Chorus.

Two lovely brown eyes! 
Oh, what a surprise! 
Art-loving-Man is less likely to black
Two lovely brown eyes!

[Illustration]

* * * * *

MEN OF THE PAST.

(COMPILED BY THE MAN OF THE PRESENT.)

CROMWELL.—­An English Brewer.  Uncertain about his aspirates.  Distinctly vulgar.  Face disfigured by warts.

PETER THE GREAT.—­Quite a common sort of Russian.  Man with coarse tastes.  Came to England to learn ship-building.  Fond of low society; in fact, the type of an enterprising cad.

WASHINGTON.—­Entirely provincial English rebel, who caused considerable trouble in America.  Family fair, but not to be traced beyond three generations.  Used to eat peas with his knife.

HANNIBAL.—­Brutal barbarian.  Feeblest ideas of stategy.  Went the wrong way over the Alps.  Given to oaths from childhood up.  Quite a classical nobody.

BUONAPARTE.—­A Corsican Parvenu.

* * * * *

The Garrick School.

  School for young actors is the Garrick Playhouse. 
  Upon the road to fame a quarter-way house
  For IRVING fils.  And likewise note we there
  The heir apparent of a parent HARE.

* * * * *

“DIO, age!” of which the classic American translation is, “Do tell!”

* * * * *

JOURNAL OF A ROLLING STONE.

NINTH ENTRY.

Curious thing, now that I am installed as a pupil in FIBBINS’S Chambers in Waste Paper Buildings, Temple, how few new briefs I am given to read.  Usual routine is for DICK FIBBINS to hand me a brief on which the dust of ages has collected, and to leave me to “get up the law about it”; but when he (FIBBINS) comes back from his day’s business in Court, about 4.30 P.M., he doesn’t seem to care a bit to know what the law is.  Seems tired, and prefers to gossip and smoke; so I do the same, or “follow on the same side,” as he expresses it.

“It strikes me forcibly,” I begin, “that the Plaintiff, SMITHERS, in that running-down case you asked me to read to-day, hasn’t got the ghost of a chance.  Why, in Blatherson v. Snipe, the Court ruled—­”

“Tried the lawn-tennis in the gardens yet?” FIBBINS interrupts, in the rudest possible manner.

“No,” I reply, “I was speaking of the Court, not lawn-tennis courts.” (One for FIBBINS, I think.) “All the Judges held in Blatherson v. Snipe, that—­”

“Oh, did they?” he interrupts again:  “doosid interesting.  Was I for plaintiff or defendant?”

“Plaintiff, SMITHERS.  A running-down case.”

“Wish it had been a running-up case—­a case of running-up the fees,” he laughs.  Then, resuming a more professional style, “You see, I’ve had such multitudes of cases since then, that I’ve forgotten the precise details.  But you write out your own Opinion—­not to-day; tomorrow will do.  Then I’ll see what it’s like.  Now let’s go a trot down the Strand.”