Did the good neighbour go by the cheap excursion? Yes, the good
neighbour did go by the cheap excursion, and so did his wife, his
wife's mother, and his six children. Did he catch the cab of the early
driver? No, he did not catch the cab of the early driver, but he used
the omnibus of the sleeping coachman, who took him as far as half-way
(half-way as far as). Had the good neighbour to finish the journey to
the railway station on foot? Yes, he had, and so had his wife, his
wife's mother, and his six children. Are they in a good temper, or
a bad temper? They are in a bad temper, because it is raining, and
because the mother of the wife of the good neighbour had not wished to
go. Have they found the right train? No, they have not found the right
train, but are entering carriages bound for another destination. Has
the guard of the wrong train disturbed the good neighbour, his wife,
his wife's mother, and his six children? The guard of the wrong train
has disturbed them, and has thrust them into the bad carriages of the
right train. Were not the bad carriages of the right train already
crowded? They were already crowded with the hairdresser, the artist's
model, the plasterers, the builders, the sweeps, the fruiterers, and
the quiet young man who contributes poetry to the columns of a local
paper. Did not the entrance of the good neighbour, his wife, his
wife's mother, and his six children, inconvenience the hairdresser,
the artist's model, the plasterers, the builders, the sweeps, the
fruiterers, and the quiet young man who contributes poetry to the
columns of the local paper? It did, and caused most of them to use
bad language (_i.e._, oaths). Did the quiet young man who contributes
poetry to the columns of a local paper use bad language? No, the quiet
young man who contributes poetry to the columns of a local paper
did not use bad language, because he was in a fit. How did the good
neighbour enjoy his journey? The good neighbour did not enjoy his
journey, because he had to submit to the smoke of the hairdresser, the
lavender water of the artist's model, the snuff of the plasterers, the
smoke of the builders, the concertinas of the sweeps, the comic songs
of the fruiterers, and the gasps of the quiet young man who contributes
poetry to the columns of a local paper. Did the good neighbour have
to submit to any further inconvenience? Yes, he was abused by his
wife, bullied by his wife's mother, and plagued by his six children.
Was the weather at the destination of the good neighbour favourable?
No, it was not favourable, as it rained heavily all day. Did the good
neighbour find time hang heavily on his hands? Yes, he did find time
hang heavily on his hands; but not so heavily as his wife, his wife's
mother, and six children. Did the good neighbour, his wife, his wife's
mother, and his six children get sufficient to eat? No, they did not
get sufficient to eat; but they discussed the broken scraps left at
a shilling ordinary (_i.e._, ordinary price one shilling). Were they
happy to get home? Yes, they were happy to get home; but had to return
with the hairdresser, the artist's model, the plasterers, the builders,
the sweeps, the fruiterers, but not the quiet young man who contributes
poetry to the columns of a local paper. Were the hairdresser, the
artist's model, the plasterers, the sweeps, and the fruiterers more
noisy at night than they had been in the morning? Yes, they were more
noisy, because they had all been drinking the much-adulterated beer of
the prosperous but dishonest publican. Did the good neighbour arrive at
home at last? Yes, the good neighbour did arrive at home at last, but
more dead than alive (_i.e._, aliver than more dead). Will the wife of
the good neighbour, her mother, and her six children go on a similar
trip on the next suitable occasion? They will go, but they will not be
accompanied, if he can help it, by the good neighbour. Will the good
neighbour be able to help it? No, the good neighbour will not be able
to help it; so he will accompany his wife, his wife's mother, and his
six children, protesting. Will the good neighbour use good language?
No, the good neighbour will use bad language. Will the bad language of
the good neighbour be very wrong? Yes, the bad language of the good
neighbour will be very wrong, but it will not be unnatural.
* * * * *
On the Cards.
M'CARTHY a-cudgelling HEALY now starts,
And HEALY mild JUSTIN remorselessly drubs.
Alas, that long over-due "Union of _Hearts_,"
Will become a Collision of _Clubs!_
* * * * *
MONOPOLY.--M. MAX O'RELL, who has commonly "a guid
conceit o' himsel'," and shows it, with more than Scottish--or, as _he_
says, Scotch--simplicity, dislikes the monopolist egotism shown in the
phrase "an English gentleman." "A gentleman of France" would perhaps
less shock his fine altruistic sensibilities. He suggests that speaking
of a courteous Scot we dub him "an _English_ gentleman," but were he a
murderer should call him "a _Scotch_ murderer." Perhaps he will write
a new book, and call it "JOHN BULL and his _Bile_." "It is
wonderful" (he continues) "how JOHN BULL manages to monopolise
all that is good, and let the rest of the world partake of what he does
not want." Well, not entirely, perhaps. For example, JOHN BULL
does not wish to "monopolise" MAX O'RELL himself, though, of
course, he is "good," and full of "good things."
* * * * *
[Illustration: "The Sooner the Better."
FIRST PORTER (A. J. B.) "COME MATE! PUT YOUR BACK INTO
IT--WE'VE GOT TO SHUNT _THIS_ BEFORE WE CAN GO OFF DUTY!"]
* * * * *
[Illustration: JUSTIN THE TERRIBLE!
_J. M'Carthy_ (_with dim recollection of Mr. Penley as the "Rev. Robert
Spalding"_). "DO YOU KNOW, TIMOTHY, IF YOU GO ON LIKE THIS, I SHALL
HAVE TO GET _VERY CROSS_ WITH YOU; I SHALL REALLY HAVE TO GIVE YOU A
_GOOD HARD KNOCK!_"
* * * * *