Page images
PDF
EPUB

cue the world from endless confusion." For he that has the power of the sword will always be in the right," and always assume the power of making war. In every war which can be named, each party has professed to "be in the right;" and the contests of nations, called Christian and civilized, have been decided, not by reason and justice, but by "Cain's Club," violence, and murder. Thus millions after millions have been murdered in christendom in wars, which were as perfectly needless and unjustifiable, as Cain's murder of Abel. And may we not add, that every man who seeks to involve a nation in war is as really deserving of the name of a murderer, as the first man that slew his brother? Alas! how many Cains are to be found in every country.

COMMODORE PERRY AND CAPT. HEATH.

AN unfortunate contention between these naval officers has, in months past, excited considerable interest in the United States. Early in the dispute, while abroad, Commodore Perry violated the laws by striking a commissioned officer. On their arrival in this country, Captain Heath demanded satisfaction by a challenge to a duel. The duel was at first prevented by the civil authority of the state of Rhode Island. In consequence of this interference, Perry went to Washington, and there, at the seat of government, made an arrangement for meeting his antagonist:

"The parties," say the seconds," accordingly met, on Monday, Oct. 19th at 12 o'clock, on the Jersey shore of the Hudson-where Commodore Perry received the fire of Capt. Heath without returning it; when Com. Decatur immediately stepped forward and declared, that Com. Perry had come to the ground with a determination not to return the fire of Capt. Heath-in proof of which, he read a letter from Com. Perry to him, which he had written soliciting him to become his friend,— and therefore he presumed the party was satisfied. Capt. Heath having expressed his acquiescence in this opinion, and that the injury he had received from Com. Perry was atoned for, the partics returned to the city.

"We do hereby certify that the foregoing is a correct statement.' 99

STEPHEN DECATUR.
R. M. DESHA.

This transaction deserves a serious review. We shall therefore submit the following observations:

First. As Com. Perry was conscious that he had injured Capt. Heath, would it not have been far more magnanimous, as well as more Christian, to have made an ingenuous confession of the wrong, than to have exposed his own life, and encouraged his antagonist to violate the laws of the land by murderous combat? We say murderous, because duelling is murder by our civil laws, as well as by the dictates of reason and the laws of God. Shall we then praise naval officers for bravely bidding defiance to the laws of their country-and the laws of Heaven!

Secondly. Though we censure Com. Perry for consenting to be a mark for revenge, in preference to making a proper confession of his fault, we cannot but approve his conduct in neglecting to return the fire of an incensed adversary. By this neglect, the anger of Capt. Heath was appeased, and a reconciliation was easily effected. How certain then it is, that Capt. Heath would have forborne to challenge for a duel, had Com. Perry, at an earlier period, shown a pacific disposition, and a readiness to retract his fault! In like manner, in almost every instance, public war might be avoided, by the display of a peaceable temper on either side. "Soft words turn away wrath;" and "it is the glory of a man to pass over a transgression."

Thirdly. Suppose that the shot of Heath had killed Perry-at whose hands would the blood have been required? And who but savages could have exulted in the event? Or suppose that both had fired and both had fallen a sacrifice to their folly: Who but mad-men could have justified this waste of life, and this savage mode of atoning for offences and settling disputes ? We must, however, admit that such private combats are in no respect more immoral than public war;-and they are usually far less unjust, and less distressing in their results.

Fourthly. There is still another view to be taken of this affair. These men were officers in the pay of the United States. It is

then a question which deserves the attention of our government, and of all our fellow citizens, whether men can be regarded as denfenders of our rights and civil institutions, who thus wantonly violate the laws of the land? Is no danger to be apprehended from permitting men to hold offices in the army or the navy, who assume the right of rising above the laws, and of committing crimes which the laws justly denominate murder?

We have no personal acquaintance with these officers, and no desire to injure either of them; but we wish to call their attention, and the attention of others, to this interesting subject; and we believe it to be the duty of every man who is a friend to religion, humanity, or the welfare of his country, to raise his voice against such flagitious violations of law on the part of men in office. We may allow that these officers are men of courage; but we see that this courage has been displayed in a manner which tends to bring our laws into contempt, and to open more widely the flood-gates of barbarism and murder. Any other men in the United States, not excepting the slaves, bave as good a right as the officers of our navy to commit murder,as good a right to choose their own modes of revenging wrongs and settling disputes in violation of law. What then would be the consequences, if all other classes of people should thus rise above the laws, set them at defiance, and adopt some mode of murder for the settlement of their disputes? The land would soon be filled with barbarity, violence, and blood-shed; every man's life would "hang in doubt," and all our civil and religious institutions would be exposed to fall a prey to malignant and revengeful passions.

If the officers of our army and navy are with impunity permitted to attempt the murder of one another, what security have we that they will not also murder other citizens? If they may thus outrage our laws while within the United States, with what safety can they be trusted abroad, as commanders of ships of war? If they will not regard the laws of God, nor the laws of their own country, can it be expected that they will regard the laws of other countries, or the law of nations? Many bloody wars have been occasioned by the haughty and wanton acts of military and naval commanders; nor may our country expect

much peace, if such officers are suffered to trample on its laws, and encourage crimes by their own example.

As the war-maker treats the laws of God, so the duellist treats the laws of the land,-excepting that in the latter case there is a little more heroic skulking to avoid the hands of justice. But the example in the two cases is adapted to destroy all reverence for the laws both of God and man.

The public will have opportunity to see, whether the President of the United States will give his sanction to murderous combat and atrocious violations of law; or whether he will cause the four naval officers to be punished according to their deserts. We say four naval officers, because the seconds are semi-murderers in view of the law, and in fact encouragers of a murderous custom.

The preceding paragraphs were written for the last Number of this work, but deferred for particular reasons. Since which our newspapers have announced another transaction to add to the reproach of our country. They have stated that the Attorney General of the United States-unmindful of his oath as a peace officer-has sanctioned by his own example the barbarous appeal to "deadly combat." With what face can be now prosecute the wanton murderer in our courts of justice, while it is known throughout the land, that he is not ashamed to transgress the laws by a challenge to a duel? Have we no men of more virtue than duellists to fill the important office of Attorney General? What but war and murder are we to expect, while men in such stations allow themselves in such flagitious violations of law? Is it possible that any imputations could be implied in the remarks of Mr. Pinckney, so injurious to the reputation of the Attorney General, as his own Gothic mode of seeking redress?

Few men, it is suspected, ever wished this gentlemen a greater injury than he has done to himself. Prior to the account of the challenge, we had entertained a favorable opinion of his character; and even now, we are disposed to make a reasonable allowance for the influence of education in a part of the country where the phrase "men of honor," means men, who, in defiance of law, settle their disputes by

revenge and murder. We deem it, however, a solemn duty to inculcate the doctrine, that no man should be regarded as worthy to execute the laws of the land, who, by his own example, encourages transgression. When such are the officers of justice, the remark will ever apply, that " Laws are like cobwebs, which only entangle the smaller flies, while wasps and hornets break through them and escape."

We have recently seen an article from a London paper, purporting to be a Proposal for a Dictionary, with new defiritions to words. Among the specimens of new definitions was the following:

"Duel, an interview between two fools."

Should the sentiment thus strongly expressed be generally adopted, duellists will cease to be called "gentlemen of honor," or the title will be regarded as the severest reproach. To the Compiler of the proposed Dictionary, we would suggest the following definition :

War, the barbarian's substitute for reason and justice, or the tiger mode of settling the disputes of Christian nations.

REVIEW OF FOUR MODERN DISCOVERIES.

THE friends of peace should be careful to notice, record, and reflect the rays of light which emanate from men in high stations, and give ample credit to rulers for all they say or do, which tends to preserve the peace of nations. Too often the professions of rulers have been deceptive; too often, also, have good intentions, on the part of rulers, been subverted or changed by rash and indiscreet imputations of insincerity.

It is the object of this article to bring together and review four important discoveries which have in this age been made by men of eminent rank. These have been heretofore occasionally noticed, but they have not been exhibited together so that the reader could at one view perceive their relation to each other, their mutual tendencies, the encouragement which they afford, and the uses to which they are applicable.

« PreviousContinue »