art of manslaying, to murder his brother duellist whenever he pleases. The clause is that which declares, that an officer "is not at liberty to decline an invitation from any person," &c. The only question, which a challenged officer can ask, is, whether the challenger is not utterly degraded." He may not inquire, whether there is any cause of offence. It is enough that somebody invites him to be killed. If he ventures to decide, that his antagonist is too "degraded" to enjoy the distinction of butchering an honorable man, he will be accused of making the decision under the influence of fear. He had better fight first, therefore, and consider the case afterwards. Besides, if the characters of all, who have fought duels, were fairly brought under review, it would be difficult to say, what degree of mental imbecility, professional incompetency, or moral depravity, or what union of all three, would constitute a sufficient degradation to deprive a military man of the privilege of killing and being killed. To apply these remarks to the case before us; if all that Com. Decatur says of his antagonist be true, his character must be base indeed. Yet it was necessary to accept an invitation, even from such a man. Suppose Com. Barron should conceive, that it is still necessary for him to call out two or three more. How could the invitation be declined? One man has accepted the invitation at the expense of his life. It would be hazardous indeed for another to decline an invitation, after the matter has been thus decided; and still more hazardous for a third: for it is to be remembered, that the character of a duellist always improves very rapidly, while the duelling process is VOL. XVI.

going on. The amount, therefore, of this part of the code, is, that the vilest man in the world may, for any cause or no cause, kill the best man, the most valuable man, whom he can find in the military service of his country.

Again; these men disapprove of duelling. They esteem it no proof of courage,--a barbarous practice,-and one that ought to be exploded. But when shall the practice be exploded, if there is no beginning of a salutary reformation? Will not the causes, which make it necessary to fight now, make it necessary to fight while the world shall stand? And how can it be said, that the practice ought to be exploded?

2. The duel under consideration bears a very striking resemblance to most of the wars, which are within the compass of history. The duel was necessary. Neither party could avoid it, if you believe his declarations. Yet we all know, that either party could have avoided it, with the most perfect ease;--without losing any thing, without endangering any thing valuable. On the contrary, fighting was a troublesome business, both in its preparation and its issue.

Each

So it is with nations. They always declare that war is necessary ⚫ and unavoidable. They make a great parade of the injuries and indignities, which they have suffered; they trumpet their meekness and forbearance, and solemnly aver, that they are impelled into war. nation represents its enemy as a prodigy of violence, and fraud, and itself as a model of justice, integrity, and suffering virtue. All these representations are false, at least as to their extent. Both nations have acted foolishly, and perhaps unjustly; but they have not suffered so much in years of peace, as they would suffer in a month of war. The necessity was altogether factitious. It commonly exists as much at the close of the war, as it did at the beginning; and the list of injuries, which were drawn up with such gravity, as imposing an irresistible necessity, has been increased a hundred fold during the reign of violence and blood.

In every case of apprehended war, it ought to be the first object with every man, who has influence, and especially of every able writer, to examine the alleged necessity; to see if it is not assumed totally without proof; to inculcate forbearance and consideration; to explain what will certainly be lost by a war; to describe the uncertainty of its issue, and the incalculable amount of what will probably be lost; and to denounce the judgments of the Almighty Ruler upon all, whether high or low, honored or disgraced, who shall, for light reasons, and through the influence of false allegations, plunder the goods, debauch the morals, and destroy the lives of their fellow men. In one respect, wars seem more unreasonable than duels. A great proportion of the sufferers are usually innocent of the alleged causes of war, and do all they can to avoid its evils. But no duellist is shot, unless he voluntarily exposes his life in single combat.

3. How much more deliberate was the murder of Com. Decatur, and how much longer premeditated, than almost any murder, which brings its perpetrator to the gallows. More than nine months elapsed after the first letter and answer were interchanged, before the crime was actually committed. In the letter and answer the deliberate design of killing, if necessary, is apparent. Many of the murders, which bring upon the guilty offender the whole vengeance of the civil power, are

perpetrated without the opportunity of a single hour's retirement and reflection; but here two cool, collected champions sit down to the work of death with as much composure, as if they were writing a dissertation on the law of projectiles, or bringing forward some plan of national improvement; and nearly three hundred days pass over their heads, between the cruel purpose and its bloody execution. Indeed, the man who comes to the deliberate resolution of shedding blood, on duelling principles, leads a life of murder, so long as he persists in that resolution, although he should never send or receive a challenge. On confirmed duellists no impression can be made; but if any young man, who is fascinated by the word honor, should cast his eye on these pages, we would solemnly warn him of the danger to which he is exposed. However lightly men may agree to regard the killing of each other, it will never be regarded as a light matter by the Almighty Lawgiver; by Him, who formed man, and endowed him with those high attributes, which are capable of noble employment in the Creator's service.

4. In how odious and despicable a light do the officious and meddling promoters of duels appear. It would seem, that there was no small agency of this kind in the case before us. Some busybody was engaged in carrying declarations backward and forward; another was soliciting the first correspondence to show around. We think it highly probable, that the duel, though perhaps long meditated, would never have taken place, had not this course been pursued. The sport of mischievous boys, who take delight in setting two fierce mastiffs upon each other, is honorable and dignified, if compared with the foolish interference of men, for the accomplishment of so atrocious a design. 5. It is very evident, from the whole correspondence, that both parties hated to fight. In other words, each felt as though it was a serious thing to be shot through the body. Each advanced to the conflict with no small apprehension for himself, though he appears to have indulged no solicitude for the safety of his adversary. From the it quickness and exactness of the fire, and the direction to the most mortal part of the body, (if the newspaper account is correct,) it would seem that each was disposed to destroy his enemy as surely and speedily as possible.

Perhaps it will be asked, how these men should be induced to fight, if they really dreaded the issue? We acknowledge that there is ground for the inquiry; and it demands a good deal of reflection to answer it tisfactorily. There is no doubt, however, that many duellists have gone to the field of blood, with almost as much reluctance as the criminal to the gallows. They have passed sleepless nights in the dreadful interval, between the challenge and the meeting. They have often resorted to very mean and humiliating expedients to creep out of the difficulty, without refusing to fight on the one hand, or exposing their lives on the other. That iron-handed necessity, which leads them to the field of slaughter, seems, in most cases, to amount to no more, than that having committed themselves on the subject of duelling, they cannot even reconsider the matter. Having sold all their precious interests, their lives, the peace of their families, and even their souls, for a mess of pottage, they cannot bring themselves to annul the bargain. It

is indeed a strange and woeful instance of the delusion, to which the depravity of man exposes him.

6. After it had been determined by the parties, that they would kill each other if possible, it is distressing to see how unalterably bent on evil their hearts were, in circumstances which should have occasioned a salutary change. The meeting became inevitable, on duelling principles, in the month of June. Nothing further was done in the matter till October; and the excuse, which Com. Barron assigns for the delay, was, "that he was confined to his bed, the chief part of that period, by a tedious and painful indisposition." p. 11. A considerable delay subsequently took place, and the last letter of the series is as follows:

"Sir,

"Norfolk, Feb. 6, 1820.

Your letter of the 29th of December found me confined to bed. with a violent bilious fever, and it was eight days after its arrival before I was able to read it; The fever, however, about that time left me, and my convalescence appeared to promise a moderately quick recovery. I therefore wrote you my note of the 16th ult. In two days after I relapsed, and have had a most violent attack, which has reduced me very low; but as soon as I am able to write, you shall hear from me again to the point. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, JAMES BARRON. Com. STEPHEN DECATUR, Washington."

What a picture! A poor helpless man, distressed with pain, and almost in the embraces of death, spending all his little strength in preparation to kill his brother;--crawling away from the sides of the grave, raising his dim and glazed eyes, and extending his feeble, trembling arm, to destroy that life, which the whole created universe could neither give originally, nor restore when lost. No proof of even occasional relentings; no symptom of the flinty heart having been softened for a moment by the fire of affliction.

Com Decatur's time passed in a different manner. The routine of fashionable life occupied his hours. In the splendid drawing-room, and the magnificent saloon, he was preparing to become a tenant of the dark and narrow house. At a ball given by himself, in his own spacious mansion, surrounded by six hundred gay and thoughtless beings, he was about taking bis final leave of elegance and beauty, putting on his shroud and extending himself in his coffin. This he was about to do, while in the deliberate act of murdering his brother And the harp, and the viol, the tabret, and pipe, and wine are in their feasts; but they regard not the work of the LORD, nor consider the opera tion of his hands.

7. The amazing inconsistency of duellists is very obvious. They professed fenderness, and their real cruelty, form one of the mos striking contrasts any where to be found. Com. Barron is trem blingly alive to the fear, that the females of his family should suspect what was in agitation. In his letter of Oct. 23d, he says; "I will thank you not to put your name on the cover of your answer, as, I pre sume, you can have no disposition to give unnecessary pain to the females of my family." p. 5. And again, at the close of his long let ter of eight closely printed pages; I can make no other apology for the apparent tardiness of this communication, than merely to state, that, being on very familiar terms with my family, out of tenderness to their feelings, I have written under great restraint." p. 18. If the

females of a family would be so much distressed, at the bare apprehension that a duel might take place, with what agony would they behold a father or a husband brought home mortally wounded? Com. Barron was tender of his own family, and yet he voluntarily exposed them to the sudden and violent loss of their protector and guardian, and of all their means of support. He was tender of his own family; but he was willing to carry agony and desolation into the family of his antagonist. He was desirous not to occasion a momentary pang; but perfectly ready to inflict a wound, which can never be healed while life remains. This lively sensibility on smaller points, and an apparent disregard of heart-rending and durable anguish, remind us of Lord Nelson's testimony, on the trial of Capt. Macnamara for the murder of Col. Montgomery. This murder took place in the form of a duel; and was occasioned by Col. Montgomery's striking the captain's dog, and replying to the owner's admonition, in a style of genteel, careless insolence. The counsel for the prisoner called witnesses to prove the excellence of his general character, in order to convince the jury that the killing was without malice. Lord Nelson swore, that, from a long acquaintance with the gallant captain, he did not think him capable of "hurting a hair of the head of man, woman, or child.", Yet that same captain had confessedly killed a man, in the prime of life, for the single offence of a hasty reply to a rather uncourtly caution.

8. The pamphlet under consideration will tend to depress our national character abroad, in the estimation of all, whose good opinion is worth possessing. The achievements of our navy, during the last war, have drawn toward it the concentrated attention of the civilized world. Every distinguished officer on its rolls is a public character of no ordinary responsibility. What he does will be known and read of all men. It could not be concealed, were he disposed to conceal it. In the case before us, the parties designedly wrote for the inspection of all men; they fought with the eyes of Europe and America upon them. Their reasons were to be canvassed, their motives examined, and their temper and habits discovered. In this trying predicament, how miserable is the exhibition. What is there, in the whole history of the transaction, that a judicious man can respect, or a virtuous man cease to condemn?

9. What is the remedy for duelling? In the present perverted taste, and amid the prevalence of warlike principles, this is a question difficult to be answered. One thing, however, can be done by the virtuous part of the community, more effectually than has ever been done hitherto. All, who abhor the principles of duelling, can express that abhorrence with more unanimity and energy, than have been yet called forth. They can show by their declarations and their example, that they regard all concerned in duelling, whether principals, seconds, surgeons, or busy-bodies, as guilty of very aggravated murder, and no more to be countenanced than other murderers. They know that the laws of their country say this;-that the law of God says it;--and they will not be backward to give the declaration their hearty assent. Their united voice will not be disregarded.

One reason, why many conscientious persons do not express more pain and regret, on account of deaths occasioned by duels, is, that they