The Code of Honor | Page 7

duelling at the present time. I am unable to say what code exists now in Ireland, but I very much doubt whether it be of the same character which it bore in 1777. The American Quarterly Review for September, 1824, in a notice of Sir Jonah Barrington's history of his own times, has published this code; and followed it up with some remarks, which I have thought proper to insert also. The grave reviewer has spoken of certain States in terms so unlike a gentleman, that I would advise him to look at home, and say whether he does not think that the manners of his own countrymen, do not require great amendment? I am very sure, that the citizens of the States so disrespectfully spoken of, would feel a deep humiliation, to be compelled to exchange their urbanity of deportment, for the uncouth incivility of the people of Massachusetts. Look at their public journals, and you will find them, very generally, teeming with abuse of private character, which would not be countenanced here. The idea of New England becoming a school for manners, is about as fanciful as Bolinbroke's "idea of a patriot king." I like their fortiter in re, but utterly eschew their suaviter in modo.
"The practice of duelling and points of honor settled at Clonmell summer assizes, 1777, by the gentleman delegates of Tipperary, Galway, Mayo, Sligo and Roscommon, and prescribed for general adoption throughout Ireland.
"Rule 1.--The first offence requires the apology, although the retort may have been more offensive than the insult.--Example: A. tells B. he is impertinent, &C.; B. retorts, that he lies; yet A. must make the first apology, because he gave the first offence, and then, (after one fire,) B. may explain away the retort by subsequent apology.
"Rule 2.--But if the parties would rather fight on: then, after two shots each, (but in no case before,) B. may explain first, and A. apologize afterward.
"Rule 3.--If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with the seconds; if they won't decide or can't agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or a hit, if the challenger requires it.
"Rule 4.--When the lie direct is the first offence, the aggressor must either beg pardon in express terms; exchange tow shots previous to apology; or three shots followed up by explanation; or fire on till a severe hit be received by one party or the other.
"Rule 5.--As a blow is strictly prohibited under any circumstances among gentlemen, no verbal apology can be received for such an insult; the alternatives therefore are: the offender handing a can to the injured party, to be used on his own back, at the same time begging pardon; firing on until one or both is disabled; or exchanging three shots, and then asking pardon without the proffer of the cane.
"If swords are used, the parties engage till one is well-blooded, disabled or disarmed; or until, after receiving a wound, and blood being drawn, the aggressor begs pardon.
"N.B. A disarm is considered the same as a disable; the disarmer may (strictly) break his adversary's sword; but if it be the challenger who is disarmed, it is considered ungenerous to do so.
"In case the challenged be disarmed and refuses to ask pardon or atone, he must not be killed as formerly; but the challenger may lay his sword on the aggressor's shoulder, than break the aggressor's sword, and say, 'I spare your life!' The challenged can never revive the quarrel, the challenger may.
"Rule 6.--If A. give B. the lie, and B. retorts by a blow, (being the two greatest offences,) no reconciliation can take place till after two discharges each, or a severe hit; after which, B. may beg A.'s pardon for the blow, and then A. may explain simply for the lie; because a blow is never allowable, and the offence of the lie therefore merges in it. (See preceding rule.)
"N.B. Challenges for individual causes, may be reconciled on the ground, after one shot. An explanation, or the slightest hit should be sufficient in such cases, because no personal offence transpired.
"Rule 7.--But no apology can be received, in any case, after the parties have actually taken their ground, without exchange of fires.
"Rule 8.--In the above case, no challenger is obliged to divulge the cause of his challenge, (if private,) unless required by the challenged to do so before their meeting.
"Rule 0.--All imputations of cheating at play, races, &c, to be considered equivalent to a blow; but may be reconciled after one shot, on admitting their falsehood, and begging pardon publicly.
"Rule 10.--Any insult to a lady under a gentleman's care or protection, to be considered as, by one degree, a greater offence than if given to the gentleman personally, and to be regulated accordingly.
"Rule 11.--Offences originating or accruing from the