Assassination Politics

 Assassination Politics

Contents

1 THE ASSASSIN HANDBOOK

2 WAR OF ASSASSINS

3 KANLY

4 THE RULES FOR THE GOVERNING OF PRINCIPALS AND SECONDS IN DUELLING

5 THE CODE DUELLO

 

THE ASSASSIN HANDBOOK

Originally a third-millennium compilation of information on poisons to aid professional assassins, The Assassin Handbook was expanded in the fifth millennium by a committee appointed by The Emperor to discuss the theory and practice of legalized murder under the rules of the Great Convention and the conditions for the Pax Concordat.

The original and expanded Assassin Handbook resulting from the committee's deliberations was widely circulated and read in The Imperium, for it was held in high regard by mercenaries and master assassins employed by The Emperor and the Great Houses. The expanded Assassin Handbook was used by several training schools for professional assassins, The Assassin Handbook fell into some official disrepute during the reign of some recent Emperors, although its principles continued to be employed.

During the reign of Emperor Tehuti, The Assassin Handbook was officially held to be as contemptible as the profession of assassin; and Emperor Imperial guard are ordered to confiscate copies of The Assassin Handbook whenever they found it, even though privately they were instructed to master its principles. As a result of this suppression, far fewer copies of The Assassin Handbook have survived, most appear to be located in private collections.

The authorship of the original version of The Assassin Handbook is a matter for controversy, but a consensus assigns it to a third millennium assassin suspected of several murders of prominent aristocrats, who himself succumbed to poison, thought to have been administered by an Imperial servant and not a professional assassin.

The expanded version of The Assassin Handbook is attributed by most authorities to the committee of nine appointed by the Lord Protector and later ratified by Imperial Council by which time several of the authors, themselves master assassins employed by the Great Houses, had become victims of the vicissitudes of their profession.

One member of The Assassin Handbook expansion committee, an anonymous but considered very able assassin appears to have been considerable, when the text is compared to the monograph on The Fine Art of Professional Homicide, especially the passages concerning methods of circumventing the rules of kanly without detection.

In the era before The Assassin Handbook, assassination flourished, but assassination in general was often crude and impulsive, lacking in the finer artistry and subtlety which the master assassins of The Imperium attained. The accomplishments of these highly skilled professionals must be in large part attributed not only to years of careful refinement of their art, but to the tutelage of such repositories of cunning as The Assassin Handbook.

The Assassin Handbook was divided into four major parts, the first dealing with poisons — a legacy from the first version — the second with other weapons and their uses, and the third section with a discussion of strategies and odds, as well as methods of circumventing the Great Convention, and the rules of kanly. The fourth section of The Assassin Handbook described certain professional standards and rules of prudence.

In the section devoted to poisons, and their various possibilities. Poisons administered in a drink was a logical agent for murder in a political world heavily dependent on festivals and ceremony. Poisons which act swiftly when injected into the bloodstream, particularly ones which could be placed on the tip of a knife, sword or even a pin. Poisons nearly invisible to the naked eye were favourites with many professional assassins in The Imperium, though its use depended usually on some context where the rules of hand-to-hand combat would apply which vary greatly from place to place.

Poison gas capable of being carried in a tiny capsule, which upon its release might well prove lethal to the occupants of a large room, even an auditorium; receives a lot of attention although less often employed.

A poison of particular interest because of its painful side effects is given a brief but special eminence in The Assassin Handbook. Most poisons are valued because of their swift action, and their ability to be disguised. But one seldom used poison, "zenobia", also referred to as the "throat of hell," was highly respected because of the excruciating pain it imposed on the victim when ingested in food or drink.

Zenobia was recommended for those special occasions when the prospective victim was completely at the assassin's mercy, and the killer wanted to impose a remarkably horrifying demise on his or her enemy. Generally, the professional assassin was advised to eschew personal feeling and to approach his work with a suitable objectivity and craftsmanship beyond mere vulgar expressions of personality; but The Assassin Handbook acknowledged that there were some occasions when even the professional using the logical approach stressed by professional conditioning might well find it important for the purpose of his employer to extend personal revenge to include suffering.

Section Two of The Assassin Handbook devoted itself to the discussion of conventional weapons, primarily swords and guns, and their functional advantages and disadvantages for the assassin. As with the poisons, subtlety was recommended, for as The Assassin Handbook comments, "Any mindless mercenary can commit indiscriminate homicide which will likely rebound upon himself at some point." The Assassin Handbook was written in a style that was often trenchant and sometimes characterized by a rich sense of irony. Assassins were instructed to acquire swordmaster training as a matter of course, and, if at all possible, to develop considerable competence in marksmanship, although tile Assassin Handbook implies that the master assassin would, whenever possible, leave slaughter with guns to ordinary journeymen.

Section three of The Assassin Handbook provided a detailed analysis of the odds for success in given situations where the assassin might be expected to perform his work. The best strategies, for instance, for murdering guests at a formal dinner were evaluated, as well as the methods of avoiding swift reprisal. Much space was given to the problems of infiltrating a ducal palace or launching attacks at public events and ceremonies, especially sporting events.

Section four of The Assassin Handbook's commentary presented the rules of the Great Convention and the code of kanly and provided numerous suggestions of how these might be circumvented or turned to the advantage of the assassin.

The use of poisoned swords at single combat was brought up again here, although much had already been said of this tactic in earlier sections. Various means of infiltrating the defences of ducal castles, despite the use of shields and other protections, were also considered at length here.

This section also presented the conventions and ritual formulas involved in a War of Assassins, from the formal declaration of intent with the Imperial Registrar and the Imperial Council Secretariat to the final moment when victory was declared for one side or the other. The Assassin Handbook seemed to imply that even such formal wars were best carried out on a small scale and waged with subtlety by experts, rather than becoming engagements involving large groups of soldiers. A frequent metaphor in The Assassin Handbook is that of the 9-level pyramid chess master; authors regarded the art of assassination as a profession rather like that of the grand master of 9-level pyramid chess.

A final note at the end of The Assassin Handbook concerned the assassin's need for self-protection. The professional assassin was enjoined to learn much of his employer's private crimes, and to store the information in places beyond the employer's reach, with provisions that would allow it to become public in the event of his own death. The assassin was also warned to make himself as valuable as possible to his master, yet never to believe himself irreplaceable.

Most important, The Assassin Handbook advised the assassin to respect his profession and to avoid the temptations of political ambition or personal involvement in his work. Although many famous assassins found the first easy enough, some authorities doubt that most of them were able to avoid the second pitfall.

It may safely be concluded from a study of The Assassin Handbook and its role in the stormy history of The Imperium, that it is in many ways a symbol of barbaric world.

WAR OF ASSASSINS

A term used to describe a large scale use of professional assassins in a feud between two great houses of the Imperial Council in The Imperium. Atomic weapons were outlawed by the Great Convention and shields nullified most projectile weapons and most but not all nonnuclear explosives. Hence the Great Houses were obliged to resort to treachery and professional assassination in order to carry on their perennial vendettas.

Most Great Houses customarily hired a master assassin — fashionably one with specialized training in logic and the traditional mental conditioning distrust of emotion — to oversee the defences of the family household, supervise the house's corps of assassins, and in some cases to command units of troops or mercenaries. Their function was therefore both offensive and defensive.

Consequently a "war of assassins” between two great houses often took on the appearance of a grand master 9-level pyramid chess game. Despite this, some barons, count, earls, marquis and dukes, although relying on the advice of their chief assassin, may be said to have managed — or mismanaged —their own campaigns presumably for personal reasons.

An outright war of assassins always required, under the Great Convention, a formal declaration of intent to be filed with the Imperial Court, and the Secretary of the Imperial Council. Imperial Justicars were appointed to monitor the conflict and particularly to observe any instances where innocent bystanders might be harmed. Such actions did not always ensure the safety of non-combatants, nor a fair treatment of the two houses involved, but the observation made the feuding houses wary of harming or even involving outsiders.

There were during the reigns of various Emperors, who for differing reasons, wars of assassins were virtually proscribed, although technically the Great Convention remained in effect. During those years, the profession of assassin fell into some disrepute, and those who took up the craft were largely second-rate. Despite this, during those times, there were still numerous assassination attempts.

Some interesting effects of wars of assassins entered the folklore of The Imperium. It was customary, for instance, to speak of someone who was notorious for his rationality as being "logical as an assassin." And the hour before dawn when human biocycles are customarily at a low ebb was often called the "hour of assassins" because of the tendency of professional assassins to use it for their attacks.

KANLY

A formal and ritualized feud or vendetta declared between two Houses Major, The rules of kanly were laid down in the Great Convention, primarily with the purpose of sparing the innocent bystanders who might otherwise be slaughtered in a House-to-House confrontation.

This regulation was considered important enough by the framers of the Convention to warrant its being detailed in twenty-five pages in the original manuscript. A broad sketch of the rules of kanly will be given here.

Kanly could be declared only by the acting, titular head of a Great House. Any person presenting such a declaration was required to notify the Imperial Council High Council and the Imperial Court, as well as the head of the House declared against, so that a Judge of the Rite could be appointed to supervise the kanly negotiations. Once such a Judge — authorized by both Council and Emperor — was appointed, the opposing parties and their immediate families could open negotiations. No outside observers, apart from the Judge, were allowed to witness these proceedings. The negotiations could take several forms.

If neither party was willing to consider any other way of reconciling the differences, the "negotiation" consisted of a personal combat with knives only, unshielded, to the death. Even the combat was stylized, with certain phrases being employed on each side to call the other out. When one or both of the combatants had died, the option of either withdrawing the kanly or reopening negotiations was left to the heir(s). It was not completely unknown, in particularly bitter kanly, for all the possible heirs to a line to be wiped out. When this occurred, the Judge of the Rite was empowered to declare the House ended, put its remaining members wider Imperial protection, and redistribute its assets.

It should be noted that victorious House was allowed only a small portion of those assets. This parsimony helped keep the kanly proceedings from becoming a popular, and profitable, way of doing business. A much larger share was allotted to the Lion Throne.

If the combat were not chosen, kanly could be settled by the challenged House's agreement to meet certain terms set by the declaring House. Such terms most often included the transfer of a fief, and of amounts of HCMA holdings or other valuables; occasionally, the demand was made for permission to marry into the declared-against House.

For a number of reasons — the violent climate of the times not least among them — the settlement approach was seldom used. Kanly, except for those Houses too weakened or sparse of heirs to face the personal combat was chiefly settled by the blade.

One other solution, rarely invoked, also existed: the Judge's Ban.

When a Judge of the Rite, acting either as an individual or as a messenger from The Emperor or Council, decided that a particular act of kanly was detrimental to The Imperium as a whole, a Judge’s Ban could be laid on both Houses. Until such time as the Ban was lifted, the House whose members acted against the other could be declared guilty of contempt of court and treason, stripped of all its holdings, and outlawed. In the face of such possible consequences, all but the most stubborn wishes for combat faded; the Judge’s Ban was a most effective deterrent.

THE RULES FOR THE GOVERNING OF PRINCIPALS AND SECONDS IN DUELLING

Publishing THE RULES FOR THE GOVERNING OF PRINCIPALS AND SECONDS IN DUELLING, to govern in cases of individual combat, might seem to imply that the publisher is an advocate of duelling and wished to introduce it as the proper mode of deciding all personal difficulties and misunderstandings; but that would be incorrect.

The question to be put is whether there are not cases where duels are right and proper, I would unhesitatingly answer, there are.

If an oppressed nation has a right to appeal to arms in defence of its liberty and the happiness of its people, there can be no argument used in support of such appeal, which will not apply with equal force to individuals. How many cases are there, that might be enumerated, where there is no tribunal to do justice to an oppressed and deeply wronged individual? If he be subjected to a tame submission to insult and disgrace, where no power can shield him from its effects, then indeed it would seem, that the first law of nature, self-preservation, points out the only remedy for his wrongs.

The principle of self-preservation is co-extensive with creation. When by education and culture we make personal character, moral worthiness and civil conduct a part of ourselves, we guard these possessions with more watchful zeal than life itself, and go further for their protection.

When one finds himself avoided in society, when shunned by friends, his substance wasting, spouse and family in want, and traces all his misfortunes and misery to the slanderous tongue of the calumniator, who, by secret whisper or artful innuendo, has sapped and undermined his reputation, he must be more or less than man to submit in silence.

The indiscriminate and frequent appeal to arms, to settle trivial disputes and misunderstandings, cannot be too severely censured and deprecated. In cases where the laws of the country or those empowered to adjudicate it, give no redress for injuries received, where public opinion not only authorizes, but enjoins resistance, it is needless and a waste of time to denounce the practice.

It will be persisted in as long as independence and lofty personal pride in all that dignifies and ennobles the human character, shall continue to exist.

I do not desire to see duelling to cease to exist entirely, to do such would be to enable evil thru the excessive passive forbearance to insult and indignity.

There is nothing more derogatory to the honour of a gentleman, than to wound the feelings of any one, however humble. That if wrong be done to another, it was more an act of heroism and bravery to repair the injury, than to persist in error, and enter into mortal combat with the injured party. We should exhibit immutable integrity, and uniform urbanity of manners. Scrupulously to guard individual honour, by a high personal self respect, and the practice of every commendable virtue.

The severest penal enactments cannot restrain the practice of duelling, and their extreme severity effectually shields the offenders. Teaching and preaching may do some service, but is wholly inadequate to suppress duelling.

CHAPTER I. The Person Insulted, Before Challenge Sent

1. Whenever you believe that you are insulted, if the insult be in public and by words or behaviour, never resent it there, if you have self-command enough to avoid noticing it. If resented there, you offer an indignity to the company, which you should not.

2. If the insult be by blows, armaments, or personal indignity, it may be resented at the moment, for the insult to the company did not originate with you. But although resented at the moment, you are bound still to have satisfaction, and must therefore make the demand.

3. When you believe yourself aggrieved, be silent on the subject, speak to no one about the matter, and seek your friend, who is to act for you, as soon as possible.

4. Never send a challenge in the first instance, for that precludes all negotiation. Let your note be in the language of a gentleman, and let the subject matter of complaint be truly and fairly set forth, cautiously avoiding attributing to the adverse party any improper motive.

5. When your second is in full possession of the facts, leave the whole matter to their judgment, and avoid any consultation with them unless they seek it. Your second has the custody of your honour, and by obeying your second in this regard you cannot be compromitted.

6. Let the time of demand upon your adversary after the insult, be as short as possible, for your adversary has the right to double that time in replying to you, unless you give them some good reason for your delay. Each party is entitled to reasonable time, to make the necessary domestic arrangements, by will or otherwise, before fighting.

7. To a written communication you are entitled to a written reply, and it is the business of your friend as your second to require it.

SECOND'S DUTY BEFORE CHALLENGE SENT.

1. Whenever you are applied to by a friend to act as his second, before you agree to do so, state distinctly to your principal that you will be governed only by your own judgment,—that they will not be consulted after you are in full possession of the facts, unless it becomes necessary to make or accept the amende honourable, or send a challenge. You are supposed to be cool and collected, and your friend's feelings are more or less irritated.

2. Use every effort to soothe and tranquilize your principal; do not see things in the same aggravated light in which they view them; extenuate the conduct of their adversary whenever you see clearly an opportunity to do so, without doing violence to your friend's irritated mind. Endeavour to persuade them that there must have been some misunderstanding in the matter. Check them if they uses opprobrious epithet towards their adversary, and never permit improper or insulting words in the note you carry.

3. To the note you carry in writing to the party complained of, you are entitled to a written answer, which will be directed to your principal and will be delivered to you by the adversary's friend. If this be not written in the style of a gentleman, refuse to receive it, and assign your reason for such refusal. If there be a question made as to the character of the note, require the second presenting it to you, who considers it respectful, to endorse upon it these words: "I consider the note of my friend respectful, and would not have been the bearer of it, if I believed otherwise."

4. If the party called on, refuses to receive the note you bear, you are entitled to demand a reason for such refusal. If they refuse to give you any reason, and persists in such refusal, they treat not only your friend but yourself, with indignity, and you must then make yourself the actor, by sending a respectful note, requiring a proper explanation of the course they have pursued towards you and your friend; and if they still adhere to their obstruction, you are to challenge or post them.

5. If the person to whom you deliver the note of your friend, declines meeting them on the ground of inequality, you are bound to tender yourself in their stead, by a note directed to them from yourself; and if they refuses to meet you, you are to post him.

6. In all cases of the substitution of the second for the principal, the seconds should interpose and adjust the matter, if the party substituting avows they do not make the quarrel of their principal their own. The true reason for substitution, is the supposed insult of imputing to you the like inequality which if charged upon your friend, and when the contrary is declared, there should be no fight, for individuals may well differ in their estimate of an individual's character and standing in society. In case of substitution and a satisfactory arrangement, you are then to inform your friend of all the facts, whose duty it will be to post in person.

7. If the party, to whom you present a note, employ a child, parent or sibling, as a second, you may decline acting with either on the ground of consanguinity.

8. If a minor wishes you to take a note to an adult, decline doing so, on the ground of his minority. But if the adult complained of, had made a companion of the minor in society, you may bear the note.

9. When an accommodation is tendered, never require too much; and if the party offering the amende honourable, wishes to give a reason for his conduct in the matter, do not, unless offensive to your friend, refuse to receive it; by so doing you may heal the breach more effectually.

10. If a stranger wishes you to bear a note for them, be well satisfied before you do so, that they are on an equality with you; and in presenting the note state to the party the relationship you stand towards them, and what you know and believe about them; for strangers are entitled to redress for wrongs, as well as others, and the rules of honour and hospitality should protect them.

CHAPTER II. The Party Receiving a Note Before Challenge.

1. When a note is presented to you by an equal, receive it, and read it, although you may suppose it to be from one you do not intend to meet, because its requisites may be of a character which may readily be complied with. But if the requirements of a note cannot be acceded to, return it, through the medium of your friend, to the person who handed it to you, with your reason for returning it.

2. If the note received be in abusive terms, object to its reception, and return it for that reason; but if it be respectful, return an answer of the same character, in which respond correctly and openly to all interrogatories fairly propounded, and hand it to your friend, who, it is presumed, you have consulted, and who has advised the answer; direct it to the opposite party, and let it be delivered to his friend.

3. You may refuse to receive a note, from a minor, (if you have not made an associate of them); one that has been posted; one that has been publicly disgraced without resenting it; one whose occupation is unlawful; a person in their dotage; or a personal suffering from mental deficiency or sanity defect. There may be other cases, but the character of those enumerated will lead to a correct decision upon those omitted. If you receive a note from a stranger, you have a right to a reasonable time to ascertain their standing in society, unless they are fully vouched for by their friend.

4. If a party delays calling on you for a week or more, after the supposed insult, and assigns no cause for the delay, if you require it, you may double the time before you respond to them; for the wrong cannot be considered aggravated; if borne patiently for some days, and the time may have been used in preparation and practice.

Second's Duty of the Party Receiving a Note Before Challenge Sent.

1. When consulted by your friend, who has received a note requiring explanation, inform them distinctly that they must be governed wholly by you in the progress of the dispute. If they refuse, decline to act on that ground.

2. Use your utmost efforts to allay all excitement which your principal may labour under; search diligently into the origin of the misunderstanding; for true genteel and noble persons seldom insult each other, unless they labour under some misapprehension or mistake; and when you have discovered the original ground or error, follow each movement to the time of sending the note, and harmony will be restored.

3. When your principal refuses to do what you require of them, decline further acting on that ground, and inform the opposing second of your withdrawal from the negotiation.

CHAPTER III. Duty of Challenger and His Second Before Fighting.

1. After all efforts for a reconciliation are over, the party aggrieved sends a challenge to his adversary, which is delivered to their second.

2. Upon the acceptance of the challenge, the seconds make the necessary arrangements for the meeting, in which each party is entitled to a perfect equality. The old notion that the party challenged, was authorized to name the time, place, distance and weapon, has been long since exploded; nor would a person of chivalric honour use such a right, if he possessed it. The time must be as soon as practicable, the place such as had ordinarily been used where the parties are, the distance usual, and the weapons that which is most generally used.

3. If the challengee insist upon what is not usual in time, place, distance and weapon, do not yield the point, and tender in writing what is usual in each, and if they refuse to give satisfaction, then your friend may post their offense publicly for all literate persons to view.

4. If your friend be determined to fight and not post, you have the right to withdraw. But if you continue to act, and have the right to tender a still more deadly distance and weapon, and they must accept.

5. The usual distance is from ten to twenty paces, as may be agreed on; and the seconds in measuring the ground, usually step three feet apart.

6. After all the arrangements are made, the seconds determine the giving of the word and position, by lot; and they who gains has the choice of the one or the other, selects whether it be the word or the position, but they cannot have both.

CHAPTER IV. Duty of Challengee and Second After Challenge Sent.

1. The challengee has no option when negotiation has ceased, but to accept the challenge.

2. The second makes the necessary arrangements with the second of the person challenging. The arrangements are detailed in the preceding chapter.

CHAPTER V. Duty of Principals and Seconds on the Ground.

1. The principals are to be respectful in meeting, and neither by look or expression irritate each other. They are to be wholly passive, being entirely under the guidance of their seconds.

2. When once posted, they are not to quit their positions under any circumstances, without leave or direction of their seconds.

3. When the principals are posted, the second giving the word, must tell them to stand firm until he repeats the giving of the word, in the manner it will be given when the parties are at liberty to fire.

4. Each second has a loaded pistol, in order to enforce a fair combat according to the rules agreed on; and if a principal fires before the word or time agreed on, they are at liberty to fire at him, and if such second's principal fall, it is their duty to do so.

5. If after a fire, either party be touched, the duel is to end; and no second is excusable who permits a wounded friend to fight; and no second who knows his duty, will permit their friend to fight a man already hit. I am aware there have been many instances where a contest has continued, not only after slight, but severe wounds, had been received. In all such cases, I think the seconds are blameable.

6. If after an exchange of shots, neither party be hit, it is the duty of the second of the challengee, to approach the second of the challenger and say: "Our friends have exchanged shots, are you satisfied, or is there any cause why the contest should be continued?" If the meeting be of no serious cause of complaint, where the party complaining had in no way been deeply injured, or grossly insulted, the second of the party challenging should reply: "The point of honour being settled, there can, I conceive, be no objection to a reconciliation, and I propose that our principals meet on middle ground, shake hands, and be friends." If this be acceded to by the second of the challengee, the second of the party challenging, says: "We have agreed that the present duel shall cease, the honour of each of you is preserved, and you will meet on middle ground, shake hands and be reconciled."

7. If the insult be of a serious character, it will be the duty of the second of the challenger, to say, in reply to the second of the challengee: "We have been deeply wronged, and if you are not disposed to repair the injury, the contest must continue." And if the challengee offers nothing by way of reparation, the fight continues until one or the other of the principals is hit.

8. If in cases where the contest is ended by the seconds, as mentioned in the sixth rule of this chapter, the parties refuse to meet and be reconciled, it is the duty of the seconds to withdraw from the field, informing their principals, that the contest must be continued under the superintendence of other friends. But if one agrees to this arrangement of the seconds, and the other does not, the second of the disagreeing principal only withdraws.

9. If either principal on the ground refuses to fight or continue the fight when required, it is the duty of his second to say to the other second: "I have come upon the ground with a coward, and do tender you my apology for an ignorance of their character; you are at liberty to post them as such." The second, by such conduct, stands excused to the opposite party.

10. When the duel is ended by a party being hit, it is the duty of the second to the party so hit, to announce the fact to the second of the party hitting, who will forthwith tender any assistance he can command to the disabled principal. If the party challenging, hit the challengee, it is their duty to say they are satisfied, and will leave the ground. If the challenger be hit, upon the challengee being informed of it, they should ask through their second, whether they is at liberty to leave the ground which should be assented to.

CHAPTER VI. Who Should Be on the Ground.

1. The principals, seconds, one surgeon and one assistant surgeon to each principal; but the assistant surgeon may be dispensed with unless the duel is for a serious or grave insult.

2. Any number of friends that the seconds agree on, may be present, provided they do not come within the degrees of consanguinity mentioned in the seventh rule of Chapter I.

3. Persons admitted on the ground, are carefully to abstain by word or behaviour, from any act that might be the least exceptionable; nor should they stand near the principals or seconds, or hold conversations with them.

CHAPTER VII. The Degrees of Insult, and How Compromised

1. The prevailing rule is, that words used in retort, although more violent and disrespectful than those first used, will not satisfy,—words being no satisfaction for words.

2. When words are used, and a blow given in return, the insult is avenged; and if redress be sought, it must be from the person receiving the blow.

3. When blows are given in the first instance and not returned, and the person first striking, be badly beaten or otherwise, the party first struck is to make the demand, for blows do not satisfy a blow.

4. Insults at a wine table, when the company are over-excited, must be answered for; and if the party insulting have no recollection of the insult, it is their duty to say so in writing, and negative the insult. For instance, if the man say: "you are a liar and no gentleman," he must, in addition to the plea of the want of recollection, say: "I believe the party insulted to be a person of the strictest veracity and a gentleman."

5. Intoxication is not a full excuse for insult, but it will greatly palliate. If it was a full excuse, it might be well counterfeited to wound feelings, or destroy character.

6. In all cases of intoxication, the seconds must use a sound discretion under the above general rules.

7. Can every insult be compromised? is a mooted and vexed question. On this subject, no rules can be given that will be satisfactory. The old opinion, that a blow must require blood, is not of force. Blows may be compromised in many cases. What those are, much depend on the seconds.

APPENDIX.

The term "rencontre" refers to an immediate fight in the heat of offense, in contrast to a consenting duel is undertaken in cool temper. Killing a man in a rencontre counted as manslaughter; in a duel, as murder.

"Posting" an offender refers to posting to the public a notice as to the offender’s behaviour in some central club or business spot frequented by all those of that level of society. It is assumed that people of Noble and Genteel manner would not advertise the offense as sanction until after the outcome was determined by duel or magistrate.

THE CODE DUELLO

"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.

"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 9.—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 support of a lady's reputation, to be considered as less unjustifiable than any other of the same class, and as admitting of lighter apologies by the aggressor; this to be determined by the circumstances of the case, but always favourably to the lady.

"Rule 12.—In simple unpremeditated rencontres with the small sword or couteau-de-chasse, the rule is, first draw, first sheathe; unless blood be drawn: then both sheathe, and proceed to investigation.

"Rule 13.—No dumb-shooting, or firing in the air, admissible in any case. The challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offence; and the challenged ought, if he gave offence, to have made an apology before he came on the ground: therefore, children's play must be dishonourable 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 choose or chance to become a principal, and equality is indispensable.

"Rule 15.—Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to be challenged intend leaving the place of offence 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 honour he is no swordsman; after which, however, he cannot 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 honours that 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 a 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 hands shake, must end the business for that day.

"Rule 23.—If the cause of 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.—When seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals.

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

ADDITIONAL ARTICLES

"Rule 1.—No party can be allowed to bend his knee or cover his side with his left hand; but may present at any level from the hip to the eye.

"Rule 2.—One can neither advance nor retreat, if the ground be measured. If the ground be unmeasured, either party may advance at pleasure, even to touch muzzle; but neither can advance on his adversary after the fire, unless his adversary step forward on him.

"The seconds stand responsible for this last rule being strictly observed; bad cases have accrued from neglecting it."

This precise and enlightened digest was rendered necessary by the multitude of quarrels that arouse without "sufficient dignified provocation:" the point of honour men required a uniform government; and the code thus formed was disseminated with directions that it should be strictly observed by all gentleperson, and kept in their pistol cases. The rules, with some others, were commonly styled "the thirty-six commandments," and have been much acted upon down to the present day.