The Sun.
London, England, 1840-05-01 00:00:00

DUELLING IN FRANCE.

On the 7th March, 183 Cr, a meeting took place in
the Forest of St. Germain, between M. Alderic de
Saint Pierre and M. Eugene Savary (Marquis de Ro-
vigo). They were attended by MM. Ladislas de Saint
Pierre, Aubin Soubzmaigne, Henry Macarty Macteig,
and the Baron de Bazancourt. The duel was to be
fought with swords. Hardly had they crossed weapons
when M. de Saint Pierre's sword broke. A pair of
foils, without buttons, were then procured by M.
Aubin Soubzmaigne. The result of the combat was,
that both the adversaries were several times wounded,
but not severely.
The case was definitively brought before the Tribu-
nal of Correctional Police at Versailles, on the 7th of
April, 1840, after having previously undergone the or-
deal or examination of one or two Courts.

The above gentlemen's name being called over, they
were all found present, with the exception of M. Aubin
Soubzmaigne, absent on public military service, and
whose trial is therefore postponed. _ _

Louis Delatre, first witness, is a servant attached to
the Pavilion Henry IV., at St. Germain. Prepared
an apartment there for the Marquis de Rovigo, whom
he helped to get out of his carriage. Was at the time
ignorant that the Marquis was wounded. It was only
some days afterwards that he learned that a meeting
had taken place in the forest between the young Mar-
quis and M. de St. Pierre.

Rosalia Bremard, second witness, a sadly ill-favoured
female, declares her residence to be at the sign of the
Syren.—(A laugh.) She saw a battle raging in the
forest. It lasted at least three-quarters of an hour.
So said a Monsieur whom she questioned on the sub-
ject. Saw one of the combatants fall, and heard him
utter a piercing cry. He was then lifted up and led to-
wards a carriage which was close at hand.

The President to M. de Saint Pierre:Do you ac-
knowledge having had a duel with the Marquis de
Rovigo ?
M. de St. Pierre—Yes, Sir.
What was the occasion of your duel ?—I wish to be
allowed not to answer that question.
By another JUDGE—Which of you two sent the
challenge ?
M. do St. Pierre—l cannot answer.

You can easily answer ; the more so as -one of you
has already confessed to being the aggressor.—No an-
swer.

What occasioned the duel P—A letter sent and re-
ceived.

The PRESIDENT to M. de Rovigo.—You were
wounded in your encounter with M. de St. Pierre ?
Yes, Sir.

Do you acknowledge yourself as having been the
agressor ?—Aggressor is not the word. We had
had some difference. I wrote a letter to my ad-
versary. He demanded satisfaction for that letter.
It was all I wished. At the beginning of the en-
counter one of the swords broke. Other weapons
were obtained, and the combat was renewed with ar-
dour. The sword broke just as we began. It be-
came necessary to obtain other weapons, for we had
come to St. Germain's with the determination to ob-
tain satisfaction. Our meeting was a fair one. I was
twice wounded by my adversary, but so very slightly
that in six days I was able to go about.
And yet a witness has sworn that the encounter
lasted three quarters of an hour. A sword is broken,
and immediately you have recourse to other weapons.
Surely this denoted a deadly animosity ?—Believe me,
Sir, there was no animosity in our encounter. Since
that event M. de St. Pierre and myself are upon ex-
cellent terms. If there had been any rancorous feel-
ing between u; we should not have met again in a
friendly manner.
Here the Baron de Bazancourt, one of the seconds,
explained, and said that the combat had not lasted
more than five or six minutes—that the principals had
shown no animosity. The reason one of the witnesses
fancied the combat to have lasted three quarters of an
hour takes its rise in that, after the sword was broken,
it required some time to go back to St. Germain's and
return with the foils. The seconds did all in their
power, consistent with their duty, in order that the re-
sult of the meeting should not prove fatal, and they are
each and all conscious of having acted well and fairly.
The KING'S ADVOCATE proposed to the Court the
application against the prisoners of the 311th article of
the penal code.

M. Barrillon appeared as counsel for the five gentle-
men, and entered into a long examination of the question
if the law, the application of which was invoked, was
really applicable to it case of duelling.
The Tribunal retired into the Council-room to dcli-
berate, and subsequently gave the following judgment :
" Considering that both from the evidence and the
avowal of Rovigo, it is proved that he did, on the 7th
March, 1839, intentionally wound St. Pierre :
" Considering from the evidence it is likewise proved
that on the same day St. Pierre did intentionally wound
Rovigo :
" Considering that Ladislas de St. Pierre, Frederic
de Bazancourt, Henry de Macarty Macteig, and Aubin
Soubamaigne did willingly aid and abet Rovigo and St.
Pierre :

" Considering that Rovigo was the aggressor in send-
ing to St. Pierre an insulting letter, and that after rt
sword had been broken the said Rovigo refused to put
an end to the combat.

" Considering that Ladislas de St. Pierre and
Macarty Macteig arc not supposed to have willingly
consented to the renewal of the duel :

" Considering that this is not the case with Bazan-
court ; making application of the 59th, 60th, and 31 Ith
articles of the penal code,

" SENTENCE.

" Rovigo, to eight months' imprisonment, and 5001.
fine.

" Alderic de St. Pierre, to one month's imprisonment,
and .50f. fine.

" Bazancourt, to six months' imprisonment, and 400 f.
fine.

" L' de St. Pierre and Macarty to six days' imprison-
ment, and 501. fine."

The five gentlemen have appealed.

MAUNDY THURSDAY. Thursday, being
Maundy Thursday, according to annual custom, the Royal
donations were distributed at the Chapel Royal, Whitehall,
consisting of fish, bread, money, and wearing apparel, to the
poor and aged men and women of Westminster, by the Sub-
imoner-and Officers of the Lord Chamberlain'soffice.