Photo byNatilyn PhotographyonUnsplash

When we think of the qualifications for public office, especially for the role of a governor, we often focus on experience, leadership skills, or political acumen. But in West Virginia, there's a rather unusual prerequisite nestled in the state’s constitution: You can’t become governor—or hold any public office—if you’ve ever participated in a duel. Yes, a duel! Specifically, under Article IV, Section 10, anyone who has fought a duel with deadly weapons, issued a challenge for one, or knowingly acted as a second in such a duel, whether in West Virginia or elsewhere, is disqualified from office.

But why does this old-fashioned, seemingly irrelevant rule exist? To understand, we need to take a quick trip back to the 19th century when dueling was not only an accepted practice but also a significant part of American political and social life.

The Historical Context of Dueling

In the 1700s and 1800s, dueling was a formal way for men to settle personal disputes, often involving matters of honor. While the idea of standing back-to-back and pacing off before turning to fire might sound absurd to modern audiences, it was a common practice among gentlemen of the era, especially in political circles. It wasn’t just barroom brawls that ended in duels—political disagreements could escalate into formal, deadly combat. One of the most famous duels in American history, for instance, occurred between Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr, where Hamilton lost his life.

As the country moved forward into the 19th century, there was a growing recognition that dueling was an archaic, violent, and often senseless way of settling disputes. As a result, states began passing laws to discourage and eventually outlaw the practice.

Why Include This in the West Virginia Constitution?

West Virginia’s anti-dueling provision was written into its 1872 constitution, just nine years after the state broke away from Virginia during the Civil War. Like many new states forming around that time, West Virginia was keen to establish itself with progressive laws that reflected modern (for the era) values. The inclusion of the anti-dueling clause was part of this shift toward a more civil, lawful society, where disputes could be settled through courts and ballots, not bullets.

In the political climate of post-Civil War America, the state wanted to set a clear tone: violence, especially the kind of ritualistic violence seen in duels, had no place in politics. This wasn’t just about preventing violence; it was about establishing public officials as people of law and reason, not individuals quick to anger and conflict. In short, anyone who had engaged in a duel was seen as unfit for public office.

A Symbol of Changing Times

The anti-dueling clause is a relic of a time when personal honor and political disagreements often spilled into violent confrontations. By banning duel participants from office, the state of West Virginia was embracing the future—one where political figures settled differences through reasoned debate and legal means rather than through violence.

What makes this clause so intriguing today is its oddity. In an era where the biggest political controversies seem to revolve around social media gaffes or fundraising scandals, the notion that a potential governor might be disqualified for participating in a centuries-old form of combat seems almost laughable. But the clause still stands and serves as a fascinating reminder of how far we’ve come in shaping modern political life.

Could This Ever Come Into Play?

Realistically, it’s highly unlikely that anyone seeking the office of governor in West Virginia—or any other political position in the state—would run afoul of this constitutional provision today. Duels are no longer part of our cultural fabric, and anyone who has participated in one would likely be seen as eccentric, to say the least.

But this clause, like many odd legal remnants from earlier times, remains part of the state’s constitution, a quirky testament to how societal values have evolved.

Why It Matters

Though it seems bizarre now, West Virginia’s prohibition against duelists taking office is a reminder of the state’s history and the priorities of its founders. They sought to create a state that valued the rule of law and rejected the violent, honor-bound customs of previous generations. While we no longer need to worry about political candidates squaring off at dawn with pistols, the clause serves as an interesting marker of how American society has shifted toward civility and rationality in its political processes.

In the end, this peculiar constitutional provision may never disqualify anyone from the office of governor, but it offers a fascinating glimpse into the state’s past—and a reflection on how far we’ve come. So, if you're aspiring to lead the Mountain State, just make sure you haven’t participated in any duels—no matter how long ago!