USE AND ABUSE OF THE DUEL. 391 



the acres entrusted to his care, and if by an exchange 

 of lands the estate is benefited, a steward, with leave 

 of the proprietor, is justified in the transaction. While 

 I hunted Bedfordshire, I gave a portion of my country 

 to the Hertfordshire as well as to the Cambridgeshire 

 hounds ; but it was on a distinct understanding that 

 on due notice I could recall that permission, and that 

 the permission was cancelled so far as I was con- 

 cerned, when I gave up the hounds. I had nothing 

 in exchange for it, but the country was not needed 

 by me, and I felt too happy to have it in my power 

 to assist my neighbour. 



In these remarks I beg to say that I am not an 

 advocate for the mere duel, I only assert that, unless 

 there is the possibility of personal, and equal, and 

 serious conflict, I know not how the rules of civilised 

 society in field or hall are to be maintained. Brute 

 force and the bully will be in the ascendant, for boxing 

 does not put men on personal equality ; and in all nice 

 points of courtesy, and in things to which the statutes 

 do not reach, the duel being abolished, nothing will be 

 found to keep ill-conditioned men in order. To forbid 

 the duel in the army or navy in the case of a cjuarrel 

 between British officers, is quite right, they have an 

 appeal to their comrades, and in extreme cases, a court- 

 martial to fall back on ; but to scout ih^ possibility of it 

 in society at large, is erroneous, and, in short, I do not 

 fear to say, that there yet are cases in which men will 

 appeal to it in spite of all that the Peace Society or par- 

 liamentary constituencies can effect. Used ivell, a code 

 of honour embracing the j^ossibilitt/ of single combat, 

 is invaluable ; abused, it then degrades and dwindles 

 into a sanguinary ruffianism, as brutal as it is useless, 

 and hostile to the interests of society. 



c c 4 



