"Code of the West"

In My Opinion
by Bob Fogarty



In 1934, author Zane Gray (1872-1939) wrote a popular western novel entitled “The Code of the West”. While no written “code” ever existed, Gray chronicled the unwritten rules of conduct that the western pioneers generally tried to live by. These rules were based on hospitality, fair play, and loyalty to friends, neighbors, and co-workers. Historian Ramon Adams, explained in his book “The Cowman and His Code of Ethics”; "Back in the days when the cowman with his herds made a new frontier, there was no law on the range. Lack of written law made it necessary for him to frame some of his own, thus developing a rule of behavior which became known as the "Code of the West." These homespun laws, being merely a gentleman’s agreement to certain rules of conduct for survival, were never written into statutes, but were respected everywhere on the range. Though the cowman might break every law of the territory, state and federal government, he took pride in upholding his own unwritten code.”

On occasion the term will come up in a conversation these days, at which point some participants will give a knowing nod, others will look around blankly, and almost always a few will snicker at such melodramatic foolishness. Most of us “country bumpkins” seem to know right off just what’s being referred to, while most of the “city slickers” seemingly haven’t a clue. For those who aren’t aware of the “Code of the West”, it’s not a joke, it’s not something an author pulled out of his hat to sell a few books, it’s not something that the kids came up with from Lone Ranger or Hopalong Cassidy movies, and it’s certainly not something that could be enforced by lawyers, judges, and juries. Quite simply it’s a mutually agreed upon code of ethics, and a way of life that doesn’t require formalities. You might say it’s an expanded version of the same Golden Rule we all learned as kids, and that ideally we would try to live our adult lives by… well, as best we can.

When we refer to “the west”, most everybody automatically thinks of the later half of the nineteenth century, of cowboys and Indians, wagon trains, cattle drives, and of course the gunfight at OK corral. But in reality, “the west” has always been quite a bit more than that. After all, what was “the west” to the Pilgrims as they stood on Plymouth Rock? What was “the west” to a seventeenth century colonist trying to clear a farm in upstate New York? What did Daniel Boone consider to be “the west”, long before the stereotype cowboy appeared on the scene? I rather think that “the west”, along with “the code of the west” began when those first Americans stepped off the boat, and tried mightily to make a new home on this continent. Consider that they had only themselves, their families, and their neighbors to depend on, and who equally depended on them. They had little or even no support from the home country. For most intents and purposes there was no law as they understood it, only mutual agreements. They were quite literally “on their own”, with no government bureaucracy around to take care of them. While the printed “code of the west” that we see at times speaks mostly of cowboys in the wild and wooly west of the late 1800’s, but it could just as well be speaking of America in the 1600’s, or even the America of today.

I’ve known of this “code” nearly all my life, being taught a part of it by my New Mexico cowboy (in his younger days) grandfather, and of course from being a Zane Gray fan in my childhood. I really don’t know how successful I’ve been through the years, but I have for the most part tried to use what Grandpa taught me as a guide to life. Certainly I’ve bent the rules a few times, but I try not to make a habit of it. In the military, and in the fire service, I’ve found a good many folks whose leadership style seemed to be based on quite similar ethics, on common sense, and on respect for their followers, rather than the threats and bluster we so often see today. For the most part these leaders were successful in their everyday lives, and in reaching their career goals. I’ve also seen those who reach their goals by walking all over everyone else and who would happily stab a friend in the back if it might give them a slight advantage. I’m reasonably sure that a good many of our countries leaders do things the same way, and would laugh hysterically if it were suggested that they might seriously consider living their life by some sort of an ethical code. But if you ask them they’ll piously assure you that they do have a quite honorable code of ethics. Perhaps… Perhaps… There is a second “Golden Rule” after all, one that states “He who has the gold makes the rules”, and that seems to fit right into the mad scramble for money and power that we see in today’s society.

We’re presently in the midst of a Presidential election campaign, with character assignations and half-baked accusations flying thick and fast, some serious mudslinging going on, and even downright lies on occasion. But the campaign hasn’t gotten really gory… or at least not yet. I might suggest that all the candidates and their supporters take a few moments to examine the unwritten code of conduct practiced by our western forbearers, and consider just how well it would serve them and our nation today, in both our internal politics and our international relations. Certainly I’d have a lot more respect for a politician who honestly tried his best to live by it.

Space won’t allow me to repeat everything attributed to the code of the west, but a few of the more prominent items might include;
The measure of a man is when he does the right thing even when no one is watching.
Be there for a friend when he needs you.

Honesty is absolute - your word is your bond, a handshake is more binding than a contract.

Look out for your own.
Don't make a threat without expecting dire consequences.

Life is not about how fast you run, or how high you climb, but how well you bounce.

It don't take a very big person to carry a grudge.

Don't interfere with something that ain't botherin' you none.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if, in the course of selecting our political leaders and representatives, we were to put a lot more value than is currently fashionable on an individual’s ethics, and be concerned with factors like honesty, truthfulness, and a sense of fair play for all? Or is that to much to ask of our public servants (and businessmen) in this modern age?