THE INTELLIGENT VAGRANT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4792, 1 August 1876, Page 3

THE INTELLIGENT VAGRANT.

(From the New Zealand Mail.) Quia scit an adjiciant hodierna; craatina summie Tempora Di Superi.—Horace. On the afternoon of Monday last a gentleman was announcing a public meeting, and attracting attention to his announcement by ringing a bell. The gentlemen who spoke at the meeting subsequently, would scarcely have been satisfied, however, if they had heard the exact manner in which the object of the meeting was described. It was announced as “ a meeting to perpetrate the memory of Dr. Featherston.” The bellman was not the only person, however, who got confused in his language this •week. Mr. Manders, M.H.E., was addressing the House on the subject of the central penal establishment at. Taranaki, and, becoming annoyed at the derisive laughter of Mr. Stout, got astray in what is usually his elegant diction. Consequently once, when he intended to speak of “ the criminal classes,” he said “ my criminal colleagues.” I got quite alarmed on Wednesday evening. Happening to be in the company of a gentleman belonging to the theatrical profession, he was suddenly taken aside by an excited person, who, in stage whisper, said to him, “I want to borrow a dagger for the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse to go to the fancy dress ball with.” At first it struck me that the Hon. Mr. Waterhouse must have limited ideas on the question of costume, but then I began to fear that he contemplated sinister designs, more especially when I remembered that, on the authority of Mr. O’Rorke, Sir Julius Vogel carries a dagger of perfidy concealed somewhere about his person. The liquors at Bellamy’s are undeniable in quality, and are a great boon to those entitled to use them, in consequence of their purity. But I was not aware until lately that a grateful country not only helped to provide them for members, but permitted their aale in bottles to gentlemen in the civil service stopping at hotels and not satisfied with the quality of the liquors procured at those hotels. Of course, the health of a civil servant is a paramount consideration, but, at the same time, if I were a landlord I should not care about competition of this land. A singular case has engaged the energies of honorable members. It was a case of a disputed bet, and was brought before an informal committee, who, having taken evidence, reported through their chairman as follows : This is a claim by Blank Blank, Esq., M.H.R., against Dash Dash, Esq., M.H.R., arising out of a bet made upon the results of the last election. It appears that the parties met at the Shamrock Hotel, Dunedin, shortly after the last session of the General Assembly. The hour was somewhat late, and the supply of whisky and water was, one might say, unlimited. One of the consequences was a bet made between the parties as to how many new members would be returned at the general election. The plaintiff bet that over 40 new men would be returned, and backed his opinion for a pound.' The defendant accepted the bet and joined issue. From the inquiry which I have made it appears to me that the consumption of hot grog must have been immense. Neither party appears to have the smallest recollection of what took place, but the bet is fully endorsed by a memorandum made in a note-book, the property of the plaintiff Blank Blank, by a gentleman who happened to be present at the .time, and who, contrary to the general custom of Dunedin, was sober at the advanced hour when the bet was made. It would have been open for either party to have pleaded non compos mentis to avoid the contract, but as neither (doubtless for good reasons) chose to set up this plea I do not feel warranted in acting upon the point. The first point to settle is what is a new member ? It was argued for the defendant Dash that members like Mr. Moorhouse who, although they had not been members of the last Parliament, had previously been members of the House, were not to be regarded as new members. After very careful consideration, and consultation of the highest authorities, viz., Bunny on Port and Starboard, Pyke on Paripassu, Rees on Novus Homo, Wakefield's advice to young members. Hander’s Habits of Parliamentary Society, Stout’s nice points of Law and Order, Reynolds’ advice to mothers of Members of Parliament, Murray on Brevity of Speech, Swanson on Parliamentary plainspeaking, Fitzherbert on carpenters’s wages, Tola on Fykes, Pyke on Tolls, Read’s Golden Arguments for Voters, Woolcock on Bores, and Button on Button-holing, and a host of other authorities ;1 I have come to_ the conclusion that the defendant’s contention is bad, and that a “new member” for the purposes of this bet means a member who was not a member of the last Farliament. I did not feel justified in asking the new members themselves, is I feard that if they once got under way there might be some difficulty in giving judgment this session. Since Writing the foregoing, I have had the opportunity of consulting Brown’s (J. E.) Yankee Notions, Brown (J. C.) on Stout, Carrington on the Heathen Chinee, Stafford on the Direction of Wind, as indicated by Straws, and Moorhouse on Swamps and Moorhens ; and I see no reason to alter mv mind, although I must confess I have been somewhat shaken by the arguments adduced bv Hodgkinson in his enquiry into the specific difference between the Welsh Rabbit and the Rabbit of Southland. I therefore give judgment for the plaintiff Blank, there being fortyfour new members in the House. On the question sf costa, I say that I have been somewhat exercised. Tim case jg the not uncommon one of a trial of a r ; g ht —a principle is sought to be established and neither gentleman cares a rap abont the £1 in dispute. I was in hopes that I might have been able to make the costs equal to the amount in dispute ; but upon reflection I am satisfied that there are limits ; and that 10s. . Ijd. will fairly represent the costs in the case. ' Mr. Woolcock, one of the members for the Grey, is credited with a sensible remark. At a caucus meeting last week, a member was advocating separation and inveighing against the extravagance of the General Government. Said Mr. Woolcock : “ I never knew a Government that was not accused of extravagance, and if you get separation the only advantage I can see is that you will get two Governments and double the extravagance.” In the Legislative Council last week the Hon. Colonel Brett informed his fellow members that thestaple food of all countrieswas “fish.” Scientific authority informs us that fish is the great brain-forming and sustaining food ; and though I do not endorse Colonel Brett’s dictum as to its being the staple article of food in all countries, still I am pretty certain every one will agree with me that Legislative Councillors are evidences that in some countries st least an enormous quantity of it requires to be conuuißod,