BY THE WAY.

Evening Star, Issue 9682, 27 April 1895, Page 4 (Supplement)

BY THE WAY.

—Let your sense be clear, Nor with a weight of words fatigue the ear. . Horace. Jerome K. Jerome, in a lively little book Upon stage matters, seems to think that audiences seldom have much sense of humor. I don't agree with him. But whether or no, I pity the man who can't get a laugh out of a political meeting of any size, sort, or quality. At Captain Russell's meeting I got my laugh even before the proceedings commenced. Sitting close behind me wore two Government men in a state of expectancy approaching to excite- ; ment. "Do you see all those chairs at the j back of the stage?" ?aid one to the other; " well, you just watch, and you'll see all the Tory swells come trooping in in their white shirts andsvallow-tailstotakcpossessiouof them.' By-and-bye the mayor came in, followed by Captain Russell alone. I could not help turning round to look at the speaker's face, over which passed an expression first of blank astonishment and then of anger. "It's a ■ Tory trick," he s-aid to his companion (and the near public generally); "he's got them all in front of him." There was a moral in the incident, too. It is in vain for politician, Government, or anybody else to try and satisfy a man who is determined not to be satisfied. »>_« From a story told me of another recent meeting in the North I also got a laugh. Mr!?eddon, it may be remembered, went to Wanganui to open a hospital—l think it was—anyhow, a public building of some sort. When the speechifying was all ov.-r Mr Seddon goodnaturedly stepped forward and said : " Ladies and gentlemen, we musn't close without three cheers for the /(architect.'' The audience responded with a decided titter but no cheers. Under the impression that he had been misunderstood the Premier again called for three cheers for the h architect. The titter was louder than before, but still no cheers. On the stage with the Premier was a strong Government supporter, who was unhappily (for the occasion) a Londoner. The poor fellow thought that the audience had stupidly mistaken Mr Seddon, so, stepping forward, he called out angrily: "Didn't jou hear : the Premier wants three cheers for the //a'chitect." Un'o:lnnately the aspirate was more accentuated- than before. The audience roared, and the poor architect never got his cheers. JN'o doubt the Piemier has but a poor opinion of either the intelligence or the generosity of a Wanganui audience. ■ •-♦-• Talking of fun at political meetings, I think I conclusively proved last week re the Blue Spur affair that the highest amusement is to be got out of meltings that don't occur at all. We don't often get this form of amuse r.ent, it is true, but we appreciate it all the more win n we <Io. My mining friend who was good enough to supply me with the account of the Blue Spur meeting (I don't see how else I can express it) last week puts me under a further obligation by sending the following letter:— Blue Spur, Tuesday. Dear ,—What made you put ;itl that stuff ?n the paper the other day? At first I was in a mortal funk for fear I would lie spotted as the man that wrote it; but it's all right, and every word I said was true, bar one thing, whicli I'll tell you of directly. All the chaps were very keen to get hold of the Star. Some one bagged my copy, so I sent Jack into Lawrence for another. ile said he had some trouble in getting one, and -.that everybody was laughing at the atfair. This is where; I was wrong last week. When the game of euchre was finished there was no vote of confidence moved at all. .Toe Karle is very indignant (not with you, but with the local'rag) at being accused of moving it. He says he went to Beaton's-, for a "nip." 'ike game was going on at the time and he bad to wait for some time before he could get St. When the game was finished Craig yoked up and drove our member off. I asked Joe when the vote of confidence was moved. K.e said if it was moved at all // n,nmt hare been in ihe hnomi »n lite mad home. So that as there was (nir) -only Isyoof them in the buggy, andasCraigsecondcd ilic motion, according to the paper, Larnach must lhave moi'fld it. If you put this in the Staii llie sure and keep my name out. And correct nny mistakes. I don't suppose there is any, but if fthero is you might just as well put them'straiiht. And pray, why should not a man move a vote of confidence in himself? It may be better to allow somebody else to do it perhaps, but if there is no one else present what are you to do? I don't see that the accuracy of my report of last week is at all impugned. - Afierman savant, a certain Dr Max Nordan, lias juaifc written a book—and a \cr\ smirtlywritten book it appears to be—in which he undertakes to prove that much of the literary and artistic work of the day, the sort of thing that excites a craze of admiration, is really the work of what he terms " degenerates." Degeneracy is defined to be "a morbid deviation from an original type." The original type is the Ihealthy type, but it appears to be very easy to wander away from it. Here is the process i When under any kind of noxious influences au organism becomes debilitated its successors will not resemble the healthy, normal type of the with capacities for development, but wjll form a new sub-species which, like all otlwis, possesses the capacity for transmitting to its ofl'.:>priair in a continually increasing degree its f-apacities, these being morbid deviations from the normal form—gaps in development, malformations and infirmities. Now we know that well marked degeneracy ■does exist, otherwise there is noway of accounting for habitual criminals, who have all got the ph>/siral manifestations of degeneracy, though it be only, perhaps, a mal-forme4 ear. The man who commits a crime may possibly be latrly good-looking and shapely, but the huUiunl criminal never. I don't believe that a shapely head with a lofty crown was ever found ,on such .a man. Dr Nordan's theory is that there is a mental form of degeneracy, a morbid (deviation from a healthy type of mind, and £hat among its manifestations stigmata is the term he applies to them—are various odd kinds of originality greatly run after at the present time. One can't lightly pooh-pooh a -theory of this kind when one reflects that Rousseau—l have read his confessions -was simply a Ibeast with a charming turn for literature, and that Swift had something incurably nasty .about him throughout his whole life. Still, I >was inclined to pay very little attention to Dr Jordan's theory of degeneracy until I noticed ■jl list of men whose genius or talent represented a deviation from the normal. Among lfchem was Oscar Wilde. There is a certain comfort, too, to be got out of Dr Nordan's theory—by those, I mean, who have .never succeeded ia being original. They aiuist at least be perfectly healthy. If one ifiould deviate a bit from the standard of mental .Tiealth at particular times—say, when one was making a political speech or writing for the .newspapers—it would be all right. Nejio.