appears heinous in the Principals, or atrocious in the Seconds,) then, let them be hanged; but if it appears that they have acted correctly, or of necessity, let them depart in peace; which, I have observed, they would generally do, if matters were well managed, and perhaps remain fast friends all their lives after; whereas, if they had not come to a decided understanding, or been brought to a timely sense of their errors, they would have lived in eternal enmity, and ever on the watch to do each other an hidden or open injury.

I am humbly of opinion, that there might be a much better plan established for the suppression of duelling, than that by criminal law, which tends to destroy more than the duel itself, in its worst consequences. He will think it a very hard case, who is compelled to fight in defence of his honor, or any other unavoidable cause, where the imperious mandates of his feelings impose upon him an indispensable duty, with which, as the guardian of his own integrity, he is coerced to comply, subject at the same time to the dreaded stigma of the censorious world, if he declines; so that if he escapes Scylla, he falls into Charybdis, with a halter about his neck.

It is therefore suggested, that a court, which might be called a Civil-military Court-martial, or Court of Honor, might be formed or established in the chief cities in the United Kingdom; and to consist of ten or a dozen members of respectability, any four or five of whom, sufficient to form a court; to whom all those differences, productive of duelling, should be referred, and to whose decision both the offending and offended party should be amenable. The party injured or offended, instead of sending a challenge, submitting his charge or complaint to the court, confirming the particulars by such evidence as he can adduce. The other party being then called upon to appear, who, if he cannot acquit himself, must make such an apology as shall seem satisfactory to the court; and in case of non-compliance, to be stigmatised on the books, or otherwise, as an offensive and dangerous man in society; and a communication thereof made to the other court. But if any man, who thinks himself aggrieved, shall rashly and indiscreetly send a challenge, instead of applying to the Court of Honor, he shall be handed over to the law, as a violator of the peace, and obliged to find sureties for his peaceable demeanour; nor shall he afterwards, on application to the court, be entitled to any apology for the offence received; and if in defiance of the Court of Honor, and the law of the land, a challenge shall be sent and accepted, and the parties meet and fight thereon; the Seconds shall, at all events, be for ever after banished their country: and if one or both of the Principals be wounded, or either of them

killed; in the first case, they shall be subject to the law according to the black act; and in the second case, as for premeditated and determined murder.

At all events, such a court of inquiry might, on the generality of occasions, be productive of very salutary consequences, in healing breaches, and conciliating the parties, that might otherwise never be reconciled, and finally their enmities terminate fatally.

This mode of reference and adjustment need not be attended with any expense to the parties, farther than a small fine, or friendly rump and dozen, to be given by the offending party, or jointly, as may seem meet to the court; whereby all rancour may be drowned in oblivion. This social termination of a quarrel, I have often known to cement new and lasting friendships; and by these and such like means, the bringing disputes and violent ruptures to an happy and honorable issue, much confusion, much bloodshed, and much law may be avoided.

It ought ever to have been a legal rule, that any one who challenged another to meet him within a less time than twenty-four hours, after the offence given, should be subject to a year's imprisonment, whether the parties fought or not. This would have given time to think seriously of the business-their friends to interfere-and passion to subside.

I shall now briefly state some of the regulations and opinions of the ancients on this subject: -

I have above mentioned, that it has been customary, from the earliest ages, to decide differences and avenge injuries by single combat; as it appears, from various authorities, that such decision, in doubtful cases, was not only permitted, but countenanced by the laws of all European nations, and sometimes authorised by the magistrate for terminating dubious questions. But duelling, (in the present acceptation of the term) on frequent and futile occasions, or arising from the resentment of private or personal injuries, did not become common till the reign of Francis the First, who, in vindication of his character, as a gentleman, (as some have stated) sent a cartel of defiance to his rival, Charles the Fifth. The example was contagious: thenceforth, every one thought himself entitled to draw his sword, and to call on his adversary to make reparation for any affront or injury that tended to wound his honor. The introduction of such an opinion amongst men of fierce courage, lofty sentiments, and captious tempers, was productive of the most fatal consequences; a disdainful look, a disrespectful word, or even a haugnty stride, was sufficient to provoke a challenge; and in consequence much of the best blood in Europe, in defiance of the subsisting laws, was frequently spilt in these frivolous contests, which, towards the

close of the 15th century, were little less destructive than war itself. But the practice of duelling, though in general as per nicious as absurd, has been followed by some beneficial effects. It has greatly tended to make men more respectful in their behaviour to each other, less ostentatious in conversation, and more tender of living characters, but especially of female reputation; and the gentleness of manners introduced by this restraint, at the same that it has contributed to social happiness, has rendered duels much less frequent, by removing the causes of offence.

In agreement with my sentiments on this subject, we find, in Ward's Animadversions on War, published in 1639, sect. 9th. chap. 9th. as follows:-"Wherefore, supposing that there are divers probabilities that may induce to conceive a lawfulness in some particular cases, having a respect to the limitations and cautions that ought to attend upon duels; and first having a regard to the necessity of the case; and then duly weighing the circumstances belonging unto it; we shall find a secret policy lie hidden, which pleads for itself, and will go near to prove that such combats are necessary, and haply within the limits of lawfulness."

And although Yno, Bishop of Chartres, did complain against the French church-men, and especially in his letter to the Bishop of Orleans, he assenting with divers other learned men, who had taken a mature consideration of the good effects which might be produced from it; and having likewise seen the injuries and mischief that might consequently follow, did manifest and ratify the lawfulness of challenging the combat, which I must likewise suppose they did upon good grounds, they having considered the manifold abuses, and most horrid aspersions, that the baseness of some degenerate spirits would invent, and falsely lay to the charges of those they hated, whereby both the reputation and lives of innocent men are endangered by false accusations, which being beyond the wit of man to screw out the truth, in regard no proof can be produced to lead authorities to discern where the abuse lies, but only the justifying and denying of the parties accusing and accused. So that the engine of wit cannot invent a more politic and discreet way than deciding the controversy by their weapons; for reason tells a man, that in a just cause, there is no man but will be resolute to defend his honor, and put forth his best valor to offend his antagonist, his combat being to maintain truth, and having a good conscience on his side, doth add vigor to his courage; whereas, contrarily, a guilty conscience will so detract from the worth and valor of the false accuser, that fear will undermine his heart, whereby he cannot perform in such a manly way as that party which hath right on his side; but admit there were no such thing

in it, yet it would be prevalent to make men cautious in abusing their neighbours, causing them to weigh the peril they must hazard; and although some have made this objection, that all men are not of like strength and valour, therefore to such kind it may seem unjust; yet it is to be supposed, in way of answer, that an inferior man will not be prone to offend his superior in skill and valour; and if he is superior in those points, should be so base as to abuse, or lay aspersions upon his inferior; yet the inferior hath the advantage of choosing his weapon, which shall be fitting to his strength and skill, whereby he shall be able both to defend himself and offend his enemy; for we daily see by experience, that very little weak men have had the better, as in the example of Sir John Vere, he being a very little gentleman, to maintain his reputation : being abused at the Hague, by a French colonel, being a proper brave fellow, who so far undervalued Sir John, that at his coming to the place appointed for the combat, seeing a countryman at work near the place, he demanded of him if he did not see de cline maniche, meaning the little gentleman, who presently came, and at a few encounters with single rapier, slew the brave cavalier, But some may object, that there is provision appointed by authority, to take up and decide quarrels, and that the party abused shall have satisfaction, by compelling the offender to ask pardon, and to show contrition for the wrongs offered.--I must confess this is somewhat colorable; yet reason and experience tell us, that such forced acknowledgments of satisfaction do not fully cover the sore of disreputation, as when the party aggrieved compels his adversary, either to give him satisfaction. adequate to the disgrace he hath done, or otherwise acquit himself as becomes a man of honor. For though thegentleman accepts of satisfaction before authority, yet there remains a secret tincture of disrepute, which will fume in the stomachs of soldiers, when they conceive that authority binds the hands of the offender, and strengthens the proceedings of the offended. A soldier's honor and reputation ought to shine so bright, that no blemish should be descried therein; for the smallest stain of baseness or cowardice pierceth through the heart of honor and valor, reducing them to the secret scorn of all who know them; in which respect, it behoves gentlemen and soldiers to manage their actions and courses without giving offence, that they may live blameless and unaccused.

Beside these reasons, if we take a view of the proceedings of the ancient worthies of former ages, we find, that amongst the Saxons duels were frequent, and upon such occasions, too often, as indeed ought not to have been tolerated. The Gauls and Saxons ordained a law to decide such controversies as no other proof could decide, and that by four ways, as Arenius Silvius re

ports. Of these I shall briefly notice, first, that which was called the camp-fight, or combat. In this the accuser was, with the peril of his body, to prove the accused guilty, and by offering him his glove or gauntlet, to challenge him to the trial; which the other must accept, or acknowledge himself culpable. If the crime deserved death, then to fight on horse or foot until one was slain. If but imprisonment, then the vanquished became the prisoner of his adversary. In this kind of combat, the accused had liberty to take another in his stead; but this indulgence the accuser had not. No women were admitted to behold it, nor male children under the age of thirteen years. The priests and people that were spectators, did silently pray, that the victory might result to the guiltless; and if the fight was for life or death, a bier stood ready to carry away the dead body of him who should be slain. None of the people might cry out, shriek, make any noise, or any sign whatsoever; and hereunto, at Hall, in Suavia, (a place appointed for camp fight,) was so great a regard taken, that the executioner stood beside the judges, ready with an axe, to cut off the right hand and left foot of the party so offending. He that, being wounded, did yield himself, was, at the mercy of the other, to be killed or to be let live. If he were slain, then he was carried away, and honorably buried, and he that slew him reputed more honorable than before; but if, being overcome, he was left alive, then he was, by sentence of the judges, declared utterly void of all honest report, and never after to ride on horseback or carry arms.1 The second was termed the fiery ordeal; the third was of the same nature, with little difference; the fourth, if possible, was more at variance with common sense and philosophy, it being the trial by cold water, which commenced in this manner:-The party suspected to be guilty, was thrown into a deep pond; if he sunk he was acquitted, but if, against nature, (as it was supposed,) he floated, then he was adjudged guilty, under the prevailing opinion, that the water abhorred to receive so base a person. By this it would seem, that whether he sunk or swam, it made very little difference; if, in the first case, he was drowned, or, in the second, he was condemned."

See Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws on Judicial Combat, vol. ii. p. 28; or Spelman's Glossary ad vocem campus.

2 It could not, I suppose, at this time have been known, nor is it, I believe, generally at this day, that men who have capacious lungs and small heads, cannot sink in water, which they may lie upon, as on a bed, for any length of time, without the smallest motion; nor would men so formed, ever sink, dead or alive, if the water did not enter and occupy the stoniach and lungs, by the mouth and nose. And I am of opinion, that when resuscitation fails in the recovery of persons apparently drowned, it is generally due to the water having entered the lungs, and that they are never restored when it does.