DOI Heft:
September 28, 1867
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16880#0144
ARTFUL-VERY!
Mary. “ Don’t keep a Screougin’ o’ me, John !”
John. “ Wh’oi bean’t a Screougin’ on yer ! ”
Mary (ingenuously). “ Well, y’ can i’ y’ like, John ! ’
A PARAGRAPH POR OUR PLYMOUTH BRETHREN.
A substitute for the big turnip now in season, somewhat exceeding
that curiosity in point of interest, is presented to the readers of the
Western Morning News in—
“ A Remarkable Coincidence.—Exactly two years ago the child o a Mb
Martin, an employe at the Plymouth Theatre, while playing outside his door, was
run over by a waggon and killed. A carter, named Finney, was at the time sup-
posed to have caused the death, and at the inquest a solicitor attended to watch the
case on his behalf. It was not elicited from the evidence, however, that Pinney
was implicated in the affair.”
No reason, observe, then, having been found confirmatory of the
supposition that Punnet had caused the child’s death, or that he was
even in any degree “ implicated in the affair,” still less of any sug-
gestion that he had done so otherwise than accidentally:—
“ One evening last week the son of the man Pinney was playing in the road
exactly opposite Martin’s house, when he was knocked down by a cart and killed.
The strangeness of the coincidence, and the accident happening on the second
anniversary of the first mentioned casualty, has caused considerable comment in
the neighbourhood.”
On the hypothesis that coincidence implies connection, there is cer-
tainly ground for comment in a case wherein there is every reason to
believe that the coincident circumstances were unconnected. It is
not, however, easy to understand bow the comment in such a case
could much exceed the remark that coincidence does not imply con-
nection. The coincidence above described as remarkable seems re-
markably slight. A death occurring on the second anniversary of
another death is not much of a coincidence. The only coincidence
to speak of in this instance is, that two deaths took place before one
door. If the first death could justly have been laid at the man’s door
before which it took place, superstition might have appeared to derive
some countenance from the fact that the second occurred there. It is
to be hoped that this is a comment on the coincidence above related,
which has generally been made by the people in the neighbourhood
of its site.
THE SYNOD.
Sir,
The term Pa«-Anglicarl smacks more of heathen mythology
than of the nominative case, neuter gender, of the Greek adjective. It
becomes positively Olympian in its apparent signification when we
remember that it might easily be alluded to as the meeting of The
Graces.
The whole affair seems to have been singularly stupid, and their
Reverences, generally being afraid to say too much on really important
subjects, appeared more dense than they really were. Surely under
these circumstances the Pan-Anglican Synod should have been held
in the parish of St. Pan-craw.
On Eriday the High Church Bishops dined at a Ritualistic “ Ordi-
nary.” There was a great demand for pancakes. Every one paid for
his own fish, and therefore for that day was able to call his sole his
own.
I remain Sir, yours,
A Miserable Synod.
A Choice of Evils.
On the arrest of the gang of City burglars the other day in Wood
Street, we learn that the rascals were in possession of a bunch of
skeleton keys that would open almost every warehouse in the street.
This is pleasant intelligence. We have often heard that, there is a
skeleton in every cupboard. Query, whether this is worse than a
skeleton-key in every safe ?
a perennial novelty.
Mr. Sot hern is announced to appear again as Lord Dundreary ! A
contributor, suffering heavily under the influence of the dead season,
writes to say, that he won’t say his Lordship is never “ dreary,”
but he is certainly never “ done.”
Mary. “ Don’t keep a Screougin’ o’ me, John !”
John. “ Wh’oi bean’t a Screougin’ on yer ! ”
Mary (ingenuously). “ Well, y’ can i’ y’ like, John ! ’
A PARAGRAPH POR OUR PLYMOUTH BRETHREN.
A substitute for the big turnip now in season, somewhat exceeding
that curiosity in point of interest, is presented to the readers of the
Western Morning News in—
“ A Remarkable Coincidence.—Exactly two years ago the child o a Mb
Martin, an employe at the Plymouth Theatre, while playing outside his door, was
run over by a waggon and killed. A carter, named Finney, was at the time sup-
posed to have caused the death, and at the inquest a solicitor attended to watch the
case on his behalf. It was not elicited from the evidence, however, that Pinney
was implicated in the affair.”
No reason, observe, then, having been found confirmatory of the
supposition that Punnet had caused the child’s death, or that he was
even in any degree “ implicated in the affair,” still less of any sug-
gestion that he had done so otherwise than accidentally:—
“ One evening last week the son of the man Pinney was playing in the road
exactly opposite Martin’s house, when he was knocked down by a cart and killed.
The strangeness of the coincidence, and the accident happening on the second
anniversary of the first mentioned casualty, has caused considerable comment in
the neighbourhood.”
On the hypothesis that coincidence implies connection, there is cer-
tainly ground for comment in a case wherein there is every reason to
believe that the coincident circumstances were unconnected. It is
not, however, easy to understand bow the comment in such a case
could much exceed the remark that coincidence does not imply con-
nection. The coincidence above described as remarkable seems re-
markably slight. A death occurring on the second anniversary of
another death is not much of a coincidence. The only coincidence
to speak of in this instance is, that two deaths took place before one
door. If the first death could justly have been laid at the man’s door
before which it took place, superstition might have appeared to derive
some countenance from the fact that the second occurred there. It is
to be hoped that this is a comment on the coincidence above related,
which has generally been made by the people in the neighbourhood
of its site.
THE SYNOD.
Sir,
The term Pa«-Anglicarl smacks more of heathen mythology
than of the nominative case, neuter gender, of the Greek adjective. It
becomes positively Olympian in its apparent signification when we
remember that it might easily be alluded to as the meeting of The
Graces.
The whole affair seems to have been singularly stupid, and their
Reverences, generally being afraid to say too much on really important
subjects, appeared more dense than they really were. Surely under
these circumstances the Pan-Anglican Synod should have been held
in the parish of St. Pan-craw.
On Eriday the High Church Bishops dined at a Ritualistic “ Ordi-
nary.” There was a great demand for pancakes. Every one paid for
his own fish, and therefore for that day was able to call his sole his
own.
I remain Sir, yours,
A Miserable Synod.
A Choice of Evils.
On the arrest of the gang of City burglars the other day in Wood
Street, we learn that the rascals were in possession of a bunch of
skeleton keys that would open almost every warehouse in the street.
This is pleasant intelligence. We have often heard that, there is a
skeleton in every cupboard. Query, whether this is worse than a
skeleton-key in every safe ?
a perennial novelty.
Mr. Sot hern is announced to appear again as Lord Dundreary ! A
contributor, suffering heavily under the influence of the dead season,
writes to say, that he won’t say his Lordship is never “ dreary,”
but he is certainly never “ done.”