are, by comparison, new.  Christianity, for example, must be held responsible for the missionary and cannibal joke, of which we have grown weary unto death; but which nevertheless possesses astonishing vitality, and exhibits remarkable breadth of treatment.  Sydney Smith did not disdain to honour it with a joyous and unclerical quatrain; and the agreeable author of “Rab and his Friends” has told us the story of his fragile little schoolmate whose mother had destined him for a missionary, “though goodness knows there wasn’t enough of him to go around among many heathen.”

To Christianity is due also the somewhat ribald mirth which has clung for centuries about Saint Peter as gatekeeper of Heaven.  We can trace this mirth back to the rude jests of the earliest miracle plays.  We see these jests repeated over and over again in the folklore of Latin and Germanic nations.  And if we open a comic journal to-day, there is more than a chance that we shall find Saint Peter, key in hand, uttering his time-honoured witticisms.  This well-worn situation depends, as a rule, upon that common element of fun-making, the incongruous.  Saint Peter invaded by air-ships.  Saint Peter outwitting a squad of banner-flying suffragettes.  Saint Peter losing his saintly temper over the expansive philanthropy of millionaires.  Now and then a bit of true satire, like Mr. Kipling’s “Tomlinson,” conveys its deeper lesson to humanity.  A recently told French story describes a lady of good reputation, family, and estate, presenting herself fearlessly at the gates of Heaven.  Saint Peter receives her politely, and leads her through a street filled with lofty and beautiful mansions, any one of which she thinks will satisfy her requirements; but, to her amazement, they pass them by.  Next they come to more modest but still charming houses with which she feels she could be reasonably content; but again they pass them by.  Finally they reach a small and mean dwelling in a small and mean thoroughfare.  “This,” says Saint Peter, “is your habitation.”  “This!” cries the indignant lady; “I could not possibly live in any place so shabby and inadequate.”  “I am sorry, madame,” replies the saint urbanely; “but we have done the best we could with the materials you furnished us.”

There are no bounds to the loyalty with which mankind clings to a well-established jest, there is no limit to the number of times a tale will bear retelling.  Occasionally we give it a fresh setting, adorn it with fresh accessories, and present it as new-born to the world; but this is only another indication of our affectionate tenacity.  I have heard that caustic gibe of Queen Elizabeth’s anent the bishop’s lady and the bishop’s wife (the Tudors had a biting wit of their own) retold at the expense of an excellent lady, the wife of a living American bishop; and the story of the girl who, professing religion, gave her ear-rings to a sister, because she knew they were taking her to Hell,—­a story which dates from the early Wesleyan revivals in England,—­I have heard located in Philadelphia, and assigned to one of Mr. Torrey’s evangelistic services.  We still resort, as in the days of Sheridan, to our memories for our jokes, and to our imaginations for our facts.