ing influence of a hostile barrel, which must
naturally confuse and agitate.

The duel à marche interrompue appears at first
sight to differ little from the one last described;
but there are grave and important points of
distinction. Out of these various shapes of
encounter the skilful amateur will find his advantage
according to his experience, and the peculiar
manner he will have acquired during that
experience. There are the same lines, and the
same distances marked off. But the parties
advance in a zig-zag direction — halting and
advancing like Indian skirmishers — with power to
fire the moment either halts. This is the grand
distinction — not one of form, it will be observed,
but of principle, and much to be recommended
to novices, who might naturally be agitated by
their début. They will thus secure an early
shot with a freedom from disturbing influences.
There is, of course, always the drawback of
having to accept the adversary's fire without sign
or protest. It should be mentioned, that as
soon as one has fired, the other is not allowed
to advance further, but must discharge his pistol
from the point at which he is standing.

Next follows the duel au signal, which is an
approach to the old Hiberno-Britannic fashion,
and was doubtless meant to conciliate national
prejudice. The signal was to be given by three
claps of the hand, with an interval of three
seconds between each. At the first, the parties
were to move slowly towards each other; at the
second, to level, still walking; at the third, to
halt and fire. The French code states that if
one fires before or after the signal, by so much
as half a second, he shall be considered a
dishonourable man; and if by the disgraceful
manœuvre he shall have killed his adversary, he
shall be looked on as an assassin. To minds
less nice there would appear but little distinction
between the cases. But if the adversary
who has been fired at thus dishonourably have
been lucky enough to escape, he is allowed a
terrible retribution — to take a slow deliberate
aim, and a shot à loisir. Where one disgracefully
reserves his fire after the signal, the
disagreeable duty is allotted to the seconds of rushing
in at all risk and peril — even in front of the
weapon, if no other course will answer — and
disarming him.

Then follows the Barrière, which is, strictly
speaking, a generic term, and applicable to any
shape of combat where a line of separation
between the parties is enforced. Sometimes the term
is applied to an arrangement by which the parties
arc set back to back, and at a given signal must
march away ten, or any special number of paces,
then turn round smartly and fire. This is,
perhaps, the most humane sort of duel, as there are
many chances that the parties will miss each
other. Whereas the Englishman who has
graduated on the bogs and moors will have a fatal
advantage in this flurried style of shooting.
Allowance, however, should be made for a profitable
experience of our neighbours among the
robins and sparrows — a good range of practice
among those tiny warblers of the grove and
bushes contributing to steady the eye and hand
very considerably.

There is also the duel à marche non
interrompue et à ligne parallèle — a rather cumbersome
title for a very simple mode of arrangement.
The inevitable parallel lines are traced
at about fifteen paces' distance (though it seems
a little mysterious how those marks can be
"traced" along the green sward of the Bois de
Boulogne), and the parties are started from
points exactly opposite each other. They can
walk either fast or slow, and can fire when they
please, but are not allowed to stop or to reserve
their fire a second after reaching the end of
the march. This system, however, is not open
to the objection of being too favourable to the
person who receives the first fire and reserves
his own, for he is compelled to be en route
while taking his aim, and is limited by time and
the short distance he has to walk.

Next in the gory annals of French duelling
comes the fashion of turning the two adversaries
into a dark room, armed each with a pair of
pistols; then, that Mexican practice of an encounter
on horseback, armed with weapons of every kind.
The first is worthy of gladiatorial days and the
most savage of the emperors, and there is
something horrible in the notion of the two caged
men creeping round by the wall, with finger
on the trigger, scarcely daring to breathe for
fear of giving their enemy a hint of their
position. There was room, too, for all manner
of artful devices to make the enemy deliver
his fire first, the light from which would
illuminate his figure, and render him a favourable
object. But these shapes of action the French
code looks on as exceptional and highly
irregular, refusing to take any notice of them, or
apply its ordinances to their case. It throws
out only one contemptuous hint in reference to
them — namely, that all stipulations and arrangements
must be put in writing.

The terrible duel à l'outrance, where so
desperate was the character of the offence it
was agreed that one of the parties should die on
the ground, was contrived by loading one pistol
only. The other was primed merely, and the
second holding them behind his back, the
parties chose, by saying " To the right," or, " To
the left." Then the end of a pocket-handkerchief
was placed in each of their hands, and the fatal
signal given. If the holder of the pistol pulled
the trigger before the signal, he was justly dealt
with as an assassin, in the case of his having the
loaded weapon. In case of its proving the
empty one, the opponent had the privilege of
putting the muzzle to his head and shooting
him on the spot. But these extravagances —
outpourings of an indecent and ungentlemanly
animosity — received but little toleration, and the
genteel code, as was mentioned, takes no
cognisance of its incidents. Of the dramatic
elements involved in a " situation" of this sort,
that skilful dramatist, M. Dumas the elder, was
not slow to avail himself; he has worked this
strata up according to true "Saint Martin's-
gate" traditions, in his melodrama of Pauline.