The Express.
London, England, 1862-11-21 00:00:00

THE LATE DUEL

(1101 OUR OWN CORRIAPONDWNT.)
PARM,
Continuing my resume of the Versailles trial yes-
terday, I find on my notes two or three facts worth
mentioning before we come to the speeches. The
Duke de Gramont Caderousse stated, in answer to
the imputation that his skill of fence rendered the
duel unequal, that he bad never bad more than
ten lessons in his life, and was a notoriously bad
fencer. This statement was corroborated by his
fencing-master, M. Pons, who said that " Although
Caderouase bad been several times to his gallery to
speak to friends he bad never taken more than three
lessons there, and that he was quite a novice in the
use of the small sword." M. Pons also deposed that
when be beard that Caderonseerrosacring to fight
with Dillon, he wrote to re him foe not
coming to take a lesson, and 11414 he should like to
have him " face to face " for a little while.
M. Lachand made it a point in Caderousse'm
favour that he had not acted upon this
letter, not wishing to take any unfair advantage.
It was on the other band admitted by Viscount de
Nod that he did succeed in piecing 14,..paikeeis
the precise position recommended by the fencing
master Gdtechair, and that if Dillon had had the
presence of mind to have acted up to his instruc-
tions Caderousse would have been "spitted like a
lark." The judge complimented Caderousse upon
his conduct when on the ground in remaining,
although be had won the toss for positions, in the
worst place, with a driving rain and sleet blowing in
his face. • Dillon's other second, M. de Mussy, was,
like Viscount de Nod, a stranger to him and was
hunted up by de Nod on the good old Irish prin-
ciple, that a man of honour should always be ready
to serve as a "friend" to any gentleman in need
of one. An affecting point of the case, upon
which both the President and the Imperial Pro-
cureur dwelt repeatedly with a view to influence
the jury in favour of Dillon, was, that when the
latter was informed by his seconds of the final de-
termination of his adversary's advisers to " drive
him off every race-course in Europe " unless he
would consent to fight with the sword, he ex-
claimed, "It is my bread that they would take from
me. Tell them that I accept the sword; better death
than dishonour." As already stated, all the pri-
soners affirmed that the threat to drive him off the
turf was only in case be should continue to annoy
Caderousse, who did not want to fight, but only
required to be let alone. But the court persisted
that this important qualification to the threat, not
having been made before the Judge of Instruction.
could not be considered by the jury as a proved
fact.

The precise cause of Mr. Dillon's death, as stated
in the medical evidence, was " pressure upon the
heart caused by an overflow of blood from the peri-
cardium."

When the evidence was finished the judge, know-
ing that it was utterly out of the question to obtain
a conviction on the capital charge, informed the
prisoners' counsel that be should amend the in-
dictment, and pat to the jury, as a subsidiary
question, whether Caderousse had not been guilty
of wilfully inflicting a wound which occasioned
death, without its being his intention to kill.
The Imperial Procureur of Versailles, M. Guille-
min, began his address by combating by anticipa-
tion some of thoee arguments against a conviction
which are commonly urged in all duelling cases.
He said that a great lesson was to be derived from
this trial. The life of a man who was the sole sup-
port of a needy family had been sacrificed to a false
point of honour in a miserable quarrel, not in
reality affecting the honour of any one of the
parties. He admitted that the jurisprudence of the
Court of Caseation on the subject of duelling
had varied since the revolution of 1789.
But the whole stream of modern decisions had con-
clusively established that to kill or wound a man in
a duel was an offence punishable by French law.
If there was anything doubtful in the code, that
doubt hail been removed by the only recognised and
only possible authority, the nettled interpretation of
the highest court. It was sometimes, said that
taking& man's life in a duel was no crime, because
by the fact of his voluntarily appearing on the
ground, he consented that his life should be taken.
But this was a false doctrine, because the law never
recognised any convention made in !hostility to its
own principles. A contrary doctrine would bring
society back to an age of violence and barbarism. If
single combats were to be legal, why not combats of
two against two, four against four, and ten
against ten ? It was impossible to sanction
the doctrine in a civilised society that any
man, or any party of men, little or great, had •
right to wage war on their own account. The laws
of France prior to the great revolution bad always
repressed duelling. In the time of Louis XIII.,
when the " point of honour " was something infi-
nitely more serious than in these days, the King
himself, whose proudest title was that of " the
first gentleman in France," issued edicts against
duelling, for the infringement of which the head
of a Montmorency fell on the scaffold. Louis XIV.
acted with great severity against duelling. Would
the jury say that in this more gentle and civilised
age the reign of violence should receive a legal
sauctiun ? Deserting for a moment the higher
grounds of law, religion, and morality, and admit-
ting for the sake of argument that their
decision would be guided by public opinion, he
submitted to them that even loose public opinion
would not approve of duelling in such a case as
that uow before them. Public opinion only con-
nived at duelling in very grave and extreme cases,
for which the law was unable to give any sufficient
remedy ; as, for instance' where the honour of a
wife, a sister, or a daughter was seriously involved.
Another rule was, that the chances of the combat
should be as near as possible equal. Public
opinion would never sanction a duel in a case
where the skill of one combatant in the particular
arm choseu was such that his adversary was almost
certain to fall. Here, notwithstanding the Duke
de Graniont's protestations that he was no master
of fence, it was unfortunately evident that he was a
man addicted to duelling. He admitted that, pre-
vious to the fatal affair with Dillon, he had
fought two duuis with the sword. Iu one,
that with the Duke de Terranova, he
had been no less than five-and-twenty minutes en-
gsged—a circumstance which in his (the Procureur
Imperial's) mind, showed that he must have very
cousiderable ability iu the use of the weapon. At
all events, Caderousse had in his favour this hn-
wens° advantage, that he had twice seen the point
of a sword in earnest, and that constituted an ex-
perieuce infinitely more valuable than a great =my
fencing lessons. The quarrel was of a most trivial
nature. Dilloa's letters in the Sport might have
been felt annoying, but he was bound to say they
did not seem to him to exceed the bounds of fair
and permissible discussion. Caderousse, by pub-
liehing hi. very offensive letter in the Journal
du Hems, insinuating that Dillon had
never bad any opportunity of knowing what
a gentleman was, had been the first to quit
the path of moderation. If Dillon bad been alive
be should have severely reproached him for chal-
lenging Caderousse for such a futile cause. But
although Dillon was not justified, he was more ex-
cusable than Cadrrowise. After a severe comment
upon the irritating paragraph in the Figaro, the
insertion of which he characterised as "almost a
bad action," he said that the most serious question
iu the cause was, who was the offended party 1 lu
his mind it was Dillon, and he could not under-
stand how his seconds so lightly gave up the right
which they had at first insisted upon, to have
the choice of weapons. He admitted, as a
general thesis, the argument of the prisoner
Viscount Talen, that a duel with swords
was less dangerous than with pistols, and he gave

Caderousse full credit for his admirable conduct
when once on the ground. Upon the whole he
pressed upon the jury that in the interests of
society this was a fit and proper occasion for the
exercise of tempered seventy. An example would
be most useful. By finding the prisoners guilty of
the minor charge and with extenuating circum-
stances, they would only render them liable to •
moderate and reasonable punishment. He called
upon the jury to be firm in the exercise of their
duty, and was sure that in this country of equality
they would not allow the social position of the pri-
soners to be any excuse for impunity.
M. Lachaud, counsel for the Duke de Gramont
Caderousse and his two seconds, said that if the
Imperial Procureur contended that there was any
law in France against duelling beyond the liability
to a fair review of all the facts of each particular
case by • jury, he would have to remould French
habits and customs. He commented upon the
various • is favourable to Caderousse which had
ap in the evidence, more especially his gene-
rous conduct on the ground, and his refusal to take
the preparatory lesson pressed upon him by Pons,
the fencing-master. He wished to speak with all
due reserve of the memory of Mr. Dillon, but he
could not help reminding the jury that, on the tes-
taniammaihsion Anissillear auplairsoisiblinksa

determined to light. He went about race-courses
crying out, " Where is the Duke de Gramont Cade-
rousse l be must fight me ;" and, in the words of
Viscount de Nob, he was determined to eat
Caderousse. N. Lachaud contended that he evi-
dently wanted to have the éclat of fighting with a
duke. He read an opinion of M. Dupio, pro-
nounced as procureur-general in 1837, that all the
oonfiicting decisions with respect to duelling had
settled down to this—that it was for a jury to say
whether the duel bad been fair and justifiable. He
was willing to place the issue on that ground. He
cited an opinion of M. Guisot in favour of duelling,
to the effect that civilised France had substituted
duelling for assassination.
M. Malapert defended Viscount de Noe and M.
de Mussy.
K Flandin, the president, who conducted the
trial with great ability, impartiality, firmness, and
courtesy, said, in summing up, that the question was
one of mixed law and fact, which was entirely
for the jury. It would be difficult to make a
special law against taking life in duel without
giving a legal sanction to duelling. It was for the
jury to appreciate the circumstances. In extreme
cases they might acquit ; in others they might
reasonably extenuate. But he hoped it would
never be said that France, which so much boasted
of the perfection of her legislation, was the only
country in Europe, or the world, which allowed
citizens to take the law into their own bands. The
jury were judges in this case, but they had •
solemn duty to perform. He seemed to adopt the
doctrine of M. Dupin, cited by M. Lachaud. But
conformably with that doctrine, there were several
circumstances in this case which called for the
serious consideration of the jury. The duel was
fought for a miserable cause, and offered none
of those excusable circumstances which might be
found in a case where the honour of • lady was
concerned. They would have to consider whether
the principal and the seconds had done all that
reasonably ought to have been done to effect a
reconciliation. It seemed to him that Dillon was
the offended party, and yet he had not been al-
lowed to choose his weapons, which accordingto the
duelling code was his right. They would eourider
whether Caderonese's secondshad not been too press-
ing, to fight with swords, and Dillon's seconds
too yielding. He laid great stress ou the threat
to drive Dillon off the turf, which he said was
regrittable language, and moreover language
w I isit he thought the prisoners Talon and Fitzpunes
would not have used towards a man in the
same social position as themselves. An attempt
had been made to extenuate that language by a
qualifying addition, but he could only tell the jury
that the phrase net forth in the indictment without
the addition, was that technically used by Viscount
de Nod before the Judge of Instruction. A more
serious question still was whether, by reason of
Dillon's ignorance of the use of the sword, the con-
ditions of the combat were so nearly equal as to be
beyond reproach. Duels would be more frequent
than they were, if the public should unfortunately
be taught to think that juries would never convict.
He mentioned a modern case in which a jury had
convicted, and a sentence of three years' imprison-
ment had been pronounced.
The jury only deliberated half an hour before re-
turning the verdict of "Not guilty" on all the points,
which has been already announced.
A French jury decides by a bare majority, with-
out being allowed to state what the majority is.
But it has transpired at Versailles, as such things
will do, that there was a minority on the jury die-
pored to make an example by returning a verdict
which would have involved the minimum penalty.

AVSTILLLIAN ASSOCIATION.—Yesterday a public
meeting of gentlemen connected with the Australasian colo-
nies was held at the rooms of the Australian Association,
17, Cheese-alley, Lombard-street, to take into consideration
the best means of giving greater interest to that institution,
so as to secure the general eeoaooppeennrion of the colonists in
its support. Sir Charles Nicholson occupied the chair, Red
in opening the proceedings said there were several points of
more or less interest to be considered by the meeting. The
first was oats extraneous to the objects of the asseciatiou,
and was whether or not they, the colonist., should, in
January next, as with One omission thee had done
for some years past, celebrate by * banquet the
foundation of the first Australian colony. There was
a division of opinion on that point when it was
discussed in the committee of the association. Every one,
however, was agreed that unless the thing was done sec.
cessfully, and carried on with some prospect of success, it
would be useless to attempt the celebration. There were
some gentlemen who thought that, owing to the difficulty
of getting the highest officers connected with the Colonial-
office to attend the dinner, it were better to hold it every
second year, rather than make it au annual celebration.
However that might be, there were one or two other mat-
ters which affected the very existence of the institution of
which they were all, he presumed, members, which claimed
their consideration. It had been intended that the amocia.
Um) should afford not only • rendezvous for gentlemen con-
nected with the Australiau colooka, but that it should also
be the means of diffusing accurate and reliable information
with respect to the colonies ; but owing to the paucity of
its members it had failed in that particular, nut that
those who were members were not able to afford that in-
fornmtioo, hut that the limited income of the association
prevente them from making it as general and as diffused
as it was desirable it should be. To remedy this defect it
Was thought advisable to establish a library of works con-
nected with the Australian colonies, and of maps showing
the extension of settlement and discovery. Captain Begot
suggested that the association 'should be made the nucleus of
a future dub, similar to the clubs connected with the Indian
empire. After • abort discussion, in which Mr. M'Ewen,
Mr. Cups, Mr. Laing, Mr. Benjainiu Mr. Boners, Mr.
Hiscerundech, and other gentlemen took part, it was re-
waived, in the first place, to ho'd the annual dinner, leaving
to the committee appointed to carry it out the determine.
tion of when it should be held. and also to remodel the
coustructioo of the association, so as to utilise its operations
for the benefit of the colonies, and • committee was ap-
pointed to carry out that
Tux INTERCOLONIAL HAlLwaY.—Tlie Hon. Mr.
sicuct,, the co.premier of Canada, and the Hon. Mr. How-
land. the finance minister of Canada. were pameneers in
the Australasian. They are the representatives of Canada
in the matter of the Interoolunial Railway ; and es the
whole of the delegates front the British North American
provinces are now here, we lave reason to believe that the
amasser, arrangements with the imperial government will
be forthwith entered upon with the view to their com-
pletion at the earliest possible date.—Canadtan News,
Nov. 20.

•••••• • ••••••
DARING ROBBERY ON SOCTBWARK-BRI DOE.
Between twelve ►nd one o'clock yesterday morning, as Mr.
James Archer, of 7, prospect-place, Kennington, was passing
over Southwark-bridge, be was met in the centre by two
men, one of whom, without uttering a word, knocked him
down Ly a stunning blow on the head. indicted, it is sup-
posed, by a life-preserver. The ruffians then aided his
person of two 51. Dotes and four sovereigns. On recovering
be trade his way to the toll-gate and gale the alarm, but
the fellows escaped.
OUTRAGI ON BOARD THE YOD NO SAN. —M
land, the chief mate of ►he American ship Young Sam, was
yesterday fully committed by the Liverpool magistrates on
the charge of shooting a seaman on board that vessel, with
intent to murder him.

OWE SMITH AND CO.'S
PURE EXTRACT of CALVES' FRET,
For Invalids and Culinary Use.
Sold le 6.1 , It, and 4a. packets. by all chemists. grocers, de.
MANUFACTORY. M LITTLE PORTLAND-ST., Regentet, W.
OFFICES, ISA, BUSH-LANE, Cannonetreet, C.
N.B.—Priao Medal awarded for excellence of quality.

0 EOOND-HAND PIANOFORTES.
63 MANIA MEI • dad WOOD hare a kris moctateet
of seoced.baad Plesetoclea, by the meet usteggseg who; at
greatly reduced prtosa-201. Itegeat-tireet.

On the 11 December iU be published, price 44.,
SOMEBODY'S LUGGAGE,
Forming the
CHRISTMAS DOUBLE NUMBER

ALL THR YEAR ROUND.
Conducted by CHARLES DICILLI4S.

IN FUN THIS WEEK, One Penny,
The New Rape of the Lord.
The Right Roth J. V. hitealtle.
Annanack and Dieu.
Prize Emma
Comic &eyetweak'.
Songs for the nrong, dc., de.

Now ready, handsomely bound in Magenta cloth, gilt, price M. dd.;
post paid ea each VoL,
THE FIRST and SECND HALF-YEARLY VOLUMES otFUN,
with numerous Engravings by talented Artiste.
Also now ready, FUN ALHANACK, with 24 Comic Cuts. One
Penny.
Office, 80, Flectatreet.