No. 29.

Remarks on Chess-Playing, and Duelling.

"We learn by Chess the habit of not being discouraged by present bad appearances, in the state of our affairs, the habit of hoping for a favourable change, and that of persevering in the search of resources."

"He's truly valiant that can wisely suffer

DR. FRANKLIN.

The worst that man can breathe and make his wrongs
His outsides; wear them like his raiment, carelessly;
And ne'er prefer his injuries to his heart,
To bring it into danger."

SHAKSPEARE.

Do not be alarmed!!! at the strange title given to this paper, and think I am about to attempt to prove some connection between Duelling and Chess-Playing. I am going to talk of them severally, and for the sake of squeezing a considerable quantity of matter into a small space, 1 have made this a case of “two single gentlemen rolled into one." The invention of the The invention of the game of Chess is attributed by Sir William Jones to the natives of the West of India, but many other nations also claim the honour of the invention, and being a game of great antiquity, we are likely to remain in the dark concerning its origin. Our great Orientalist confirms his opinion from

the Persians ascribing the invention to India, where I think it is generally supposed, that Chess was invented. In Europe as well as in the East, Chess is a favourite game. In Spain they even go so far as whole cities challenging each other; and in China we are told it makes a considerable part of female education. Although the English do not carry the thing quite so far as the Spanish or Chinese, still it forms one of their principal amusements, especially among the Eng· lish in India. Many a heart has been lost over a game of Chess. There is no game that brings a young couple so comfortably together, the one during a game of Chess can form a tolerably correct idea of the mind of the other, and if he or she be pleased with the antagonist, throughout the game, depend upon it they only "part to meet again." Reader did you ever view at the distance a young couple engaged at Chess? They laugh, and look at each other in a most killing manner, surely, that cannot proceed from considering the theory of the movements of Pawns and Rooks; no, they are playing a different game (i. e.) the game of love, a species of gamboling, in which no playing for MONEY is allowed. How many subalterns at Chess are constantly checked by the languishing looks of their fair antagonists,

which take away their attention from the game; little they think how soon they will be check-mated. Such scenes may take place among ladies and gentlemen in India as well as in England; Montaigne one of the greatest essayists and egotists (vide Spectator) that have ever lived, condemns the game of Chess as requiring too much reflection for a game, he must have been alluding to making love at chess, to decide the end of which, certainly requires some reflection; but suppose the girl is engaged to some other, while you are making love; the lover must now proceed to duelling.

Honour, that single word honour, "dearer to man than even life," yes, honour is the cause of every duel (i. e.) a single combat, at a time and place appointed in consequence of a challenge. Many of our greatest writers, especially Steele in the Tatler, have written strongly against duelling, but I should question if they have done very much good. If honour is, as Shakspeare says, dearer to man than life, how is a dispute to be settled, but by the duel. Whenever a duel happens certainly all concerned therein ought to be severely punished, as in itself it is a great evil, but it is one of those evils out of which proceeds much good to society, that is even allowed by the

strictest enemies to duelling. In civil Society both in India and England, duelling does not now so often occur, it seems to have deserted it, and enlisted in the army, in which, we frequently hear of the most absurd duels, a young Officer especially, the moment he leaves off wearing a Pinafore, often imagines himself one complete mass of honour, as well as heroism, if any one tells him he did not do such a thing, when he says he did do it, he immediately foams at the mouth like a mad dog, and fancies his honour is injured, that his veracity is at stake, when perhaps a year or two before in the nursery, the nurse in making the same reply would have accompanied it with a box on the ear, and sent the young culprit to bed, to snore away his false notions of honour. Addison says" The great violation of the point of honour from man to man is giving the lie, the reason perhaps may be, because no other vice implies a want of courage, so much as the making of a lie; and therefore telling a man he lies, is touching him in the most sensible part of honour, and indirectly calling him a coward." From this saying of one of our wisest English moralists, let the junior branches of the army (especially) take a lesson. According to Blackstone "Deliberate duelling is by the law of England, a species of

murder; and accordingly it charges both the crime and punishment of murder on the principals, and as some say, on their seconds also." It appears to me a very strange thing, how any man really believing in a hereafter, can give himself up to fighting a duel, he stands on the brink of life, the next instant he or his comrade, may be in the regions of death, what feelings then must possess the dying man departing from the world, himself murdered, and bearing on his conscience the attempt to murder another, and all about one single word, honour. But" such is life," duels must sometimes take place; but among the junior Officers of the Army especially, let no pistols or swords be brought out, except in a case like that of Sheridan and Mathews, when the great orator obtained at the point of the sword, Miss Linley, the fair maid of Bath; then when his Juliet is in danger of being walked off by another, let him by all means rush out into the field, and demand satisfaction, but only in matters of such great importance.

POLYPHILUS.

Saturday, March 9, 1844.