Chapter 3

The Baron begs to recommend the latest volume of the Whitefriars Library, called _King Zub_, by W.H. POLLOCK. _Zub_ is a wise poodle, and the waggish tale of the dog gives the name to the collection. _The Fleeting Show_ is quite on a par with _The Green Lady_ in a former collection by the same author, and such other stories as _Sir Jocelyn's Cap_ and _A Phantom Fish_ will delight those who, like the Baron, love the mixture as before of the weird and the humorous. In the _Phantom Fish_ there is much local dialect, and The Baron coming across the expression, "a proper bender," is inclined to ask if this is not Zummerzetsheer for, and only applicable to, a running hare? The Baron remembers the expression well, though 'tis years since he heard it, and owns to being uncertain as to whether it is not Devonian or Cornish. That he heard it applied to a hare apparent he is prepared to make oath and say; but he is not in the least prepared to assert that it is not generally applied as an expression of admiration for adroitness in avoiding pursuit. "Be that as it may, give me _King Zub_ and the other stories, a good fire, a glass of spiritual comfort, a cosy chair, and a soothing pipe, and I am prepared to spend a pleasant evening," says

THE BARON DE BOOK-WORMS.

* * * * *

* * * * *

CONVERSATIONAL HINTS FOR YOUNG SHOOTERS.

(_BY MR. PUNCH'S OWN GROUSE IN THE GUN-ROOM._)

In our last (it is _Mr. Punch_ who speaks), we indicated very briefly the conversational possibilities of the Gun. It must be observed, that this treatise makes no pretensions to be exhaustive. Something must, after all, be left to the ingenuity of the young shooter who desires to talk of sport. All that these hints profess, is to put him in the way of shining, if there is a certain amount of natural brightness to begin upon. The next subject will be--

CARTRIDGES.

To a real talker, this subject offers an infinite variety of opportunities. First, you can begin to fight the battle of the powders, as thus:--

"What powder are you shooting with this year, CHALMERS?"

"Schultze."

"How do you find it kill?"

"Deadly--absolutely-deadly: best lot I've ever had."

You need not say anything more now. The discussion will get along beautifully without you, for you will have drawn, (1), the man who very much prefers E.C., which he warrants to kill at a distance no other powder can attain to; (2), the man who uses E.C. or Schultze for his right barrel, and always puts a black-powder cartridge into his left; (3), the detester of innovations, who means to go on using the good old black-powder for both barrels as long as he lives; and (4), the man who is trying an entirely new patent powder, infinitely superior to anything else ever invented, and is willing to give everybody, not only the address of the maker, but half a dozen cartridges to try.

You cannot make much of "charges" of powder. Good shots are dogmatic on the point, and ordinary shots don't bother their heads about it, trusting entirely to the man who sells them their cartridges. Still you might throw out, here and there, a few words about "drams" and "grains." Only, above all things, be careful _not_ to mention drams in connection with anything but black powder, nor grains, except with reference to Schultze or E.C. A laboriously-acquired reputation as a scientific shot has been known to be ruined by a want of clearness on this important point.

"Shot." Conversationally much more valuable than powder. "Very few people agree," says a well-known authority; "as to what is the best size of shot to use, and many forget that the charge which will suit one gun, and one description of game, will not do as well for another. Usually, one gun will shoot better one size of shot than will another, and we may safely say, that large bores shoot large shot better than do smaller bores." This last sentence has the beautiful ring of a profound truism. Lay it by for use, and bring it out with emphasis in the midst of such disagreement and forgetfulness as are here alluded to. "If a shooter is a good shot," says the same classic, "he may use No. 6 early in the season, and only for partridges--afterwards, nothing but No. 5. To the average shot, No. 6 throughout the season." This sounds dreadfully invidious. If a good shot cannot kill grouse with No. 6, how on earth is a merely average shot to do the trick? But, in these matters, the conversationalist finds his opportunity. Only they must not be pushed too far. There was once a party of genial, light-hearted friends, who went out shooting. Early in the day, slight differences of opinion made themselves observed with reference to the size of shot. Lunch found them still more or less good-tempered, but each obstinately determined not to give way even by a fraction on the point under discussion.

Afterwards they began again. The very dogs grew ashamed of the noise, and went home. That afternoon there was peace in the world of birds--at least, on that particular shooting--and the next morning saw the shooting-parties of England reduced by one, which had separated in different dog-carts, and various stages of high dudgeon, for the railway station. So, please to be very, very careful. Use the methods of compromise. If you find your friend obstinately pinned to No. 5, when you have declared a preference for No. 6, meet him half-way, or even profess to be converted by his arguments. Or tell him the anecdote about the Irishman, who always shot snipe with No. 4, because, "being such a little bird, bedad, you want a bigger shot to get at the beggar." You can then inform him how you yourself once did dreadful execution among driven grouse in a gale of wind with No. 8 shot, which you had brought out by mistake. You may object that you never, as a matter of fact, did this execution, never having even shot at all with No. 8. Tush! you are puling. If you are going to let a conscientious accuracy stand in your way like this, you had better become dumb when sporting talk is flying about. Of course you must not exaggerate too much. Only bumptious fools do that, and they are called liars for their pains. But a _little_ exaggeration, just a _soupçon_ of romance, does no one any harm, while it relieves the prosaic dullness of the ordinary anecdote. So, swallow your scruples, and

Join the gay throng That goes talking along, For we'll all go romancing to-day.

(_To be continued._)

* * * * *

DOE VERSUS ROE(DENT).

["The basements of the Royal Courts of Justice have lately been invaded by swarms of mice. They have become very audacious, and have penetrated into the Courts themselves, whose walls are lined with legal volumes, the leaves of which provide them with a rich feast."--_Daily Paper_.]

For students of the law to "eat Their terms" is obviously right, But to devour the books themselves Is impolite.

Unfortunately Mr. STREET. Who planned the legal edif-[=i]ce, Designed a splendid trap for men, But not for mice.

To view the Courts at midnight now, The Courts all in the stilly Strand, With rodents squeaking out their pleas, That _would_ be grand!

No Ushers 'ush them; they consume The stiffest calf you ever saw, Developing, these curious beasts, A taste for Law.

They fill--perhaps--the box wherein, Twelve bothered men have often sat, And try, with every proper form, Some absent cat.

A fore-mouse probably they choose, The culprit's advocate deride, And fix upon that cat the guilt Of mouseycide.

At the Refreshment-bars, perchance, They eat the cakes, and drink the milk, And in the Robing-room indulge In "taking silk."

The Judges' sacred Bench itself From scampering feet is not exempt; With calmness they commit, of Court, Frightful "contempt."

Through _Byles on Bills_ they eat their way; Law "Digests" they at will digest; Not even _Coke on Littleton_ Sticks on _their_ chests!

Wanted--the stodgiest Law-book out! The Judges soon _must_ note these facts, And try a copy of the Ju- -dicature Acts!

* * * * *

WHY THE FRENCH WON THE BOAT-RACE.

(_ANSWERS SUPPLIED BY AN UNPREJUDICED BRITON._)

Because the English Eight had had no practice on the Seine.

Because the Londoners had had a fearful passage crossing the Channel.

Because they smashed their boat, and had to have it repaired.

Because the English steering might have been better.

Because the weather was intolerable, and chiefly affected the Englishmen.

Because the Londoners had no chance of pulling together.

Because the French knew the course better than the English.

Because the race should have been rowed weeks before.

Because the race should not have been rowed for months.

Because the British naturally liked to see the foreigners win.

And last (and least), because the French had by far the better crew!

* * * * *

ECCLESIASTICAL INTELLIGENCE.--The style, title, office, and dignity of Archbishop of Canterbury, with all appurtenances thereto belonging, with all emoluments, spiritualities and temporalities appertaining, have been conferred by letters patent, under supreme authority, according to Act V. Henricus Noster in such cases made and provided, on the Rev. Mr. VINCENT, in consequence of the retirement of the Right Rev. ARTHUR STIRLING from the said office; the duties of which he so recently and so effectively performed between the hours of ten-thirty and eleven-fifteen every night for several months at the Theatre Royal Lyceum. We are in a position to add, that his resignation of this high and valuable office, has not taken place in consequence of any question as to the validity or invalidity of orders ("not admitted after 7·30"), nor has this step been rendered imperative by reason of any "irregularity" in "properties" or "appointments."

* * * * *

NOTICE.--Rejected Communications or Contributions, whether MS., Printed Matter, Drawings, or Pictures of any description, will in no case be returned, not even when accompanied by a Stamped and Addressed Envelope, Cover, or Wrapper. To this rule there will be no exception.