FOR THE NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY MAGAZINE.

DUELS.

MESSRS. EDITORS,

THE frequent Duels which have lately occurred in this Country, render the fubject of this mode of combat interefting. Not doubting that your readers will be amufed by the following hiftorical anecdotes relative thereto, I have taken the liberty to inclose them to you for publication. The "Curiofities of Literature" afford them. Yours, &c. KALAT.

D

UELS were fo common, no later than in the beginning of the reign of Louis XIII. (about 1610) that Houffaie, in his Memoires Hiftoriques, Vol. II. p. 259, informs us, that the first news enquired after every morning, when the people met in the streets or public places, were, ordinarily, Who has fought yefterday? and in the afternoon, Do you know who has fought this morning?

At this time there was one Bouteville, whom it was not necef fary to provoke, to fight; for no man enjoyed with keener pleafure the clafhing of fwords. If he heard any one fay by chance, and in the most friendly converfation, that fuch an one was courageous, he immediately addreffed himself to that perfon, in these words: "Sir, I am told you are a brave fellow; we must fight together." There remained no alternative but to conclude with a duel, or continually to fuffer his mad infults.

Every morning the duellifts met at Bouteville's house in a great hall, where were always found bread and wine on a table ready prepared, with foils to fence. This hall was the fchool of duellifts, or rather the place where the councils of war of these men were held. De Valencay, an officer of eminence, who was at the head of this fociety, had fuch an itch for fighting, that one day, he wanted to call out Bouteville, his most intimate friend, because this duellift had not chofen him for a fecond in a duel which he had had within a few days. Nor would this quarrel have been compromised, but for another that Bouteville, in the gaiety of his heart, had at that moment with the Marquis de Portes; at which meeting De Valencay amufed himself with the Marquis's fecond, one Cavois, and wounded him dangercufly.

Refpecting this duel an anecdote is recorded, which will ferve to characterise the duellifts. When the Marquis de Portes introduced Cavois to De Valencay, he obferved, that he brought one of the best scholars of Du Perche, (then the most skilful fencingmafter in Paris) and therefore he faid to De Valencay, you will meet a Rowland for your Oliver. When De Valencay pierced Cavois, he cried out, My dear friend, this ftroke does not come from Du Perche; but you will acknowledge it to be as good." Cavois fortunately recovered, and they were on the beft terms im

aginable, of which De Valencay gave a diftinguished proof. When Cardinal Richelieu defired him to select a brave man to command a company of life guard men, which he was then raifing, he warmly recommended Cavois; and answered on his honour that his eminence could not find a braver. Cavois thus recommended was accepted without hesitation; and it was through this fingular duel that the fortunes of this poor gentleman began to flourish.

Bouteville became the peft of Paris; and at length was punished with death. Such was the attractive generofity of his character, that he did not go to the place of execution unaccompanied by the lamentations of many perfons. An ingenious appeal to his Majefty was drawn up, and which is remarkable for being a curious defence of duelling. Richelieu was defirous of faving his life, but his death was neceffary.

The learned Selden has written a treatife on the DUELLO, or fingle Combat; it abounds with curious antiquarian information. He only confiders this fpecies of Combat in a legal view; and has collected, with great learning and induftry, the ceremonies, institutions, and occafions in which it has been lawfully allowed. On judicial duels, it is not now neceffary to dwell. The refinement of modern times has abolished such barbarous public decifions; and we fhould alfo abolifh the refenting private injuries by an instant appeal to the fword or piftol, were we not deluded by a falfe fpirit of honour; an idol to which we offer up human facrifices every day.

I have now lying before me a collection of the Edicts, Declar, ations, Records, and other pieces concerning duels and rencounters, which were made at various periods by the Court of France, with a view of fupprefling duels. From thefe materials a sketch of the hiftory of modern duelling may be formed.

The firft decree against duels is dated the 12th June, 1599. It declares, that by reafon of the murders and homicides, continually committed in duels, to obviate their frequency, (and which duels are generally practifed by persons who confider themselves injured and incapable, but by this mode of reparation, to fill thofe public occupations for which they are otherwife qualified) it is therefore decreed that thofe who revenge themfelves of infults, by any other mode than the ordinary course of law, fhall be deemed guilty of high treason, and their eftates confiscated to the king.

The next edict is made by Henry IV. and is dated April 1602. This great monarch tells us, that fo prevalent was the custom of fighting duels, and fuch was the daily effufion of blood of many brave men, that he should not confider himself as worthy of holding the fceptre if he deferred repreffing this enormous crime by the fevereft laws. He, therefore, in the pathetic expreffions of this edict, not being able of fuffering any longer the juft complaints of many fathers and others, who fear that the temerity of youth may precipitate their children to thofe dreadful

combats, fought by fome through an ambition that is deftructive of their friends and feelings, and accepted by others, who confider they cannot avoid the combat unless they would appear inferior in courage to their enemy; he declares, in conformity to the former decree of parliament, all who have fought duels, whether they be dead or alive, guilty of treason, and enforces the feizure of their eftates, and employing every other means of preventing the effusion of blood.

However great the feverity of thefe edicts may appear, they availed little against this falfe honour with which the French were fo dreadfully infected. In the next edict, published only feven years afterwards, June 1609, we obferve Henry lamenting, that notwithstanding the rigour of the laws, it feemed rather to provoke than banish this inhuman cuftom. He, therefore, befides the penalties before impofed, ordains punishments for all perfons who are concerned, in any way whatever, of duelling; not only for principals, and feconds, and bearers of challenges, but alfo for fpectators, who fhall come to the field and not prevent the shedding blood. However, that he might in fome manner not exafparate the prevailing difpofition of the nation, he permits those who imagine themfelves injured beyond the redress of law to make their application to himself, or to the marshals, governors, &c. and, according to the nature of the affront, he promifes to allow them the duel, if no other fatisfaction be deemed fufficient.

This fevere edict was of great benefit during the latter part of tlie reign of Henry the Great. But in the commencement of the reign of Louis XIII. to elude its force, a novel mode of duel was invented; the parties gave no challenge, but met as if it had been by accident. On this Louis XIII. published a declaration, dated 3d July, 1611. He there confirms the preceding decrees in all their force, and extends them to all rencounters, whenever they could be proved not to have been occafioned by accident. On the 18th January, 1613, he was compelled to publish another, in which he declares, with a view that all hopes of pardon might be destroyed, that whoever fhall dare to make application to his mother, the queen regent, to intercede for pardon of fuch offences fhall incur his indignation, and also that whoever fhall conceal the criminals fhall be reputed an acceffary to their crimes. In the next year we meet with an edict published by the parliament, at the motion of the king's attorney general, in confequence of the frequent duels which occurred in the streets cf Paris.

We will pass over feveral edicts, in which always fome new punishment was added to the former ones. In April, 1624, we find a remarkable one concerning our duellift, Bouteville. He and three others are there condemned for having fought a duel on Easter-day. They are fentenced to be degraded from all privileges and titles of honour, are declared infamous, to be hung on

a gibbet in Paris, and, if not apprehended, to be hung in effigy their houses to be rased to the ground, never to be rebuilt; the trees growing about them to be cut off by the middle, that they may remain as a perpetual monument of their crimes; a pillar of free ftone, with an infcription on a copper plate, to be erected there, containing an account of this demolition, and the estates and property of the culprits to be confiscated.

It merits obfervation, and clearly proves how univerfal must have been the practice of duelling (and in fact perfons of the fir distinction had rendered themselves obnoxious to the laws by it) that when the fifter of the king of France was married to Charles I. that monarch being defirous of granting to his fubjects fome public act of grace as a mark of his joy on the occafion, none could be thought of more acceptable to them than a general par don for duels.

In 1627, Bouteville and his accomplices were apprehened, and fuffered condign punishment. In May, 1634, the rage of duelling was still alive; for by a declaration then published the parliament revives all former edicts, and folemnly fwears to grant no pardons ; and, in 1635, it declared the will of a perfon of diftinction wha had fought a duel to be null.

When Louis XIV. came to the crown, an elaborate edict was published, dated June, 1643. This monarch was more fucefsful in his attempts to abolish this pernicious practice than his fuçceffors; and it is not to be accounted amongst the least of his great enterprises. He effected this by having formed into a body a variety of ufeful regulations, which have been called the laws of honour. They originated from the following circumftance, worthy of being imitated by ourselves.

Several gentlemen of diftinction in France, lamenting the deplorable progrefs of duelling, fubfcribed to a public declaration, in which they folemnly protefted to refufe all kinds of challenges, and never to fight duels. This declaration they prefented to the marthals of Frence, prelates and doctors of the Sorbonne, all of whom alledged their reafons for the abolition of this fatal and prevailing vice. The marfhals were then enjoined, by an exprefs order from his majefty, to meet together, and form a fhort code of laws concerning fatisfactions and reparations of honour. This they have performed in nineteen regulations, afterwards confirmed and enlarged, figned by the great marfhals of France, and dated Auguft, 1653.

It must not be confidered that this article relates merely to a curious incident in the hiftory of other times. Duelling appears to be making no flow progrefs at the prefent moment; and if fome great and good minds, who are always independent of the prejudices of their age, would now imitate the example of those perfons whofe declaration we have noticed, the public tranquili ty would be lefs frequently disturbed, and our domestic felicities would preferve a stability, which, while this fatal practice is prevalent, they never can know.

For the NEW-ENGLAND QUARTERLY MAGAZINE.

MESS. EDITORS.

There is amusement in the following

GLANCE INTO THE FRENCH ACADEMY,

be pleafed to give it a place among your mifcellanies. It was written previous to the Revolution. Yours, &c. RICARDO.

IN the Republic of Letters the establishment of an Academy has always been a favourite project. It is perhaps one of the Utopian fchemes of literature. Various Academies have been established, and the public have been aftonished to fee the united efforts of so many men of letters produce fuch inconfiderable fruit. Amongst these establishments the French Academy makes a splendid appearance. When this fociety however published their dictionary, that of Furetiere's became a formidable rival, and Johnson did as much as the forty themfelves. Where it poffible to observe the junto at their meetings, one might be enabled to form fome opinion of the manner in which they employed their time. This I am fortunately enabled to do. The Queen of Sweden, when at Paris, took a fudden fancy to vifit the Academy. Patru in one of his letters minutely defcribes what paffed at that vifit. I fhall collect the circumstances from his lifeless detail; which will prove that they met to little purpose. From fuch an affembly nothing eminent could be reasonably expected.

The Queen of Sweden having refolved to vifit the French Academy, he gave them fo fhort a notice of her design, that it was impoffible to inform the majority of the members of her intention. About four o'clock fifteen or fixteen Academicians were affembled. Mr. Gombaut one of the members, who did not know of the intended royal vifit, and who was enraged against the Queen, becaufe fhe did not relish his verses, thought proper to fhew his refentment by quitting the affembly.

She was received in a fpacious hall. In the middle was a table, covered with rich blue velvet, ornamented with a broad border of gold and filver. At its head was placed an arm-chair of black velvet embroidered with gold, and round the table chairs were placed with tapestry backs. The chancellor had forgotten to hang in the hall the portrait of the Queen, which he had prefented to the academy, and which was confidered by fome as a great omiffion. About five, a footman belonging to the Queen, enquired if the company were affembled. Soon after, a fervant of the King informed the chancellor that the Queen was at the end of the street; and immediately her carriage was feen to draw p in the court-yard. The chancellor, followed by the rest of