» 
é 
1799.] Ur. Capel Lofft on Duelling, andon an Evvrorin Didot’s Virgil. 67 
*¢ It has been remarked of Charles, ~ 
that he never faid a foolifh thing, nor ever 
did a wife one: a c¢enfure which, though 
too far carried, feems to have fome founda- 
tion in his character and deportment.” 
Why thts perpetual loquacity and in-, 
compactnefs ? Suppofe thus: “fa cenfure 
too fevere,-but not unauthorifed by fome 
peculiarities in his deportment.”” 
«¢ When the king was informed of this 
faying, he obferved, that the matter was 
eafily accounted for: for that his diftour/e 
was his own, his actions were the mi- 
niftry’s.”” ae tag 
Exceed this, Vulgarity and Infipi- 
dity? if ye can. © ye admirers of David 
Hume, give me, as Hieitinais of ftyle, a 
fingle pagein Mitton, or the controver- 
fial works of MiDDLETON, in preference 
to all the volmmes, metaphyfical and hif- 
torical, by this object of your idolatry ! 
Dt GILBERT WaKEFIELD. 
Hackney, April 14, 1799- 

Yo the Editor of the Moxthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
A QUESTION of very great importance 
in the CarminaL Law has been put, 
in your Magazine :——-Whether there be any 
cafe in which Ailing, in what is called a 
fair duel, has been apsuDGED MuRTHER, 
and has had a Conviction of Mur. 
THER pronounced upon it. 
‘There are many cafes where the Juoces 
have ftated to the Jury, and indeed they 
almoft always (perhaps always) do ftate, 
upon thefe unhappy occafions, that Filling, 
on a deliberate fet CHALLENGE zs Mur- 
THER; but I know not ove in which 
there has been a Conviction of Murther, 
which has not turned upon other circum- 
ftances of malice, than merely the general 
implied malice which the conftruction of 
the Law annexes to the Aét of Duelling. 
The cafe of Major Ozedy, Tr. 13 G. I. 
and 1 G. II. is perhaps the neareft. The 
parties there, having quarrelled at a gam- 
ing table, and the deceafed having offered 
to make it up, they ftaid an four together 
in company, and immediately after fought, 
upoh a verbal challenge given by the prz- 
fouer. The deceafed received a mortal 
wound, The prifoner was left upon a 
Specal Verdi? to the opinion of all the 
Judges on his cafe. The Twelve Judges 
were unanimous, that the faéts found upon 
the Special Verdi&t amounted to Murther. 
He was accordingly fentenced: and a 
retty ftrong application was made in his 
half to his late Majefty on his acceffion. 
But the King declared, “ that the Judges 
baving pronounced the prifemer guilty of 
bottle at the head of the deceafed. 
Murther, the law muf? take its courfec” 
The night before his intended execution, 
the prifoner committed fuicide. 
But this cafe had ftrong circumftances 
beyond the duel. It had an aét of great 
violence and infelt; the throwing of .a 
Tt had 
expreflions of contempt, and of murther- 
ous hatred, afrer the offer of reconcitia- 
tion made by the young man who fell in 
the duel. It had-a circumftance in proef 
of the continuance of this fate and difpo- 
fition of mind, and of the deliberate pur- 
pofe of gratifying this hatred, to the very 
tnfiant before the duel. For thefe reafons, 
which the Judges.declare exprefsly to have 
weighed with them in their refolution, I 
think this cannot be confidered as coming 
up to an Adjudication and Conviétion of 
-Murther; for the killing of another in 
* 
what is called a fair duel, with #9 other 
malice in evidence than what the conftruc- 
tion of law attaches to the Act 2tfelf of 
Homicide on fet challenze, abftracted trom 
any other circumftances. . 
Within thefe very fewdays, I have learnt 
that there has been a conviction at the laf 
Exerer Affizes of Murther, founded on 
homicide, ina duel. sam wholly igno- 
rant what the facts are in that cafe; and _ 
if I were otherwife, it would be improper 
to anticipate what remains for folemn de- 
termination. —~What I have here faid, is’ 
without refereiice to that cafe; and in an- 
fwer merely to the queftion as ftated in the 
abftraét. I remain yours fincerely, 
Lrofion, Apr.16, 1799. CaPEL LOFFT. 
ee 
Small Stereotype Edition of Virgil by Didot. 
ifa faultlefs Edition of a Work of confidex- ~ 
able quantity be poffible, Thad hope that at laft 
it was effected ‘Vhis elegant little Edition has 
proofs of uncommsna attention to correctnels. 
Yet one fault of the Prefs has already ftruck 
me: andd am forry to fay, that it as of the 
Errata graviora, as it violates: af once quan- 
tity nnd mythology, 
s¢ Peque fibi generum Thetis’ emat omni- 
* bus undis,?’ i GEORG, 32+ 
It is neceffary to fay for Tethys. 
Ifwe happily were at peace, I fhould havetaken 
a method more delicate than by this public no~ 
tice, to have intimated the error. I haye found 
no other yet which is not fairly referable toa 
various reading ; though not every where the. 
reading which I fhpuld have expected to have 
feen preferred. Butinthis no Editor can fa- 
tisfy every individdal. Ci. 
Lord Raymond, 1485, r500.—S. C. Strange. 
' catia een a 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
AS a conftant reader of the Monthly 
Magazine, I cannot be emacquainted 
with 
- 

