"SOMEBODY TOLD ME!”

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 4817, 30 August 1876, Page 3

"SOMEBODY TOLD ME!”

(From the World.) Who sets the stone of scandal rolling, and contributes tho first Item to the marvellous history which, with its wealth of minute though occasionally contradictory detail, forms the nine days’ wonder of club-windows and Belgravian boudoirs ? As often as not the story is absolutely untrue ; oftener still the germ from which it sprang is as different from the full-blown product as can well- be imagined ; while in the comparatively rare instances when the whole of the circumstances are authentic, telling but imaginative details are generally added with a lavish hand by each successive raconteur. We have likened scandal to a stone, and the simile is certainly applicable in one respect—stones will not roll up-hill ; scandal rolls downward to the depths. The person who would invent an amiable story, or one to his neighbor’s credit, is yet to be found; nay, a perfectly authentic story which redounds to the advantage of its object is rarely believed and ueverrepeated. If any amiable soul should by a wonderful chance attempt to give it currency, it is received with a dubious "Ah, really !’’ and the subject at once drops. It is impossible ever to trace a scandalous his- : tory, the greater number of them have beginnings absolutely infinitesimal ; but the growth of Jack’s beanstalk was leisurely and protracted when compared with the rate at which they grow, so that the original disseminator can hardly two days after recognise the offspring of his own brain. It is a point of honor among the scandal-loving fraternity not to give up their authority,—there is honor, it is said, among thieves ; so perhaps those who steal characters are no exception to the rule. Besides, they do not wish their own names mentioned, and fear that if they gave up their authority they might themselves in turn be quoted. So it is always “ somebody” who tells them, “somebody” who “knows all about it,” or who “ has it on the very best authority and so the story rolls on, growing longer and fuller of startling details, in direct contravention of the proverb that declares that “a rolling stone gathers no moss.” We presume we shall be laughed to scorn when we record our deliberate conviction that when a story owes its origin to deliberate invention rather than to misapprehension, the “somebody” who commences it is, almest invariably, a man. Women, we allow, propagate, and perhaps embellish, the story when it has once started on its career, but it is very rarely indeed that they originate it. It is in club-windows that scandals are chiefly hatched. There is no special subject of conversation at the moment, and even the thousand and one rumors as to the soundness or the reverse of racing favorites have been exhausted ; some lady drives past the window, and, rather than not talk, some one makes a remark connecting her with some man with whom she may happen to be intimate. It has no foundation, the person who utters it probably means nothing by it; but, unfortunately, be is certain to have listeners who cannot endure that it should be imagined that they do not know the minutest details of every story. They instantly assume that he “ knows something,” and proceed to draw on their imagination for details to show that they know more. It is worse than useless for a slightly more sensible bystander to endeavor to point out that some parts of the history are impossible and others improbable; the doubts be suggests bring fresh raconteurs into tte fray, all anxious to prove themselves well informed as to what never occurred, and the story grows with greater rapidity than if he had never interfered. Dr. Watts has informed us that “Satan finds mischief for idle hands to do ;” and without entering on a controversy which might involve tis in a correspondence with Mr. Jenkins or Mr. Cook, we may safely aver that “ empty heads ” are to the full as dangerous. Polo and Prince’s, race-horses and pigeon-matches, are doubtless engrossing topics ; but even so, they appear occasionally to pall on the sated taste, and then the vacuous mind turns naturally to gossip, and—men’s loquacity not having the unfailing feminine safety-valve of dress—at once progresses to scandal. A woman’s reputation more or less —what can that signify compared to the satisfaction of contributing imaginary details to a mythical scandal ? The happiness of a pure woman’s life may be destroyed, the confidence of a home ruined ; but the gdbemouche cares little—he will have had his hour, when, as the contributor of a false incident to a sensational invention, he may for once have been listened to with attention.

Unfortunately it is one of the evil affectations of the day for men to profess to believe that no woman is pure or worthy of respect, encouraged thereto by the more than doubtful behavior of the fast set who imagine they win homage by emancipating themselves from the trammels of decency and self-respect. Affectation we coil it advisedly, for they would be quick as ever to resent the faintest imputation on any woman connected, no matter how remotely, with themselves ; and if each man’s own womankind is spotless, what room is left for the shameless and abandoned persons whereof they talk as if they believed society were full ? But if, as we say, men originate the scandals, women are very far from blameless as regards their repetition. We fear, indeed, that they often very specially welcome those of their male friends who bring them the most of what'they euphemistically call “news,” but which is really gossip and scandal, seldom edifying, and frequently unsavoury. Formerly such conversation was left to the rouged and bewigged dowagers, who had lost their power of participating in the pleasures of youth without acquiring any of the graces or dignities of age; but now young women, who ought to blush at the merest whisper of the stories they so glibly repeat, nay, even girls to whom they should be utterly unknown and incomprehensible, rival each other in reciting what “ somebody told them.” It is wonderful it should not strike them that this eagerness to tarnish the reputation of others is apt to cause thoughtful persons to imagine that they are not free from suspicion themselves, and are therefore anxious to drag others down to their own level. A woman, herself above suspicion, should never be afraid to profess her disbelief in an ill-natured story, or, if possible, to confute it by positive proof. Cynics may sneer at her credulity, but in their hearts they will respect her infinitely more than they do her gossiping neighbors ; and quidnuncs may hate her for spoiling their story, but will speedily console themselves with hints, innuendoes, and oracular mutterings that “ there is no smoke without fire,” a saying more untrue, if that be possible, than the generality of proverbs, If women would resolutely combine and refuse to listen to scandal, they would do more to compass the destruction of the mendacious “somebody” than can bo done any other way ; for one of the great objects of concocting these piquant dishes is to render the gohemouche acceptable to his lady friends. But “somebody” is also responsible for many stories, born not so much of deliberate malice as of thick-headed stupidity. There are unfortunately many persons gifted with a curious inaptitude for either understanding thoroughly what is told to them, or for repeating the smallest matter correctly ; and among such well-meaning but aggravating persons a story grows and alters much as in a game of “Russian scandal," until its original author would certainly fail to recognise his production. These worthy people in all good faith say, “ Somebody told me ;” they are far too puzzle-headed to attempt to give their authority, which is as well, for they would, almost certainly, give the wrong one. Then there is another class who understand the story, but overlay it in repetition with so many of their own opinions, surmises, and deductions, that they leave on the listener’s mind a totally different impression from that which is on their own. Then, too, follow all the phases

of the people who think such and such very likely, those who think it is the case, who believe it has occurred, who have it on the best authority from “somebody,” who know it for a fact, because “ somebody ” told them. Very often in telling a story people are constrained to quote this most aggravating and meddling “somebody,” having been specially enjoined by their informants “ not to mention them as an authority.” Why cannot they summon all their resolution, and determine never again to repeat an ill-natured story when it rests on no better testimony than “somebody tJd me?”