OCR Text |
Show Duelling IGHT or resign" tho un--i writton law of the kaiser J compelling aggrieved officers of-ficers to defond them-solves them-solves in a duol, has sent two men in tho German army to thoir death within tho last tortnight.( This, too, just as tho heated Reichstag debates, which bitterly deuouueed the custom upheld by tho kaiser, had closed. Duelling must go, ia the cry of the people; duelling must Btaj-, is tho reply of thoir ruler. Onco moro; then, Germany is at odds with its kaiser at odds over a question that Germany has do-bated do-bated for centuries, Famous as is Franco for its historical "combats "com-bats of honor," France pales in tho light of tho Teuton's record. Puelling as duelling is todny understood was born with the Germans. Ger-mans. History is repleto with the duols of the Romans, but the contests con-tests of the Roman pladiators wero not like the duols of today. Romans Rom-ans fought not aB a means of do-fonae, do-fonae, but to afford bloody spectacles spec-tacles to an offominatc, dogenurato and bloodthirsty people. Duelling was unknown to the civilized rnccs of antiquity, but was prevalent among tho Germans and Gnu la, as tho historical romances ro-mances relate, in tho earliest ages. Germany was not civilized then, but so firmly rooted had the custom cus-tom become that the GorinanB retained re-tained it after thoir conversion. Tho law of the Germans permitted the duel, and with very few exceptions the old Gorman laws mention tho .judicial duol as a legal ordeal. This followed a two-fold conviction. It believed, first, that God could not allow the innocopts to be defeated in a duol hence it was hold that the guilty party would not dare primarily primar-ily appeal to the .iudgment of God in proof of his innocence and then enter tho field under tho weight of perjury; secondly, tho fear of tho divino wrath would discourage him nnd mako victory impossible. As early as the fifth' century the church took earnest appeal against tho above-mentioned laws, and in France, whore the custom was spreading, the state denounced duelling as an unnecessary evil. In 160S tho edict against duelling was issued by Henry IV of France. Whoever killed his opponent in a duol was to bu punished with death; severe penalties wore also enacted against tho sending of a challenge nnd tho acceptance of tho same. Unfortunately, transgressors trans-gressors against this law wero generally gen-erally pardoned. In 1620, during the reign of Henry's successor, Louis XIII, tho laws against duelling duel-ling wero made more stringent, and wore strictly carried out. Notwith-standine Notwith-standine these measures th custom cus-tom of duelling increased alarmingly alarming-ly in France. The great number of French noblemen who fell in duols about the middle of tho seven- . teenth century is shown by the statement of the contemporary writer, Thoophilo Raynaud, that within thirty yoar3 moro men of rank had been killed in duels than would have been neoded to make up nn outirc army. Tho moro tho judicial combat fell into disiiHO, the more the old instinct of tho Germanic and Gallic Gal-lic people, by which each mun sought to gain his rights with weapon wea-pon in hand, showed itself in personal per-sonal contests and at touruamonts. From tho middlo of the fifteeuth century duelling over questions, of honor Increased so greatly, especially especial-ly iu the romance countries, that tho council of Trent, according to the Catholic oncyclopedia, was obliged to eunct the severest penalties penal-ties against it. It decreed that "the dotostablo custom of duelling which tho devil had originated in order to bring about at tho samo tinlo the ruin of tho soul and tho violent death of tho body, shall be entirely uprooted from Christian 6oil." Tt pronounced tho severest ecclesiastical penalties against those princes who should permit duelling between Christians in their territories. In othor countries, too sovoro measures wero takou auainst tho constantly spreadinc evil. In 1681 the emperor. Leopold L. forbade tho flehting of duels under the severest se-verest penalties; Maria Theresa ordered not only the chnllcugcr nnd the challpnged, but also all who had any share in a duol to be beheaded, and in the reign of Emperor Em-peror Joseph IL duellists received the punishment of murderers. Frederick tho Great of Prussia tol-oratod tol-oratod no duolUsta in his army. The present penal code of Austria Aus-tria makes imprisonment the punishment pun-ishment of duelling; tho penal code of the Germnn enipiro communds confinement in a fortress. The ponnltv is. without doubt, entirely insufficient and constitutes a form of privilege for tho person who kills his advorsary in a duol. WTioover ib killed in a duel is indirectly in-directly euilty of self-murdor, bo-cause bo-cause he has for no justifiable rea son risked his lifo, and whoever slavs his adversary in a duel is truilty of unjustifiable homicide, because ho has taken the risk of causinc death without any rieht to do so : this holds true oven though ho did not diroctly intend his opponent's op-ponent's death. In 1S96 when, in consequence of the fatal issue of a duel, the roichs-tntr roichs-tntr by a large majority called upon tho coverumcnt to proceed by all moans in its power ngainst the practice of duelling, as opposed to tho criminal code, the emperor issued is-sued a cabinet ordor on January 1. 1S97. which established couris of honor to deal with disputes in the army concerning questions of honor. hon-or. Uu fortunately, tho doerco leaves it opon to tho court of honor hon-or to ponnit or even command a duol to take place. Furthermore, on January 15, lOOti, General Von Einem. Prussian minister of war, stated that tho principle of tho duel was still in force, and Chancellor Chan-cellor von Bwelow aoVd to this: "The corps of army officers can tol-crato tol-crato no member iu its ranks, who is uot ready, should necessity arise, to dofeud his honor by force of arrriH. " In the army, as a result of this principle, a conscientious onoonent of duclliucr ie constantly exposed to tho danger of being expelled ex-pelled for refusiucr to fight. "In England duelling is almost unknown, and no duel has occurred, oc-curred, it is said, iu tho British nrmv for the last eighty yonrs. "A preliminary convention, held at Frankfort-on-thc Main in tho spring of 1001 . issued an appeal for tho support in its struggle ncainst this ovil. In a few weoks a thousand signatures wero re-caivodt re-caivodt niOHtlv thoso of moh of influence in-fluence from tho moat varied ranks of society. A convention to draw T."; nn a constitution met at Cassel, 'f. Januarv 11. 1902, and Prince Carl j !(; 7.u Lowonstcln was elected Presl- " lS dent. A committee was also ap- ia-j pointed to direct affairs and con- J' duct the agitation. The league Ik'.;' has made most satisfactory prog- ress: in 190S it establishod a per- ,: Sr: manenf. bureau at Loipzig. Con- f-,t ceming the aims of tho league tho 5tr; declaration subscribed bv tho j members states the following: HlfiJ 'Tho undersigned herewith doclaro Oltf their rejection, on principle, of fUf i duelling as a custom repugnant to if ; ' reason, conscience tho domands or civilization, existing law3, and tho tJ Common good of society and the .1 . state.' " " tJlA |