where I am to be found." A further altercation ensued; but his

Lordship being at the other end of the stand, did not distinctly
hear it, and then the parties retired.

`Lord Dartrey, afterwards Lord Cremorne, and his lady, with a
gentleman, were at the inn at the time the duel was fought. They

went into the garden and endeavoured to prevent the duel; several
other persons were collected in the garden. Mr Rowlls desired

his Lordship and others not to interfere; and on a second attempt
of his Lordship to make peace, Mr Rowlls said, if they did not

retire, he must, though reluctantly, call them impertinent. Mr
England at the same time stepped forward, and took off his hat;

he said--"Gentlemen, I have been cruelly treated; I have been
injured in my honour and character; let reparation be made, and I

am ready to have done this moment." Lady Dartrey retired.
His Lordship stood in the bower of the garden until he saw Mr

Rowlls fall. One or two witnesses were called, who proved
nothing material. A paper, containing the prisoner's defence,

being read, _the Earl of Derby, the Marquis of Hertford, Sir
Whitbread, jun., Colonel Bishopp, and other gentlemen_, were

called to his character. They all spoke of him as a man of
_decent gentlemanly deportment_, who, instead of seeking

quarrels, was studious to avoid them. He had been friendly to
Englishmen while abroad, and had rendered some service to the

military at the siege of Newport.
`Mr Justice Rooke summoned up the evidence; after which the jury

retired for about three quarters of an hour, when they returned a
verdict of "manslaughter."

`The prisoner having fled from the laws of his country for twelve
years, the Court was disposed to show no lenity. He was

therefore sentenced to pay a fine of one shilling, and be
imprisoned in Newgate twelve months.'

This trial took place in the year 1796, and the facts in evidence
give a strange picture of the times. A duel actually fought in

the garden of an inn, a noble lord close by in a bower therein,
and his lady certainly within _HEARING_ of the shots, and

doubtless a spectator of the bloodyspectacle. But this is not
the point,--the incomprehensible point,--to which I have

alluded--which is, how Lord Derby and the other gentlemen of the
highest standing could come forward to speak to the character of

_DICK ENGLAND_, if he was the same man who killed the
unfortunate brewer of Kingston?

Here is _ANOTHER_ account of the matter, which warrants the
doubt, although it is fearfully circumstantial, as to the certain

identity:--
`Mr William Peter le Rowles, of Kingston, brewer, was habitually

fond of play. On one occasion he was induced--when in a state of
intoxication--to play with Dick England, who claimed, in

consequence, winnings to the amount of two hundred guineas. Mr
le Rowles utterly denied the debt, and was in consequence pursued

by England until he was compelled to a duel, in which Mr le
Rowles fell. Lord Dartrey, afterwards Lord Cremorne, was present

at Ascot Heath races on the fatal occasion, which happened in
1784; and his evidence before the coroner's inquest produced a

verdict of wilful murder against Dick England, who fled at
the time, but returned twelve years afterwards, was tried, and

found guilty of manslaughter only. He was imprisoned for twelve
months. England was strongly suspected of highway robberies;

particularly on one occasion, when his associate, F--, was shot
dead by Col. P-- on his return from the Curragh races to the town

of Naas. The Marquis of Hertford, Lords Derby and Cremorne,
Colonels Bishopp and Wollaston, and Messrs Whitbread, Breton,

&c., were evidences in the trial.'[145]
[145] _The Gaming Calendar_, by Seymour Harcourt.

It may seem strange that such a man as Dick England could procure
such distinguished `witnesses to character.' The thing is easily

explained, however. They knew the man only as a turf companion.
We can come to no other conclusion,--remembering other instances

of the kind. For example, the case of Palmer, convicted for the
poisoning of Cooke. Had Palmer been on his trial merely for

fighting a fatal duel; there can be no doubt that several
noblemen would have come forward to give him a good character. I

was present at his trial, and saw him _BOW TO ONE, AT LEAST, OF
OUR MOST DISTINGUISHED NOBLEMEN_ when the latter took his

seat near the judge, at the trial. There was a _TURF
ACQUAINTANCESHIP_ between them, and, of course, all

`acquaintanceship' may be presumed upon, if we lay ourselves open
to the degradation.

The following is a curious case in point. A gentleman of the
highest standing and greatest respectability was accosted by a

stranger to whom he said--`Sir, you have the advantage of me.'
`Oh!' rejoined the former, `don't you remember when we used to

meet at certain parties at Bath many years ago?' `Well, sir,'
exclaimed the gentleman, `you may speak to me should you ever

again meet me at certain parties at Bath, but nowhere else.'
MAJOR BAGGS.

This famous gamester died in 1792, by a cold caught in `a round-
house,' or place of detention, to which he had been taken by

Justice Hyde, from a gaming table.
When too ill to rise out of his chair, he would be carried in

that chair to the Hazard table.
He was supposed to have been the utter ruin of above forty

persons at play. He fought eleven duels.
THE DUC DE MIREFOIX.

The Duc de Mirefois was ambassador at the British Court, and was
extremely fond of chess. A reverend gentleman being nearly his

equal, they frequently played together. At that time the
clergyman kept a petty day-school in a small village, and had a

living of not more than twenty pounds a-year. The French
nobleman made uncommon interest with a noble duke, through whose

favour he obtained for his reverend protege a living of
about L600 per annum--an odd way of obtaining the `cure of

souls!'
A RECLAIMED GAMBLER'S ACCOUNT OF HIS CAREER.

`Some years since I was lieutenant in a regiment, which the alarm
and policy of administration occasioned to be quartered in the

vicinity of the metropolis, where I was for the first time. A
young nobleman of very distinguished family undertook to be my

conductor. Alas! to what scenes did he introduce me! To places
of debauchery and dens of destruction. I need not detail

particulars. From the lures of the courtesan we went to an
adjoining gaming room. Though I thought my knowledge of

cards superior to those I saw play that night, I touched no card
nor dice. From this my conductor, a brother officer, and myself

adjourned to Pall Mall. We returned to our lodgings about six
o'clock in the morning.

`I could think of nothing but Faro's magic centre, and longed for
the next evening, when I determined to enter that path which has

led so many to infamy, beggary, and suicide. I began cautiously,
and for some time had reason to be satisfied with my success. It

enabled me to live expensively. I made golden calculations of my
future fortune as I improved in skill. My manuals were treatises

on gaming and chances, and no man understood this doctrine better
than I did. I, however, did not calculate the disparity of

resisting powers--my purse with _FIFTY_ guineas, and the Faro
bank with a hundred thousand. It was ruin only which opened my

eyes to this truism at last.
`Good meats, good cooking, and good wines, given gratis and

plenteously, at these houses, drew many to them at first, for the
sake of the society. Among them I one evening chanced to see a

clerical prig, who was incumbent of a parish adjoining that