Chapter I: Front Matter (1)

Personal Sketches of His Own Times, Vol. II.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERSONAL SKETCHES

OF

HIS OWN TIMES,

BY

SIR JONAH BARRINGTON,

JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY IN IRELAND,
&c. &c. &c.

IN THREE VOLUMES.

VOL. II.

SECOND EDITION,
REVISED AND IMPROVED.

LONDON:
HENRY COLBURN AND RICHARD BENTLEY,
NEW BURLINGTON STREET.

1830.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRINTED BY A. J. VALPY, RED LION COURT, FLEET STREET.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

TO

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

LORD STOWELL.

MY DEAR LORD,

The general approbation of a literary work must be highly gratifying to any Author. But the cordial approval of an eminent individual, whose grave, sound judgment, and profound erudition, give authenticity to his opinions, affords a gratification of an higher order.

Such was my feeling on your Lordship’s suggestion to me of a _third_ volume of those Sketches, “composed of _similar materials_.” To have amused you gives me pleasure—to have informed you excites my vanity. My gratitude for your kindness (when in office) has met no alloy by retirement from a station where your repute will find no rivals. Your _suggestion_ is in progress.

Time and declining health impair the vigour of men’s intellect,—in that point I must bow to Providence. But such as my coming volume may be, if it does not arrive at my own wishes, I hope it will not stop very short of your Lordship’s expectation.

I am, my Dear Lord,
With true regard and respect,
Your Lordship’s sincere Servant, &c.
JONAH BARRINGTON.

10th July, 1828.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONTENTS

OF

THE SECOND VOLUME.

THE FIRE-EATERS.

Passion for duelling in Ireland—Ancient duel before the judges and law authorities, &c. &c. at the Castle of Dublin—List of official and judicial duellists in author’s time—Family weapons described—The Fire-eaters’ Society—Their chiefs—Elegant institution of the Knights of Tara—Description of them—Their exhibitions and meetings—The rules of duelling and points of honour established by the fire-eaters, called the Thirty-six Commandments—Singular duel between the author and Mr. Richard Daley, a remarkable duellist and fop—Daley hit—Author’s second the celebrated Balloon Crosby—His singular appearance and character p. 1

DUELLING EXTRAORDINARY.

Frequency of election duels—Ludicrous affair between Frank Skelton and an exciseman—Frank shoots the exciseman and runs away—His curious reasons—Sir J. Rourke’s quadrille duel, with five hits—Mr. H. D. G * * * y’s remarkable meeting with Counsellor O’Maher—O’Maher hit—Civil proposition of G * * * y’s second—G * * * y’s gallant letter to the author on his election for Maryborough—Honourable Barry Yelverton challenged by nine officers at once—His elucidation of the Fire-eaters’ Resolutions—Lord Kilkenny’s memorable duels and law-suits—His lordship is shot by Mr. Ball, an attorney—The heir to his title (the Hon. Somerset Butler) challenges Counsellor Burrowes—The latter hit, but his life saved by some gingerbread nuts—Lord Kilkenny’s duel with Counsellor Byrne—The counsellor wounded—Counsellor Guinness escapes a rencontre—Sketch of Counsellor M‘Nally—His duel with the author—His three friends: all afterward hanged—M‘Nally wounded—Bon-mot of Mr. Harding—The affair highly beneficial to M‘Nally—His character, marriage, and death—Ancient mode of fighting duels—The lists described—Duel of Colonel Barrington with Squire Gilbert on horseback—Both wounded—Gilbert’s horse killed—Chivalrous conclusion 30

GEORGE HARTPOLE.

Curious fatality in the Hartpole family—Characteristic sketch of the last of the name—Description of Shrewl Castle—The chapel and cemetery—Strictures on Epitaph writing—Eccentricities of the Earl of Aldborough—His lordship proposes his sister, Lady Hannah Stratford, as _returning officer_ for the borough of Baltinglass—Consequent disturbances—The North-Briton put on his mettle, but out-manœuvred—“Lending to _the Lord_”—Successful conspiracy to marry Hartpole to the daughter of a village inn-keeper—He is stabbed by his wife, and deserts her in consequence—He forms an attachment to Miss Maria Otway, whom he marries, under the plea of his previous connexion being illegal—Unfortunate nature of this union—Separation of the parties—Hartpole’s voyage to Portugal, his return and death—Sundry other anecdotes of the Stratford family 59

HAMILTON ROWAN AND THE BAR.

Sketch of the character of Mr. Hamilton Rowan—His Quixotic spirit of philanthropy—Case of Mary Neil, taken up by Mr. Rowan—Dinner-club among the briefless barristers of Dublin—Apparition of Mr. Hamilton Rowan and his dog—More frightened than hurt—An unanswerable query—Mr. Rowan’s subsequent adventures—The Rev. Mr. Jackson—He is brought up to receive sentence for high treason, and expires in court 110

SELF-DECAPITATION.

An Irish peasant cutting his own head off _by mistake_—His reputed ghost—Humours of an Irish _wake_—_Natural_ deaths of the Irish peasantry—Reflections on the excise laws 121

FATHER O’LEARY.

Humorous story of Father O’Leary and a bear—Mistaken notions respecting Ireland on the Continent—Lord Ventry and his tenant: an anecdote characteristic of the Irish peasant 131

DEATH OF LORD ROSSMORE.

Strictures on Dr. Johnson—His biographer, Boswell—False definitions and erroneous ethics—Superstition—Supernatural appearances—Theological argument of the author in favour of his peculiar faith—Original poetry by Miss T * * *—The author purchases Lady Mayo’s demesne, County Wicklow—Terrific and cultivated scenery contrasted—Description of the Golden Belt of Ireland and the beauties of the above-mentioned county—Lord Rossmore—His character—Supernatural incident of a most extraordinary nature, vouched by living witnesses, and attendant on the sudden death of his lordship 138

MEMORANDA CRITICA.

Remarks on Lady Morgan’s novel of “The Wild Irish Girl,” &c.—Prince O’Sullivan at Killarney—Miss Edgeworth’s “Castle Rackrent”—Memoir of Jonathan Clerk—“Florence Macarthy”—Comparison between Lady Morgan and Thomas Moore as writers—The author’s knowledge of both—“Captain Rock” condemned—The “Irish Melodies” by Moore—The harmonising of them by Sir John Stevenson injurious to the national music—Anecdote of Mr. Thomas Moore and Mrs. K * * * y 156

MEMORANDA POETICA.

Poets and poetasters—Major Roche’s extraordinary poem on the battle of Waterloo—“Tears of the British Muse”—French climax of love—A man’s age discovered by his poetry—Evils of a motto—Amorous feelings of youth—Love verses of a boy; of a young man—“Loves of the Angels”—Dinner verses of an Oxonian—“The Highlander,” a poem—Extracts from the poetical manuscripts of Miss Tylden, &c. 168

THEATRICAL RECOLLECTIONS.

The author’s early visits to Crow-street Theatre—Interruptions of the University _men_—College pranks—Old Mr. Sheridan in “Cato” and in “Alexander the Great”—Curious _scene_ introduced, by mistake, in the latter tragedy—Mr. Digges in the Ghost of Hamlet’s father—Chorus of cocks—The author’s preference of comedy to tragedy—Remarks on Mr. Kean and the London moralists—Liston in “Paul Pry”—Old Sparkes—The Spanish _débutante_—Irish Johnstone—Modern comedy—The French stage 195

MRS. JORDAN.

Public mis-statements respecting that lady—The author’s long acquaintance with her—_Début_ of Mrs. Jordan, at the Dublin Theatre, as Miss Francis—Her incipient talents at that period—Favourite actresses then in possession of the stage—Theatrical jealousy—Mrs. Daly (formerly Miss Barsanti)—Curious inversion of characters in the opera of “The Governess,” resorted to by the manager to _raise the wind_—Lieut. Doyne proposes for Miss Francis—His suit rejected from prudential considerations—Miss Francis departs for England—Mr. Owenson, Lady Morgan’s father—Comparison between that performer and Mr. John (commonly called _Irish_) Johnstone—Introduction of the author to his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence—Reflections on the scurrilous personalities of the English press—Mrs. Jordan in the green-room, and on the stage—Her remarks on the theatrical art, and on her own style of acting—Her last visit to Dublin, and curious circumstances connected therewith—Mr. Dwyer the actor and Mr. Sergeant Gold—Mrs. Jordan in private society—Extracts from her letters—Her retirement from Bushy and subsequent embarkation for France 211

MRS. JORDAN IN FRANCE.

Decline of Mrs. Jordan’s health—Description of her cottage and grounds at Boulogne-sur-Mer—Madame Ducamp and her servant Agnes—Their account of Mrs. Jordan’s habits and manners—Removal of that lady to Versailles and subsequently to St. Cloud—Account of her illness and last moments 238

MEMORY.

Diversity of the author’s pursuits—Superficial acquirements contrasted with solid—Variety and change of study conducive to health—Breeding ideas—How to avoid _ennui_—The principles of memory and fear—The author’s theory respecting the former, and his motive for its introduction 250

POLITICAL CONDUCT OF THE AUTHOR.

Letter from the author to Mr. Burne, relating to the political conduct of the former at the period of the Union—Extracts from letters written to the author by Lord Westmoreland—General reflections on the political condition of Ireland at the present time—Hint toward the revival of a curious old statute—Clerical justices—The king in Ireland—The Corporation of Dublin—The “Glorious Memory”—Catholics and Protestants—Mischievous virulence of party feeling 258

SCENES AT HAVRE DE GRACE.

Peace of 1814—The Bourbons and _émigrés_ generally—Motives of the author in visiting the continent—His departure from England with his family—Arrival at Havre de Grace—The _Côteau d’Ingouville_—Doctor Sorerie and his _graduated scale_—The Pavillon Poulet—Price of commodities at Havre—Rate of exchange—English assumption abroad—The author’s rural retirement disturbed by Napoleon’s return from Elba—Circumstances attending the announcement of this fact at Havre—Previous demonstrations of the inhabitants of the town, and more particularly of the military quartered there—Uniform of the old guard—Two Russians mutilated by the mob—Retirement of Louis _le Désiré_ from Paris—Curious variety of feeling manifested among the people at Havre—Policy of the priests—Good humour of all parties—Recruiting for the _Emperor_ and the _King_—Consternation of the English at Havre—Meeting at the house of the consul, Mr. Stuart—A vinous harangue—Prompt embarkation of the British—Accommodations of a storehouse—The huissiers and the spring showers—_Signs_ of the times 273

COMMENCEMENT OF THE HUNDRED DAYS.

A family council—Journey from Havre to Paris—Attention of the French officers to the author and his party—Peaceable condition of the intervening country—Thoughts on revolutions in general—Ireland in 1798—Arrival in the French capital—Admirable state of the police—Henry Thevenot—Misgivings of the author—His interview with Count Bertrand—Polite conduct of the Count—The Emperor’s chapel—Napoleon at mass—His deportment—Treasonable garments—Col. Gowen—Military inspection after mass—Alteration in the manner of the Emperor—Enthusiasm of the soldiers 295

THE ENGLISH IN PARIS.

Doctor and Mrs. Marshall—Col. Macirone, aide-de-camp to Joachim Murat, while king of Naples—General Arthur O’Connor—Lord and Lady Kinnaird—His lordship under the _surveillance_ of the police—Suspected of _espionage_, and arrested, but set at liberty immediately after—Messrs. Hobhouse and Bruce—Dr. Marshall’s correct information as to passing events—Real character of the _coterie_ at his house—_Madame la parente du ministre Fouché_—Misconception of the minister’s Swiss porter—Henry Thevenot 310

INAUGURATION OF THE EMPEROR.

The peers and deputies summoned for the 8th of June—Abduction of the regalia by the royalists—Author obtains a ticket of admission to the gallery of the Chamber of Deputies, to witness the ceremony—Grenadiers of the old guard—Enthusiasm of the military, and comparative quiescence of the other ranks—Entrance of Napoleon into the Chamber—Sketch of his appearance and that of _Madame Mère_—Administration of the oath of allegiance—The Duke of Otranto and Count Thibaudeau—The imperial speech and its ineffective delivery 322

PROMULGATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

Apathy of the people—Temporary building in front of the _Ecole Militaire_—Pont de Jena—Policy of Napoleon regarding Fouché—Procession to the Champ de Mars—Peculiar accoutrements of a regiment of cavalry—Reflections on some points in the history of Napoleon—His mistake in changing the republican into a monarchical government—Coaches of ceremony of the French noblesse and officers of state—The Emperor’s liberality to various members of his court—His personal dejection on this day—Rejoicings succeeding the promulgation—Superiority of the French in matters of _embellishment_—Gratuitous distribution of provisions and wine—Politeness of the lower orders of French—Display of fireworks—Mr. Hobhouse’s “Second Reign of Napoleon” 345

LAST DAYS OF THE IMPERIAL GOVERNMENT.

Rejoicings on Napoleon’s victory over Blucher and surprise of Lord Wellington—Bulletin issued at St. Cloud—Budget of news communicated by a French cockney—Author’s alarm on account of his family—Proposes quitting Paris—Information of Henry Thevenot: confirmed at Lafitte’s—Napoleon’s return from Waterloo—The author’s sources of intelligence—His visits to the Chamber of Deputies—Garat, minister of justice at the period of Louis’s decapitation—The _Rousseau Mss._ and their peculiar utility to the author—Fouché’s treachery—Vacillating plan to inform Napoleon thereof, through Count Thibaudeau—Observations on the vicissitudes and political extinction of Bonaparte 360

DETENTION AT VILETTE.

Negotiation between the provisional government of Paris and the allies—Col. Macirone’s mission—The author crosses the barrier of the French army, misses the colonel, and is detained on suspicion—Led before Marshal Davoust, Prince d’Eckmuhl and commander-in-chief of the forces at Vilette—The marshal’s haughty demeanour, and the imprecations of the soldiery—A friend in need; or, one good turn deserves another—Remarks of a French officer on the battle of Waterloo—Account of the physical and moral strength and disposition of the army at Vilette—Return of the _parlementaires_—Awkward mistake of one of the sentries—Liberation of the author—Marshal Davoust’s expressions to the negotiators 376

PROJECTED ESCAPE OF NAPOLEON.

Attack on the bridge of Charenton by the Russians—Fouché’s arrangements for the _defence_ of Paris—Bonaparte’s retirement to Malmaison—His want of moral courage—Comparison between Napoleon and Frederick the Great—Extraordinary resolution of the Ex-Emperor to repair to London—Preparations for his undertaking the journey as secretary to Dr. Marshall—The scheme abandoned from dread of treachery on the road to the coast—Termination of the author’s intercourse with Dr. Marshall, and the cause thereof—Remuneration of Col. Macirone by the arch-traitor Fouché 387

BATTLE OF SEVRES AND ISSY.

Afternoon ramble on the Boulevard Italien—Interrupted by the report of artillery—_Sang froid_ of the fair sex—Female soldiers—The author repairs to a point commanding the field of battle—Site of the projected palace of the King of Rome—Rapidity of the movements of the French as contrasted with those of the Prussians—Blowing up of the bridge of St. Cloud—Visit of the author to the encampment in the Champ de Mars—The wounded soldier 398

CAPITULATION OF PARIS.

Retirement of the army of Vilette behind the Loire—Occupation of the French capital by the allies—Thoughts on the disposition of the Bourbon government towards Great Britain—Conduct of the allies after their possession of Paris—Infringements of the treaty—Removal of the works of art from the Louvre—Reflections on the injurious result of that measure to the British student—_Liberal_ motive operating on the English administration of that period—Little interludes got up between the French King and the allies—Louis the Eighteenth’s magnanimous letters—Threatened destruction of the _Pont de Jena_ by Marshal Blucher—Heroic resolution of His Most Christian Majesty to perish in the explosion 413

THE CATACOMBS AND PERE LA CHAISE.

The Catacombs of Paris—Ineffective nature of the written description of these as compared with the reality—Author’s descent into them—His speedy return—Contrast presented by the cemetery of Père la Chaise—Tomb of Abelard and Heloise—An English capitalist’s notions of sentiment 423

PEDIGREE-HUNTING.

The author’s efforts to discover the source of his name and family—The Irish herald-at-arms—Reference made by him to the English professor—Heraldic speculation—Ascent of the author’s pedigree to the reign of William the Conqueror—Consultation with the Norman herald suggested—Author’s visit to Rouen—Anecdotes of French convents—Madame Cousin and her _system_—Traits of toleration—M. Helliot, the celebrated _ancien avocat_ of Rouen—Practice of _legal bigamy_ in Normandy—A breakfast party—Death of M. Helliot—Interview with an old herald, formerly of the noblesse—His person and costume described—Discovery of the town and castle of _Barentin_—Occurrences there—The old beggar-man—Visit to Jersey, where Drogo de Barentin was killed in defending the castle of Mont Orgueil—Return to Barentin, and singular incident at Ivetot—Conclusion 429

------------------------------------------------------------------------

PERSONAL SKETCHES.

THE FIRE-EATERS.

Passion for duelling in Ireland—Ancient duel before the judges and law
authorities, &c. &c. at the Castle of Dublin—List of official and
judicial duellists in author’s time—Family weapons described—The
Fire-eaters’ Society—Their chiefs—Elegant institution of the Knights
of Tara—Description of them—Their exhibitions and meetings—The rules
of duelling and points of honour established by the fire-eaters,
called the Thirty-six Commandments—Singular duel between the author
and Mr. Richard Daley, a remarkable duellist and fop—Daley
hit—Author’s second the celebrated Balloon Crosby—His singular
appearance and character.

It may be objected that anecdotes of duelling have more than their due proportion of space in these sketches, and that no writer should publish feats of that nature (if feats they can be called), especially when performed by persons holding grave offices, or by public functionaries. These are very plausible, rational observations, and are now anticipated for the purpose of being answered.

It might be considered a sufficient excuse, that these anecdotes refer to events long past; that they are amusing, and the more so as being matters of _fact_, (neither romance nor exaggeration,) and so various that no two of them are at all similar. But a better reason can be given;—namely, that there is no other species of detail or anecdote which so clearly illustrates the character, genius, and manners of a country, as that which exemplifies the distinguishing propensities of its population for successive ages. Much knowledge of a people will necessarily be gained by possessing such a series of anecdotes, and by then going on to trace the decline of such propensities to the progress of civilization in that class of society where they had been prevalent.

As to the objection founded on the rank or profession of the parties concerned, it is only necessary to subjoin the following _short_ abstract from a long list of official duellists who have figured away in my time, and some of them before my eyes.—The number of grave personages who appear to have adopted the national taste, (though in most instances it was undoubtedly before their elevation to the bench that they signalised themselves in single combat,) removes from me all imputation of pitching upon and exposing an unusual frailty; and I think I may challenge any country in Europe to show such an assemblage of gallant _judicial_ and _official_ antagonists at fire and sword as is exhibited even in the following list.[1]

-----

Footnote 1:

Single combat was formerly a very prevalent and favourite mode of
_administering justice_ in Ireland; the _letter_ of that law existed
in England; and, not being considered so brutal as bullfights, or
other beastly amusements of that nature, it was legally authorised,
and frequently performed before the high authorities and their ladies,
in the castle-yard of Dublin;—_bishops_, _judges_, and other persons
of high office, generally honouring the spectacle with their presence.

The last exhibition of that nature I have read of was between two
Irish gentlemen, Connor Mac Cormac O’Connor, and Teige Mac Kilpatrick
O’Connor. They fought with broadswords and skeens (large knives), in
the castle of Dublin, in the presence of the archbishop and all the
chief authorities and ladies of rank. They had hewed each other for a
full hour, when Mr. Mac Kilpatrick O’Connor happening to miss his
footing, Mr. Mac Cormac O’Connor began to cut his head off very
expertly with his knife; which, after a good deal of cutting,
struggling, and hacking, he was at length so fortunate as to effect;
and, having got the head clear off the shoulders, he handed it to the
lords justices (who were present), and by whom the head and neck was
most graciously received.

-----

Earl Clare, Lord Chancellor of Ireland, fought the Master of the
Rolls, the Right Honourable John Philpot Curran, with
twelve-inch pistols.

The Earl of Clonmell, Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, fought
Lord Tyrawly, about his wife, and the Earl Landaff, about his
sister; and others, with sword or pistol, on miscellaneous
subjects.

The Judge of the County of Dublin, Egan, fought the Master of
the Rolls, Roger Barrett,[2] and _three_ others; one with
swords.

-----

Footnote 2:

On the duel between Judge Egan and Counsellor Roger Barret a
curious incident occurred, of hackneyed celebrity, but very
illustrative of that volatile eccentricity with which the
gravest events were frequently accompanied in that country.

On the combatants taking their ground (secundum
consuetudinem), Roger (who was the _challenger_) immediately
fired without much aim, and missing his antagonist, coolly
said, “Egan, now my honour is satisfied,” and began to walk
away with great stateliness and composure.

The judge, however, (who had not fired,) cried aloud, “Hulloa,
Roger—hulloa!—stop—stop, Roger; come back here; stay till I
take a _shot_ at your _honour_!”

Roger obeyed; and with the same composure cried out, “Very
well, fire away, Jack.”

Egan presented, and seemed by his motions determined to finish
Roger:—at length he cried out, “Pho! pho! I won’t humour you,
by G—d! I wouldn’t be _bothered_ shooting you, Roger!—so now
you may go to the devil your own road; or _shake hands_,
whichever you like best.”

The finale may be anticipated. This circumstance is truly
Irish; it took place on the site of Donnybrook fair, and some
hundreds of _amateurs_ were present.

-----

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Right Honourable Isaac
Corry, fought the Right Honourable Henry Grattan, a privy
counsellor, and the chancellor was hit. He also exchanged shots
or thrusts with _two_ other gentlemen.

A baron of the exchequer, Baron Medge, fought his brother-in-law
and _two_ others—a hit.

The Chief Justice, C. P., Lord Norbury, fought Fire-eater
Fitzgerald, and _two_ other gentlemen, muzzle to muzzle, and
frightened Napper Tandy and several besides: one hit
only.—Napper was near being hanged for _running away_!

The Judge of the Prerogative Court, Doctor Duigenan, fought
_one_ barrister and frightened _another_ on the ground.—The
latter case a very curious one.

The First Counsel to the Revenue, Henry Deane Grady, Esq., K.
C., fought Counsellor O’Maher, Counsellor Campbell, and
others:—very stout work.

The Right Honourable the Master of the Rolls fought Lord
Buckinghamshire, (Chief Secretary, &c.) because he would not
dismiss an official person.

The Provost of the University of Dublin, the Right Honourable
Hely Hutchinson, fought Mr. Doyle, master in Chancery: they went
to the plains of Minden to fight!

N.B. The spirit of the Hutchinson family was proverbial, and
their good nature was no less so.

The Chief Justice C. P. Patterson fought _three_ country
gentlemen, one of them with swords, another with guns, and
wounded _all_ of them.

The Right Honourable George Ogle, the Orange chieftain, a privy
counsellor, fought Barny Coyle, a whiskey distiller, because he
was a _papist_.—They fired eight shots without stop or stay, and
no hit occurred: but Mr. Ogle’s second broke his own arm by
tumbling into a potatoe-trench.

Sir Harding Gifford, late Chief Justice of Ceylon, fought the
rebel General Bagenal Harvey at a place called the Scalp, near
Dublin. The Chief Justice received a severe, but very _odd_
wound.—He eventually, however, suffered no important injury.

Counsellor Dan O’Connell fought the Orange chieftain, who had
been _halloo’d_ at him by the corporation. The champion of
Protestant ascendancy never rose to fight again.

The Collector of the Customs of Dublin, the Honourable Francis
Hutchinson, fought the Right Honourable Lord Mountnorris:—a hit.
_Cum multis aliis quæ nunc enumerare longum est._

The reader of this dignified list (which, as I have said, is only a _very_ short abridgment[3]) will surely see no great indecorum in an Admiralty Judge having now and then, when required so to do, exchanged _broadsides_, more especially as they did not militate against the law of nations, and no _ghost_ was the consequence.

-----

Footnote 3:

Two hundred and twenty-seven memorable duels have actually been fought
during my grand climacteric.

-----

However, it must be owned that there were occasionally _peaceable_ and _forgiving_ instances among the barristers.—A brave, thrice-proven, but certainly capricious individual, Mr. Curran, was whipped by a very _savage_ nobleman, Lord Clanmorris; and another eminent barrister was _said_ to have had his eye saluted by a messenger from a gentleman’s lips in the body of the House of Commons.—Yet both those little _incivilities_ were arranged very amicably, and without the aid of any deadly weapon whatsoever, I suppose for _variety’s_ sake. But the people of Dublin used to observe, that a _judgment_ came upon Counsellor O’Callaghan, for having kept his friend, Mr. Curran, _quiet_ in the horse-whipping affair, inasmuch as his own brains were literally scattered about the ground by a Galway attorney very soon after he had turned pacificator.

To speak after the manner of a _Bulletin_:—“In my time, the number of killed and wounded among the bar was very considerable.—The other learned professions suffered much less.”

It is nearly incredible what a singular passion the Irish gentlemen (though in general excellent-tempered fellows) formerly had for fighting each other and immediately becoming friends again. A duel was indeed considered a necessary piece of a young man’s _education_, but by no means a ground for any future animosity with his opponent:—on the contrary, proving the bravery of both, it only cemented their friendship.

One of the most humane men existing, an intimate friend of mine, and a prominent and benevolent public character, but who (as the expression then was) had frequently played both “hilt to hilt” and “muzzle to muzzle,” in desperate rencontres, was heard endeavouring to keep a little son of his quiet who was crying for something:—“Come, now, do be a good boy! Come, now,” said my friend, “don’t cry, and I’ll give you a case of nice little _pistols_ to-morrow. Come, now, don’t cry, and we’ll shoot them all in the morning.”—“Oh, yes! yes! papa! we’ll _shoot them all_ in the morning!” responded the child, drying his little eyes and delighted at the notion.

I have heard Sir Charles Ormsby, who affected to be a wit, though at best but a humourist and _gourmand_, liken the story of my friend and his son to a butcher at Nenagh, who in a similar manner wanted to keep _his_ son from crying, and effectually stopped his tears by saying,—“Come, now, be a good boy! don’t cry, and you shall _kill a lamb_ to-morrow! now, won’t you be good?”—“Oh yes, yes,” said the child, sobbing; “Father, is the _lamb ready_?”

Within my recollection, this national relish for fighting was nearly universal,—originating (I think) in the spirit and habits of former times. When men had a glowing ambition to excel in all manner of feats and exercises, as their forefathers had done, they naturally conceived that single combat in an _honest_ way (that is, not knowing _which_ would be perforated) was the most chivalrous and gentlemanly of all possible accomplishments; and this idea gave rise to an assiduous cultivation of personal tactics, and dictated _laws_ for carrying them into execution with regularity, honour, and dispatch, among the nobility and gentry of that punctilious nation.

About the year 1777, _Fire-eating_ was in great repute in Ireland. No young fellow could _finish his education_ till he had exchanged shots with some of his friends or acquaintances. The first questions asked as to a young man’s respectability and qualifications (particularly when he proposed for a lady-wife) were, “What family is he of?”—“Did he ever _blaze_?”—His _fortune_ was then the last inquiry; because the reply was seldom satisfactory.

Tipperary and Galway were the ablest schools of the duelling science. Galway was most scientific at the sword: Tipperary most practical and prized at the pistol: Mayo not amiss at either: Roscommon and Sligo had many professors and a high reputation in the leaden branch of the pastime.

When I was at the university, Jemmy Keogh, _Buck English_,[4] Cosey Harrison, Crowe Ryan, Reddy Long, Amby Bodkin, Squire Fulton, Squire Blake, Amby Fitzgerald, Terry Magrath, and some others, were supposed to understand the _points of honour_ better than any men in Ireland, and were constantly referred to.—Terry Magrath especially was counted a very good opinion.

-----

Footnote 4:

The celebrated Buck English was expelled for killing by foul play, and
had like to be hanged. The “Fire-eaters” _outlawed_ him.—Foul play was
never known to occur in that society—save in this instance. English
was saved, on his trial, by _one_ juror holding out against his
_eleven_ brethren:—however, as they could not agree, Baron Hamilton
ordered them all to be packed in turf kishes, conveyed on cars to the
boundary of the county, twenty-seven miles off, and there discharged
on foot. At the ensuing assizes all the witnesses against English were
duly disposed of—none appeared—and he was acquitted of course.

-----

In the North, the Fallons and the Fentons were the first hands at it; and most counties could then boast their regular _point-of-honour_ men. The late chief justice of the common pleas was supposed to understand _the thing_ as well as any gentleman in Ireland, and was frequently referred to by the high circles.

In truth, these oracles were in general gentlemen of good connexions[5] and most respectable families, otherwise nobody would either fight or consult them.

-----

Footnote 5:

There was an association in the year 1782, (a volunteer corps) which
was called the “Independent Light Horse.” They were not confined to
one district, and none could be admitted but the younger brothers of
the most respectable families. They were all both “hilt and muzzle
adepts;”—and, that no member might set himself up as greater than
another, every individual of the corps was obliged, on entering, to
give his honour “that he could cover his fortune with the crown of his
hat, and had exchanged a shot or thrust before he was ballotted for.”

Roscommon and Sligo then furnished some of the finest young fellows
(fire-eaters) I ever saw: their spirit and decorum were equally
admirable, and their honour and liberality conspicuous on all
occasions.

-----

Every family had then a case of hereditary pistols, which descended as an heir-loom, together with a long silver-hilted sword, for the use of their posterity. Our family pistols, denominated _pelters_, were brass (I believe my second brother has them still): the barrels were very long and _point-blankers_. They were included in the armoury of our ancient castle of Ballynakill in the reign of Elizabeth, (the stocks, locks, and hair-triggers were, however, modern,) and had descended from father to son from that period: one of them was named “_sweet lips_,” the other “_the darling_.” The family rapier was called “_skiver the pullet_” by my grand-uncle, Captain Wheeler Barrington, who had fought with it repeatedly and run through different parts of their persons several Scots officers, who had challenged him all at once for some national reflection. It was a very long, narrow-bladed, straight cut-and-thrust, as sharp as a razor, with a silver hilt, and a guard of buff leather inside it. I kept this rapier as a curiosity for some time; but it was stolen during my absence at Temple.

I knew Jemmy Keogh extremely well, when he was pretty old. He was considered in the main a _peace-maker_, for he did not like any body to fight but himself; and it was universally admitted that he never killed any man who did not well deserve it. He was a plausible, although black-looking fellow, with remarkably thick, long, curled eyebrows closing with a tuft over his nose. He spoke deliberately, reasoned well, and never showed passion. When determined to fight, his brows knit, his eyes fixed, and (as an antagonist) he cut a very unprepossessing figure. I never heard that he was wounded. When he tried to _restrain_ his anger, he set his teeth, kept his tongue a close prisoner, and appeared like one with a locked jaw. No man was more universally known in Ireland. He unfortunately shot a _cripple_ in the Phœnix Park, which, though fair enough, did him great mischief. He was land-agent to Bourke of Glinsk, to whom he always officiated as second.

At length, so many quarrels arose without sufficiently _dignified_ provocation, and so many things were considered as quarrels _of course_, which were not quarrels at all,—that the principal fire-eaters of the South clearly saw disrepute was likely to be thrown both on the science and its professors, and thought it full time to interfere and arrange matters upon a proper, steady, rational, and moderate footing; and to regulate the time, place, and other circumstances of duelling, so as to govern all Ireland on one principle—thus establishing a uniform, national code of the _lex pugnandi_; proving, as Hugo Grotius did, that it was for the benefit of all belligerents to adopt the same regulations.

In furtherance of this object, a _branch society_ had been formed in Dublin termed the “Knights of Tara,” which met once a month at the theatre, Capel-street, gave premiums for fencing, and proceeded in the most laudably systematic manner. The amount of admission-money was laid out on silver cups, and given to the best fencers, as prizes, at quarterly exhibitions of pupils and amateurs.

Fencing with the small-sword is certainly a most beautiful and noble exercise: its practice confers a fine, bold, manly carriage, a dignified mien, a firm step, and graceful motion. But, alas! its professors are now supplanted by contemptible groups of smirking quadrillers with unweaponed belts, stuffed breasts, and strangled loins!—a set of squeaking dandies, whose sex may be readily mistaken, or, I should rather say, is of _no_ consequence.

The theatre of the Knights of Tara, on these occasions, was always overflowing:—the combatants were dressed in close cambric jackets, garnished with ribbons, each wearing the favourite colour of his fair one: bunches of ribbons also dangled at their knees, and roses adorned their morocco slippers, which had buff soles, to prevent noise in their lunges. No masks or visors were used as in these more timorous times; on the contrary, every feature was uncovered, and its inflections all visible. The ladies appeared in full morning dresses, each handing his foil to her champion for the day, and their presence animating the singular exhibition. The prizes were handed to the conquerors by the fair ones from the stage-boxes, accompanied each with a wreath of laurel, and a smile then more valued than a hundred victories! The tips of the foils were blackened, and therefore instantly betrayed the hits on the cambric jacket, and proclaimed without doubt the successful combatant. All was decorum, gallantry, spirit, and good temper.

The Knights of Tara also had a select committee to decide on all actual questions of honour referred to them:—to reconcile differences, if possible; if not, to adjust the terms and continuance of single combat. Doubtful points were solved generally on the peaceable side, provided women were not insulted or defamed; but when that was the case, the knights were obdurate, and blood must be seen. They were constituted by ballot, something in the manner of the Jockey Club; but without the possibility of being dishonourable, or the opportunity of cheating each other.

This most agreeable and useful association did not last above two or three years. I cannot tell why it broke up: I rather think, however, the original fire-eaters thought it frivolous, or did not like their own ascendancy to be rivalled. It was said that they threatened direct hostilities against the knights; and I am the more disposed to believe this, because, soon after, a comprehensive code of the laws and points of honour was issued from the Southern fire-eaters, with directions that it should be strictly observed by all gentlemen throughout the kingdom, and kept in their pistol-cases, that ignorance might never be pleaded. This code was not circulated in print, but very numerous written copies were sent to the different county clubs, &c. My father got one for his sons; and I transcribed most of it on some blank leaves. These rules brought the whole business of duelling into a focus, and have been much acted upon down to the present day. They called them in Galway “the _thirty-six_ commandments.”

As far as my copy went, they appear to have run as follows:—

The practice of duelling and points of honour settled at Clonmell
summer assizes, 1775, by the gentlemen delegates of Tipperary,
Galway, Mayo, Sligo, and Roscommon, and prescribed for general
adoption throughout Ireland.

RULE 1.

The first offence requires the first apology, though the retort may
have been more offensive than the insult: example;—A tells B he is
impertinent, &c. B retorts, that he lies: yet A must make the first
apology, because he gave the first offence, and then (after one
fire) B may explain away the retort by subsequent apology.

RULE 2.

But if the parties would rather fight on, then, after two shots
each, (but in no case before,) B may explain first, and A apologise
afterwards.

N.B. The above rules apply to all cases of offences in retort not of
a stronger class than the example.

RULE 3.

If a doubt exist who gave the first offence, the decision rests with
the seconds: if they _won’t_ decide or _can’t_ agree, the matter
must proceed to two shots, or to a hit, if the challenger require
it.

RULE 4.

When the _lie direct_ is the _first_ offence, the aggressor must
either beg pardon in express terms; exchange two shots previous to
apology; or three shots followed up by explanation; or fire on till
a severe hit be received by one party or the other.

RULE 5.

As a blow is strictly prohibited under any circumstances amongst
gentlemen, no verbal apology can be received for such an insult: the
alternatives therefore are—first, the offender handing a cane to the
injured party, to be used on his own person, at the same time
begging pardon;—second, firing on until one or both are disabled; or
thirdly, exchanging three shots, and then asking pardon, _without_
the proffer of the _cane_.

If swords are used, the parties engage till one is well blooded,
disabled, or disarmed; or until, after receiving a wound, and blood
being drawn, the aggressor begs pardon.

N.B. A _disarm_ is considered the same as a _disable_: the disarmer
may (strictly) break his adversary’s sword; but if it be the
challenger who is disarmed, it is considered as ungenerous to do so.

In case the challenged be disarmed, and refuses to ask pardon or
atone, he must not be _killed_, as formerly; but the challenger may
lay his own sword on the aggressor’s shoulder, then break the
aggressor’s sword, and say, “I spare your life!” The challenged can
never revive that quarrel—the challenger may.

RULE 6.

If A gives B the lie, and B retorts by a blow (being the two
greatest offences), no reconciliation _can_ take place till after
two discharges each, or a severe hit;—_after_ which, B may beg A’s
pardon humbly for the blow, and then A may explain simply for the
lie;—because a blow is _never_ allowable, and the offence of the lie
therefore merges in it. (See preceding rule.)

N.B. Challenges for undivulged causes may be reconciled on the
ground, after one shot. An explanation or the slightest hit should
be sufficient in such cases, because no personal offence transpired.

RULE 7.

But no apology can be received, in any case, after the parties have
actually taken their ground, without exchange of fires.

RULE 8.

In the above case, no challenger is obliged to divulge his cause of
challenge (if private), unless required by the challenged so to do
_before_ their meeting.

RULE 9.

All imputations of cheating at play, races, &c. to be considered
equivalent to a blow; but may be reconciled after one shot, on
admitting their falsehood, and begging pardon publicly.

RULE 10.

Any insult to a lady under a gentleman’s care or protection, to be
considered as, by one degree, a greater offence than if given to the
gentleman personally, and to be regulated accordingly.

RULE 11.

Offences originating or accruing from the support of ladies’
reputation, to be considered as less unjustifiable than any others
of the same class, and as admitting of slighter apologies by the
aggressor:—this to be determined by the circumstances of the case,
but _always_ favourably to the lady.

RULE 12.

In simple unpremeditated _rencontres_ with the small sword, or
_couteau-de-chasse_ the rule is—first draw, first sheath; unless
blood be drawn: then both sheath, and proceed to investigation.

RULE 13.

No dumb-shooting or firing in the air admissible _in any case_. The
challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offence;
and the challenged ought, if he gave offence, to have made an
apology before he came on the ground: therefore, _children’s play_
must be dishonourable on one side or the other, and is accordingly
prohibited.

RULE 14.

Seconds to be of equal rank in society with the principals they
attend, inasmuch as a second may either choose or chance to become a
principal, and equality is indispensable.

RULE 15.

Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to
be challenged intend leaving the place of offence before morning;
for it is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.

RULE 16.

The challenged has the right to choose his own weapon, unless the
challenger gives his honour he is no swordsman; after which,
however, he cannot decline any _second_ species of weapon proposed
by the challenged.

RULE 17.

The challenged chooses his ground: the challenger chooses his
distance: the seconds fix the time and terms of firing.

RULE 18.

The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their
mutual honours they have charged smooth and single, which should be
held sufficient.

RULE 19.

Firing may be regulated—first, by signal; secondly, by word of
command; or, thirdly, at pleasure—as may be agreeable to the
parties. In the latter case, the parties may fire at their
reasonable leisure, but _second presents_ and _rests_ are strictly
prohibited.

RULE 20.

In all cases, a miss-fire is equivalent to a shot, and a _snap_ or a
_non-cock_ is to be considered as a miss-fire.

RULE 21.

Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation _before_ the meeting
takes place, or _after_ sufficient firing or hits, as specified.

RULE 22.

Any wound sufficient to agitate the nerves and necessarily make the
hand shake, must end the business for _that day_.

RULE 23.

If the cause of meeting be of such a nature that no apology or
explanation can or will be received, the challenged takes his
ground, and calls on the challenger to proceed as he chooses: in
such cases, firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may be
varied by agreement.

RULE 24.

In slight cases, the second hands his principal but one pistol; but,
in gross cases, two, holding another case ready-charged in reserve.

RULE 25.

Where seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it
must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals,
thus:—

S
|
|
P-----------P
|
|
S

If with swords, side by side, with five paces interval.

N.B. All matters and doubts not herein mentioned will be explained
and cleared up by application to the committee, who meet alternately
at Clonmell and Galway, at the quarter-sessions, for that
purpose.[6]

Crow Ryan, President,
James Keogh,}
Amby Bodkin,} Secretaries.

-----

Footnote 6:

The residue of the rules I have found among other papers since the
first edition of this book was printed—but they are much defaced.
There were eleven or twelve of them only, on _points of honour_.
The rules of combat are all given; and they are full of a
pugnacious _sophistry_, which would scarcely entertain the reader.

-----

Additional Galway Articles.

RULE 1.

No party can be allowed to bend his knee, or cover his side with his
left hand; but may present at any level from the foot to the eye.

RULE 2.

None can either advance or retreat, if the ground be measured. If no
ground be measured, either party may advance at his pleasure, even
to touch muzzle; but neither can advance on his adversary after the
fire, unless the adversary step forward on him.

N.B. The seconds on both sides stand responsible for this last rule
being _strictly_ observed, bad cases having accrued from neglect of
it.

These rules and resolutions of the “Fire-eaters” and “Knights of Tara” were the more deeply impressed on my mind, from my having run a great chance of losing my life, when a member of the university, in consequence of the strict observance of one of them. A young gentleman of Galway, Mr. Richard Daly, then a Templar, had the greatest predilection for single combat of any person (not a society fire-eater) I ever recollect: he had fought sixteen duels in the space of two years; three with swords and thirteen with pistols;—yet, with so little skill or so much good fortune, that not a wound worth mentioning occurred in the course of the whole. This gentleman was called to the Bar; figured afterwards for many years as patentee of the Theatre Royal, Dublin; and had the credit of first introducing that superior woman and actress, Mrs. Jordan, when Miss Francis, on the Dublin boards.

I was surprised one winter’s evening by receiving a written challenge, in the nature of an _invitation_, from Mr. Daly, to fight him early the ensuing morning. I never had spoken a word to him in my life, and scarcely _of_ him, and no possible cause of quarrel that I could guess existed between us: however, it being then a decided opinion that a first overture of that nature could _never_ be declined, I accepted the _invitation_ without any inquiry; writing, in reply, that as to place, I chose the field of Donnybrook fair as the fittest spot for _all_ sorts of _encounters_. I had then to look out for a second, and resorted to a person with whom I was very intimate, and who, as he was a curious character, may be worth noticing. He was brother to the unfortunate Sir Edward Crosby, Bart., who was murdered by a court-martial at Carlow, May, 1798. My friend was afterward called “_Balloon_ Crosby,” being the first aeronaut who constructed an Hibernian balloon, and ventured to take a journey into the sky from Ireland (from Ranelagh Gardens).[7]

-----

Footnote 7:

His second ascent was a most unfortunate one for the _spectators_. It
took place from the Duke of Leinster’s lawn, Merrion-square: the
crowds outside were immense, and so many squeezed together and leaned
against a thick parapet wall fronting the street, that it yielded to
the weight and pressure, and the spectators and parapet wall came
tumbling down together a great depth. Several were killed and many
disabled; while Crosby sailed quietly over their heads, in all human
probability, to be drowned before an hour had expired.

-----

Crosby was of immense stature, being near six feet three inches high: he had a comely-looking, fat, ruddy face, and was, beyond comparison, the most ingenious mechanic I ever knew. He had a smattering of all sciences, and there was scarcely an art or trade of which he had not some practical knowledge. His chambers at college were like a general workshop for all kinds of artisans: he was very good tempered, exceedingly strong, and as brave as a lion—but as dogged as a mule: nothing could change a resolution of his when once made; and nothing could check or resist his perseverance to carry it into execution. He highly approved of my promptness in accepting Daly’s invitation; but I told him that I unluckily had no pistols, and did not know where to procure any against the next morning. This puzzled him: but on recollection, he said he had no complete pistols neither; but he had some _old locks_, _barrels_, _and stocks_, which, as they did not originally belong to each other, he should find it very difficult to make any thing of: nevertheless, he would fall to work directly. He kept me up till late at night in his chambers to help him in filing the old locks and barrels, and endeavouring to patch up two or three of them so as to go off and answer that individual job. Various trials were made: much filing, drilling, and scouring were necessary. However, by two o’clock in the morning we had completed three entire pistols, which, though certainly of various lengths and of the most ludicrous workmanship, struck their fire _right well_, and that was all we wanted of them,—_symmetry_ (as he remarked) being of no great value upon _these_ occasions.

It was before seven o’clock on the 20th of March, with a cold wind and a sleety atmosphere, that we set out on foot for the field of Donnybrook fair, after having taken some good chocolate and a plentiful draught of cherry-brandy, to keep the cold wind out. On arriving, we saw my antagonist and his friend (Jack Patterson, nephew to the chief justice) already on the ground. I shall never forget Daly’s figure. He was a very fine-looking young fellow, but with such a squint that it was totally impossible to say what he looked at, except his nose, of which he never lost sight. His dress (they had come in a coach) made me ashamed of my own: he wore a pea-green coat; a large tucker with a diamond brooch stuck in it; a three-cocked hat with a gold button-loop and tassels, and silk stockings; and a _couteau-de-chasse_ hung gracefully dangling from his thigh. In fact, he looked as if already standing in a state of triumph, after having vanquished and trampled on his antagonist. I did not half like his steady position, showy surface, and mysterious squint; and I certainly would rather have exchanged _two_ shots with his slovenly friend, Jack Patterson, than _one_ with so magnificent and overbearing an adversary.

My friend Crosby, without any sort of salutation or prologue, immediately cried out “_Ground_, gentlemen! _ground—ground!_ come, d—n measurement, to work!” and placing me on his selected spot, whispered into my ear “_Medio tutissimus ibis_: never look at the _head_ or the _heels_: _hip_ the maccaroni! the hip for ever, my boy! hip, hip!”—when my antagonist’s second, advancing and accosting mine, said, Mr. Daly could not think of going any further with the business; that he found it was totally a mistake on his part, originating through misrepresentation, and that he begged to say he was extremely sorry for having given Mr. Barrington and his friend the trouble of coming out, hoping they would excuse it and shake hands with him. To this arrangement I certainly had no sort of objection; but Crosby, without hesitation, said, “We cannot do that _yet_ sir: I’ll _show_ you we _can’t_: (taking a little manuscript book out of his breeches pocket,) there’s the _rules_!—look at that, sir,” continued he, “see No. 7.:—‘No apology can be received _after_ the parties meet, _without a fire_.’ You see, there’s the rule,” pursued Crosby, with infinite self-satisfaction; “and a young man on his _first blood_ cannot break rule, particularly with a gentleman so used to the sport as Mr. Daly. Come, gentlemen, proceed! proceed!”

Daly appeared much displeased, but took his ground, without speaking a word, about nine paces from me. He presented his pistol instantly, but gave me most gallantly a full front.

It being, as Crosby said, my first blood, I lost no time, but let fly without a single _second_ of delay, and without taking aim: Daly staggered back two or three steps; put his hand to his breast; cried, “I’m hit, sir!” and did not fire. Crosby gave me a slap on the back which staggered me, and a squeeze of the hand which nearly crushed my fingers. We got round him: his waistcoat was opened, and a black spot, about the size of a crown-piece, with a little blood, appeared directly on his breast-bone. I was greatly shocked: fortunately, however, the ball had not penetrated; but his brooch had been broken, and a piece of the setting was sticking fast in the bone. Crosby stamped, cursed the damp powder or under-loading, and calmly pulled out the brooch: Daly said not a word; put his cambric handkerchief doubled to his breast, and bowed. I returned the salute, extremely glad to get out of the scrape, and so we parted without conversation or ceremony; save that when I expressed my wish to know the _cause_ of his challenging me, Daly replied that he would _now_ give no such explanation, and _his_ friend then produced his book of rules, quoting No. 8.:—“If a party challenged accept the challenge without asking the reason of it, the challenger is never bound to divulge it afterward.”

My friend Crosby, as I have mentioned, subsequently attempted to go off from Dublin to England in a balloon of his own making, and dropped between Dublin and Holyhead into the sea, but was saved. The poor fellow some time after went abroad, and was supposed to have died far too early for friendship,—which he was eminently capable of exciting. I never saw two persons in face and figure more alike than Crosby and my friend Daniel O’Connell: but Crosby was the taller by two inches, and it was not _so_ easy to discover that he was an Irishman.[8]

-----

Footnote 8:

It has since been discovered that death did not master him for many
years after this report. His history is not a common one. I have
lately received a considerable quantity of documents and Mss.
collected or written during the period he was supposed to be dead, and
at many different places, till a late day. Most of them are to me
utterly unintelligible; but there is sufficient to furnish matter for
one of the most _curious memoirs_ that can be conceived, and
altogether novel. So multifarious, however, are the materials, that I
fear their due arrangement would be quite beyond my powers.

-----

DUELLING EXTRAORDINARY.

Frequency of election-duels—Ludicrous affair between Frank Skelton and
an exciseman—Frank shoots the exciseman and runs away—His curious
reasons—Sir J. Bourke’s quadrille duel, with five hits—Mr. H. D.
G * * * y’s remarkable meeting with Counsellor O’Maher—O’Maher
hit—Civil proposition of G * * *’s second—G * * *’s gallant letter to
the author on his election for Maryborough—Honourable Barry Yelverton
challenged by nine officers at once—His elucidation of the
Fire-eaters’ Resolutions—Lord Kilkenny’s memorable duels and
law-suits—His Lordship is shot by Mr. Ball, an attorney—The heir to
his title (the Hon. Somerset Butler) challenges Counsellor
Burrowes—The latter hit, but his life saved by some gingerbread
nuts—Lord Kilkenny’s duel with Counsellor Byrne—The counsellor
wounded—Counsellor Guinness escapes a rencontre—Sketch of Counsellor
M‘Nally—His duel with the author—His three friends: all afterward
hanged—M‘Nally wounded—Bon-mot of Mr. Harding—The affair highly
beneficial to M‘Nally—His character, marriage, and death—Ancient mode
of fighting duels—The lists described—Duel of Colonel Barrington with
Squire Gilbert on horseback—Both wounded—Gilbert’s horse
killed—Chivalrous conclusion.

Our elections were more prolific in duels than any other public meetings: they very seldom originated at a horse-race, cock-fight, hunt, or at any place of amusement: folks then had pleasure in view, and “something else to do” than to quarrel: but at all elections, or at assizes, or, in fact, at any place of business, almost every man, without any very particular or assignable reason, immediately became a violent partisan, and frequently a furious enemy to somebody else; and gentlemen often got themselves shot before they could tell what they were fighting about.