impudent fellow by giving him a bloody nose. "The Colonel, smiled, and told Mr. Willis he had an excellent knack at answering an argument with a jest. However, added he, I will try you on another ground. The world, you must acknowledge, is full of ill-manners. You are insulted at every corner of the street; at least you would be, if there were not something to keep the tongues of licentious people in awe. These petty offences, though insufferable, cannot be brought into a court of justice. To preserve good manners, therefore, and decorum among gentlemen, it seems to me, that nothing can be so effectual as the point of honour, which, resenting every impropriety of behaviour, keeps them at that respectful distance from each other, which good manners requires. Why, yes (said Mr. Willis), if a man is to be run through the body for speaking a wry word, I suppose it will make him rather cautious. But, whether the offence given, and the remedy applied, are well adapted to each other, is another question. We began our dispute, you remember, Colonel, with your as serting, that the laws of honour are very consistent with the precepts of christianity. But can you conceive, that the acutest casuistry can bring the bloody law you have just been expounding, into the most distant resemblance of a precept, which commands us not to avenge ourselves, but to give place unto wrath-to feed an enemy, if he hunger, and give him drink, if he thirst.-These, and numberless other rules, are given us to promote peace and happiness among men. "But we see (said the Colonel) that they do not promote peace and happiness among men. We see, that if it were not for the statutebook, the laws of christianity would have little effect: and, therefore, we are obliged to fortify the laws of christianity by our political institutions. Now, we consider the law of honour in that light. It is meant to strengthen and fortify the precepts of christianity; and to preserve that peace which they dictate. The man of honour, therefore, may be considered as a magistrate acting under the gospel. "You are not surely serious, my dear Sir (replied Mr. Willis), in this high encomium on the magistracy of duelling. We fortify the precepts of christianity, it is true, by human laws. But it is always supposed, that the divine and human law look the same way. Adultery and thefvare forbidden by christianity, and punished in our courts of justice. But, does this sanction us in making a law, or establishing a a practice, directly opposite to the precepts of christianity, in blowing a man's brains out, merely for speaking a wry word!-Besides, how strange is it to talk of maintaining peace, by fomenting quarrels Our Saviour says, I come not to send peace on earth, but a sword. I shall soon expect to hear that expression alleged as a license for duelling; though it was expressly used to cha racterize and brand that opposition, which he foresaw these unchristian practices would make to the gospel. To settle the dispute between us, continued Mr. Willis, in the fairest light, the best way, as it appears to me, is to consider the tendency of the different principles we hold; and see what their effect would be, both on society, and on individuals, if carried into extensive practice.→→→ To try the virtue of any principle we must give it its full scope, and carry it as far as it will go. Suppose then the the law of honour prevailed generally-that is, that every man revenge ed the injuries he met with (I will allow in their due proportion), what would be the consequence? Would not the whole world be a scene of injury, retaliation, and injury again, without end? Can you conceive any thing more horrid and dismal? Whereas, if the mild, and peaceable doctrines of the gospel should prevail, the world universally would be changed into a scene of happiness,. and repose, beyond conception. The greatest miseries that befal mankind, arise from man himself. All these would be removed, and no distresses left, but such as unavoid ably accompanied mortality. Nation would unite with nation, and man with man, in bonds of fellowship and love. The man of honour says, you provoke injury by forgiving it. I should only wish to ask the man of honour, whether he ever made the experiment? I am afraid, Colonel (said Sir Charles), you have undertaken a cause which cannot be defended. You have also a sturdy opponent to deal with. This good man (laying his hand on Mr. Willis's shoulder) is skilful at his weapon. He wrested my sword very fairly, some years ago, out of my hand; and I am wicked enough, for my own credit's sake, to rejoice when I see him gain an advantage over others. But now suppose, Colonel, we take the cause in question into a lower court of judicature, than that of christianity. Suppose we carry it before an heathen tribunal. I should be glad to know, whether you find any traces of duelling among the Greeks and Romans? I am not indeed deeply read in ancient history; but I do not recollect one instance of a duel recorded by any of my classi cal friends. "Why, Sir (said the Colonel), the ancient Greeks were gross fel lows. They had none of the delicate feelings and polished manners of gentlemen. Homer, who gives us, I suppose, an exact picture of ancient Greece, tells us what blackguards (if I may use the expression) his heroes were; and what foul of fensive language they commonly used. As far too as any anecdotes of quarrels in the later times of Greece and Rome have come down to us, I believe the same coarse mode of repressing injury may be traced. 66 Only with this difference (replied Sir Charles), that as the age po lished, the mode of reproof polished with it. The cutting irony-the sarcastic sneer-the biting rapar tee-the sly insinuation-or, where necessary, the valid argument with other modes of refined reproof, became the weapons of offence. And what does all this prove, but that, according to the dictates of truth, every man should repel an injury with those weapons, with which he had been assaulted. If a man attack you with his tongue, with your tongue defend yourself. If, like an assassin, he draw his sword upon you, draw your's in your own de fence. Now the old Roman knew all this system of injury and reproof perfectly well; and how to adjust the one to the other. It remained for the Christian to invert this order, and draw his rapier against the sting of a wasp. of "I met lately, in a History Greenland (said Mr. Willis), a mode of deciding quarrels, which pleased me much; and, I dare say, it will please you, Sir Charles, as it is very agreeable to the sentiments you have just been recommending. The honest Greenlanders seldom quarrel: but when any offence has been at first know how to take it; but on a moment's recollection, he said, your highness has passed a very good jest; but we do it much better in England, and then threw a full glass of wine into the prince's face. The prince was startled a little at first, but before he had time to speak,Come, come, said an old general officer who was present it is all well, your highness began first. given, or taken, they never meddle with swords and pistols. The duel lists challenge each other before proper judges, to a kind of satirical contest. The challenger begins, and opens the ground of his complaint in a sort of comical doggerel verse; for the Greenlanders are re presented to be people of humour. The adversary then defends himself in the same kind of doggerel. Rejoinders are sometimes made." But pray (said the Colonel) how Sentence is then passed; and he who has had least to say for himself, begs pardon. The duellists then shake hands; and the day generally ends in some kind of merri * Excellent! (said Sir Charles). If poor Ingram, who gave occasion to this conversation, had acted with the wisdom of a Greenlander, all had been well. He was certainly guilty of a petty breach of good manners, by thrusting his finger and thumb into a gentleman's snuffbox, without his leave. It was not an offensive expression indeed, but an offensive action, which comes to the same thing: and the Scotch gentleman reproved it very neatly, as I suppose an old Roman, or perperhaps a Greenlander, would have done by another action. Ingram should have made a slight apology, which, no doubt, would have been well taken. But the foolish fellow chose to introduce his sword into the business; and his life paid the forfeit of his folly. "There is an excellent story, much in point, told of the late General Oglethorpe. When a very young officer, he was at table, in Germany, with one of the princes of Wirtemberg. As they were drinking after dinner, the prince jocosely dipped his finger in a glass of wine, and fillipped it into Oglethorpe's face. Oglethorpe did not would you have advised Mr. Forbes to have acted in this business? "As to Ingram, I entirely give up his cause but I see not how Forbes, pushed as he was, could have acted otherwise than he did. "I think (replied Sir Charles) the story Mr. Willis hath just told us, of the gentleman who complain. ed to the Court of King's Bench, points out a very proper line of conduct. Am I to risk my life at the desire of any insolent fellow, who wishes to fire a pistol at me? "But he gives you a blow (said the Colonel). "Aye, let him, if he dare (replied Sir Charles); and I shall request the lord chief justice to give him another: and we will see, who strikes hardest.Depend upon it, Colonel, a few such examples, from men of character, would make these fiery sparks a little more careful of meddling with gun-powder, and would contribute more than any thing else, to teach them better manners, and rid society of such pests. judge between us; and bidding his antagonist follow him, leaped down from the rampart among a party of the enemy. The other followed; and they fought like lions. One being overpowered, the other ran to his relief; and kept the enemy at bay, till they were both relieved, and got safe to the camp-where they shook hands-went merrily to their mess-talked over their duel and were ever afterwards good friends. I know not whether I tell the story exactly right; I have not read it, I believe, since I left school, "You have given us, however (said Sir Charles), the outline of it, which is all we want.-You may add also, if you please, on the subject, that the Romans could not place duelling in a more contemptible light, than by making it, as they did, the business only of slaves. A school of gladiators would certainly throw the same stigma on duelling at Rome, which intoxicating their slaves did upon drunkenness at Sparta. And yet we, of this polished age, and polished country, consider this barbarous practice as gentlemanly! "But you will remember (said the Colonel) that knights, senators, and even emperors, did not disdain to draw their swords in a gladiatorian school. "I remember it well (replied Sir Charles); and I remember, also, with what high panegyric they are handed down by historians, for their prize-fighting, charioteering, and other noble feats of that kind. Degrading, however, as their practice of duelling was, it was certainly superior to the duels of our days. They had not the rancour of savages in their breast: they were only ridiculous fellows, and fought .for fame. "After all (said the Colonel), I see not what advantage you get by a comparison with the Greeks and Romans. Their revenge often led them to assassination which, I doubt not, you will consider as a worse crime than duelling. "I do not mean (replied Sir Charles) to enter into a defence of the virtue of the Greeks and Romans. But you will observe oue thing, that poisoning and stabbing were always considered as deeds of darkness:→→ they durst not face the day. Whereas, we are talking of a crime, that stalks in open, day-light-that as sumes an honourable name that is defended-that is even ranked in a catalogue of virtues; and tends, of course, to corrupt the manners of the public. It is on this 1 chiefly lay my finger. The Christian vindicates a crime of which the heathen was ashamed. Besides, many moralists consider duelling, in itself, as a crime very little, if at all removed from the guilt of assassination. The Colonel not making an immediate reply, Sir Charles went on. As it seems very plain, therefore, that duelling is neither of Christian, nor of classical origin, I will endea vour to shew you, as well as I can, from what noble origin it did spring. When the trumpet of the holy wars sounded over Europe, and inspired its inhabitants, from one end to the other, with a frantic zeal for war, nothing was heard, or seen, but what had a military cast. The air, the dress, the language, the amusements of men, were all martial. Then, first the tournament came in use. It was intended as the great school for the Saraceu expeditiona kind of drill to train the armies of Europe. Its laws were established, and it became a legal institution. But, as I have heard, that in the noble diversion of cock-fighting, besides the main, as they call it, there are many bye-battles allowed, so, in the noble institution of the tournament, many private quarrels were introduced, and decided under the sanction of the lists. The thing, though not legal, was winked at for the honour of arms; till at length it rose to such a height, that it was forbidden by law, as early, if I remember right, as Cœur de Lion's time. But though forbidden, it could not be repressed. The whole nation was then mad; and, in this instance, continues so: For though duelling is still forbidden by law, it is still practised. Thus you see from what a Gothic stock it originally sprang; it ought, indeed, long ago' to have been ashamed of its ancestry, and to have hidden its head. "I have heard (said Mr. Willis) that duelling and throwing at cocks, came into England at the same time; but I am not solicitous to ascertain its birth and parentage. All I am solicitous about is, to shew that it is 'no way related to christianity. On this head the honest confession, of a young gentleman pleased me more, than all I ever heard said in defence of duelling. He had been educated under; a religious father; but not making a proper use of the advantages he had received, he launched out into the fashionable vices of the age: and though he was not of a quarrelsome disposition,. yet, in one of his frolics, he got into a fray, which ended in a duel. His father, shocked at this thing, expostulated with him, for having acted in defiance of the laws both of God and man. The young gentle, man honestly replied; Sir, I know that duelling is a breach of the Christian law; and that it is, of course, a wicked action. But what would the world say of me, if 1, who have certainly not beera correct observer of the precepts of christianity, on other occasions, should, in this single instance, have sholtered myself behind its authority. "The Colonel making no reply, Sir Charles, looking at his watch, said he was afraid they should make the tea-table wait. He get up, therefore, and taking the Colonel by one arm, in a jocular way, desired Mr. Willis to hold him by the "other;," and they would take him into custody, and deliver him over, as a disturber of the public peace, to the ladies, who should pass sentence upon him. "The Colonel begged and prayed they would not treat him with so much severity; and said, he would promise any thing to be set at liberty, provided they would not whisper it abroad, that he had given up the noble cause of duelling." ON THE ANCIENT ENGLISH MORRIS DANCE. [From MR. DOUCE'S ILLUSTRATIONS OF SHAKSPEARE.] Tis the observation of an elegant writer, that disquisitions concerning the manners and conduct of our species in early times, or indeed at any time, are always curious at least and amusing. An investi gation of the subject before us, if completely and successfully performed, would serve to fill up a chasm in the history of our popular antiquities: but this must not be expected. The culpable indifference of histori cal |