THE CODE OF HONOUR 319 



viewing the matter in the light of a steward, a steward does well 

 who makes the most of 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 concerned, 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 quarrel 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 the 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 Parliamentary constituencies can 

 effect. Used well, a code of honour embracing the possibility 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. 



