pistol,'-and being himself a novice in the use of the weapon, he went to the field as he left the Atlantic shores, profoundly convinced that he would be compelled to yield up his life for his principles. The whole code, as it is upheld in the South, is a barbarous practice, and I have not been able to draw the distinction between that humanity which sends a human soul, unanointed and unshrived, into eternity by a bullet, and that other system which destroys life with an ordinary bowieknife.' The bloodiest transactions of remote and of recent date, some resulting from sudden quarrel, and some deliberately prearranged, have taken place in the Southern States. The terrible duel between Pleasants and Ritchie, near Richmond, not many years ago, was fought with pistols and swords; and the great Jack McCarty duel, also a Virginia affair, was fought upon a basis of this character. I have heard it stated that a formal duel with knives lately took place in New Orleans; and it is alleged that two of the Southern members of the present House engaged in a fearful conflict with the ordinary bowieknife. Those who know say that there is a manual by which the use of the bowie-knife is regulated in prearranged fights; and it is notorious that many of those who carry this instrument of death use it with as much dexterity as the Indian uses the bow or the scalping-knife."

Among many memorable duels and challenges, some of the most famous were those of Daniel O'Connell, the illustrious Irish "Liberator." For using the phrase For using the phrase "a beggarly corporation" in relation to the city of Dublin, he was challenged by D'Esterre, a member of that body, who would take no apology. O'Connell killed him at the first fire. This was in 1815. In 1835 he stigmatized the present Tory leader, Benjamin Disraeli, who deserted his party, as follows: "I cannot divest my mind of the belief that if this fellow's genealogy were traced, it would be found that he is the lineal descendant and true heirat-law of the impenitent thief who atoned for his crimes on the

cross." Disraeli had been upbraiding O'Connell fiercely, but was, nevertheless, very indignant at this retort, and threatened to chastise O'Connell; but, instead of this, challenged his son Morgan, who declined the contest, and printed the correspondence. In 1830 Sir Robert Peel, Prime - minister, challenged O'Connell for styling him, while Peel was Secretary of Ireland, "the son of a cotton-spinner;" but a meeting was prevented by the authorities. After that he declined all challenges to fight, saying "he had blood on his hands, and had registered a vow in heaven."

George Canning and Lord Castlereagh fought in 1809, on a misunderstanding in regard to the administration of the Duke of Portland. Canning was severely wounded. The causeless and fatal duel between Jonathan Cilley, of Maine, and William J. Graves, of Kentucky, was fought near Washington in 1838. Mr. Cilley was killed after having previously said he entertained "the highest respect and most kind feelings" for his adversary. There can be no doubt that the leading parties to this affair, whose names I do not wish to recall, pressed the matter so that it was impossible for the Northern man to decline. Henry Clay fought two duels-the first in 1808, with Humphrey Marshall, when both were members of the Legislature of Kentucky. They exchanged two or three shots, and retired from the field each slightly wounded; the second in 1826, on the Virginia shore of the Potomac, near Washington, with John Randolph, while Mr. Clay was Secretary of State, and Mr. Randolph a Senator in Congress. It was a political duel, and was without any just cause. The two men really loved each other, even in the hour of mutual combat. The cause was an attack upon Clay in the Senate by Randolph. They fought on the afternoon of Saturday, the 8th of April, on the right bank of the Potomac, above the Little Falls bridge, each party being attended by two seconds and a surgeon. At the first fire Mr. Randolph's bullet struck a stump behind Mr. Clay, and Mr. Clay's knocked

up the earth and gravel behind Mr. Randolph. The bullets had gone so true and close that it was a marvel they missed. Mr. Clay demanded another fire. The second time Randolph received the fire of Mr. Clay, and discharged his pistol into the air, saying, “I do not fire at you, Mr. Clay," and, immediately advancing, offered his hand. He was met in the same spirit. They met half-way, Randolph saying, "You owe me a coat, Mr. Clay" (the bullet had passed through the skirt of the coat, near the hip); to which Mr. Clay promptly and gracefully replied, "I am glad the debt is no greater."

Colonel Thomas H. Benton fought several duels, and in one of them killed Mr. Lucas. General Jackson had several affairs, and killed Mr. Dickinson in a duel, described at length in Parton's life of the Iron President. General Alexander Hamilton was killed in a duel by Aaron Burr, in 1804, under circumstances reflecting great discredit upon the latter. No event of the Revolution excited more interest. The mortal combat between two post captains in the navy, Stephen Decatur and James Barron, at Bladensburg, on the 22d of March, 1820, will never be forgotten. At the first shot both fell. "They fired so near together,” says an eye-witness, "that but one report was heard." Decatur was killed and Barron severely wounded. De Witt Clinton and John Swartworth fought in 1802, exchanging five shots. George C. Dromgoole, of Virginia, fought and killed Mr. Dugger, a gentleman of the same State, in 1837, in a border county of North Carolina. David C. Broderick was killed by D. S. Terry, of California, September 16, 1859, in consequence of a difference on the Lecompton question. General J. W. Denver, while a member of the State Senate of California, had a controversy with Hon. Edward Gilbert, ex-member of Congress, in 1852, in regard to some legislation, which resulted in a challenge from Gilbert, that was accepted by Denver. Rifles were the weapons. Gilbert fell at the second shot, and expired in a few minutes.

Hon. J. W. McCorkle

and Hon. William M. Gwin, the former a Senator and the latter a Representative in Congress from the same State, had an affair in 1853 in California. The weapon was the rifle, at three paces, the combatants to wheel at the word and fire. After three ineffectual shots the difficulty was settled. General Sam Houston, though a brave man, gave his opinion on duelling as follows: "I never made a quarrel with mortal man on earth, nor will I ever do anything to originate a quarrel with any man, woman, or child on earth. If they quarrel with me, it is their privilege; but I shall try to take care that they do me no harm."

George McDuffie, the celebrated statesman, fought Colonel Cummings, of Georgia, on the 8th of June, 1822, near Lister's Ferry, South Carolina, in consequence of a political quarrel. McDuffie was wounded and disabled for life. A good story is told of General Putnam, the Revolutionary hero. He accepted a challenge and fixed the time, and as his antagonist approached he was greeted with a shot from Putnam's gun at thirty rods. As Putnam was reloading his piece, his adversary approached and said, "What are you about to do? Is this the conduct of an American soldier and a man of honor?" "What am I about to do?" was the reply of the General. "A pretty question to put to a man you intend to murder! I am about to kill you; and if you do not fight in less time than it takes old Heath to hang a Tory, you are a gone dog." Of course the other turned and ran away. The second affair was with a British officer who challenged him. Putnam accepted, fixed the time and place; and when the Englishman found him he was seated near a barrel, apparently containing powder, smoking his pipe. The General requested him to take a seat on the other side of the cask, and then set fire to a match communicating with the contents of the barrel. The officer looked at the burning fuse and retired. As he moved off, the General said, “You are just as brave as I took you to be; this is noth

ing but a barrel of onions with a few grains of powder on the top, to try you by ; but you don't like the smell." While Pierre Soulé was Minister at the Court of Madrid he had a quarrel with the Duke of Alba. Two shots were exchanged. At the second the Duke fell, severely wounded below the knee. John Quincy Adams, in 1838, offered a series of resolutions in the House of Representatives against Andrew Stevenson, son of the present Senator from Kentucky, then the American Minister at England, for sending a challenge to Daniel O'Connell, the great Liberator; but they were laid upon the table, and, when repeated in another form, were disposed of in the same way.

I could fill several volumes with published instances as they are given in the books, but these will suffice. I cannot better terminate this sketch than by publishing the following statement of the great duel which took place near Washington in 1819 between Colonel Armistead T. Mason, Senator in Congress from Virginia, and the celebrated John M. McCarty. They were brothers-in-law, and fought with muskets. McCarty did not want to fight, but Mason pressed him. Mason's words were as follows: "Agree to any terms that he may propose, or to any distance-to three feet, his pretended favorite distance, or to three inches, should his impetuous and rash courage prefer it--to any weapons or forms-pistols, muskets, or riflesagree at once." He received the challenge. McCarty proposed to fight on a barrel of powder, or with dirks. Both modes were objected to, and finally McCarty accepted the cartel, and stated his terms as follows: "Gentlemen, I agree to meet and fight your friend General A. T. Mason to-morrow evening at five o'clock, at Montgomery Court-house. As I am. at liberty to select the weapons with which I am to fight, I beg leave to propose a musket charged with buckshot, at the distance of ten feet." Afterwards they substituted a single ball for buckshot, and increased the distance to more than twelve