When the poll was declared the figures ran—­

  Jenkins (Coalition) ... 20,428
  Coddem (Bottomley) ... 9,344
  Dulham (Labour) ... 9,028
  Guff (Wee Free) ... 2,008
  Stilts (National Party) ... 49

And The Daily News’ headline the next day was—­

  “CORRUPT MINORITY CANDIDATE CARRIES MUDDLEBORO.”

* * * * *

[Illustration:  DEMODE.

She. “SOMEWHAT ARCHAIC—­WHAT?”

He. “YE—­ES.  ALL RIGHT SIX WEEKS AGO. QUITE ACADEMICAL NOW.”]

* * * * *

COMMERCIAL CANDOUR.

From a poultry-breeder’s advertisement:—­

    “My strains of Rhodes are only too well known.”

* * * * *

    “Miss Winnie ——­, the charming and talented actress, writes:—­’I am
    quite positive—­I owe my present health and spirits to ——.’”—­Advt.
    in Daily Paper.

    “Poor Miss Winnie ——­ has had to retire suddenly from the revue—­
    doctor’s orders.”—­Same paper, same day.

We should have liked to hear the Advertisement Manager’s view of the News Editor.

* * * * *

[Illustration:  “OO, LUMME!  WOT PRICE REGINALD IN ’IS MALLABY-DEELEYS?”]

* * * * *

FREUD AND JUNG.

[A reviewer in a recent issue of The Times Literary Supplement asks, “Why should the characters in the psychological novel be invariably horrid?” and is inclined to explain this state of affairs by the undiscriminating study of “the theories of two very estimable gentlemen, the sound of whose names one is beginning to dislike—­ Messrs. Freud and Jung.”]

  In QUEEN VICTORIA’S placid reign, the novelists of note
  In one respect, at any rate, were all in the same boat;
  Alike in Richard Feverel and in Aurora Floyd
  You’ll seek in vain for any trace of Messrs. JUNG and FREUD.

  They did not fail in colour, for they had their PEACOCK’S tales;
  Their heroines, I must admit, ran seldom off the rails;
  They had their apes and angels, but they never once employed
  The psycho-analytic rules devised by JUNG and FREUD.

  They ran a tilt at fraud and guilt, at snobbery and shams;
  They had no lack of Meredithyrambic epigrams;
  The types that most appealed to them were not neurasthenoid;
  They lived, you see, before the day of Messrs. JUNG and FREUD.

  (I’ve searched the last edition of the famous Ency.  Brit.
  And neither of this noble pair is even named in it;
  Only the men since Nineteen-Ten have properly enjoyed
  The privilege of studying the works of JUNG and FREUD.)

  Their characters, I grieve to say, were never more unclean
  Than those of ordinary life, in morals or in mien;
  They had not slummed or fully plumbed with rapture unalloyed
  The unconscious mind as now defined by Messrs. JUNG and FREUD.