We shall not take leave of our learned author without giving two or three instances out of his proofs and illustrations relative to the termination of private feuds by judicial or private combat.
This mode of trial was so acceptable, that ecclesiastics, notwithstanding the prohibitions of the church, were constrained not only to connive at the practice, but to authorize it. A remarkable instance of this is produced by Pasquier, Recherches, lib. iv. ch. i. p. 350. The abbot Wittikindus considered the determination of a point of law by combat as the best and most honorable mode of decision.
In the year 978, a judicial combat was fought in the presence of the emperor. The archbishop Aldebert advised him to terminate a contest which had arisen between two noblemen of his court, by this mode of decision. The vanquished combatant, though a person of high rank, was beheaded on the spot. Chronic. Ditmari. Episc. Mersb. chez Bouquet Recueil des Hist. tom. x. p. 121. Questions concerning the property of churches and monasteries were decided by combat. In the year 961, a controversy concerning the church of St. Medard, whether it belonged to the abbey of Beaulieu or not was terminated by judicial combat. Bouquet Recueil des Hist. tom. ix. p. 729. ibid. p. 612, &c. The emperor Henry I. declares that this law, authorizing the practice of judicial combats, was enacted with consent and the applause of many faithful bishops. Ibid. p. 231. So remarkable did the martial ideas of those ages prevail over the genius and maxims of the canon law, which in other instances was in the highest credit and authority with ecclesiastics. A judicial combat was appointed in Spain by Charles V. A. D. 1522. The combatants fought in the presence of the emperor, and the battle was conducted with all the rites prescribed by the ancient laws of chivalry. The whole transaction is described at great length by Pontus Heuterus Rer. Austrica. lib. viii. C. 17. p. 205.
The last instance which occurs in the history of France, of a judicial combat authorized by the magistrate, was the famous one between M. Jarnac and M. de la Chaistagnerie, A. D. 1547. A trial by combat was appointed in England, A. D. 1571, under the inspection of the judges in the court of Common Pleas; and though it was not carried to the same extremity with the former, queen Elizabeth having interposed her authority, and enjoined the parties to compound the matter, yet in order to preserve their honor, the lists were marked out, and all the forms, previous to the combat, were observed with much ceremony. Spelm. Gloss. Voc. Campus, p. 103. In the year 1631, a judicial combat was appointed between Donald lord Rea, and David Ramsay, Esq. by the authority of the lord high constable and earl marshal of England; but that quarrel likewise terminated without bloodshed, being accommodated by Charles I. Another instance occurs seven years later. Rushworth in Observation on the Statutes, &c. p. 266.
It manifestly appears from these extracts, that in former times not only the property of individuals was considered, but their feelings, as men of honor, were consulted. Law, however, soon obtained the entire ascendancy, and judicial or private combats were not only laid aside, but were moreover strictly forbidden. The military character alone seems to have retained a sort of tacit privilege to make appeals to the sword, in cases where the nice sensibility of the heart breaks through the trammels of legal disquisition, and establishes points of honor which can only be determined by personal exposure. Thus we find that although premeditated duels were severely punished in France, Rencontres or accidental quarrels were always overlooked, whatever their issue might be. Frederic the Great of Prussia seems to have set his face against duelling altogether. Yet it is singular, that notwithstanding his severe prohibition, a Prussian officer was under the necessity either of vindicating his wounded honor by an appeal to the sword or pistol, or was disgraced for having suffered a personal affront. In England the same hardship exists. Lord Kenyon declared from the bench, that he would personally interfere as expounder of the British laws, should any minister recommend mercy to his majesty on the conviction of an individual who had murdered his fellow creature in a duel. See [Duel].
Word of Honor, (parole d’honneur, Fr.) A promise or engagement that is made or entered into by word of mouth, the breach of which entails disgrace upon the violator.
Point of Honor, (point d’honneur, Fr.) A delicacy of feeling, which is generally acquired by education, and strengthened by an intercourse with men of strict integrity and good conduct. It is likewise very frequently the offspring of peculiar habits, received notions, and established etiquettes. The French familiarly say, Ils se sont battus pour un point d’honneur, they fought for a point of honor; they likewise say, Il y va de son honneur, his honor is at stake.
To die upon the bed of Honor, (mourir au lit d’honneur, Fr.) is a term particularly applied to military men, who die in battle fighting in their country’s cause.
A court of Honor. Although a court of honor may be said, in some degree, to resemble a court of inquiry, nevertheless it cannot be strictly so; for a court of honor has not only the power of ascertaining the degree of guilt which may be attached to misconduct, but it can entail ignominy upon the guilty person; whereas a court of inquiry only investigates the matter and circumstances, and determines whether there be sufficient ground to try the accused before a general court martial; which is the last resort of military jurisdiction, and unites within itself all the qualities and powers of the other two courts.
A debt of Honor, an obligation which among honorable men, especially officers, is more binding than those engagements or contracts that are guaranteed by law. The reason is manifest.