shocking, that people felt the time was come to decide. whether a system should continue, by which a man, having first been insulted, must also expose himself to be shot, or be branded in one event as a coward, or in another as a criminal. The Prince felt that the first step towards the extinction of the practice generally would be to put a stop to duels in the army. With this view he sought an interview with the Duke of Wellington. The Duke, he found, had himself given attention to the subject, but had come to the conclusion that nothing could be done, having no belief in the efficiency of any remedy except that of public opinion. This did not satisfy the Prince. The current of public opinion had no doubt set in the right direction, but much mischief might be done before it became so strong as to sweep away a practice so deeply rooted. He therefore suggested the establishment of Courts of Honour, bound to secrecy, to whose arbitrament officers should submit their differences. To give weight to the tribunal the Prince also proposed that the Duke should place himself at its head, offering at the same time his own personal co-operation, if this were thought advisable. The Duke was afraid,' the Prince writes in his Memorandum of this interview (25th July), 'that there was a great jealousy against any secret tribunal; however, he would give it his best consideration. I reminded him of the Tribunal des Maréchaux in France, and suggested that he should make inquiry about the Courts of Honour which had been, and still were, attended with the best results in the Bavarian Army. This he agreed to do, as a basis for whatever further steps might have to be taken.'

6

The Prince's suggestion was deliberately canvassed by the heads of both Services. The Lords of the Admiralty objected to it on the ground that, owing to the peculiar nature of the naval service, a system of Courts of Honour could not be carried out in practice, although they admitted that it might

1843

SUGGESTED BY PRINCE.

171

be of use where the officers were resident in England. Duelling, moreover, was of rare occurrence in the Navy, and there was therefore less necessity for the adoption of any new tribunal. The Master of the Ordnance, Sir George Murray, objected altogether to the plan. Quarrels, he contended, would not be made up or differences reconciled upon the arbitration of others-and the law, in his opinion, was already sufficiently strong, if properly enforced, to repress the practice. But the healing of quarrels was not the object in view; and the law was powerless, as had again and again been shown, to protect the innocent.

There certainly is the power of punishment,' says the Prince in a letter to the Duke of Wellington (13th January, 1844), but it seems almost unjust to resort to it, so long as no other protection is given to the honour of officers.

6

Honour, abstractedly taken, is invulnerable.

It is a treasure that nobody can take from us, and which we cannot even injure ourselves. No act of a third person can deprive us of it. But there is an honour which is entirely based upon the opinion of the world, and therefore dependent upon others. The person whose honour (in this sense of the word) has been injured, must have a remedy by which he can recover the treasure taken from him, and re-establish himself in the consideration of the world. In olden times the appeal to the sword was the acknowledged remedy. With the progress of civilisation and the Christian religion this unchristian and barbarous custom has been generally condemned, forbidden by law, and severely punished; but no substitute has been granted, and the officer, whose very existence is based upon his honour, is left to the alternative of either trespassing against the laws of religion and of the State, and becoming a criminal, or of losing caste in the estimation of his profession and of the world, and seeing that honour tarnished, which is his pride. It is, therefore, from a sense of justice

that it becomes necessary to consider what other remedy should be granted, if the only one at present acknowledged is to be prosecuted with all severity.'

The Prince goes on to say, that this remedy seemed to him to be most easily found in a Court or Courts of Honour. Admitting, however, the difficulty of such an organisation of these Courts as would include both Services, he concurs with the Duke in thinking that it will be best to bring the subject, through the Secretary of War, before the Cabinet, who will report upon it and tender the Queen their advice. This course was accordingly taken. The introduction of Courts of Honour appeared to the Cabinet to be surrounded by too many practical difficulties. The idea was therefore abandoned, and it was resolved to effect the desired reform by an amendment of the Articles of War. In pursuance of this decision Amended Articles were issued in April 1844, which declared it to be suitable to the character of honourable men to apologise and offer redress for wrong or insult committed, and equally so for the party aggrieved to accept frankly and cordially explanation and apologies for the same.'

The Prince had the satisfaction of seeing that he had not taken up the question in vain; for a deathblow was dealt by this declaration to so-called affairs of honour. Duelling was so discredited that it became from that time practically impossible. A change so great could scarcely be effected without some temporary injury to the tone of manners. On natures of a certain cast the dread of being called out exerted a salutary restraint. We are still occasionally reminded, by some brusquerie of manner or recklessness of language, that it might not be without value as a check on selfishness, or boorish rudeness. But on all refined and generous natures the consciousness that this restraint no longer exists has had the effect of inspiring that higher restraint of inward courtesy and forbearance, which makes the grace of good society.

CHAPTER X.

Ir had long been the desire of the Queen to visit King Louis Philippe, to make the personal acquaintance of his admirable Queen, and to see them and their family in their own home. The most cordial relations had for many years subsisted between their respective Houses,' and it was conceived that a friendly visit, made without any political object, might have a good effect in removing the lingering asperity which had been occasioned in France by the action of the English Government on the Eastern Question. A favourable opportunity for making this visit now presented itself. The country, with the gradual revival of trade and increased employment for its artisans, had regained its tranquillity, and the rising of Parliament after a comparatively quiet Session was close at hand. For many reasons,' Stockmar wrote to the Prince from Wiesbaden (18th August, 1843), 'I wish your contemplated excursion may be safely and pleasantly carried out, and in a way to cheer and gladden you.

The King, when Duke of Orleans, had been a most intimate friend of Her Majesty's father the Duke of Kent, as well as of the Princess Charlotte, and her husband Prince Leopold. This was the beginning of the intimacy, which led to the many alliances (four) between the Orleans and Coburg families. These naturally brought them into close connection with the Queen long before her marriage with Prince Albert, the Duchess of Kent being a Princess of Coburg, sister to King Leopold, and to the Prince Consort's father the late Duke of Coburg. A mistaken impression prevails very generally that the Queen's connection with the Orleans family began after her marriage, while, in fact, it had subsisted since the marriage, in 1832, of her uncle King Leopold with the Princess Louise of Orleans.

Any opportunity for observing real life, and for interrupting the monotony that attends an exalted position, is a great gain for Your Royal Highness. It gives fresh nourishment and vigour to the mind. Parliament, let us hope, will rise at the right time, and Ireland remain quiet.'

The French Royal family were at Château d'Eu, near Tréport, a private domain of the King's, which could be reached in a few hours from Southampton; and the new yacht, "Victoria and Albert,' which had just been built for the Queen, could not better initiate her career than in such an expedition. Parliament was prorogued on the 27th of August. On the 28th the Queen and Prince embarked at Southampton, and after cruising about the Isle of Wight and along the coast of Devon for a couple of days, they crossed to Tréport, where they arrived about 6 P.M. on the 2nd of September. Immediately the King came off in his barge to welcome them. The Prince de Joinville, who had met the Royal yacht off Cherbourg early that morning, and had then come on board, was on the lookout, and when he reported its approach, Her Majesty's Journal records: I felt, as it came nearer and nearer, more and more agitated. At length it came close, and contained the King, Aumale, Montpensier, Augustus' (Prince Augustus of SaxeCoburg and Gotha, first-cousin of the Queen and Prince, and married to the Princess Clémentine of Orleans), M. Guizot, Lord Cowley, and various officers and ministers. The good kind King was standing on the boat, and so impatient to get out that it was very difficult to prevent him, and to get him to wait till the boat was close enough. He got out and came up as quickly as possible, and embraced me warmly. It was a fine and really affecting sight, and the emotion which it caused I shall never forget. The King expressed again and again how delighted he was to see me.

...

His barge is a

very fine one, with many oars, and the men in white, with red sashes, and red ribbons round their hats.'