DUELLING.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5481, 21 October 1878, Page 3

DUELLING.

(From the Saturday Review.) Tho debates in tho French Chamber of Deputies seem hardly to have caused the usual number of duels this year. There was an encounter between two deputies who were carried away by political fervor early in the session ; but most of the disputes in the Chamber have ended without any attempt at bloodletting, and outside it the fiery writers who comment on its proceedings, and who are usually so perfectly willing to fight e*ch other about anythingl'or nothing, appear to have been of late remarkably pacific. The discussions in the Chamber have not, it is true, usually produced many duels among the members themselves, who, either from good sense or because a large number of them are not young men, do not often think it necessary to prove their devotion to their principles by attempting to kill or injure each other. Of. this wise abstinence from an absurd and barbarous manner of terminating political controversies the present leader of the House once set au excellent example. M. Gambetta declined to take any notice of a challenge which was sent to him ; and, fanatical as Frenchmen commonly are on all matters which relate or are supposed to relate to personal courage, it does not appear that his conduct on this occasion did him any injury in the eyes of his countrymen. With writers for the Press, however, there has generally been an amazing willingness to try the wager of battle. Those who are quite in the first rank seem to have become convinced of the folly of duelling as a method of settling political differences, but this has not been the case with disputants of less degree. How often have English readers been half astonished and half amused to see that two contributors to Paris journals of opposite principles bad fought a duel with swords, and how often must wonder have been felt at the process of reasoning which causes a man to think that he does something towards proving the superiority of one form of government over another when he makes a small punctured wound in au antagonist’s shoulder ! This method, however, of bringing a political discussion to a conclusion certainly seems to commend itseff to a considerable number of Frenchmen. Now and then—though happily but very seldom —the fervour of the controversialists carries them too far, and one of them is killed ; but this unfortunate result, when it occurs, is not generally approved of, as showing that excess of zeal which is apt to degenerate into bad taste. The reason why battles have been on the whole more rare than usual may be the partial retirement of the moat successful combatant of the day—the W. G. Grace, so to speak, of swordsmen. Some time ago it was announced that M. Paul de Cassagnac had renounced duelling and would fight no more, or at least would only fight under extreme provocation. That any one would be inclined to give M. Paul de Cassagnac extreme provocation appeared, to say the least, by no means probable; and it must have seemed to many enthusiastic Frenchmen, eager for combat and glory, that the most victorious of champions was in fact abandoning altogether, while yet young, a practice which had brought him nothing but triumph. It may have occurred to ambitious and .youthful writers who had shown, and hoped to show again, that their mastery of the sword was as perfect as their command of stinging sentences, that after all even duelling must be a vanity if the first duellist of tho time gave it up when at the zenith of his powers. .... It is not impossible that considerations, arising from tho retirement of so distinguished a paladin, may have had some effect on warlike young journalists and politicians, full of faith in their views as to tho future of France, and also in the result of five years’ training in a fencing-room andof weekly practice in a pistolgallery. Perhaps in time it will seem to moat Frenchmen, as it does now to almost all Englishmen, that there can be no worse way of settling a dispute than a duel, inasmuch as the result either depends on chance, or is determined by tho greater skill of one of the two combatants, who is of course as likely to be in tho wrong as in the right. As yet, however, such opinions are very far from being generally held, and though during the past Paris season there were not so many combats as usual, it is safe to predict that even M, do Cassaguac’s retirement will be forgotten, and that when another political question arises without there being a terrible crisis in the East to attract all men's attention, the old love of trial by battle will be shown, and that journalists certainly, and perhaps some few deputies, will think it necessary to cross swords, though not improbably doubt as to the expediency of such proceedings may be more felt by men of all parties than before. So deeply rooted a practice will not easily be done away with. But it is only fair to say that, if the French are terribly illogical iu adhering to duelling, the method for which they are justly famous is shown in the manner in which duelling is arranged ; and this is well worthy of attention from the ingenuity with which a due feeling for honor and some regard for the sanctity of human life are happily combined. That men who do not really want to kill each other are able to avoid doing so without going through the absurdity of a sham contest is due to the art and mystery of fencing. Duels with pistols are apt to be very serious indeed, or else somewhat laughable. An accomplished shot may b® able to make certain of hitting his antagonist without endangering his life, but ho can hardly make sure of hitting him and at the same time of not doing him serious injury. Those who have been much in salks d'armes know that, when a man unaccustomed to fencing tries to use a foil, he frequently, after one or two unmeaning nourishes, rushes wildly in at his opponent usually with his hand down. If the other does not immediately give what is called tho coup d'arret, lunging out and catching his assailant full on tho chest as he advances, he is very likely to be hit himself, however great hia skill may be. What happens in the mimic contest may also happen in the real one. The unskilled man rushes in, and his practised antagonist must either kill him'as ho does so, or run extreme risk of receiving a terrible wound himself. Where both are skilled fencers the case is different. A regular attack can be parried without its being necessary to spit tho assailant, and the riposte which is given by the fencer first attacked can bo parried also. Of course, if both are in earnest, there will be a hit before long, but there is no necessity for immediate slaughter in selfdefence ; and moreover, men who have command of the sword, and who are not actuated by very deadly hostility, will probably not con- , centrato all their energies in attacks on vital parts, but, being able to play lightly and neatly for the shoulder, the arm, or the thigh, will do so, each seeking to draw an ounce or two of - malapert blood from the other, but neither wishing to take life. Seeing that no very great harm results from most of the sword duels fought in France, it may fairly be assumed that in the majority of cases tho combatants being to some extent cunning of fence, defend themselves carefully without making any very vigorous attempt at homicide. The wounds which are sooner or later inflicted aro, though not clangorous, sufficient to prevent such contests from scorning ridiculous ; and thus it is possible-to comply with the ru,lo which enjoins tho duel without running excessive risk on tho cue hand, and without going through a solemn

farce bn the other. It maybe said ;for the French that, if they have insisted on retaining the practice of duelling, they have certainly deprived it of its most objectionable features. That they should retain it at all does, however, seem extremely strange. The vanity of a few who became famous for their encounters may be gratified, but it is wonderful that the practice of private combat should prevail amongst so cute, a people. Even if it be admitted, as many would be willing to admit, that there are some outrages which the law cannot reach, and which must therefore bo avenged by the sufferers themselves, bow absurd does it seem to say that men who have become wroth in political controversy are equally, justified in talcing the law into their own hands ! There has been a sufficiently strong feeling on foreign politics in this country of late without doubt; but, even in these days of strange antics, a man would certainly not be thought sane and serious who proposed to prove the soundness of his opinions by fighting a hostile editor or an outspoken and aggressive member of Parliament.