fe,"
he muttered to himself, as he halted at his own door. "Not a single ray
of light anywhere--not one."

"Popsey," he called out to his daughter, when he was inside, "bring me
the decanter of whisky, some cold water, my tobacco-jar and a new
churchwarden into the office; and don't let me be disturbed by anyone
for four hours."

(_To be continued._)

ON LETTER-WRITING.

It is a matter of common remark that the epistolary art has been killed
by the penny post, not to speak of post-cards.

This is a result which was hardly anticipated by Sir Rowland Hill, when,
in the face of many obstacles, he carried his great scheme; and
certainly it did not dwell very vividly before the mind of Mr. Elihu
Burritt, the learned blacksmith, when he travelled over England,
speaking there, as he had already done in America, in favour of an ocean
penny postage.

It is urged that in the old days when postage was dear, and "franks"
were difficult to procure, and when the poor did not correspond at all,
writers were very careful to write well and to say the very best they
could in the best possible way--to make their letters, in a word, worthy
of the expense incurred. But those who argue on this ground leave out of
consideration one little fact.

The classes to whom English literature is indebted for the epistolary
samples on which reliance is placed for proof of this proposition, very
seldom indeed paid for the conveyance of the letters in question. The
system of "franking"--by which the privileged classes got not only their
letters carried, but a great deal too often their dressing-cases and
bandboxes as well--grew into a most serious grievance; so serious indeed
that the opposition for a long period carried on against cheap postage
arose solely from over nice regard to the vested interests of those who
could command a little favour from a Peer, a Member of Parliament, or an
official of high rank, not to speak of those patriotic worthies
themselves.

The fact may thus be made to cut two ways.

From our point of view, it may be cited in direct denial of the
conclusion that people wrote well in past days simply because the
conveyance of their letters was costly. We believe that the mass wrote
just as badly and loosely then as the mass do now, in fact that they
were rather loose on rules of spelling; and that the specimens preserved
and presented to us in type are exceptional, and escaped destruction
with the mass precisely