The Washington Murder and Public Outrage

     Few duels drew the ire of the American populace to the degree that the strange duel between senators Johnathan Cilley (ME) and William Graves (KY) in 1838. Graves originally had been sent with a letter of grievances by Colonel Webb but ended up challenging Cilley when the letter was refused.[1] Upon hearing that Graves had assumed his quarrel with Cilley, Webb gathered two friends to hunt for the men in an attempt to protect Graves by any means necessary, including breaking Cilley’s arm or killing him on the spot.[2] Webb was unsuccessful in his search and returned to Washington, followed shortly after by Graves and the body of Cilley. [3]

     This bizarre scenario was compounded by the unusual circumstances of the duel itself. It was unusual to pursue a duel of etiquette (refusal to receive a letter) after both parties missed their first shot, and even more unusual to follow two missed rounds to a fatal third exchange. [4] It was also the first time a member of Congress had been killed by another sitting member of Congress.[5]

     The whole ordeal was very poorly received and became known as “The Washington Murder”.[6] Newspapers across the country took the opportunity to revile the event and those involved, especially Webb. The Morning Herald, a New York newspaper, reported “Throughout the whole route, whenever [Webb] approached civilized beings, they recoiled horror-struck. This sentiment pervades all parties and classes.”[7] The North Carolina Standard published a collection of reports from other papers with notes on political affiliation. One such report from the Detroit Free Press (Dem. Republican) is a good example of the general attitude of the assorted papers:

The expression of public opinion upon the late murder of the Hon. Mr. Cilley of Maine, by duel, is very justly severe against all the participators in that bloody transaction. The sentiment appears to be general, on the part of the press, that every member of Congress engaged, in, or accessory to the death of Mr. Cilley, should be expelled from his seat.[8]

    This line of thought was by no means exclusive to the press, however. Throughout the latter half of the 2^nd session of the 25^th Congress (March-July 1838), petitions from across America were sent in to decry the practice and, in many cases, demand for the expulsion of those responsible. The demands and requests within the petitions mirrored the sentiments expressed by the various news outlets. Fitting for the United States towards the conclusion of the Second Great Awakening, Christian civilization and morals are a common trend. Dueling was also seen by some, as in the case of the Washington County petition, as threatening to the values of popular representation; if a man could not speak his mind without fear of physical retribution (an issue that would continue in the form of caning, most infamously that of Charles Sumner in the 1850s) then the values of popular representation were at risk of beinging destroyed.[9] Even after the presentation of petitions had slowed, dueling remained a subject of discussion well into 1839 until the passage of an act to prohibit the giving or accepting of duels within D.C[10].