an extent, who are so determined to hold the talk in their own
hands, that I declare they might as well have a company of stuffed
seals to sit down to dinner with, as a circle of living and
breathing men. But I do not think it right, or at all events
necessary, in the interests of human kindliness, that I should
victimize myself so for a man's pleasure. Neither do I think it
necessary that I should attend a ceremony where I neither get nor
give anything of the nature of pleasure, simply in order to conform
to a social rule, invented and propagated by those who happen to
enjoy such gatherings.

I remember being much struck by an artless reminiscence of an
undergraduate, quoted in the Memoirs of a certain distinguished
academical personage, who was fond of inviting young men to share
his hospitality for experimental reasons. I cannot recollect the
exact words, but the undergraduate wrote of his celebrated
entertainer somewhat to the following effect: "He asked me to sit
down, so I sate down; he asked me to eat an apple, so I ate it. He
asked me to take a glass of wine, so I poured one out, and drank
it. I am told that he tries to get you to talk so that he may see
the kind of fellow you are; but I didn't want him to know the kind
of fellow I was, so I didn't talk; and presently I went away." I
think that this species of retaliation is perfectly fair in the
case of experimental entertainments. Social gatherings must be
conducted on a basis of perfect equality, and the idea of duty in
connection with them is a bugbear invented in the interests of
those who are greedy of society, and not in a position to
contribute any pleasure to a social gathering.

It might be inferred from the above considerations that I am an