at home upon; and a few facts concerning our career--sufficient to
save the stranger from, what is vulgarly termed "putting his foot in
it." Before making jokes about "Dumping," or discussing the question
of Chinese Cheap Labour, one would glance behind and note whether
one's companion was ticketed "Whole-hogger," or "Pro-Boer." Guests
desirous of agreeable partners--an "agreeable person," according to
the late Lord Beaconsfield's definition, being "a person who agrees
with you"--could make their own selection.

"Excuse me. Would you mind turning round a minute? Ah, 'Wagnerian
Crank!' I am afraid we should not get on together. I prefer the
Italian school."

Or, "How delightful. I see you don't believe in vaccination. May I
take you into supper?"

Those, on the other hand, fond of argument would choose a suitable
opponent. A master of ceremonies might be provided who would stand
in the centre of the room and call for partners: "Lady with strong
views in favour of female franchise wishes to meet gentleman holding
the opinions of St. Paul. With view to argument."

An American lady, a year or two ago, wrote me a letter that did me
real good: she appreciated my work with so much understanding,
criticised it with such sympathetic interest. She added that, when
in England the summer before, she had been on the point of accepting
an invitation to meet me; but at the last moment she had changed her
mind; she felt so sure--she put it pleasantly, but this is what it
came to--that in my own proper person I should fall short of her
expectations. For my own sake I felt sorry she had cried off; it