Rangitikei Advocate. THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1907. EDITORIAL NOTES

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8711, 10 January 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate. THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1907. EDITORIAL NOTES

The Lyttelton Times remarks on the vulgarity of the comments in the visitors’ book at the Exhibition and says that while they are evidently intended to be smart, they are generally a tilde worse than flippant. A rather striking feature of the slangy expressions written in the book is the fact that most of them are used by ladies and girls. Five or six ladies describe the Exhibition as “ the juicy oyster,” which, apparently, is quite a popular expression. Several condense it by writing only the letters “ J. 0.,” and one lady, from New South Wales, varies by “ Quiey Joyster.” A lady from Wanganui thinks that the Exhibition is “ a bit of orl right.” A Dunedin lady says that it is “ a snorter, boshker,” another Dunedin lady says that it is “ very decent,” and Christchurch ladies say that it is “ all serene ” and “ scrumcious,” while one of them expresses her opinion by saying “Here I am again.” Other expressions dotted over the pages are “ Asnorter,” “ not half bad,” “ not so rusty,” “ basko,” “bosko,” “0.K.” “Al,” “just the fixing,” “scrummy,” “ just the feller,” “just the ticket," “ rats,” “ not ’arf,” and “ let her go,” The point which strikes us most strongly about these dreary effusions is the absolute mental vacuity of the writers. The prospect of passing a lifetime in the company of a woman who thinks it humorous to describe the Exhibition a.s a “ juicy oyster ” is enough to make men foreswear matrimony and live celibate lives. We note also the lack of taste which fails to appreciate the fact that expressions which may be permitted in the intimacy of the family circle are quite out of place when added after a signature in a book open to public inspection. The use of slang is in nearly every case undesirable because it tends to make one word serve for many meanings and abolishes all need for thought. The person who describes a book, a play at the theatre, a new hat, and a fine day by the same adjective “ awfully jolly ” is either too ignorant or too lazy to employ the English language correctly. Women, who should show an

; example of refinement in speech as s -well as in other matters seem often to think that they render themselves > more attractive by the use of phrases >' which may not be out of place in the 1 stables or the tap room, but which ! are quite unsuitable for the drawing j* room. It is true they often raise a 1 laugh from men as empty headed as I themselves, but it is a laugh at them j rather than with them. Slang may sometimes be used effectively, but it < should bo used rarely in order to I obtain its full effect or it becomes as ) meaningless as the one phrase which > garnishes the speech of the lowest and least educated classes, a phrase 1 which was innocently described in a 1 dictionary published in France as “ a ! term of endearment among British 1 sailors.”

“It is generally only failure in the struggle for existence that induces a man to emigrate,” says Christchurch Truth. This is a hard saying as it accuses of failure the majority of the settlers who have made New Zealand what it is to-day. The writer in Truth is probably best acquainted with the class of emigrant who is shipped off to the colonies by his friends when there seems no hope for him at home. Such men hang about ‘ the hotels in towns and live as best J they can in the intervals between the I arrival of their remittances which ] temporarily place them in circum- i stances of comparative affluence. I But the remittance man forms a very ] small percentage of the immigrants c to' this country. No one who looks t round our towns or travels through ( the country districts and considers c what a change has been produced in 8 the last fifty years can imagine for a ’ moment that the progress noted has 1 been the work of men who in any way were not capable of holding their ow; q in the struggle for existence. The p British are not a stay-at-home people, oi They seem to have ptill in their blood ® the roving instincts of their hardy Saxon and Norman ancestors which b wen long generations of town life B

have been unable to eradicate. The love of sport and of an open ait life is one sign of this heritage} and in another form it urges men of every nlimH to leave their quiet homes and seek for fortune in the remotest corners of the world under strange skies and in new surroundings. Many rren who could live in comfort at home prefer to risk their health and lives in wild and uncivilised regions rather than stagnate in an existence which offers little of the interest and excitement for which they crave. Even the working man who toils from daylight till dark in some squalid town is moved by lorn© pamphlet he reads or lecture he hears and in a moment his eye brightens at the thought of a new and freer life and if he has the right spirit it will not be long before he is pacing the deck of a steamer on the way to his new home. Unlike the French emigrant who always aims at returning to France to spend his declining years the British settler takes a firm grip of his new country and soon prefers it to his old home. The immigrants to the colonies, if we except the small class of ne’er-do-wells, are on the whole men of greater energy and quicker intelligence than those who stay behind. They have the courage to break old ties and shake themselves free from an environment which they feel offers no scope for the realisation of their desires and ambitions. If the writer in Truth would visit any vessel that brings new citizens to this country he would find the majority bear no stamp of failure. They may be hopelessly ignorant of the conditions of life in their new country but they are ready to learn and above all ready to work and will make no unworthy successors to the pioneers who underwent the hardships of early ’ settlement.