RANDOM SHOTS

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 263, 10 November 1906, Page 12

RANDOM SHOTS

BY

lomt Z3& name to lash; cash? am thou e ht — for needful Some write.to mease fhe country Cash, Wnr. ~, a ra »se a din. ' *or mc an aim I never fash— I write for fun.

I have to acknowledge with thanks a copy of the -'Northeote Athenaeum Meteor, which is. I gather from the uue page, published under the auspices ot the A-ortheobe Ldterary, Mimical Debating and Dramatic Society. It may or may not interest the members of the said society to learn that I have road tins issue (Vol. 1., No. 2) with a good deal of care and same amusement, it really is very public-spirited of this suburban organisation to start a new paper, more especially as its politics *™ n °t likely to clash with those of the - tar. ' But I grieve to observe that according to an advertisement on the first page, tho "Meteor" is already in want of a working editor. Because I am afraid that editors are born, not made; at least the kind of editor who is prepared to devote his whole time. to the interests of the society, and he. content with "the love and affection "f a grateful people."' Now, please don't tel] mc that this is one of the "Meteor's" best jokes. I know it. Only I thought it would be a neat and ingenious way of introducing the style of the ZSforthcote Athenaeum organ to the notice of my readers. 4<*2-"J**!;"l'"i"l"'"i"]'' Here is a specimen of colonial advertising that ought to be hard to beat. It is taken, so my informant alleges, from the shop of a small butcher in a Southern city, and it consists oi the prices and labels attached to various brands and varieties of steak. It runs as follows: — "Prime steak, 1/2 per lb; extra quality steak, 1/ per lb; best steak, lLd. per lb; steak, 10d. per lb." Suggestive, isn't it? I don't know exaotly what difference there ought to be between "prime" and "extra quality" in stea.k; exceipt, of course, that the difference seerus to be 2\l a pound. Ana when you come to "best" steak at 3d a, pound less than "prime," I confess that I am even more bewildered. Bait I have given up trying to understand the advertisement, and ha.ye devoted myself to enjoying the dull, hea.vy thud that the solitary word "steak" makes at the end of the list. That appeals i,o mc as really b. splendid stroke of humour—the flat contempt suggested for the kind of steak t/hat -can't afford a descriptive adjective in front of it. ?Cow that I come to think of it, I have seen something like it before in one of Barries novels:—"Egsjs, warranted, 1/ per dozroi; pggs, fresh, lid per dozen : eggs, Od. per dozen." Perhaps it. is only ><» coincidence after all; because I don't suppose that the butchers in Roiuthern towns spend much time over such books as '"When a Man's Single." *********^> T have recently observed in two separate English papers more or less disparaging remarks about the "moral standard" of the colonies. I was greatly relieved to find on investigation that the remarks in both cases referred to the fact that in these glorious lands we may, if so inclined, marry our deceased wife's sister. It is not a step that is always to be advocated, of course. But I can't pee the moral objection myself; nor can I see thp good taste or the good sense of denouncing other people's notions of morality because they don't square with one's own. Which reminds mc of the best joke that this rather gloomy subject has ever introduced to public notice. At ■1 he last election —though I don't doubt that the yarn is told about any number of elections — a free and independent voter asked the candidate if he ■was in favour of the Deceased Wife's Sister Bill. "Yes. certainly,'' was the answer. "Then/ said the elector, "you don't git my vote. I ain't agoin' to be forced to marry anybody, lot alone my wife's sister Jane —not mc!" The poor man had been told that the bill was ''obligatory and not permissive." I rather like that story. "Zaniiel ,, is nothing if not impartial, and therefore he hastens to admit that the Domestic Help question, like most other questions, has got two very distinct sides. I have received a letter from c. young lady—l presume that she is young—pointing out that my previous remarks about the tyranny now exercised by domestic servants don't' represent the real state of affairs. Now, I don't think that I over suggested that all "girls" demand time for music lessons or promptly give notice when their mistress suggests a change in the breakfist hour. But some of '-.hem do. On the other hand, my fair correspondent — I'm sure she is fair —has convinced mc Knot that I needed convincing) that under some circumstances it is not the "domostie" who is the real tyrant of the hearth and home. The tale she tells is really the sort of thing that should make any man with any sense of Christian charity demand the immediate formation of a Society for the Protection of Downtrodden Domestic Helps. She was nursery housemaid (whatever that may be) in a family that included five small children, and lived in a 19-roomed liouse. She got up before six in the morning, got five children ready for breakfast before eight o'clock, had five minutes for her own breakfast, and was on her feet practically all day till 8.30. Often shi had to prepare late suppers for guests, and frequently her "Sundayaftornoon' , was cut short at either end, and generally speaking she seems to have been treated with as little courtesy or consideration as one human being could possibly show another. It is certainly wp -ry sad, and I haven't a word to say *n defence of the unknown miswess or the five badly-behaved children. 1 know this is serious—and I am only putting it i n t h is column because my correspondent thinks I ought not always "for fun." Nor do I. Only get as tragic as this I wish ttarks awV 6luded int ° makil * re " ieadSg em under this reticular