Code Duello: The Rules of Dueling

[Ozark Iron John]

Reprinted from "American Duels and Hostile Encounters," Chilton Books, 1963.


The Code Duello, covering the practice of dueling and points of honor, was drawn up and settled at Clonmel Summer Assizes, 1777, by gentlemen-delegates of Tipperary, Galway, Sligo, Mayo and Roscommon, and prescribed for general adoption throughout Ireland. The Code was generally also followed in England and on the Continent with some slight variations. In America, the principal rules were followed, although occasionally there were some glaring deviations.



Rule 1. The first offense requires the first apology, though the retort may have been more offensive than the insult. Example: A tells B he is impertinent, etc. B retorts that he lies; yet A must make the first apology because he gave the first offense, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by a 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.

N.B. The above rules apply to all cases of offenses in retort not of stronger class than the example.

Rule 3. If a doubt exist who gave the first offense, the decision rests with the seconds; if they won't decide, or can't agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or to a hit, if the challenger require it.

Rule 4. When the lie direct is the first offense, the aggressor must either beg pardon in express terms; exchange two 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 -- the offender handing a cane to the injured party, to be used on his own back, at the same time begging pardon; firing on until one or both are disabled; or exchanging three shots, and then asking pardon without proffer of the cane.

If swords are used, the parties engage until 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 as ungenerous to do so.

In the 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 own sword on the aggressor's shoulder, then 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 gives B the lie, and B retorts by a blow (being the two greatest offenses), no reconciliation can take place till after two discharges each, or a severe hit; after which B may beg A's pardon humbly for the blow and then A may explain simply for the lie; because a blow is never allowable, and the offense of the lie, therefore, merges in it. (See preceding rules.)

N.B. Challenges for undivulged 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 offense transpired.

Rule 7. But no apology can be received, in any case, after the parties have actually taken ground, without exchange of fires.

Rule 8. In the above case, no challenger is obliged to divulge his cause of challenge (if private) unless required by the challenged so to do before their meeting.

Rule 9. All imputations of cheating at play, races, etc., 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 offense than if given to the gentleman personally, and to be regulated accordingly.

Rule 11. Offenses originating or accruing from the support of ladies' reputations, to be considered as less unjustifiable than any others of the same class, and as admitting of slighter apologies by the aggressor: this to be determined by the circumstances of the case, but always favorable to the lady.

Rule 12. In simple, unpremeditated recontres with the smallsword, or couteau de chasse, the rule is -- first draw, first sheath, unless blood is drawn; then both sheath, and proceed to investigation.

Rule 13. No dumb shooting or firing in the air is admissible in any case. The challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offense; and the challenged ought, if he gave offense, to have made an apology before he came on the ground; therefore, children's play must be dishonorable on one side or the other, and is accordingly prohibited.

Rule 14. Seconds to be of equal rank in society with the principals they attend, inasmuch as a second may either choose or chance to become a principal, and equality is indispensible.

Rule 15. Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to be challenged intend leaving the place of offense before morning; for it is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.

Rule 16. The challenged has the right to choose his own weapon, unless the challenger gives his honor he is no swordsman; after which, however, he can decline any second species of weapon proposed by the challenged.

Rule 17. The challenged chooses his ground; the challenger chooses his distance; the seconds fix the time and terms of firing.

Rule 18. The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their mutual honors they have charged smooth and single, which should be held sufficient.

Rule 19. Firing may be regulated -- first by signal; secondly, by word of command; or thirdly, at pleasure -- as may be agreeable to the parties. In the latter case, the parties may fire at their reasonable leisure, but second presents and rests are strictly prohibited.

Rule 20. In all cases a miss-fire is equivalent to a shot, and a snap or non-cock is to be considered as a miss-fire.

Rule 21. Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation before the meeting takes place, or after sufficient firing or hits, as specified.

Rule 22. Any wound sufficient to agitate the nerves and necessarily make the hand shake, must end the business for that day.

Rule 23. If the cause of the meeting be of such a nature that no apology or explanation can or will be received, the challenged takes his ground, and calls on the challenger to proceed as he chooses; in such cases, firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may be varied by agreement.

Rule 24. In slight cases, the second hands his principal but one pistol; but in gross cases, two, holding another case ready charged in reserve.

Rule 25. Where seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals, thus:

If with swords, side by side, with five paces interval.

N.B. All matters and doubts not herein mentioned will be explained and cleared up by application to the committee, who meet alternately at Clonmel and Galway, at the quarter sessions, for that purpose.

[Gaucho]

Of course, down south aways in Uruguay and the surrounding plains, they fight it out with long knives called "facones" or "facon" in the singular. The gaucho, or Argentine/Uruguayan/Paraguayan/Southern Brazilian cowboy ties his poncho around the left arm to absorb or deflect cuts, and fights one-handed with the knife in the right. My great-great-great grandfather and his opponent killed each other in one of these "duelos criollos." My grandfather sliced open the other man's abdomen, was killed himself, and his opponent wrapped his intestines in his poncho, rode back to his own house, reported the location of my grandfather's body, and fell off the horse, dead. Makes gunfighting seem civilized, don't it?

[Trailrider]

Howdy, Pards,

"It's the Code of the West, to thine ownself be true!  It's the Code of the West, you must do unto others... Do unto others before themothers can do it unto you!" 

[Ozark Iron John]

Rule 1. The first offense requires the first apology, though the retort may have been more offensive than the insult. Example: A tells B he is impertinent, etc. B retorts that he lies; yet A must make the first apology because he gave the first offense, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by a subsequent apology.

Don't this mean that the first agrieved party is entitled to an apology by the frist offender?  How's a feller to know if he's the first offender or not?  I mean sometimes a situation heats up pretty quick and everyone know's who done what to whom, but other times, it happens over the course of time and one might think he's B, but in reality, he's A.  Do ya know what I mean?

[Ozark Iron John]

Rule 3. If a doubt exist who gave the first offense, the decision rests with the seconds; if they won't decide, or can't agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or to a hit, if the challenger require it.

How do you pick seconds?  Do I just ask my brother or my uncle to stand up for me or does it have to be something more formal?  And how do I know who the other fella's second is so that my second can coordinate with him?

[St. George]

During the 'extremely' limited time frame that duels were fought in America - 'Upper-Class Society' was a far smaller element that you'd think.

These folks 'all' knew one another - there was 'no' question as to what constituted an 'insult' or an 'apology' - and should such an event come to a head - any man that would be used as a 'Second' was known to the group as well.

They all came from the same 'Social Class', for the most part - and 'Le Affaire d'Honneur' - i.e. -'Duelling' was something that was an affectation for them, as a throwback to European ways of nobility and privilege - and not the newly-created 'American' mores, where men were equal...

Not to say that Americans didn't 'settle things' - they did - but as a whole, they were a 'lot' more direct and generally, only one man was left standing - as opposed to satisfaction of drawing  'First Blood' and walking away.

Now what this has to do with what's known as the 'Old West' is beyond me, since this particularly formalized activity existed prior to the Civil War and was frowned upon even then.

After that War - men had far more important things to do with their lives - like trying to rebuild them or maybe to carve new ones out of the Frontier...

Scouts Out!

[Books OToole]

During the Civil War General Marmaduke (CSA) was insulted by a fellow officer who's name escapes me.  A duel took place using Colt Navy Revolvers.  General Marmaduk survived the affair.  The other participant did not. 

Marmaduke later became the Govenor of Missouri.

Books

[Ozark Iron John]

Now what this has to do with what's known as the 'Old West' is beyond me, since this particularly formalized activity existed prior to the Civil War and was frowned upon even then.

Sir!  This is the CAS City Historical Society, is it not?  Therefore, what better place to discuss the Code Duello than here.  It seems to me that  'Le Affaire d'Honneur' is the basis of most if not all of the famous gun battles in the "Old West".  I think we may be better off if gentlemen settled their differences honorably today.

Your point is well take that the lower classes' involvement in the practice made it more ruthless and violent as well as less organized and structured.  This is at the foundation of my questions about the code.  I believe that a thorough study of history is important to understanding our current state of affairs and consequently, that is why I initiated this thread.

[St. George]

Interesting thoughts...

As to your assumption that this 'Code' was the basis for those gunfights - you'd best review them and once done - you'll see that most had far more to do with money and opportunity than with 'Honor'.

My comment didn't address 'lower classes' - it addressed the fact that in America - 'Equality' was the name of the game and every man had the opportunity to be a gentleman on his own merit and not by blood.

The 'Nobility' was something left behind in Europe - along with their foibles.

As to the study of the 'current state of affairs'  and how to rectify them - that particular statement has 'political discussion' written all over it.

That's something best left to other Forums - not here - and if you like - I'll be most happy to move this thread to the Longbranch, where it would reach a larger audience.

Scouts Out!

[Ozark Iron John]

Ah!  Yes, your point is well taken.  Money & Opportunity rather than Honor were at the heart of most duels.  Of course that is correct.

I was just day dreaming about the typical hollywood ideal of a romantic cowboy character waging a forlorn campaign against some ruthless cattle baron or captain of industry.  Good vs. Evil in the Old West.  Of course that was just a myth.  Men did not / do not behave that way.

I don't think this thread should be moved to the Longbranch.  The code afterall is a very serious matter and ought not be discussed too lightly.

[St. George]

And those are fine daydreams to indulge in - the concept has sold a lot of tickets and even more books.
Just remember human nature and step away from the 'John Ford Reference Library' when you're doing your research.

Like Radney Foster says in his song - 'Went For a Ride'.

It bluntly sums up the reality of Life in the 'Old West' .

'It wasn't Cowboys and Ponies - it was Horses and Men.
It wasn't Schoolboys and Ladies - it was Cow-Towns and Sin...'

Men - then as now - are still motivated to fight and kill by the same things - Money, Greed, Opportunity and Power.
Women and Religion factor in to a degree - but not as heavily.

It's not likely to change.

I'll leave this thread - the 'Code' itself is worth reading as an insight to 'conduct' in the Ante-Bellum years.

Scouts Out!

[Wes Virginian]

Ozark Iron John,

     I enjoyed reading the article on Dueling and also your thought's on the subject. I'll be in Missouri for a couple of months and I'll look you up.

Your Pard,
Wes Virginian

[Forty Rod]

I seem to recall that Abe Lincoln was challenged to a duel by a much shorter man.

Lincoln chose sledge hammers across a floating log in 5 1/2 feet of water.

After the laughter, the men became friends.

Any truth to this, because I heard it well over forty years ago, and only the one time.

[Books OToole]

The version that I heard was that Lincoln chose swords or cutlasses.  His opponet, not coming close to Lincoln's 6'4" height/armspan, thought better of the challenge.

Either version make a good story.

Books

[Ozark Iron John]

Ozark Iron John,

     I enjoyed reading the article on Dueling and also your thought's on the subject. I'll be in Missouri for a couple of months and I'll look you up.

Your Pard,
Wes Virginian

Dog Gone It Wes, Don't call me out!  I've seen ya shoot sir.  Fast & Accurate!  I don't want no part of it.

Look me up when the time comes.  We'll get together and shoot some steel or bust some balloons.  Just let me know.