I doubt the Totem theory of abstinence from certain foods, and fancy

somebody had noticed that certain diseases went with certain kinds of

food, and had prohibited those foods accordingly. There have been men

whose precepts we all follow without quite understanding why, and we say

these men were “in advance of their generation” or “born before their

time”; and yet the truth may be the other way--they were of their

generation and their time, but mankind has deteriorated since.

Whenever I look at bees, I feel misgivings about the future of mankind.

Think of the bees that invented the hexagonal cells, and the bees that

go on building these cells and yet go buzzing against glass panes in one

half of a window when the other half is open. The bees that could invent

such cells, would surely have ability enough to find their way round

glass. But bees are socialists; and socialism means that individuals of

great ability will be kept down, and all ability will gradually be

atrophied for want of use. I rather think that this is what has happened

to the bees, and may be happening to mankind.

Collingwood ate rats. He said ships’ rats were very clean feeders, and

he always had a dish of them at dinner when he was at sea; and I have

heard that many officers fought shy of invitations to the Admiral’s

table. No doubt his dish of rats was properly cooked; but rat may be as

dangerous as pig, considered as diet, since rats are also liable to

trichinosis. Amongst human beings the disease is very rare in England as

compared with Germany: they eat a great deal of smoked ham there, and

mere smoking does not kill trichinæ.

In former ages leprosy was common here. There was a hospital for lepers

this side of Newton, founded by John Gilberd, 4 October 1538, “for the

releff of powre lazar people wherof grete nomber with that diseas be now

infectid in that partis to the grete daunger of infection of moche

people to whom they use to resort and be conversant withal for lacke of

convenyent hospitals in the county of Devon for them.” There were much

older hospitals for lepers outside Exeter and Barnstaple and Tavistock

and other towns; but these were more or less monastic, and had suffered

from the dissolution of the monasteries. This hospital was then a

quarter of a mile outside Newton Bushell; but the town has spread beyond

it, and the old buildings have long since been replaced by alms-houses.

Leprosy is quite extinct; but I fear that people hereabouts are careless

in the cooking of cured food.

Leprosy would naturally be commoner before the Reformation, as so much

fish was eaten during fasts; and the fasts themselves made people weaker

and less able to resist disease. I agree with old folks here who say

that fasts should be a time of feasting for the poor. “Rich folk have

money to buy butcher’s meat in Lent as well as other times; and if they

will not eat’n, they should give’n to they as cannot buy.” However,

fasting was enjoined on rich and poor alike, and was deemed of more

importance than almost anything else. Machiavelli was not easily

shocked, but he drew the line at Sforza’s coming to Florence and eating

meat in Lent, _Istorie Fiorentine_, VII, anno 1471, “cosa in quel tempo

nella nostra città ancora non veduta.” I can myself remember how

frightfully Prince Napoleon shocked the pious French by eating

beef-steak on Good Friday.

Nobody thought of fasting here on any day except Good Friday; and

fasting meant no more than eating hot-cross-buns in addition to the

usual food. But whether it came as early as March 20 or as late as April

23, Good Friday was the great day for potato-planting. Whatever the

season was, potatoes planted on Good Friday came up better than potatoes

planted any other day--at least, that was the common belief here. There

must have been a religious or superstitious base for this, and perhaps

also for the custom of kicking a football round when the planting had

been done. (In my early years a football was hardly ever seen here

except on a Good Friday.) I have seen the sailors flogging Judas

Iscariot on Good Fridays in Mediterranean ports, and I hear it may be

seen on foreign ships in English ports. Judas Iscariot is there a dummy

like Guy Fawkes and here, I think, he had become a football. But it is

always hard to judge the meaning of such things. Some fifty years ago an

acquaintance of mine, a midshipman, went up to Jerusalem with a lot of

other midshipmen when the Mediterranean squadron was cruising off that

coast; and they marched into Jerusalem singing a song (which then was

popular) of Kafoosalum, ... the barber of Jerusalem, ... the daughter of

the barber. And good Mahommedans were much impressed, thinking it was a

holy song that these young angels sang so fervently.

There is now a service of Three Hours at Lustleigh on Good Friday. I

inquired what authority there was for this, and was informed

(officially) that it was a service licensed by the Bishop under the

Shortened Services Act. That was quite good as a bit of cynicism or a

joke, but rather past a joke if one remembers how that Act was passed

through Parliament. Its promoters said that it was only to be used for

shortening the old services, not for introducing anything new.

On the coronation of Queen Victoria there was a service in Exeter

Cathedral and ‘rejoicings’ in the town; and my father’s diary finds

fault--“the stupid dun of cannon, which even fired during the anthem,

shaking the edifice and distracting everyone’s attention”--and so on for

a couple of pages, finishing, “it seemed somewhat like a Good Friday: by

no means a favourite day of mine.”

There is no desire here for more Good Fridays or Ash Wednesdays, but

only for Shrove Tuesdays at all seasons of the year; and these Carnivals

are not followed by Lenten fasts. Carnivals are superseding Fêtes and

Galas, here called Feets and Gaylers; but knowing that a Swarry (or a

Soirée) consisted of a leg of mutton, I should say that every Carnival

or Feet or Gayler consists of a brass band ‘with the usual trimmings’

like the leg. It seems perverse of people to speak of fêtes as feets

when they invariably speak of beans as banes, and even more perverse to

want these foreign words at all. This coast is getting known as a

Riviera, which they pronounce Riveerer as if it were a German word.

I have got a bill here for ‘mendin gardin oz’--hose--and I have seen a

bill in Bedfordshire for ‘hoke’ and ‘hellum’ and ‘hash.’ With phonetic

spelling there would be as many written languages as there are dialects

now--water would be ‘warter’ in the Eastern counties, and ‘watter’ or

‘wetter’ here--but fonetic fanatics would take the cockney dialect and

foist it on us all. On looking at an Elementary English Grammar, of

which 350,000 have been sold, I found it said--“Take c out of the

alphabet, and we could write, kat, sity, speshal, instead of cat, city,

special, and in thus writing those words, we should be writing them

according to their pronunciation.” No doubt, the cockney news-boys

screech out ‘Extra Speshal’; but if we are to get pronunciation down

from town, we might get it from the West End rather than the East.

Sometimes people make mistakes here about the origin of

words--Reformatory is not Reform-a-Tory, as ardent Liberals said--and

sometimes they make mistakes about the words themselves. During the War

there was an entertainment for wounded soldiers at a house not far from

here; and they came up in chars-à-banc with bagpipes playing all the

way. I heard a small boy calling out, “Hearken to that music there,” and

another one snubbing him, “Bain’t music, ‘tbe the magpies.” On first

hearing of a Turkish bath, a girl assumed that it must be a turkeys’

bath. I picture an old turkey-cock jerking his head about and gobbling

while he was screwing up his courage for a header into the cold plunge.

A cockney was greeted by a man down here with courteous inquiries about

her health, “And how be you now? Be you all right?” The reply was, “No,

half right, half left, like you”; and he told me that he had to do a bit

of thinking afore he saw the sense of it. An old lady here surprised me

just as much in town. She had not been there before, though well

advanced in years; and I took her up in the Great Wheel at Earl’s Court

to get a good look round. She told me afterwards, “I were a-thinkin’ all

the time how Satan took our Lord up into an exceedin’ high place

a-seein’ all the kingdoms of the world.”

I once heard a cockney expressing her contempt for everybody born

elsewhere. She said with pride, “I was born and bred where I stand,” and

she was standing in a gutter in a slum. Londoners do not often give

themselves away like that: they usually are people of resource. I

complained to an umbrella-maker that a new umbrella kept turning

inside-out, and with a jerk I turned it inside out at once. He took the

umbrella, jerked it the other way and said, “You see, sir, it comes back

again quite easily.” I complained to a stationer that his envelopes did

not stick. He replied with dignity, “No, sir, they do not: we use only

the purest gum.”

On a spring morning I was coming out of Charing Cross station on my way

back from Algeria with a very sun-burnt face, about the colour of a red

geranium; and while my hansom was going slowly through the gates, I

heard a loafer say, “Look, Bill, ee’s come into bloom early this year.”

People are more courteous here. At a harvest supper there was a general

desire to sing, “For he’s a jolly good fellow,” but also a general

feeling that it would not be quite respectful: so they softened the

familiar term and sang without restraint, “For he’s a jolly good

gentleman.” And this version suits the tune so well that anyone would

think the tune was written for it.--I am told that when I go to sleep, I

snore. One afternoon I asked why the letters had not been brought in to

me as soon as they arrived; and the answer was, “I was afraid I might

disturb you, sir, I thought I heard you sleeping.”

There is a House of Mercy at Bovey, a Gothic Revival building designed

by Woodyer about 1865. Its inmates come from every part of England, not

especially from Devon; and they have been described to me as “Maidens as

hath gotten babies without ever goin’ nigh a church,” in other words,

unmarried mothers. But less courteous terms were used when laundry-work

was started there. One old lady gave me her whole mind--not merely a bit

of it--about “they paltry gentry as took their washin’ away from honest

folk to give it to they hussies.” The practical mind thought it a waste

of money to have such institutions: the inmates could be married off, at

much less cost, by giving them dowers. And really there is just as much

marrying for money among the poorer classes as among the rich, though

the amount of money may be smaller and sometimes very small indeed.

Under a farmer’s will his farm went to his only son, but nearly all the

stock was sold for paying the daughters’ legacies, as he had not

reckoned on a fall in prices. The young man only got an unstocked farm

and had no money for stocking it; but an aged relative of his made light

of that. She said to me, “I tell’n he must marry one that hath some

hornéd cattle,” and he chafed at such restriction of his choice. Another

old lady, a relative of hers, was asking after a friend of mine who had

been badly wounded in the War. I told her that he had quite recovered,

and added that he had married his nurse: whereat she threw up her hands,

exclaiming, “Oh, that War, it hath been a terrible thing for some of’n.”

There was an old saying here, “I would rather go to the funeral of a

daughter than to her wedding of a doctor.” My grandfather quotes it in a

letter of 30 November 1865 as if he quite agreed with it, and adds,

“Strange, those doctors are always poor, and a miserable affair of it

generally.” He did not much approve of marrying for love, or anything

else, unless there were sufficient means. I remember that he thought the

answer insufficient when somebody had cried out, “There she is, marrying

him all in the depths of poverty,” and another person answered, “He hath

blood.”

In his letters to my father on the death of relatives or friends, he

enumerates all possible grounds of consolation. Thus, 30 June 1854,

“Therefore on reflection I say we ought to be very thankful he was taken

off as he was without pain or suffering.” He says this of a friend who

had been staying with him a week before in full vigour of body and mind,

and died just after leaving here from unsuspected weakness of the heart.

In most cases he finds so many grounds for consolation that he comes

very near saying it is really a good riddance. Thus, 18 September 1853,

“On the whole, taking everything into consideration, I say there is

nothing to grieve about, but all his friends ought to be thankful he is

taken.” Again on 6 October 1853, “I should say a happy release for his

mother,” and on 10 January 1855, “A happy release, I say, for himself

and all about him,” and on 16 January 1855, “I say we ought all to be

thankful he is taken before his sister, for what he would have done, had

she been taken first, I cannot tell.”

This practical or utilitarian view was not uncommon here. He writes

about a death at Lustleigh, 7 September 1845, “She died last evening.

What will the old man do now. When his wife was very ill, I inquired for

her. He said she was not likely to live, but then (he said) we can do

without her. This is his son’s wife, a clever woman; and what they will

do now, I am at a loss to say, for they have neither wife nor daughter,

and of course must trust to a housekeeper.”

My grandmother generally saw things in another light. She writes to my

father on 19 February 1845, “Report says we are to have Jane for a

neighbour. It appears she has captivated Mr ***** and in due time, I

suppose, will become his wife. It will be an excellent match for Jane.

He is considered very wealthy and I believe a very nice man. He has

called here several times and repeatedly requested your father to visit

him: your father calls on no person, I am sorry to say.” Writing on 23

February, my grandfather just mentions the report and adds, “Depend on

it, Jane will soon turn things upside down there.”

On another marriage he writes, 16 November 1851, “Your mother had a full

and particular account of the wedding the day after.... I have often

heard of throwing an old shoe after a new married couple to wish them

good luck. I never knew it practised in Moreton but once, and then [the

bride’s father] ran out in the street and threw an old shoe after the

carriage. It did not carry luck with it, for that was an unfortunate

marriage, so the story was he ought to have thrown more. To obviate all

that, they threw shoes by the dozen: all the old shoes were looked up

and thrown after and about the carriage like grape shot. Well, I hope

they will be happy.”

As he thought all this worth mentioning, he might as well have gone to

see it for himself, and also gone to see much else; but that was not his

way. He writes on 9 June 1862, “This is Whitmonday, and the bells are

ringing for two weddings that are solemnized today, so Lustleigh will be

gay in addition to the usual holyday for the labourers and the children.

I see nothing of it, but generally hear a squall of children and the

hoarse voice of the men at the skittle playing. I give something to set

the children a-running and something for the fiddler.” A younger man, of

great ability, told my sister what he thought about it all, 11 October

1870, “He thought living in this remote part enough to rust the brains

of any clever man, as you might pass a month without meeting anyone who

could talk on any subject above pigs and cows.”

Flocks and herds, or pigs and cows, are not bad themes for talk, if

anyone can handle themes judiciously and keep them in their

place--flocks and herds are not like golf. But in reality they may be

burdensome. My grandfather notes with pleasure, 13 December 1841, “My

cows are regularly fed, three times a day, unlike farmer’s cows which

catch what they can,” and then rather wearily, 10 August 1869, “My farm

is a trouble and expense.” And the lesson is, never have a hobby that

you cannot cast aside. You want no needless worries at a time when you

have one foot in the grave and then get the gout in the other one.

In my father’s diary of his first visit to London he speaks of pictures

at the Royal Academy and National Gallery and elsewhere, but the only

artist whom he mentions by name is Benjamin West. This was in 1832, and

West had died in 1820; he had been President of the Academy for nearly

thirty years and was still in high repute. There are two wash drawings

here signed, ‘B. West, 1785’ and ‘B. West, Windsor, 1788.’ The latter is

one of his designs for the friezes at the Queen’s Lodge, built by George

the Third and since destroyed. It is four feet long and seven inches

high, with thirty-three figures personifying arts and sciences; the fine

arts in the middle, the peaceful arts and sciences on one side and the

warlike on the other. The earlier drawing is of Segestes giving his

daughter to Germanicus as a hostage for Arminius. This was a favourite

subject then, and West painted several pictures of it, the earliest in

1772.

West’s drawings are generally a great deal better than his paintings,

and Galt gives the reason in his _Life of West_, II. 204.--In drawing

and colouring he was one of the greatest artists of his age, but his

powers of conception were far higher; “and it is this wonderful force of

conception which renders his sketches so much more extraordinary than

his finished pictures.” West is in oblivion now with most of the

Academicians of his time, except the portrait painters. (There is a

picture by one of those Academicians in Teign Grace church, a Madonna by

James Barry, quite unnoticed now.) But repute depends on fashion, not on

merit; and many artists of less merit are extolled.

Rustic critics judge things in a different way. Two large oil paintings

here were praised--“There bain’t no other’n like’n in this parish, no,

nor yet the next: look at their size and finish.” A portrait was praised

also as a speaking likeness--“Why, any blind man could tell ‘twere he.”

(Portraits, I may note, are known as photos here, even portraits of old

ancestors; and ‘photos’ is coming to include all kinds of pictures, as

‘pictures’ now means movies.) I brought a very good Persian carpet down

from London, and the criticism was--“Well, and if you’d got that old bit

by you, I d’esay it were all so well as buyin’ a new’n.”

A friend of my mother’s writes to her from Brighton, 28 October 1841, “I

have been twice to be charmed though not mesmerized by that delightful

pet of yours Jullien and his helps (at the Town Hall) and a very grand

affair they made of it. After beautiful Overtures, Waltzes and a capital

set of Irish Quadrilles by Jullien, they gave us the Storming of St Jean

d’Acre in perfection. The piece commenced with a slow movement of ‘God

save the Queen,’ and after sundry descriptive morceaux the attack began

and Jullien was in all his glory. Bombs, cannon, musquetry, bells

tolling, shouts of victory, etc., and lots of blue lights, Roman Candles

and last (though not least in effect) that beautiful rich crimson light

that you saw last year.” And one of my great-aunts who liked all that,

complained in later years that Wagner was so noisy.

Jullien brought Berlioz to England. My father was at the Opera, 25 June

1853, for the first night of _Benvenuto Cellini_, and was impressed by

it, or rather by the final scene, the casting of the statue. And it

might be more impressive now with better stage machinery for it--the

furnace, the molten metal running down into the mould, and then the

breaking of the mould revealing the great figure of Perseus still aglow

with heat.--The real statue is said to be Cellini’s masterpiece; but I

do not agree. I think myself that he surpassed it in the relief of

Perseus and Andromeda on the pedestal below.

On first hearing Boito’s _Mefistofele_ I recognized the chirruping of

the angels as a familiar sound, but could not recollect where I had

heard it. I had really heard it in expresses between Paris and

Marseilles. Some of the P.L.M. carriages had wheels, or springs, or

something, which gave forth just that sound when they were running fast;

and it may be heard on some of the G.W.R. carriages, but with a

different rhythm and pitch. A railwayman assures me that the English

engines talk and (being foul-mouthed creatures) use unseemly words.

Since learning this from him, I have distinctly heard an engine saying,

“blów and blást it, fétch anóther,” when sent off up these gradients

here with load enough for two; and then, quite cheerfully, “nów I’ve

dóne it, nów I’ve dóne it,” when it has reached the top.

Writing from Teignmouth on 3 August 1854, my grandfather says, “There is

nothing new here, but a ship of this place has just arrived literally

gutted by the Greek pirates. She was laden with raisins. The crew were

obliged to beg for their lives, they had but three biscuits left on

coming to Falmouth. That must be put stop to somehow.” Greece was a

nuisance then: the coast had been blockaded by the English fleet, and

French and English troops were landed at the Piræus in May to stop the

Greeks from siding with the Russians in the Crimean war. He writes on 2

April, “As war is declared, the papers will be interesting. I fancy

people have been too sanguine.”

After the Coup d’état he writes from here, 7 December 1851, “Well, the

President is taking very high ground, and no doubt he will make himself

Emperor, if he can keep the Army on his side,” and further on 26

January, “What a scoundrel that President is.” But he went astray in

saying that the President would not become Emperor “without a desperate

struggle,” and still further astray on 12 October 1851 in generalizing

from some undesirables whom he had seen, “America must now be made up of

outcasts and rogues of all nations.”

In one of his letters--it looks just like the rest--he says on 17

December 1843, “I can scarcely tell if I am not writing plainer and more

legibly than usual, as it is by candle, but I fancy so. I am writing

with a metal pen. When at Moreton last, I bought some and am much

pleased with them, for my sight is so bad that even with the assistance

of glasses I cannot make a pen by candle light and very badly by

daylight.” Twenty years after that, I was taught to make a pen (that is,

to cut a quill into a point) as one of the things that every child must

learn. Metal pens did not come into common use until after 1840, though

introduced some years before, and many people still despised them. A

friend of my father’s writes to him, 13 September 1856, “I hope you will

be able to read my letter, but as I write with a steel pen, I am not

quite certain of it.” Few people now could write so neatly with a quill;

and his writing here is just as neat as ever.

Old letters and diaries can be trusted when they are recording facts;

but they have never been revised, and may contain opinions which the

writers would have modified on second thoughts. My father writes to my

sister from Perugia, 17 September 1876, “This is the most curious and

romantic place I ever saw: Laon is nothing to it.” Curious and romantic

places generally had bad hotels, and Perugia had a good one; and I

suspect this made him view the place benignantly and give it this

excessive praise. He notes in his diary, 24 August 1874, “Elbe scenery

rather fine, tho’ not equal to the Danube, Rhine or Moselle, but better

than the Meuse or Loire.” He wrote this at Dresden, just after coming

down the Elbe from Schandau; and I imagine he was thinking of the

scenery there, forgetting other parts.

Small Talk at Wreyland. Third Series · 第 9 / 10 段