The Cecil Whig., 1885-12-19

I ward, Prince OF Wales. There were
t others from smaller fry, but this tri,
| did indeed form a place in my
t album, and, as | am a conservative
/. they occupy very prominent posi-
} ton.
Lord Beaconsheld was another I'm.
gct-atable individual. His secretary
would respond to your first applica
ton, saying that his Lordship never
gave his autograph to anybody. 1t
was useless to impress upon Beacons-
; field that his was the only autograph
necessary to make your collection
OF modern celebrities complete. You
. might wait long and anxiously for a
rejoinder, but you wouldn't get it.
Then, perhaps, you would write, ex-
pressing regret for having trespassed
SO much on his valuable time, and,
if you were rash, you would spend
IS or 50 cents on an elegant photo
graph, and urge him Just to affix his
signature thereto and return it. He
would do neither, and any further
portraits you might send him would
be gone from your gaze forever.
| But l got his autograph nevertheless.
My brother came across an lmpecu-
NOUS man who had in his heyday,
spent some months Of his existence in
writing laudatory poem on the royal
family, and who had ventured to sub
NIT the proof sheets to Beaconsfeld
81 finished the proofs this evening, and
have read them with transcendent in
terest," wrote Beaconsfield in reply. A
small sum purchased this letter for me,
and l was made the happy possessor Of
Beaconfeld's autograph.
Won Moltke is dear old man. He
WE'LL send his autograph to anybody,
but he has this peculiarly, trrisct he IL
ways returns your own communication
with his signature cramped into cor
ner.
Charles Darwin would rarely respond |
to an application for his autograph, but
when l wrote asking for an elucidation
of what to me was complex portion,
of his "Origin of Species," he was
prompt in replying. His caligraphy |
was wretched, and l felt like asking
him to explain his explanation. An in
itial letter, dash of the pen, and a
final letter were made to represent a
word. His reply could only be under
stood by guess work and the aid of a
powerful microscope. To Prof. Tyn-
dali and Prof. Huxley 1 wrote, asking
their opinion with regard to a theory
which had been pnt forth by scientist
named Harrington, that the sun was
not source of heat or light to the solar
system. Huxley, l verify believe, es-
teemed me lunatic, but, although his
reply was curt, it gave ME his auto
graph. Tyndall wrote at some length,
saying that he had heard of Mr.. Har-
rington's theory, but Mr.. Harrin2ton's S
ideas were not his, and he would ad-
wise me to pause before making them
my own. Probably no man is so much
importuned as Mr.. Gladstone, and, un-
like Beaconsfeld, he will, when out OF
office, send personal answer to almost
every communication he receives, and,
if by chance request for his autograph
should be unsuccessful, one has only to
mention some current political topic to
open the floodgates of his eloquence
and draw from HIM a torrent of closely
written sentences. Cardinal Newman
is ever responsive, but in nine cases
out of ten you don't actually get his
handwriting, although you think you
do. The great theologian has had
Autographed few lines which serve as
an answer to most Of the commonplace
communications he receives-a sort Of
literary panacea for the ailments of au-
tograph hunters. 1t runs thus: "Ex-
cuse me. | am an old man and my
hand is feeble" | was a long time
getting a letter from Mr.. .Ruskin, but
it came at last. For some reason which
can't now explain. l asked his opin-
ion as to what were the best theological
works for young member of the
Church Of England to improve her
mind with. His reply was this: Il
have no time to write you al any length,
and | take no interest iii any young
ladies who study theology
FLORENCE NJ.