The Jeweller’s Window Glimpses Of Early Wellington

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30076, 9 March 1963, Page 8

The Jeweller’s Window Glimpses Of Early Wellington

[Specially Written for “The Press” by ARNOLD WALL]

/"IN December 18, 1842, '-'Susan Wall, wife of Anthony Wall, wrote a long letter to her sisters in Derbyshire from “Parrarua road,” Wellington. Anthony Wall, a remote cousin of mine, came to Wellington in 1840 and settled at Porirua, where his descendants still hold the old property. Some extracts from Susan’s letter now appear in the Jeweller’s Window. She was very religious and was thrilled to find herself acting as hostess to Bishop Selwyn. “I don’t think,” she writes, “that I ever talked to such a spiritual minded man to all appearances in my life.” She “kept beds and refreshments for travellers” and says that this was the only house near the road between Wellington and “Parrarua.”

Her account of prices is very thorough. She sells “fresh butter ait three shillings a pound; new milk is 8 pence a quart, eggs is two shillings a dozen, fresh beef nine pence a lb, mutton is the same, pork is sixpence, flour is about three shillings a stone, all kinds of strong clothing much the same as in England, I think not quite so cheap.” She did business with the natives: “they are very naked and frightful looking, but they are quiet and inoffensive. I have got as I can talk the native language pretty well so as I can be able to understand them and make a bargain with them. Sometimes I make pretty good bargains but they are getting every day more knowing.”

Susan’s son George, she says, was working for £l2 a year before he was 12 years old as well as his board and some part of his Clothes “which would be great wages for a man in England.” When George began to work with his father he got three shillings a day and his father six shillings, working only eight hours a day. But they did much better when working “by the bargain” i.e., by contract. “Wall," she says, (thus she always speaks of her husband), “has earned a great deal of money” chiefly by felling timber and clearing land by contract Susan gives a short account of the voyage to New Zealand —evidently she had given a longer one in a previous letter. There were more than 200 on board and “plenty for all hands to do.” “The Almighty was very gracious to us in blessing me and all my family with good health.” “There were nine deaths and five births on board. Such scenes before I have never witnessed.” And thus Susan Wall concluded her letter: “my dear sisters I must conclude with my kind love to you all and may the Lord bless you all.” This Anthony Wall was descended from John Wall (1621-1688) of Dariey, in Wensleydale, not far from Matlock, and this John was also my own ancestor. I have visited Dariey Church and seen the grave of my grandfather, Henry Wall of Crooked Stile, Hackney Lane, Dariey (1721-1790). I may suppose him to have been the original “crooked man who walked a crooked mile,” may I not?

Fan—And Company

When you speak of a fan, do you mean a large kind of basket or a wooden shovel? You do not—you mean a dainty little instrument "for agitating air to cool face” as the dictionary puts it But when you read of a fan in the Bible, as you may do three or four times —“whose fan is in his hand and he will throughly purge his floor” (Matthew, 3,12) —you understand that what is referred to is an implement used for winnowing grain, a thing which is no longer used in your country, and one which would be completely forgotten were it not mentioned in the Bible. The clumsy but useful article, used only on the farm, is translated in miniature to the drawing-room, from the horny hand of Hodge to the delicate hand of Harriet. It first appeared in this sense in 1555. The old “fan” was from Latin “vannus,” a winnowing basket, and we have had it as “van” as well as “fan”; in that form it was used by Milton of angels’ wings. In very as well as “fan,” in that figuratively used in geography in “shingle-fan” for the debris “fanning-out” from a mountain-side. Similar translations have occurred in other cases. “Fork” in our day usually means a table fork which is a miniature version of the agricultural implement, the hay-fork or pitch-fork. The old word “fork” was a very early loan from Latin “furca” and in the familiar Latin tag “you may oust nature with a fork. . . .” it of course means the farmer’s, not the diner’s fork. The word first appeared in that sense in 1463. Fall In Status Another terrific fall in status has been suffered by the word “catapult," now, since 1871, a mere schoolboy’s toy, formerly, since 1577, a huge military engine and still, of course, usable in that sense.

The schoolboy’s toy is more often called a “shanghai” than a “catapult” on this side of the world and does not seem to be nearly as popular as it was in my young days. The etymology of “shanghai” was for a long time a puzzle, and some authorities such as Morris (Australasian English) , and Partridge (Dictionary of Slang), could only make wild guesses. It was at last run to earth and found, surprisingly, to be a Highland Scottish word for a forked stick used to keep a dog’s tail down. I have yet one more diminished article, the match, which in our day means a tiny slender rod tipped with inflammable material, sometimes called lucifer (what a come-down!). This usage dates from 1831. The original “match,” like “catapult,” had a military significance; it was a wick, a rope or cord of hemp or cotton used to ignite the powder in a cannon; this, as an English word, dates from 1549 but may now be said to be obsolete in this sense. It is the French “meche,” a word of obscure origin. The other “match,” which you meet or make, is

another word altogether, a chip of the bedrock of our language and no gatecrashing foreigner.