Audacious self-esteem, with good ground for it, is always imposing.  What resplendent beauty that must have been which could have authorized Phryne to “peel” in the way she did!  What fine speeches are those two:  “Non omnis mortar,” and “I have taken all knowledge to be my province”!  Even in common people, conceit has the virtue of making them cheerful; the man who thinks his wife, his baby, his house, his horse, his dog, and himself severally unequalled, is almost sure to be a good-humored person, though liable to be tedious at times.

—­What are the great faults of conversation?  Want of ideas, want of words, want of manners, are the principal ones, I suppose you think.  I don’t doubt it, but I will tell you what I have found spoil more good talks than anything else;—­long arguments on special points between people who differ on the fundamental principles upon which these points depend.  No men can have satisfactory relations with each other until they have agreed on certain ultimata of belief not to be disturbed in ordinary conversation, and unless they have sense enough to trace the secondary questions depending upon these ultimate beliefs to their source.  In short, just as a written constitution is essential to the best social order, so a code of finalities is a necessary condition of profitable talk between two persons.  Talking is like playing on the harp; there is as much in laying the hand on the strings to stop their vibrations as in twanging them to bring out their music.

—­Do you mean to say the pun-question is not clearly settled in your minds?  Let me lay down the law upon the subject.  Life and language are alike sacred.  Homicide and verbicide—­that is, violent treatment of a word with fatal results to its legitimate meaning, which is its life—­are alike forbidden.  Manslaughter, which is the meaning of the one, is the same as man’s laughter, which is the end of the other.  A pun is prima facie an insult to the person you are talking with.  It implies utter indifference to or sublime contempt for his remarks, no matter how serious.  I speak of total depravity, and one says all that is written on the subject is deep raving.  I have committed my self-respect by talking with such a person.  I should like to commit him, but cannot, because he is a nuisance.  Or I speak of geological convulsions, and he asks me what was the cosine of Noah’s ark; also, whether the Deluge was not a deal huger than any modern inundation.

A pun does not commonly justify a blow in return.  But if a blow were given for such cause, and death ensued, the jury would be judges both of the facts and of the pun, and might, if the latter were of an aggravated character, return a verdict of justifiable homicide.  Thus, in a case lately decided before Miller, J., Doe presented Roe a subscription paper, and urged the claims of suffering humanity.  Roe replied by asking, When charity was like a top?  It was in evidence that Doe preserved a dignified