MELBOURNE GOSSIP.
(I'liOJf OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.)
Melbourne May, IS. The discreditable! scone that occurred in tho City Court Inst Friday, whon Mr David Gaunson gavo his tongue a little too much lioenso, furnishes a justification for tho action of his lato Parliamentary constituents—supposing that they needed one—in declining to again return him to tho Legislative Assembly. For, it must bo obvious to tho dullest intellect that a man is not fit to bo entrusted with the important task of framing laws who has so profound a contempt for them when made, us Mr Gaunson exhibited on the day named. Thoro can bo little doubt that his general conduct in tho House very materially influenced, tho voting lit the last general election, and that his failuro to gain a seat was principally owing to tho fact that it was thought tho interests of the district would bo better served by another person. It is, perhaps, a fortunate circumstance for Mr (Jamison that his clients do not view things in a similar light. I have seen a barrister, engaged in an important case, who was "suspended" by the judge before whom he was pleading for very much less than what occurred last Friday, and the client's interests suffered in consequence. For, after all, it must bo borne in mind that a barrister does not practice before a court as a matter of " prescriptive right," but upon " sufferance." And any judge may refuse to hear a barristor who systematically defies and insults him. I was present in a British colony a few years ago when counsel in an important cass was repeatedly rude to the judge. After caution upon caution failed to have any effect, the judge said quietly :—''Mrß —, I refuse to hear you any further, and I interdict you from conducting any casein this court for a period of two months." That sentence meant, in the case of Mr 8., a loss in fees of about £200. Severe, but necessary. The whirligig of time spins round, however, and that same Mr B. now dispenses " justice " in the very court from which he was ignominously expelled less than a dozen years ago.
As a specimen of the good breeding of ionic of our Melbourne " ladies," the following is a good example; it is given on the authority of a writer in Punch : — " When coming out of the Town Hall on the night of one of the Halle concerts last week, I saw a sturdy-looking woman rudely pushing everyone out of her way, and among those who politely let her pass were two ladies, who I believe hold important positions in a fashionable Collins-street warehouse. On seeing these latter, the pushing lady loudly exclaimed to her companion, " Oh, there are the two shop-women I was telling you about, Whatever do they want at a classical concert?" The author of the above ludicrous snobbery is the daughter of a well-known member of the Legislative Council, and the wife of in Elsternwick solicitor, and I believe poses as a "lady." Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast, but evidently it sometimes fails to elevate the mind of a would-be thought lady, who seemingly forgets that whilst family reverses frequently compel " ladies " to serve behind a shop counter, it is their misfortune to have to wait upon vulgar, rich "women," whom Nature intended to keep a fish-stall.
Taken in connection with the foregoing specimen of the genus snob, how is this for high ? I give it from a list of approaching marriages (in high life) from a "society" paper: —"The marriage of Miss K. A. Colmer, third daughter of Keuben Colmer, Esq., of Sydney-road, Coburg, to Mr E. A. Ford, of Brunswick, youngest son of the late W. I). Ford, of West Melbourne, grandson of the late James Steer, Esq., of " Box House," Kent, and great-grand-nephew of Hogarth, the famous painter, of Chiswiok, England, is announced to take place early in August." Great Peter! A great-grand-nephew of the famous author of " The Hake's Prog'-ess," about to be married —in Victoria ! It is enough to take one's breath nway. I wonder the law docs not provide a tight-fitting waistcoat for people who heedlessly hurl broadcast such stupendous announcements among a lot of harmless people; there is no knowing what harm they may do. Before the marriage really eomes oil someone may be rash enough to inform the bridegroom that .Sir William Thornhill married Hogarth's daughter, and then we shall have Sir William's ghost hurled at our heads, together with the ghosts of all his paint brushes. I hear of all sr.rtaof practical jokes performed by the G. C. T. during his stay in this eily. A few days before leaving Melbourne ho walked into an undertaker's oHieo in Fitzroy, in company with a friend, and asked to bo supplied with the most costly bridal bouquet the establishment could produce. The undertaker's daughter, who was in charge of the oflico, replied that her father " buried people" The G. C. T. then said he might turn his call to account by taking a price list of eolKns, and be would endeavour to put some business in her father's way. At that moment tho undertaker himself walked in, and seeing tho G. C. T., said, "How do you do, Mr Toole?" whoso face, onno seen, is not easily forgotten. Tho G.C.T. left the premises.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18900705.2.41.5
Bibliographic details
Waikato Times, Volume XXXV, Issue 2805, 5 July 1890, Page 6 (Supplement)
Word Count
895MELBOURNE GOSSIP. Waikato Times, Volume XXXV, Issue 2805, 5 July 1890, Page 6 (Supplement)
Using This Item
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.