and are bound thereby, in common with all mankind, to maintain the dignity and natural freedom of human nature: and those foldiers, who, in addition to their natural reason, have a true fenfe of religion, will not only be mindful, that they are foldiers and fubjects to an earthly king, but that they are alfo foldiers and fubjects to the King of Kings; whofe laws and precepta they will, on all occafions, prefer to every other command; and will obey the fame with fuch a steady courage, as may be equal to every adverfity, and undeserved fuffering that threatens them. 'It was this indifpenfible, this unhappy difpofition, and sense of fuperior duty, which prevailed even in an unlawful ftanding army, that had been raifed, and was exprefly defigned for arbitrary purposes, and which, nevertheless, contrary to all expectation, exerted itself in faving this kingdom, at the glorious revolution, from the political flavery, which then threatened it, as well as from the more intolerable tyranny of the Romish religion.'

It will not be an easy matter for this writer to juftify a mili tary man, and protect him from declared penalties, especially if he is in a fubordinate rank, for difobedience to orders; though he may difapprove the cause of a war, in which the government demands his fervice. Nor can any general principle be drawn from fo peculiar an exigence as the revolution, which was not only justified by the general fenfe of the nation, but by what was of much more importance in this view of the cafe, by fucfs. Had the Prince of Orange been defeated, as Monmouth was, and the nation again fubjected to James, it may be left to Mr. Sharp to imagine what would have been the fate of thofe officers who carried over their men to the unsuccessful invader ! Even as affairs terminated, though the army deferted the King, the individuals that compofed the bulk of it, however willingly they changed fides, ftill preferved military obedience to their immediate fuperiors, who led them over.

N.

ART. IV. Curjory Reflections on the Single Combat, or Modern Duel: Addreffed to Gentlemen in every Clafs of Life. 4to. I s. Bald. win. 1773.

OTHIC and abfurd as the custom of duelling is generally allowed to be, there are advocates for it, on principle; reafoners, who coolly argue for the neceffity, and even convenience, of this mode of accommodating certain kinds of perfonal differences, and of redreffing certain fpecies of injuries, for which the laws have not provided proper or adequate remedies: they conclude, therefore, that an appeal to the fword is a requifite fupplement to the law, and that this fort of fatisfaction for extrajudicial offences, muft take place, till fome other mode fhall

20

be devifed and established. And the learned Dr. Robertfon has obferved, in favour of this practice-even while he condemns it-that its influence on modern manners, has been found, in fome refpects, beneficial to mankind.

"To this abfurd custom, fays he, we muft afcribe, in fome degree, the extraordinary gentleness and complaifance of modern manners, and that refpeatful attention of one man to another, which, at prefent, render the focial intercourfes of life far more agreeable and decent than among the most civilized nations of antiquity."

The Author of thefe confiderations reduces the arguments which have been offered in behalf of the private combat, to these two:

I. That the duel is the only expedient to obtain fatisfaction for thofe injuries, of which laws take no cognizance.

II. That a man of honour is bound on pain of infamy to refent every indignity that may be offered him, with the point of his fword, or with a piftol. 19 (

Thefe pofitions our fenfible Author undertakes to refute; and we fhall give a fpecimen of his reafoning: but, firft, it will not be improper to lay before our Readers part of what he has faid on the origin of the fingle combat, or duel.

The ancient ftates, fays he, of Greece and Rome, from whence we derive the noblest models of heroilm, fupported private honour, without delivering down to us any evidences of this baneful cuftom of demanding fo fevere a decifion of private affronts; which confidering the military fpirit of thofe nations, muft, if it obtained at all, have proved more deftructive to them at home, than the united fwords of their enemies abroad. The practice is in fact of later and more ignoble birth; the judicial combat, the parent of modern duels, fpringing from monkish fuperftition, grafted on feudal barbarism, Whoever reads Hurd's entertaining and ingenious Letters on Chivalry and Romance, with Robertfon's elaborate Hiftory of the Reign of the Emperor Charles V. will no longer hefitate concerning this clear fact.

The judicial combat obtained in ignorant ages, on a conclusion that in this appeal to Providence, innocence and right would be pointed out by victory, and guilt figmatifed and punished by defeat, But, alas! experience at length taught us not to expect a miraculous interpofition whenever fuperior ftrength, fuperior skill, and fu perior bravery or ferocity, either or all of them, happened to appear on the fide of injuftice.'

Dr. Robertfon, above quoted, derives the fashion (as the Writer of thefe Reflections has obferved) of terminating pri vate differences by the fword, or piftol, from the illuftrious example of the challenge fent by Francis I. of France, to the Emperor Charles V. This was not, indeed, the first inftance of fuch challenges, among princes; but as cur Author remarks, * Author of the Eiftory of Scotland, &c.

the

the dignity of the parties, in the prefent cafe, afforded a fufficient fanction for extending this mode of deciding differences, and fettling disputes: to which we may add, that the spirit of chivalry and romantic knighthood ftill prevailing in those fighting times, was continually exciting the heroes of the age to this mode of proving their perfonal prowefs and valour.

We now return to our Author's manner of reasoning upon the two poftulata before ftated:

With refpect to the first argument, fays he, if we annex any determinate ideas to our words, by fatisfaction we are to understand redrefs, compenfation, amends, or atonement. Now, Gentlemen! for the fake of all that is valuable in Irfe, condescend for a minute to bring down your refined notions to the fure ftandard of common fenfe, and then weigh the fatisfaction to be obtained in a duel.

• Is fatisfaction to be enforced from an adversary, by putting a weapon into his hand, and standing a contention with him life for life, upon an equal chance?

⚫ Is an offender against the rules of gentility, or again the obligations of morality, a man prefumptively destitute of honour himself, fairly intitled to this equal chance of extending an injury already committed, to the irreparable degree of taking the life alfo from an innocent man?

If a gentleman is infatuated enough to meet a person who has degraded himfelf from the character of a gentleman, upon these equal terms, and loses a limb, or his life, what fpecies of fatisfaction can that be called-But it is better to fuffer death than indignity. What from the injurious hand? Correct your ideas, and you will esteem life too valuable to be complimented away for a mistaken notion.

If the aggreffor falls, the full purpose of the injured person is thus answered, but what is the fatisfaction? The furvivor becomes a refugee like a felon; or if he should be cleared by the equivocal tenderness of a court of justice, muft he not be a barbarian instead of a gentleman who can feed upon this inhuman bloody fatisfaction, without experiencing the pangs of felf reproach for having facrificed the life of a fellow-creature to a punctilio; and perhaps involved the ruin of an innocent family by the brutal deed? If, on the other hand, he is really a mistaken man of humanity, what has he obtained? The fatisfaction of imbittering all the remainder of his life with the keeneft forrow; of having forfeited all his future peace of mind by a consciousness of guilt, from which his notions of honour can never release him, till the load drags him down to the grave!

• If a man of strict honour is reduced to beg his life of a meer pretender to honour, a fcoundrel; what portion of fatisfaction can this be esteemed? Is not this a mortifying painful aggravation of a wrong already fultained? What confolation can honour afford for fuch a difgráce?'

Our Author has fome other very fenfible animadverfions on this first branch of the argument in defence of duelling; after which he proceeds to the fecond plea, viz. the obligation of refenting affronts in this manner, founded on the infamy of fufpected courage; and, in our opinion, he fatisfactorily proves that

th's

this argument is by no means irrefragable: but for his reasoning on this delicate point, we must refer to his pamphlet,-and proceed to take notice of his plan for putting a stop to the practice of duelling.

In the first place, he recommends that a law be paffed, ⚫ declaring the act of fending a challenge, or the reducing a person to defend his life with fword or pistol, to be felony; and the killing a person in a duel, to be punished as murder, without benefit of clergy, unlefs fufficient proof is made that the party killed, really urged the combat.'

As this first part of his propofal relates rather to the mode of punishing than to the means of preventing duels, he proceeds:

In every quarrel between two gentlemen where fatisfaction is thought neceffary, let the parties be empowered to fummon a jury of honour from among their friends, fix to be appointed by one gentleman, and fix by the other; or in case of a refusal of either party, let the fix chofen by the other compleat the number by their own appointment, each nominating one: and finally, let all this be done, if poffible, free from the embarraffing intervention of lawyers.

Let this jury of honour, when duly affembled, difcufs the merits of the difpute in queftion, and form their opinion by a majo, rity of votes; but to guard againft generating fresh quarrels by the discovery of the votes on either fide, let the whole twelve be bound to fecrecy upon their honour, and the whole twelve fign the verdic of the majority. Let a copy of this verdict be delivered, or tranfmitted to the gentleman whofe conduct is condemned; and if he refuses to make the required conceffion or due fatisfaction, let this opinion be published in fuch a manner as may be thought proper, and be understood to divest him of his character as a gentleman, fo long as he remains contumacious.

By this fingle expedient conveyed in a few words, it is hoped the neceffity of duels may be effectually fuperfeded, the practice fuppreffed, and ample fatisfaction enforced for all injuries of honour. In the examination of fubjects of importance we are often tempted to overlook the thing we want, on a supposition that it cannot be near at hand. This plan may perhaps admit of amendment, but it is feared, that the more complicated it is rendered, the more difficult it may prove to carry into execution: and it is hoped, fuch as it is, it will not be the worse thought of, for coming from an unknown pen.'

With respect to the practicability of this fcheme, we apprehend that the great difficulty would lie in the obliging the quarrelling parties, or either of them (who by the Author's plan are merely empowered) to refer them atter to the court of honour. But the Writer does not give this as a finifhed plan: he barely fuggests the hint; leaving others to improve upon it, if thought worthy of farther confideration.

As to the propofed a&t for punishing the furvivor, where one of the parties has fallen in the conflict, it is, indeed, a melan choly truth that our laws in being have been found inadequate so the purpose of preventing duels, by the dread of legal con

fequences.

fequences. The King of Sweden's method was virtually the fame with that which is here recommended; and it is faid to have been effectual in that kingdom.

The great Guftavus Adolphus, finding that the custom of duelling was become alarmingly prevalent among the officers in his army, was determined to fupprefs, if poffible, thofe falfe notions of honour. Soon after the King had formed this refolution, and iffued fome very rigorous edicts against the practice, a quarrel arose between two of his generals, who agreed to crave his Majefty's permiffion to decide their difference by the laws of honour. The King confented; and said he would be a fpectator of the combat. He went, accordingly, to the place appointed, attended by a body of guards, and the public executioner. He then told the combatants, that "they must fight till one of them died;" and turning to the executioner, he added, "Do you immediately ftrike off the head of the furvivor."-The Monarch's inflexibility had the defired effect: the difference between the two officers was adjusted; and no more challenges were heard of in the army of Guftavus Adolphus.

From the peculiar prevalency of this cuftom, in countries where that religious fyftem is established, which, of all others, moft exprefsly prohibits the gratification of revenge, with every fpecies of outrage and violence, we too plainly fee how little mankind are, in reality, influenced by the principles of the religion by which they profefs to be guided:-in defence of which, too, they will occafionally rifk even their lives in fight, though fighting is abfolutely forbidden by it!-But, we fear Horace was too much in the right:

Naturam expellas furcâ, tamen ufque recurret.

G.

ART. V. Juliet Grenville: or, the Hiftory of the Human Heart. By Mr. Brooke. Izmo. 3 Vols.

1774

E have fo frequently

WE

7,5.

6 d. fewed.

Robinfon.

given our opinion of the merit of this Writer, as a novellift, and the two works which he has published, of this kind, are fo uniformly characteristic, that we have little to add, on the prefent occafion, either of panegyric or of cenfure. Mr. Brooke's heroes and heroines are ftill faints, of angels on earth; too exalted, we apprehend, for mere finful mortals to prefume to emulate, and we fear too, that they have fo much of the old-fashioned form of piety about them, and talk fo folemnly, in the ftyle and phrafe of the fcriptures, that they will not be generally looked upon as fit models for imitation, in this age of freedom and gaiery. Yet, See our accounts of Mr. Brooke's novel, entitled, The Fool of Quality," given at the feveral periods of its fucceffive publications, in feparate volumes, Review, vols, xxxv. xxxix. xli. and xlii.