A Prince and a Poltron. . .

This is the second of three crudely satiric prints—all published by James Aitken and all related to a somewhat confusing but very public dispute between the Prince of Wales's brother, the Duke of York, and Lt. Colonel Charles Lennox, a member of the Duke's regiment in the Cold Stream Guards.* (The other two prints are Brunswick Triumphant, or The Battle of the Bloods and The Coward Comforted.) This one purports to show the outcome of the dispute— a duel between York and Lennox which took place on Tuesday the 26th of May on Wimbledon Common. Lord Rawdon (also known as Lord Moira) served as Second for the Prince; the Earl of Winchelsea was Second for Lennox.

Accounts of the duel appeared almost immediately in many of the newspapers of the day with some interesting and significant differences in detail.** A separate account was also provided by the two Seconds at the duel in order to set the record straight and was reprinted in several of the papers. Here is that account from the London St James Chronicle Or British Evening Post, May 26, 1789,Pg. 4,:

To preclude the unfounded representations, which may be propagated respecting the affair that took place this day, the Seconds think it necessary to give the following authenticated account.

In consequence of a dispute already known to the public, His Royal Highness the Duke of York, attended by Lord Rawdon, and Lieutenant Colonel Lennox, accompanied by the Earl of Winchelsea, met at Wimbledon Common. The ground was measured at twelve paces, and both parties were to fire upon a signal agreed upon. The signal being given. Lieutenant Colonel Lennox fired, and the ball grazed His Royal Highness's curl. The Duke of York did not fire. Lord Rawdon then interfered, and said, "That he thought enough had been done." Lieutenant Colonel Lennox observed, "That his Royal Highness had not Fired." Lord Rawdon said, "it was not the Duke's intention to fire; His Royal Highness had come out upon Lieutenant Colonel Lennox's desire, to give him satisfaction, and had no animosity against him." Lieutenant Colonel Lennox pressed that the Duke of York should fire, which was declined, upon a repetition of the reason. Lord Winchelsea then went up to the Duke of York, and expressed his hope, "that his R. H. could "have no objection to say, he considered Lieut. Col. Lennox as a man of honour and courage." His H. replied, "that he should say nothing; he had come out to give Lieut. Col. Lennox satisfaction, and did not mean to fire at him; if Lieut. Col, Lennox was not satisfied, he might fire again." Lieut. Col. Lennox said, " he could not possibly fire again at the Duke, as his Royal Highness did not mean to fire at him."

On this, both parties left the ground. The Seconds think it proper to add, that both parties behaved with the most perfect coolness and intrepidity.

Signed,
WINCHELSEA
RAWDON
Tuesday evening May 26, 1789.

Assuming that the account of the Seconds is more or less accurate, we can see that the print is clearly biased in favor of the Prince. And the over-riding theme of that bias is to portray Lennox as a poltroon, i.e. a coward, and as in Brunswick Triumphant a coward whose character was determined by his Stuart lineage. (Gillray purposely uses the French spelling of the word (poltron) to further associate Lennox with the hated Stuarts.) Even though Lennox is doubly armed (and his Second is equipped with a veritable arsenal of weapons), both he and Winchelsea are shown as visibly shaking with fear. Their posture is contrasted with the firm and upright stance of Rawdon and the Prince who (in this account) is shown firing into the air (which is a lot more dramatic than simply refusing to fire). The speech bubbles of the print similarly represent an exaggerated version of the event with Lennox himself first using the word "coward."

I hope your H—gh—ss is satisfied now that I am a Man of Honor, by my firing thro' your hair – & that you will retract the opinion of my being a Coward.

The Prince's retort is also a good deal stronger than his simple refusal to say anything.

Satisfied? yes I am satisfied! that your whole race are a set of dastards! – & you may fire at me till the day of Judgment, e'er I will retract my opinion – or honor a Coward, by putting him out of the World!

As if that were not enough, Rawdon then further emphasizes race and the Stuart connection, urging the Prince to "make them eat their own words. . . thats the way to quiet Charles's-bastard-brood."

** In the Whitehall Evening Post (May 26), for instance, the crucial post-firing exchange between the Duke and Lennox was reported very differently:

'Your Highness; has not fired.' 'I have not,' replied the Duke; 'I will now tell you publicly, what I before communicated privately to Lord Rawdon, I did not mean to fire – I came here only in obedience to your summons.' "I trust then,' replied the Colonel, 'that your Highness is now convinced that you were mistaken, –and that you will justify my character as a man of honour.' 'I shall be very ready to say,' rejoined his Royal Highness, 'that, on this ground, you have behaved like a man of spirit, – and better than I think you behaved on the occasion to which I originally alluded.'

In the London St James Chronicle or British Evening Post for May 26, it was also reported that

when the Duke of York took his ground, he stood with a full front to his Antagonist. Lord Rawdon cried out, "Sir, for God's sake don't stand so – turn your side front." The Duke did so. How fortunately, the event has proved.

Sources and Reading

• Commentary from the British Museum on A Prince and a Poltron. . ..
• "Prince Frederick, Duke of York and Albany," Wikipedia
• "Francis Rawdon-Hastings, 1st Marquess of Hastings," Wikipedia
• "Charles Lennox, 4th Duke of Richmond," Wikipedia
• "George Finch, 9th Earl of Winchilsea," Wikipedia
• Thomas Wright and Joseph Grego, The Works of James Gillray, the Caricaturist; With the History of His Life and Times, p. 110.