“ALIEN’S” LETTER FROM ENGLAND.

Otago Witness, Issue 3149, 22 July 1914, Page 67

“ALIEN’S” LETTER FROM ENGLAND.

June 5. j Our Whitsuntide was saddened by the disaster to the Empress of Ireland, which ; was more terrible to those ashore than even the Titanic wreck, for we had. so ( much less information of how men and • women died, and the details were more horrible. The heroic stories of the Titanic, which made .world-wide human nature | kin, are for the most part missing here, for few had the time to note how then neighbours died. All were concerned m the scramble to escape the death trap which these “floating palaces” prove when they do not float. The shrieks of passen- j gers rudely awakened from sleep, or m j agony, the distracted hoarse cries of captain and officers, and the wailing of women and children, and then—except for the tew —who knows what individual agonv ot soul and body! From the first notifiestion of the news in .London and Liver- ! pool, piteous scenes were enacted outside the Canadian Pacific Company’s offices. Most of the crew had their homes in Liverpool. Hundreds of stewards, cooks, pantrymen, stewardesses, and kitchen staff were among these, and of a thousand or more passengers homeward bound most were of English connection, or visitors ; from the dominions. Some were corning home to be married, some, were on their honeymoon trip, others who had sought fortune in Canada were returning to visit the old folk with their children. Others, again, after long though successful exile, were returning for a well-earned holiday in the Old Land, and some were coming for the first time with joyful anticipation to prove the things whereof they had been told. 1 In theatrical circles and among the theatre going public the greatest sorrow is felt for Mr Lawrence Irving and his wife.. That story of his attempt to save her, and quiet her' terror, appeals very keenly to those who knew them, for they were a most united couple. His dead hand clasped tightly to a piece of the cambric of her nightdress is eloquent of that last cruel parting wrench. “M.y partner,” as he called his wife in the sue- , cess which he had won on the stage, after many years of work and endeavour, was partner in that most dramatic scene of all which they enacted together. He was married to Miss Mabel Hackney 11- years ago, when Sir Henry was playing “Dante” at Drury Lane,'and Miss Hackney was a member. Mr James 'Waters, in his appreciation of Mr Lawrence Irving, says in the Daily Mail;—“Mr Irving took a ‘wider view of life and its responsibilities than did the people he met in his ordinary experiences, and all through his career he nursed interests of a wide human and political character that were entirely independent of the art of the theatre. There was no* question about it; he believed lie had a mission, and had he lived he would assuredly have become the greatest character in the English-speaking theatre. . • • At all the theatres in which they worked these faithful partners shared the same office, and at evening when the theatre was lighted and the audience seated Lawrence Irving s dressing room became the office for himself and his wife, so that they might always be near one another. Their holidays . . • a week-end, or a week, were for both together, and those were spent in a little cottage they owned on a country road far out of London. Their house in Kensington and their cottage by the country roadside were being got ready for their return. Mr and Mrs Irving were to have a brief holiday previous to going out for a short tour in August to produce their new Bonaparte play in the provinces before their London season of next October. All these plans have gone down with the tragedy. They had no children, and their houses"are lonely and empty. ’_ -■ An American woman who witnessed the conduct of the police as they repulsed the deputation outside the gates of Buckingham Palace on the occasion of the attempt to petition the King exclaimed: “Well, I don’t wonder you Englishhwomen have been forced to be militants. Ii American men treated their women as you are treated over here-: !’’ and a blank was left to fill up. “An insult to go to your King with a petition? Sav, what do you keep your King for? And this is what is called a free country. I would like to see Wilson treat our women like that.’ f I Comparison? are becoming very odious for this country. You will have heard the storv of May 21. The Christian Commonwealth and several other journals told what they say is the true version, which , was that" a deputation of women from ' the Women’s Social and Political Union I set off within their legal rights to petition the King. The Bill of Rights grants : “It is the right of the subject to petition the King, and all commitments and prosecu- ( tions for such petitioning are _ illegal.” With Mrs Pankhurst at their head, orderly, unarmed, peaceable, the tion within their legal rights, no insult intended or offered to his Majesty, the women set off with the purpose of laying their cause before the Sovereign of the realm. The King, advised by his Minis- | fers, refused to receive the deputation. | But the manner of the refusal! Surely f his Majesty had nothing to do with that! The Bill of Rights has never been repealed, yet when the deputation—many of the women frail. and underfed workers ” reached the Palace gates to place their petition before the King, it was closed and guarded bv an army of giant police, among whom were many,mounted and in plain clothes. They repulsed the women bent on a peaceful mission, with a fierceness and barbarity that could not have. been excelled had the deputation, instead of being within their legal rights, set out ’ with the purpose of blowing up the Palace. The Evening News of that same day

(Specially Written for the Ladies’ Page.) STORIES 01? DISASTER.

says: “When the Suffragette deputation which set out to ‘interview’ the * VIII S reached the Waterloo Arch at about this afternoon, there was air amazing fight. A strong guard of police was drawn up there, and' when the women attempted to force the gates they were shown no mercy by the constables. Thej were knocked down, ridden down by mounted men, and thrown into the crowd with the utmost force. '"Several of the women who seized the bridles of the horses were struck at by the riders,, and when they refused to leave go the men drew their truncheons and struck at them wildly.” One of the deputation says: ‘When 1 was arrested I was rushed into the small police station in the Archway, and treated with the greatest violence, my chest being so badly crushed that I nearly fainted when I was released. Inside the police station women showed the greatest bravery, but they were set upon by the police (those in plain clothes were the most brutal) and terribly knocked about. due ■woman I saw was pushed into a corner and surrounded with men, who were striking her all round. The sight was sickening.” The revolutionary sequel that folowed is without precedent even among the militants. A portrait of the King in the Royal Scottish Academy, Edinburgh, expressed the feeling there, windows oi puuiic buildings have been smashed all over the country, empty mansions and cnurch.cs> burnt down, pictures at the National Gallery damaged, and two pictures damaged in the Dore Gallery, editors horsewhipped, also the prison doctor outside Holloway, and constables on guard there, and numerous other protests. As a consequence of the attacks upon pictures and other art treasures, the National Gallery, the late Gallery, the Tennant Gallery at Queen Anne’s Gate, the Wallace Collection, and the Leeds Picture Gallery have been closed to the public, and at the British Museum women are only admitted by ticket, anil at Hampton Court a charge of Is is made for admission. An appeal to the Queen has been made this week by the Men's Political Union for Women’s Enfranchisement, part oi which runs; “We beg to submit that the advice tendered to his Majesty by his Ministers in regard to the militant wr.m-m is pernicious, and that the scandalous du ferential treatment as between women militants and Ulster men militants perpetuates the grave injustice which lies at the root of the present crisis. In great crises of his tory Queens have come to the rescue, and we humbly pray that history may repeat itself, and that it may be granted to a loyal and grateful people to rejoice in the restoration of the King’s honour by the love of your Most Graeious Majesty, and that it may seem good to your Majesty lo plead with the King that his Majesty shall hear from the lips of Mrs Pankhurst herself the story of the conditions which surround the lives of millions of votelcss women in the United Kingdom. Even to the Court the Suffragettes’ voice has penetrated. At the Fourth Court of the season, which was held last night at Buckingham Palace, during the presenta -.ions to his Majesty a cultured voice began to appeal to the King. It was a most dramatic moment, and. made a profound though subdued sensation. A handsome young woman, dressed in black, fell on her knees before the King when being presented, and began: “Your Majesty, for God’s sake ” Two gentlemen of the Court stepped forward and quietly led her away, and the pageant proceeded as usual. Elaborate precautioris®)had been taken to nurd the Palace from Suffragette attacks, and to prevent the entrance of unauthorised persons. But this was an authorised” person, a lady who has passed preliminary etiquette of presentation, the truth is, that it is among the gentlewomen that the vote is most intelligently advocated. A very large crowd of police awarded the Palace and the grounds, and as each carriage passed the gates the' card bearing the name of the occupant v as examined, and at the grand entrance it was again examined and checked with the Lord Chamberlain’s list. A large crowd had gathered to witness the arrival of the King’s guests, many of whom were visitors from the dominions and elsewhere. The gathering in the Palace was exceptionally brilliant. The King and Queen stood side by side upon a crimson-carpeted dais to receive those presented, with the Royal group in a half-circle around them. There were between 800 and 900 guests, and several Indian nrinces were present in their gorgeous Oriental attire, with jewels blazing in their turbans. The King wore the uniform of Colonel-in-Chief of the Coldstream Guards, and the Queen a gown of gold brocade, with_ gold and diamento embroideries, the train being of Irish pomt lace arranged over gold tissue, and trimmed with a deep border of gold flowers. Her Majesty’s jewels included a crown of diamonds, a necklace of diamonds and emeralds, the Order of the Garter, and the family orders. The attendance of debutantes was exceptionally large, and among them was the younger daughter oi the Prime Minister, Miss Elizabeth Asquith. Mrs Asquith’s gown was a marvellous shimmering gold on a background of black, with a train of wonderful velours souple. The skirt, of silk black satin, was bordered with jet beads, and caught up in front with graceful folds, over which were long draperies of gauze. The corsage was gold embroidered gauze, loose about the waist, where it was met by a broad ceinture of nasturtium chiffon, richly embroidered in coloured beads, matching the chiffon which lined the train. Miss Asquith wore a dainty white gown of tulle edged with silver, which fell over a skirt of pleated chiffon, and a Gourt train of

soft broche with a design of silver roses. Others greatly admired were the Duchess of Devonshire (Mistress of the Robes), in a dress of cream and gold brocade with Venetian point, who presented her daughter, Lady Maud Cavendish; Lady Suffold, who presented her niece, Lady Irene Curzon. The History of Nursery Rhymes. When do children get too big for nursery rhymes—or do children care for nursery rhymes now? At all events, you can interest even the modern advanced young person by telling the legend of some of the rhymes, along with the verses. Very ancient In many cases is the origin of the nursery rhymes which have delighted the children of every land. “Jack and Jill ' is supposed to refer to the comrdete amalgamation between Saxons and Normans, while “Humpty-Dumpty” is said to have been a hold, bad baron hi the time of King John. The “Babes in the Wood” had its origin in an actual crime committed in the fifteenth century, and the story may be seen carved on a mantelpiece of an ancient house in Norfolk. “Little 80-Peep” w*is not a maiden, but a holy friar, who, in Anglo-Saxon days, went round collecting for the monasteries. The “sheep” referred to the congregation, and their “tails” to the contributions they would bring in with them. “The House That Jack Built” was an adaptation of a Chaldee hymn, symbolising events in the history of the Hebrew nation; while, according to the Observer, a romantic history attaches to “Little Jack Horner,” who was steward to the Abbot of Glastonbury. The latter wished to appease King Henry VIII, who was indignant because the monks had built a kitchen which he could not burn down. The abbot accordingly despatched Jack Horner with a specially tempting-looking pie, which was filled inside with the titledeeds of twelve monasteries, as a present to the King. “Jack Horner” slyly abstracted one deed, which was that referring to the Manor of Wells, and on Iris return to Glastonbury he informed the abbot that the deed had been given to him by the King. The rhyme was founded Von this incident, the “plum”.which he abstracted being the title-deed of Wells. Equally interesting is the story of “ Mary Had a Little Lamb,” 'some of the verses” of which, it may surprise our readers to learn, were written by a schoolboy named John Rollston, who attended the same school at Massachusetts to which “Mary” went with her little pet. A long time afterwards the poem was completed by Mrs Sarah Hall, a well-known author. At a fail’, at Boston many years ago ■& stocking knitted from thef woven fleece of the famous lamb was ravelled out, and