“I have little to do with honor as young men understand it; but I am desirous to serve you. Tell me, therefore, what is your predicament?”
“A quondam friend and rival lover, jealous of my success with a lady, insinuated something to her prejudice in the presence of gentlemen. I struck him. He challenged me; and I am bound to fight him.”
“Why?”
“The laws of honor accord full satisfaction to an injured person.”
“Is he injured?”
“No, not in fact: he merely received a just chastisement for a wanton insult.”
“Who says, then, that he is injured?”
“He says so.”
“And is it one of the articles of your code of honor that a party to a quarrel is entitled, also, to be a judge of his own case?”
“That is immaterial. If a man chooses to consider himself aggrieved, he can demand an apology, or, personal satisfaction. The apology being refused—as in my case it must be—the challenge ensues: and to question his right to issue it, provided he is recognised as a gentleman, is, equally with a refusal to fight, equivalent to an admission of cowardice.”