WAS IT COINCIDENCE?

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1509, 31 January 1901, Page 6

WAS IT COINCIDENCE?

In “The Life and Letters of the Late Sir John Millais,” written by his ,son, John Guille Millais, there occurs a.fc page 182, rol. 11., an interesting incident in connection with the late Matthew Ar_ nold, which from its astonishing sequel may well make us pause before dismissing from our minds the belief in the occult, or the interference of the spiritual world with this material world with which we are to some extent acquainted. The writer inclines to the belief of the society in London formed for the express purpose of setting at naught prevailing superstition, such as unlucky days, and numbers, acts such as passing beneath a raised ladder, signs, omens, etc. ; but though it must be admitted

that this society has succeeded in showing the stupid ivy of some old supers stations, the ca&e in question is so marvellous and gruesome that it hardly belongs to the ordinary category of superstitions engendered 1 by isolated coincidences. We are familiar with, the firmly fixed idea in tb© human mind o#the danger of giving oral expression to boasts of self-congratulation respecting health, and a thousand other things bound up in our individuality which have received a rude shock .soon after-

wards by an occurrence which has scattered our self-comp lac ency to the winds. This belief that it is dangerous to give expression to our thoughts in certain, directions lest some occult spirit- forces should be lingering near us and on the listen, as ib were, for any slips of the tongue, is .well illustrated by the anecdote told of Voltaire. He is said to

have been one of a- large party in one of the Paris Salons, and during the evening entered into conversation with, a lacfy about the same , age as himself, she remarking that tuey had lived &0

Jong that- perhaps death had forgotten them. Lowering his voice almost to- a whisper, Voltaire replied, “Hush, madams, let us not remind him of our exi

Without, however, expressing any opinion on the case in question, let me give the quotation, and allow five rea-der to form his, or her, own conclusions. ■

Of a distinguished- party entertained

by Sir John Millais at Hirnam HaSH, to which he had invited Lord Wolseley from October Ist to the 10th, in 1858, for fishing, . the eon writes :—“A few days later he and his friends joined my mother and other members of the family

at Barnaul Hall, Murthly, and in the fol-

kradnging months the party was increased ,by the arrival of five additional guests—Matthew Arnold, Miss G. 8., and three of my old college friends, Edgar Dawson, Arthur Newton, and 33... 8. (I suppress his name for reasons, that will presently appear), making 13 in all. A n unlucky number this, w r e all know ; but nobody noticed irb till.we had all sat down t-o dinner, when Miss G. S. called attention to the fact. She dare not, she

said, be one of the 13, after her painful experiences on a former occasion when 13 were present; and my father failing to laugh her out of her superstition, asked me, as an only son afc home, to go and dine in the drawing-room, which I accordingly did. Still the lady was nob at ease ; she became very anxious, and said repeatedly, ‘I fear some calamity will happen.’ “When the ladies were about to rise I came back to the dining-room, and found Matthew Arnold discoursing learnedly on the .subject of superstition. ‘And

now, Miss S.,’ said he’ -with a laughs -‘the idea is that whoever leaves the table first will die within a year, so, with the permission of the laoies, we wiH cheat the Pates for one. I and these fine strong lads (pointing to Edgar Hawson and E. -S.) will all rise together, f and I think our united constitutions will' be able to withstand the assault of the Reaper.’ The three men then rose, and the ladies left the room., “The sequel was, to say the least, remarkable. Some six months- later, Matthew -Arnoldpthen ip Hi© prime of life, and to; all; appeal noes ; in/robiist health died suddenly of heart disease. Ants hardly had we recovered from the shock of this terrible news, that we learned frbm the papers that E.. 8., was found dead in his bed, with an empty by his side! ’ He whs a clever young feb? Sow, and had dramatised with immense success a novel by an authoress now famous, but then comparatively onknown ; but no sooner was it put on the stage than . the authoress, .who after-, Wards dramatised’ it herself. Compelled him to withdraw his pMy. Then, in a fit of the blues,- he -wandered off ft© America to hide his’ grief . ultimately reaching New York, where his life ' Was ended; whether by his own hand or that of aa-l other it ■is impossible tb say. The mosibskilled detectives in/New York weieh bafHed in their inquiry, though to favour the theory of murder.

“After this our thoughts naturally flew to Edgar Dawson, the last of the daring three. He wus a very dear friend b-fi* mine, with whom I had corresponded for many years, aiid happily, I could assure my friends that; he., at least, had outlived the year. He had gone out ye. Australia for the benefit of__is healthy, and in his last letter he. told me he was Coming home again by the Quetta, a steamer that was leaving Melbourne on February 18th, was already on’its way to England. But, alas, that steamer. reached' its - destination!: It foundered on one of the thousand reefs that skirt the coast of New Guinea, and not a single soul was left to tell, the tale/’. _

It will be observed that the last-nan>-ed 1 , unlike the other- two, died the twelvemonths, but there is quit© enough in the tragic death of the whole three to give us pause before we ’’boast. * of to-morrow.” ; Mr J. G. Millais concludes the naira-1' tive as follows: —“And now what shall he said to these things ? The facts ai*e exactly as I have stated them, and are only too well known to many now living. , . . . For myself, I am content to; state what I know, without attempting, “to point a moral, or adorn a tale/’

CHALTHOME