Chapter VIII: Act 1856: , is mainly declaratory of the English common law, as embodied (1)

in decided cases, which indicate that the changes in the persons to or for whom a guarantee is given may consist either of an increase in their number, of a diminution thereof caused by death or retirement from business, or of the incorporation or consolidation of the persons to whom the guarantee is given. In this connexion it may be stated that the Government Offices (Security) Act 1875, which has been amended by the Statute Law Revision Act 1883, contains certain provisions with regard to the acceptance by the heads of public departments of guarantees given by companies for the due performance of the duties of an office or employment in the public service, and enables the Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury to vary the character of any security, for good behaviour by public servants, given after the passing of the act.

Before the surety can be rendered liable on his guarantee, the principal debtor must have made default. When, however, this has occurred, the creditor, in the absence of express agreement to the contrary, may sue the surety, without even informing him of such default having taken place, or requiring him to pay, and before proceeding against the principal debtor or resorting to securities for the debt received from the latter. In those countries where the municipal law is based on the Roman civil law, sureties usually possess the right (which may, however, be renounced by them) originally conferred by the Roman law, of compelling the creditor to insist on the goods, &c. (if any) of the principal debtor being first "discussed," i.e. appraised and sold, and appropriated to the liquidation of the debt guaranteed (see Codes Civil, Fr. and Bel. 2021 et seq.; Spain, 1830, 1831; Port. 830; Germany, 771, 772, 773; Holland, 1868; Italy, 1907; Lower Canada, 1941-1942; Egypt [mixed suits] 612; _ibid._ [native tribunals] 502), before having recourse to the sureties. This right, according to a great American jurist (Chancellor Kent in _Hayes_ v. _Ward_, 4 Johns. New York, Ch. Cas. p. 132), "accords with a common sense of justice and the natural equity of mankind." In England this right has never been fully recognized. Neither does it prevail in America nor, since the passing of the Mercantile Law Amendment Act (Scotland) 1856, s. 8, is it any longer available in Scotland where, prior to the last-named enactment, the benefit of discussion, as it is termed, existed. In England, however, before any demand for payment has been made by the creditor on the surety, the latter can, as soon as the principal debtor has made default, compel the creditor, on giving him an indemnity against costs and expenses, to sue the principal debtor if the latter be solvent and able to pay (_per_ A. L. Smith, L.J., in _Rouse_ v. _Bradford Banking Company_, 1894, 2 Ch. 75; _per_ Lord Eldon in _Wright_ v. _Simpson_, 6 Ves., at p. 733), and a similar remedy is also open to the surety in America (see Brandt on _Suretyship_, par. 205, p. 290) though in neither of these countries nor in Scotland can one of several sureties, when sued for the whole guaranteed debt by the creditor, compel the latter to divide his claim amongst all the solvent sureties, and reduce it to the share and proportion of each surety. However, this _beneficium divisionis_, as it is called in Roman law, is recognized by many existing codes (Fr. and Bel. 2025-2027; Spain, 1837; Portugal, 835-836; Germany, 426; Holland, 1873-1874; Italy, 1911-1912; Lower Canada, 1946; Egypt [mixed suits], 615, 616).

The usual mode in England of enforcing liability under a guarantee is by action in the High Court or in the county court. It is also permissible for the creditor to obtain redress by means of a set-off or counter-claim, in an action brought against him by the surety. On the other hand, the surety may now, in any court in which the action on the guarantee is pending, avail himself of any set-off which may exist between the principal debtor and the creditor. Moreover, if one of several sureties for the same debt is sued by the creditor or his guarantee, he can, by means of a proceeding termed a third-party notice, claim contribution from his co-surety towards the common liability. Independent proof of the surety's liability under his guarantee must always be given at the trial; as the creditor cannot rely either on admissions made by the principal debtor, or on a judgment or award obtained against him (_Ex parte Young In re Kitchin_, 17 Ch. Div. 668). Should the surety become bankrupt either before or after default has been made by the principal debtor, the creditor will have to prove against his estate. This right of proof is now in England regulated by the 37th section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883, which is most comprehensive in its terms.

Rights of sureties.

A person liable as a surety for another under a guarantee possesses various rights against him, against the person to whom the guarantee is given, and also against those who may have become co-sureties in respect of the same debt, default or miscarriage. As regards the surety's rights against the principal debtor, the latter may, where the guarantee was made with his consent but not otherwise (see _Hodgson_ v. _Shaw_, 3 Myl. & K. at p. 190), after he has made default, be compelled by the surety to exonerate him from liability by payment of the guaranteed debt (_per_ Sir W. Grant, M.R., in _Antrobus_ v. _Davidson_, 3 Meriv. 569, 579; _per_ Lindley, L.J., in _Johnston_ v. _Salvage Association_, 19 Q.B.D. 460, 461; and see _Wolmershausen_ v. _Gullick_, 1893, 2 Ch. 514). The moment, moreover, the surety has himself paid any portion of the guaranteed debt, he is entitled to rank as a creditor for the amount so paid, and to compel repayment thereof. In the event of the principal debtor's bankruptcy, the surety can in England, if the creditor has not already proved in respect of the guaranteed debt, prove against the bankrupt's estate, not only in respect of payments made before the bankruptcy of the principal debtor, but also, it seems, in respect of the contingent liability to pay under the guarantee (see _Ex parte Delmar re Herepath_, 1889, 38 W.R. 752), while if the creditor has already proved, the surety who has paid the guaranteed debt has a right to all dividends received by the creditor from the bankrupt in respect thereof, and to stand in the creditor's place as to future dividends. This right is, however, often waived by the guarantee stipulating that, until the creditor has received full payment of all sums over and above the guaranteed debt, due to him from the principal debtor, the surety shall not participate in any dividends distributed from the bankrupt's estate amongst his creditors. As regards the rights of the surety against the creditor, they are in England exercisable even by one who in the first instance was a principal debtor, but has since become a surety, by arrangement with his creditor, duly notified to the creditor, though not even sanctioned by him. This was decided by the House of Lords in the case of _Rouse_ v. _The Bradford Banking Co._, 1894, A.C. 586, removing a doubt created by the previous case of _Swire_ v. _Redman_, 1 Q.B.D. 536, which must now be treated as overruled. The surety's principal right against the creditor entitles him, after payment of the guaranteed debt, to the benefit of all securities, whether known to him (the surety) or not, which the creditor held against the principal debtor; and where, by default or _laches_ of the creditor, such securities have been lost, or rendered otherwise unavailable, the surety is discharged _pro tanto_. This right, which is _not_ in abeyance till the surety is called on to pay (_Dixon_ v. _Steel_, 1901, 2 Ch. 602), extends to all securities, whether satisfied or not, given before or after the contract of suretyship was entered into. On this subject the Mercantile Law Amendment Act, 1856, S 5, provides that "every person who being surety for the debt or duty of another, or being liable with another for any debt or duty, shall pay such debt or perform such duty, shall be entitled to have assigned to him, or to a trustee for him, every judgment, specialty, or other security, which shall be held by the creditor in respect of such debt or duty, whether such judgment, specialty, or other security shall or shall not be deemed at law to have been satisfied by the payment of the debt or performance of the duty, and such person shall be entitled to stand in the place of the creditor, and to use all the remedies, and, if need be, and upon a proper indemnity, to use the name of the creditor, in any action or other proceeding at law or in equity, in order to obtain from the principal debtor, or any co-surety, co-contractor, or co-debtor, as the case may be, indemnification for the advances made and loss sustained by the person who shall have so paid such debt or performed such duty; and such payment or performance so made by such surety shall not be pleadable in bar of any such action or other proceeding by him, provided always that no co-surety, co-contractor, or co-debtor shall be entitled to recover from any other co-surety, co-contractor, or co-debtor, by the means aforesaid, more than the just proportion to which, as between those parties themselves, such last-mentioned person shall be justly liable." This enactment is so far retrospective that it applies to a contract made before the act, where the breach thereof, and the payment by the surety, have taken place subsequently. The right of the surety to be subrogated, on payment by him of the guaranteed debt, to all the rights of the creditor against the principal debtor is recognized in America (_Tobin_ v. _Kirk_, 80 New York S.C.R. 229), and many other countries (Codes Civil, Fr. and Bel. 2029; Spain, 1839; Port. 839; Germany, 774; Holland, 1877; Italy, 1916; Lower Canada, 2959; Egypt [mixed suits], 617; _ibid._ [native tribunals], 505).

As regards the rights of the surety against a co-surety, he is entitled to contribution from him in respect of their common liability. This particular right is not the result of any contract, but is derived from a general equity, on the ground of equality of burden and benefit, and exists whether the sureties be bound jointly, or jointly and severally, and by the same, or different, instruments. There is, however, no right of contribution where each surety is severally bound for a given portion only of the guaranteed debt; nor in the case of a surety for a surety; (see _In re Denton's Estate_, 1904, 2 Ch. 178 C.A.); nor where a person becomes a surety jointly with another and at the latter's request. Contribution may be enforced, either before payment, or as soon as the surety has paid more than his share of the common debt (_Wolmershausen_ v. _Gullick_, 1803, 2 Ch. 514); and the amount recoverable is now always regulated by the number of solvent sureties, though formerly this rule only prevailed in equity. In the event of the bankruptcy of a surety, proof can be made against his estate by a co-surety for any excess over the latter's contributive share. The right of contribution is not the only right possessed by co-sureties against each other, but they are also entitled to the benefit of all securities which have been taken by any one of them as an indemnity against the liability incurred for the principal debtor. The Roman law did not recognize the right of contribution amongst sureties. It is, however, sanctioned by many existing codes (Fr. and Bel. 2033; Germany, 426, 474; Italy, 1920; Holland, 1881; Spain, 1844; Port. 845; Lower Canada, 1955; Egypt [mixed suits], 618, _ibid._ [native tribunals], 506), and also by the Indian Contract Act 1872, ss. 146-147.

The discharge of a surety from liability under his guarantee may be accomplished In various ways, he being regarded, especially in England and America, as a "favoured debtor" (_per_ Turner, L.J., in _Wheatley_ v. _Bastow_, 7 De G. M. & G. 279, 280; _per_ Earl of Selborne, L.C., in _In re Sherry--London and County Banking Co._ v. _Terry_, 25 Ch. D., at p. 703; and see Brandt on _Suretyship_, secs. 79, 80). Thus, fraud subsequent to the execution of the guarantee (as where, for example, the creditor connives at the principal debtor's default) will certainly discharge the surety. Again, a material alteration made by the creditor in the instrument of guarantee after its execution may also have this effect. The most prolific ground of discharge, however, is usually traceable to causes originating in the creditor's laches or conduct, the governing principle being that if the creditor violates any rights which the surety possessed when he entered into the suretyship, even though the damage be nominal only, the guarantee cannot be enforced. On this subject it suffices to state that the surety's discharge may be accomplished (1) by a variation of the terms of the contract between the creditor and the principal debtor, or of that subsisting between the creditor and the surety (see _Rickaby_ v. _Lewis_, 22 T.L.R. 130); (2) by the creditor taking a new security from the principal debtor in lieu of the original one; (3) by the creditor discharging the principal debtor from liability; (4) by the creditor binding himself to give time to the principal debtor for payment of the guaranteed debt; or (5) by loss of securities received by the creditor in respect of the guaranteed debt.

In this connexion It may be stated in general terms that whatever extinguishes the principal obligation necessarily determines that of the surety (which is accessory thereto), not only in England but elsewhere also (Codes Civil, Fr. and Bel. 2034, 2038; Spain, 1847; Port. 848; Lower Canada, 1956; 1960; Egypt [mixed suits], 622, _ibid._ [native tribunals], 509; Indian Contract Act 1872, sec. 134), and that, by most of the codes civil now in force, the surety is discharged by _laches_ or conduct of the creditor inconsistent with the surety's rights (see Fr. and Bel. 2037; Spain, 1852; Port. 853; Germany, 776; Italy, 1928; Egypt [mixed suits], 623), though it may be mentioned that the rule prevailing in England, Scotland, America and India which releases the surety from liability where the creditor, by binding contract with the principal, extends without the surety's consent the time for fulfilling the principal obligation, while recognized by two existing codes civil (Spain, 1851; Port. 852), is rejected by the majority of them (Fr. and Bel. 2039; Holland, 1887; Italy, 1930; Lower Canada, 1961; Egypt [mixed suits], 613; _ib._ [native tribunals], 503); (and see Morice, _English and Dutch Law_, p. 96; van der Linden, _Institutes of Holland_, pp. 120-121). A revocation of the contract of suretyship by act of the parties, or in certain cases by the death of the surety, may also operate to discharge the surety. The death of a surety does not _per se_ determine the guarantee, but, save where from its nature the guarantee is irrevocable by the surety himself, it can be revoked by express notice after his death, or, it would appear, by the creditor becoming affected with constructive notice thereof; except where, under the testator's will, the executor has the option of continuing the guarantee, in which case the executor should, it seems, specifically withdraw the guarantee in order to determine it. Where one of a number of joint and several sureties dies, the future liability of the survivors under the guarantee continues, at all events until it has been determined by express notice. Moreover, when three persons joined in a guarantee to a bank, and their liability thereunder was not expressed to be several, it was held that the death of one surety did not determine the liability of the survivors. In such a case, however, the estate of the deceased surety would be relieved from liability.

The Statutes of Limitation bar the right of action on guarantees under seal after twenty years, and on other guarantees after six years, from the date when the creditor might have sued the surety.

AUTHORITIES.--De Colyar, _Law of Guarantees and of Principal and
Surety_ (3rd ed., 1897); American edition, by J. A. Morgan (1875);
Throop, _Validity of Verbal Agreements_; Fell, _Guarantees_ (2nd
ed.); Theobald, _Law of Principal and Surety_; Brandt, _Law of
Suretyships and Guarantee_; article by de Colyar in _Journal of
Comparative Legislation_ (1905), on "Suretyship from the Standpoint of
Comparative Jurisprudence." (H. A. de C.)

GUARATINGUETA, a city of Brazil In the eastern part of the state of Sao Paulo, 124 m. N.E. of the city of Sao Paulo. Pop. (1890) of the municipality, which includes a large rural district and the villages of Apparecida and Roseira, 30,690. The city, which was founded in 1651, stands on a fertile plain 3 m. from the Parahyba river, and is the commercial centre of one of the oldest agricultural districts of the state. The district produces large quantities of coffee, and some sugar, Indian corn and beans. Cattle and pigs are raised. The city dwellings are for the most part constructed of rough wooden frames covered with mud, called _taipa_ by the natives, and roofed with curved tiles. The Sao Paulo branch of the Brazilian Central railway passes through the city, by which it is connected with Rio de Janeiro on one side and Sao Paulo and Santos on the other.

GUARDA, an episcopal city and the capital of an administrative district bearing the same name, and formerly in the province of Beira, Portugal; on the Guarda-Abrantes and Lisbon-Villar Formoso railways. Pop. (1900) 6124. Guarda is situated 3370 ft. above sea-level, at the north-eastern extremity of the Serra da Estrella, overlooking the fertile valley of the river Coa. It is surrounded by ancient walls, and contains a ruined castle, a fine 16th-century cathedral and a sanatorium for consumptives. Its industries comprise the manufacture of coarse cloth and the sale of grain, wine and live stock. In 1199 Guarda was founded, on the site of the Roman Lencia Oppidana, by Sancho I. of Portugal, who intended it, as its name implies, to be a "guard" against Moorish invasion. The administrative district of Guarda coincides with north-eastern Beira; pop. (1900), 261,630; area, 1065 sq. m.

GUARDI, FRANCESCO (1712-1793), Venetian painter, was a pupil of Canaletto, and followed his style so closely that his pictures are very frequently attributed to his more celebrated master. Nevertheless, the diversity, when once perceived, is sufficiently marked--Canaletto being more firm, solid, distinct, well-grounded, and on the whole the higher master, while Guardi is noticeable for spirited touch, sparkling colour and picturesquely sketched figures--in these respects being fully equal to Canaletto. Guardi sometimes coloured Canaletto's designs. He had extraordinary facility, three or four days being enough for producing an entire work. The number of his performances is large in proportion to this facility and to the love of gain which characterized him. Many of his works are to be found in England and seven in the Louvre.

GUARDIAN, one who guards or defends another, a protector. The O. Fr. _guarden_, _garden_, mod. _gardien_, from _guarder_, _garder_, is of Teutonic origin, from the base _war-_, to protect, cf. O.H. Ger. _warten_, and Eng. "ward"; thus "guardian" and "warden" are etymologically identical, as are "guard" and "ward"; cf. the use of the correlatives "guardian" and "ward," i.e. a minor, or person incapable of managing his affairs, under the protection or in the custody of a guardian. For the position of guardians of the poor see POOR LAW, and for the legal relations between a guardian and his ward see INFANT, MARRIAGE and ROMAN LAW.

GUARDS, AND HOUSEHOLD TROOPS. The word _guard_ is an adaptation of the Fr. _guarde_, mod. _garde_, O. Ger. _ward_; see GUARDIAN. The practice of maintaining bodyguards is of great antiquity, and may indeed be considered the beginning of organized armies. Thus there is often no clear distinction between the inner ring of personal defenders and the select corps of trained combatants who are at the chief's entire disposal. Famous examples of corps that fell under one or both these headings are the "Immortals" of Xerxes, the Mamelukes, Janissaries, the _Huscarles_ of the Anglo-Saxon kings, and the Russian Strelitz (_Stryeltsi_). In modern times the distinction of function is better marked, and the fighting men who are more intimately connected with the sovereign than the bulk of the army can be classified as to duties into "Household Troops," who are in a sense personal retainers, and "Guards," who are a _corps d'elite_ of combatants. But the dividing line is not so clear as to any given body of troops. Thus the British Household Cavalry is part of the combatant army as well as the sovereign's escort.

The oldest of the household or bodyguard corps in the United Kingdom is the King's Bodyguard of the _Yeomen of the Guard_ (q.v.), formed at his accession by Henry VII. The "nearest guard," the personal escort of the sovereign, is the "King's Bodyguard of the Honourable Corps of _Gentlemen-at-Arms_," created by Henry VIII. at his accession in 1509. Formed possibly on the pattern of the "Pensionnaires" of the French kings--retainers of noble birth who were the predecessors of the _Maison du Roi_ (see below)--the new corps was originally called "the Pensioners." The importance of such guards regiments in the general development of organized armies is illustrated by a declaration of the House of Commons, made in 1674, that the militia, the pensioners and the Yeomen of the Guard were the only lawful armed forces in the realm. But with the rise of the professional soldier and the corresponding disuse of arms by the nobles and gentry, the Gentlemen-at-Arms (a title which came into use in James II.'s time, though it did not become that of the corps until William IV.'s) retaining their noble character, became less and less military. Burke attempted without success in 1782 to restrict membership to officers of the army and navy, but the necessity of giving the corps an effective military character became obvious when, on the occasion of a threatened Chartist riot, it was called upon to do duty as an armed body at St James's Palace. The corps was reconstituted on a purely military basis in 1862, and from that date only military officers of the regular services who have received a war decoration are eligible for appointment. The office of captain, however, is political, the holder (who is always a peer) vacating it on the resignation of the government of which he is a member. The corps consists at present of captain, lieutenant, standard bearer, clerk of the cheque (adjutant), sub-officer and 39 gentlemen-at-arms. The uniform consists of a scarlet swallow-tailed coat and blue overalls, with gold epaulettes, brass dragoon helmet with drooping white plume and brass box-spurs, these last contrasting rather forcibly with the partizan, an essentially infantry weapon, that they carry.

_The Royal Company of Archers._--The king's bodyguard for Scotland was
constituted in its present form in the year 1670, by an act of the
privy council of Scotland. An earlier origin has been claimed for the
company, some connecting it with a supposed archer guard of the kings
of Scotland. In the above-mentioned year, 1676, the minutes of the
Royal Company begin by stating, that owing to "the noble and usefull
recreation of archery being for many years much neglected, several
noblemen and gentlemen did associate themselves in a company for
encouragement thereof ... and did apply to the privy council for their
approbation ... which was granted." For about twenty years at the end
of the 17th century, perhaps owing to the adhesion of the majority to
the Stuart cause, its existence seems to have been suspended. But in
1703 a new captain-general, Sir George Mackenzie, Viscount Tarbat,
afterwards earl of Cromarty (1630-1714), was elected, and he procured
for the company a new charter from Queen Anne. The rights and
privileges renewed or conferred by this charter were to be held of the
crown for the _reddendo_ of a pair of barbed arrows. This _reddendo_
was paid to George IV. at Holyrood in 1822, to Queen Victoria in 1842
and to King Edward VII. in 1903. The history of the Royal Company
since 1703 has been one of great prosperity. Large parades were
frequently held, and many distinguished men marched in the ranks.
Several of the leading insurgents in 1745 were members, but the
company was not at that time suspended in any way.

In 1822 when King George IV. visited Scotland, it was thought
appropriate that the Royal Company should act as his majesty's
bodyguard during his stay, especially as there was a tradition of a
former archer bodyguard. They therefore performed the duties usually
assigned to the gentlemen-at-arms. When Queen Victoria visited the
Scottish capital in 1842, the Royal Company again did duty; the last
time they were called out in her reign in their capacity of royal
bodyguard was in 1860 on the occasion of the great volunteer review in
the Queen's Park, Edinburgh. They acted in the same capacity when King
Edward VII. reviewed the Scottish Volunteers there on the 18th of
September 1905.

King George IV. authorized the company to take, in addition to their
former name, that of "The King's Body Guard for Scotland," and
presented to the captain-general a gold stick, thus constituting the
company part of the royal household. In virtue of this stick the
captain-general of the Royal Company takes his place at a coronation
or similar pageant immediately behind the gold stick of England. The
lieutenants-general of the company have silver sticks; and the
council, which is the executive body of the company, possess seven
ebony ones. George IV. further appointed a full dress uniform to be
worn by members of the company at court, when not on duty as guards,
in which latter case the ordinary field dress is used. The court dress
is green with green velvet facings, gold epaulettes and lace, crimson
silk sash, and cocked hat with green plume. The officers wear a gold
sash in place of a crimson one, and an _aiguillette_ on the left
shoulder. All ranks wear swords. The field dress at present consists
of a dark-green tunic, shoulder-wings and gauntleted cuffs and
trousers trimmed with black and crimson; a bow-case worn as a sash, of
the same colour as the coat, black waistbelt with sword, and Balmoral
bonnet with thistle ornament and eagle's feather. The officers of the
company are the captain-general, 4 captains, 4 lieutenants, 4 ensigns,
12 brigadiers and adjutant.

Corps of the gentlemen-at-arms or yeoman type do not of course count as combatant troops--if for no other reason at least because they are armed with the weapons of bygone times. Colonel Clifford Walton states in his _History of the British Standing Army_ that neither the Yeomen of the Guard nor the Pensioners were ever subject to martial law. The British guards and household troops that are armed, trained and organized as part of the army are the _Household Cavalry_ and the _Foot Guards_.

The Household Cavalry consists at the present day of three regiments, and has its origin, as have certain of the Foot guard regiments, in the ashes of the "New Model" army disbanded at the restoration of Charles II. in 1660. In that year the "1st or His Majesty's Own Troop of Guards" formed during the king's exile of his cavalier followers, was taken on the strength of the army. The 2nd troop was formerly in the Spanish service as the "Duke of York's Guards," and was also a cavalier unit. In 1670, on Monk's death, the original 3rd troop (Monk's Life Guards, renamed in 1660 the "Lord General's Troop of Guards") became the 2nd (the queen's) troop, and the duke of York's troop the 3rd. In 1685 the 1st and 2nd troops were styled Life Guards of Horse, and two years later the blue-uniformed "Royal Regiment of Horse," a New Model regiment that had been disbanded and at once re-raised in 1660, was made a household cavalry corps. Later under the colonelcy of the earl of Oxford it was popularly called "The Oxford Blues." There were also from time to time other troops (e.g. Scots troops 1700-1746) that have now disappeared. In 1746 the 2nd troop was disbanded, but it was revived in 1788, when the two senior corps were given their present title of 1st and 2nd Life Guards. From 1750 to 1819 the Blues bore the name of "Royal Horse Guards Blue," which in 1819 was changed to "Royal Horse Guards (The Blues)." The general distinction between the uniforms of the red Life Guard and the blue Horse Guard still exists. The 1st and the 2nd regiments of Life Guards wear scarlet tunics with blue collars and cuffs, and the Royal Horse Guards blue tunics with scarlet collars and cuffs. All three wear steel cuirasses on state occasions and on guard duty. The head-dress is a steel helmet with drooping horse-hair plume (white for Life Guards, red for Horse Guards). In full dress white buckskin pantaloons and long knee boots are worn. Amongst the peculiarities of these _corps d'elite_ is the survival of the old custom of calling non-commissioned officers "corporal of horse" instead of sergeant, and corporal-major instead of sergeant-major, the wearing by trumpeters and bandsmen in full dress of a black velvet cap, a richly laced coat with a full skirt extending to the wearer's knees and long white gaiters. There is little distinction between the two Life Guards regiments' uniforms, the most obvious point being that the cord running through the white leather pouch belt is red for the 1st and blue for the 2nd.

The Foot Guards comprise the Grenadier Guards, the Coldstream Guards, the Scots Guards and the Irish Guards, each (except the last) of three battalions. The Grenadiers, originally the First Foot Guards, represent a royalist infantry regiment which served with the exiled princes in the Spanish army and returned at the Restoration in 1660. The Coldstream Guards are a New Model regiment, and were originally called the Lord General's (Monk's) regiment of Foot Guards. Their popular title, which became their official designation in 1670, is derived from the fact that the army with which Monk restored the monarchy crossed the Tweed into England at the village of Coldstream, and that his troops (which were afterwards, except the two units of horse and foot of which Monk himself was colonel, disbanded) were called the Coldstreamers. The two battalions of Scots Foot Guards, which regiment was separately raised and maintained in Scotland after the Restoration, marched to London in 1686 and 1688 and were brought on to the English Establishment in 1707. In George III.'s reign they were known as the Third Guards, and from 1831 to 1877 (when the present title was adopted) as the Scots Fusilier Guards.

The Irish Guards (one battalion) were formed in 1902, after the South African War, as a mark of Queen Victoria's appreciation of the services rendered by the various Irish regiments of the line.[1] The dress of the Foot Guards is generally similar in all four regiments, scarlet tunic with blue collars, cuffs and shoulder-straps, blue trousers and high, rounded bearskin cap. The regimental distinctions most easily noticed are these. The Grenadiers wear a small white plume in the bearskin, the Coldstreams a similar red one, the Scots none, the Irish a blue-green one. The buttons on the tunic are spaced evenly for the Grenadiers, by twos for the Coldstreams, by threes for the Scots and by fours for the Irish. The band of the modern cap is red for the Grenadiers, white for the Coldstreams, "diced" red and white (chequers) for the Scots and green for the Irish. Former privileges of foot guard regiments, such as higher brevet rank in the army for their regimental officers, are now abolished, but Guards are still subject exclusively to the command of their own officers, and the officers of the Foot Guards, like those of the Household Cavalry, have special duties at court. Neither the cavalry nor the infantry guards serve abroad in peace time as a rule, but in 1907 a battalion of the Guards, which it was at that time proposed to disband, was sent to Egypt. "Guards' Brigades" served in the Napoleonic Wars, in the Crimea, in Egypt at various times from 1887 to 1898 and in South Africa 1899-1902. The last employment of the Household Cavalry as a brigade in war was at Waterloo, but composite regiments made up from officers and men of the Life Guards and Blues were employed in Egypt and in S. Africa.

The sovereigns of France had guards in their service in Merovingian
times, and their household forces appear from time to time in the
history of medieval wars. Louis XI. was, however, the first to
regularize their somewhat loose organization, and he did so to such
good purpose that Francis I. had no less than 8000 guardsmen
organized, subdivided and permanently under arms. The senior unit of
the _Gardes du Corps_ was the famous company of Scottish archers
(_Compagnie ecossaise de la Garde du Corps du Roi_), which was
originally formed (1418) from the Scottish contingents that assisted
the French in the Hundred Years' War. Scott's _Quentin Durward_ gives
a picture of life in the corps as it was under Louis XI. In the
following century, however, its regimental history becomes somewhat
confused. Two French companies were added by Louis XI. and Francis I.
and the _Gardes du Corps_ came to consist exclusively of cavalry.
About 1634 nearly all the Scots then serving went into the "regiment
d'Hebron" and thence later into the British regular army (see HEPBURN,
SIR JOHN). Thereafter, though the titles, distinctions and privileges
of the original Archer Guard were continued, it was recruited from
native Frenchmen, preference being (at any rate at first) given to
those of Scottish descent. At its disbandment in 1791 along with the
rest of the _Gardes du Corps_, it contained few, if any, native Scots.
There was also, for a short time (1643-1660), an infantry regiment of
_Gardes ecossaises_.

In 1671 the title of _Maison Militaire du Roi_ was applied to that
portion of the household that was distinctively military. It came to
consist of 4 companies of the _Gardes du Corps_, 2 companies of
_Mousquetaires_ (cavalry) (formed 1622 and 1660), 1 company of
_Chevaux legers_ (1570), 1 of _Gendarmes de la Maison Rouge_, and 1 of
_Grenadiers a Cheval_ (1676), with 1 company of _Gardes de la Porte_
and one called the _Cent-Suisses_, the last two being semi-military.
This large establishment, which did not include all the guard
regiments, was considerably reduced by the Count of St Germain's
reforms in 1775, all except the _Gardes du Corps_ and the
_Cent-Suisses_ being disbanded. The whole of the _Maison du Roi_, with
the exception of the semi-military bodies referred to, was cavalry.

The _Gardes francaises_, formed in 1563, did not form part of the
_Maison_. They were an infantry regiment, as were the famous _Gardes
suisses_, originally a Swiss mercenary regiment in the Wars of
Religion, which was, for good conduct at the combat of Arques,
incorporated in the permanent establishment by Henry IV. in 1589 and
in the guards in 1615. At the Revolution, contrary to expectation, the
French Guards sided openly with the Constitutional movement and were
disbanded. The Swiss Guards, however, being foreigners, and therefore
unaffected by civil troubles, retained their exact discipline and
devotion to the court to the day on which they were sacrificed by
their master to the bullets of the Marseillais and the pikes of the
mob (August 10, 1792). Their tragic fate is commemorated by the
well-known monument called the "Lion of Lucerne," the work of
Thorvaldsen, erected near Lucerne in 1821. The "Constitutional,"
"Revolutionary" and other guards that were created after the abolition
of the _Maison_ and the slaughter of the Swiss are unimportant, but
through the "Directory Guards" they form a nominal link between the
household troops of the monarchy and the corps which is perhaps the
most famous "Guard" in history. The Imperial Guard of Napoleon had its
beginnings in an escort squadron called the Corps of Guides, which
accompanied him in the Italian campaign of 1796-1797 and in Egypt. On
becoming First Consul in 1799 he built up out of this and of the guard
of the Directory a small corps of horse and foot, called the Consular
Guard, and this, which was more of a fighting unit than a personal
bodyguard, took part in the battle of Marengo. The Imperial Guard,
into which it was converted on the establishment of the Empire, was at
first of about the strength of a division. As such it took part in the
Austerlitz and Jena campaigns, but after the conquest of Prussia
Napoleon augmented it, and divided it into the "Old Guard" and the
"Young Guard." Subsequently the "Middle Guard" was created, and by
successive augmentations the corps of the guard had grown to be 57,000
strong in 1811-1812 and 81,000 in 1813. It preserved its general
character as a _corps d'elite_ of veterans to the last, but from about
1813 the "Young Guard" was recruited directly from the best of the
annual conscript contingent. The officers held a higher rank in the
army than their regimental rank in the Guards. At the first
Restoration an attempt was made to revive the _Maison du Roi_, but in
the constitutional regime of the second Restoration this semi-medieval
form of bodyguard was given up and replaced by the _Garde Royale_, a
selected fighting corps. This took part in the short war with Spain
and a portion of it fought in Algeria, but it was disbanded at the
July Revolution. Louis Philippe had no real guard troops, but the
memories of the Imperial Guard were revived by Napoleon III., who
formed a large guard corps in 1853-1854. This, however, was open to an
even greater degree than Napoleon I.'s guard to the objection that it
took away the best soldiers from the line. Since the fall of the
Empire in 1870 there have been no guard troops in France. The duty of
watching over the safety of the president is taken in the ordinary
roster of duty by the troops stationed in the capital. The "Republican
Guard" is the Paris gendarmerie, recruited from old soldiers and armed
and trained as a military body.

In _Austria-Hungary_ there are only small bodies of household troops
(Archer Body Guard, Trabant Guard, Hungarian Crown Guards, &c.)
analogous to the British Gentlemen at Arms or Yeomen of the Guard.
Similar forces, the "Noble Guard" and the "Swiss Guard," are
maintained in the Vatican. The court troops of Spain are called
"halberdiers" and armed with the halbert.

In _Russia_ the Guard is organized as an army corps. It possesses
special privileges, particularly as regards officers' advancement.

In _Germany_ the distinction between armed retainers and "Guards" is
well marked. The army is for practical purposes a unit under imperial
control, while household troops ("castle-guards" as they are usually
called) belong individually to the various sovereigns within the
empire. The "Guards," as a combatant force in the army are those of
the king of _Prussia_ and constitute a strong army corps. This has
grown gradually from a bodyguard of archers, and, as in Great Britain,
the functions of the heavy cavalry regiments of the Guard preserve to
some extent the name and character of a body guard (_Gardes du
Corps_). The senior foot guard regiment is also personally connected
with the royal family. The conversion of a palace-guard to a combatant
force is due chiefly to Frederick William I., to whom drill was a
ruling passion, and who substituted effective regiments for the
ornamental "Trabant Guards" of his father. A further move was made by
Frederick the Great in substituting for Frederick William's expensive
"giant" regiment of guards a larger number of ordinary soldiers, whom
he subjected to the same rigorous training and made a _corps d'elite_.
Frederick the Great also formed the Body Guard alluded to above.
Nevertheless in 1806 the Guard still consisted only of two cavalry
regiments and four infantry regiments, and it was the example of
Napoleon's imperial guard which converted this force into a corps of
all arms. In 1813 its strength was that of a weak division, but in
1860 by slight but frequent augmentations it had come to consist of an
army corps, complete with all auxiliary services. A few guard
regiments belonging to the minor sovereigns are counted in the line
of the German army. In war the Guard is employed as a unit, like other
army corps. It is recruited by the assignment of selected young men of
each annual contingent, and is thus free from the reproach of the
French Imperial Guard, which took the best-trained soldiers from the
regiments of the line.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] The "Irish Guards" of the Stuarts took the side of James II.,
fought against William III. in Ireland and lost their regimental
identity in the French service to which the officers and soldiers
transferred themselves on the abandonment of the struggle.

GUARD-SHIP, a warship stationed at some port or harbour to act as a guard, and in former times in the British navy to receive the men impressed for service. She usually was the flagship of the admiral commanding on the coast. A guard-boat is a boat which goes the round of a fleet at anchor to see that due watch is kept at night.

GUARICO, a large inland state of Venezuela created by the territorial redivision of 1904, bounded by Aragua and Miranda on the N., Bermudez on the E., Bolivar on the S., and Zamora on the W. Pop. (1905 estimate), 78,117. It extends across the northern _llanos_ to the Orinoco and Apure rivers and is devoted almost wholly to pastoral pursuits, exporting cattle, horses and mules, hides and skins, cheese and some other products. The capital is Calabozo, and the other principal towns are Camaguan (pop. 3648) on the Portugueza river, Guayabal (pop. 3146), on a small tributary of the Guarico river, and Zaraza (pop. 14,546) on the Unare river, nearly 150 m. S.E. of Caracas.

GUARIENTO, sometimes incorrectly named GUERRIERO, the first Paduan painter who distinguished himself. The only date distinctly known in his career is 1365, when, having already acquired high renown in his native city, he was invited by the Venetian authorities to paint a Paradise, and some incidents of the war of Spoleto, in the great council-hall of Venice. These works were greatly admired at the time, but have long ago disappeared under repaintings. His works in Padua have suffered much. In the church of the Eremitani are allegories of the Planets, and, in its choir, some small sacred histories in dead colour, such as an Ecce Homo; also, on the upper walls, the life of St Augustine, with some other subjects. A few fragments of other paintings by Guariento are still extant in Padua. In the gallery of Bassano is a Crucifixion, carefully executed, and somewhat superior to a merely traditional method of handling, although on the whole Guariento must rather be classed in that school of art which preceded Cimabue than as having advanced in his vestiges; likewise two other works in Bassano, ascribed to the same hand. The painter is buried in the church of S. Bernardino, Padua.

GUARINI, CAMILLO-GUARINO (1624-1683), Italian monk, writer and architect, was born at Modena in 1624. He was at once a learned mathematician, professor of literature and philosophy at Messina, and, from the age of seventeen, was architect to Duke Philibert of Savoy. He designed a very large number of public and private buildings at Turin, including the palaces of the duke of Savoy and the prince of Cacignan, and many public buildings at Modena, Verona, Vienna, Prague, Lisbon and Paris. He died at Milan in 1683.

GUARINI, GIOVANNI BATTISTA (1537-1612), Italian poet, author of the _Pastor fido_, was born at Ferrara on the 10th of December 1537, just seven years before the birth of Tasso. He was descended from Guarino da Verona. The young Battista studied both at Pisa and Padua, whence he was called, when not yet twenty, to profess moral philosophy in the schools of his native city. He inherited considerable wealth, and was able early in life to marry Taddea de' Bendedei, a lady of good birth. In 1567 he entered the service of Alphonso II., duke of Ferrara, thus beginning the court career which was destined to prove a constant source of disappointment and annoyance to him. Though he cultivated poetry for pastime, Guarini aimed at state employment as the serious business of his life, and managed to be sent on various embassies and missions by his ducal master. There was, however, at the end of the 16th century no opportunity for a man of energy and intellectual ability to distinguish himself in the petty sphere of Italian diplomacy. The time too had passed when the profession of a courtier, painted in such glowing terms by Castiglione, could confer either profit or honour. It is true that the court of Alphonso presented a brilliant spectacle to Europe, with Tasso for titular poet, and an attractive circle of accomplished ladies. But the last duke of Ferrara was an illiberal patron, feeding his servants with promises, and ever ready to treat them with the brutality that condemned the author of the _Gerusalemme liberata_ to a madhouse. Guarini spent his time and money to little purpose, suffered from the spite and ill-will of two successive secretaries,--Pigna and Montecatini,--quarrelled with his old friend Tasso, and at the end of fourteen years of service found himself half-ruined, with a large family and no prospects. When Tasso was condemned to S. Anna, the duke promoted Guarini to the vacant post of court poet. There is an interesting letter extant from the latter to his friend Cornelio Bentivoglio, describing the efforts he made to fill this place appropriately. "I strove to transform myself into another person, and, like a player, reassumed the character, costume and feelings of my youth. Advanced in manhood, I forced myself to look young; I turned my natural melancholy into artificial gaiety, affected loves I did not feel, exchanged wisdom for folly, and, in a word, passed from a philosopher into a poet." How ill-adapted he felt himself to this masquerade life may be gathered from the following sentence: "I am already in my forty-fourth year, the father of eight children, two of whom are old enough to be my censors, while my daughters are of an age to marry." Abandoning so uncongenial a strain upon his faculties, Guarini retired in 1582 to his ancestral farm, the Villa Guarina, in the lovely country that lies between the Adige and Po, where he gave himself up to the cares of his family, the nursing of his dilapidated fortunes and the composition of the _Pastor fido_. He was not happy in his domestic lot; for he had lost his wife young, and quarrelled with his elder sons about the division of his estate. Litigation seems to have been an inveterate vice with Guarini; nor was he ever free from legal troubles. After studying his biography, the conclusion is forced upon our minds that he was originally a man of robust and virile intellect, ambitious of greatness, confident in his own powers, and well qualified for serious affairs, whose energies found no proper scope for their exercise. Literary work offered but a poor sphere for such a character, while the enforced inactivity of court life soured a naturally capricious and choleric temper. Of poetry he spoke with a certain tone of condescension, professing to practise it only in his leisure moments; nor are his miscellaneous verses of a quality to secure for their author a very lasting reputation. It is therefore not a little remarkable that the fruit of his retirement--a disappointed courtier past the prime of early manhood--should have been a dramatic masterpiece worthy to be ranked with the classics of Italian literature. Deferring a further account of the _Pastor fido_ for the present, the remaining incidents of Guarini's restless life may be briefly told. In 1585 he was at Turin superintending the first public performance of his drama, whence Alphonso recalled him to Ferrara, and gave him the office of secretary of state. This reconciliation between the poet and his patron did not last long. Guarini moved to Florence, then to Rome, and back again to Florence, where he established himself as the courtier of Ferdinand de' Medici. A dishonourable marriage, pressed upon his son Guarino by the grand-duke, roused the natural resentment of Guarini, always scrupulous upon the point of honour. He abandoned the Medicean court, and took refuge with Francesco Maria of Urbino, the last scion of the Montefeltro-della-Rovere house. Yet he found no satisfaction at Urbino. "The old court is a dead institution," he writes to a friend; "one may see a shadow of it, but not the substance in Italy of to-day. Ours is an age of appearances, and one goes a-masquerading all the year." This was true enough. Those dwindling deadly-lively little residence towns of Italian ducal families, whose day of glory was over, and who were waiting to be slowly absorbed by the capacious appetite of Austria, were no fit places for a man of energy and independence. Guarini finally took refuge in his native Ferrara, which, since the death of Alphonso, had now devolved to the papal see. Here, and at the Villa Guarina, his last years were passed in study, law-suits, and polemical disputes with his contemporary critics, until 1612, when he died at Venice in his seventy-fifth year.

The _Pastor fido_ (first published in 1590) is a pastoral drama composed not without reminiscences of Tasso's _Aminta_. The scene is laid in Arcadia, where Guarini supposes it to have been the custom to sacrifice a maiden yearly to Diana. But an oracle has declared that when two scions of divine lineage are united in marriage, and a faithful shepherd has atoned for the ancient error of a faithless woman, this inhuman rite shall cease. The plot turns upon the unexpected fulfilment of this prophecy, contrary to all the schemes which had been devised for bringing it to accomplishment, and in despite of apparent improbabilities of divers kinds. It is extremely elaborate, and, regarded as a piece of cunning mechanism, leaves nothing to be desired. Each motive has been carefully prepared, each situation amply developed. Yet, considered as a play, the _Pastor fido_ disappoints a reader trained in the school of Sophocles or Shakespeare. The action itself seems to take place off the stage, and only the results of action, stationary tableaux representing the movement of the drama, are put before us in the scenes. The art is lyrical, not merely in form but in spirit, and in adaptation to the requirements of music which demands stationary expressions of emotion for development. The characters have been well considered, and are exhibited with great truth and vividness; the cold and eager hunter Silvio contrasting with the tender and romantic Mirtillo, and Corisca's meretricious arts enhancing the pure affection of Amarilli. Dorinda presents another type of love so impulsive that it prevails over a maiden's sense of shame, while the courtier Carino brings the corruption of towns into comparison with the innocence of the country. In Carino the poet painted his own experience, and here his satire upon the court of Ferrara is none the less biting because it is gravely measured. In Corisca he delineated a woman vitiated by the same town life, and a very hideous portrait has he drawn. Though a satirical element was thus introduced into the _Pastor fido_ in order to relieve its ideal picture of Arcadia, the whole play is but a study of contemporary feeling in Italian society. There is no true rusticity whatever in the drama. This correspondence with the spirit of the age secured its success during Guarini's lifetime; this made it so dangerously seductive that Cardinal Bellarmine told the poet he had done more harm to Christendom by his blandishments than Luther by his heresy. Without anywhere transgressing the limits of decorum, the _Pastor fido_ is steeped in sensuousness; and the immodesty of its pictures is enhanced by rhetorical concealments more provocative than nudity. Moreover, the love described is effeminate and wanton, felt less as passion than as lust enveloped in a veil of sentiment. We divine the coming age of _cicisbei_ and _castrati_. Of Guarini's style it would be difficult to speak in terms of too high praise. The thought and experience of a lifetime have been condensed in these five acts, and have found expression in language brilliant, classical, chiselled to perfection. Here and there the taste of the 17th century makes itself felt in frigid conceits and forced antitheses; nor does Guarini abstain from sententious maxims which reveal the moralist rather than the poet. Yet these are but minor blemishes in a masterpiece of diction, glittering and faultless like a polished bas-relief of hard Corinthian bronze. That a single pastoral should occupy so prominent a place in the history of literature seems astonishing, until we reflect that Italy, upon the close of the 16th century, expressed itself in the _Pastor fido_, and that the influence of this drama was felt through all the art of Europe till the epoch of the Revolution. It is not a mere play. The sensual refinement proper to an age of social decadence found in it the most exact embodiment, and made it the code of gallantry for the next two centuries.