became virtually the act of the Pope himself. Fortescue, on the other hand, regarding the king as a persona mixta, believed him to exercise of right such an episcopal function as the collating to prebends during the vacancy of any see. None the less in Fortescue's view the king was the subject and functionary of the Holy See, and in the case of flagrant misconduct it was for the Pope to punish and depose.12 But neither to the Lord Chancellor nor to the great canonist, pious men both and loyally devoted to their sovereign, would it, I submit, ever have occurred that a medieval king was consecrated to govern the Church in any but temporal matters. Perhaps I am wrong, but I venture to ask for stronger evidence than any which has been so far produced by Dr. Legg and his fellow editors.

HERBERT THURSTON, S.J.

12 It may perhaps be permissible to point out that the alleged medieval conception of the king's ecclesiastical character does not convey to all students of the past quite what it conveys to Dr. Legg. In Dr. Gierke's view, 'the offices of Kaiser, King and Prince' were judged by the canonists to be 'ecclesiastical offices,' not because these temporal rulers govern the Church, but, on the contrary, because the temporal government, when it has been constituted, remains a subservient part of the ecclesiastical order'—or, in other words, 'because the temporal power is subject to and should obey the spiritual' (Political Theories, p. 13). This is the interpretation of the teaching of the medieval Church party, propounded by the great Berlin jurist. It can hardly be supposed that Dr. Legg would wish to import this conception into the ceremonial of a modern coronation.

THE YOUNG ENGLISH GIRL

SELF-PORTRAYED

THE MONKEY MAGAZINE'

THIS Review has been lately privileged to give to the world the opinions on life and conduct of a number of French young ladies brought up for the most part in convent schools. Almost without exception their sentiments indicate a high standard of virtue, and may be studied with edification. Without any desire to draw an invidious comparison, it may not be unamusing to the reader should like hospitality be accorded to extracts from the writings of some English girls, who, though younger than their French sisters, have also given their views on things in general with an outspoken candour certainly not restrained by fear of conventual or other supervision.

One of the young editors of a magazine, bearing the not inappropriate name of Monkey, lately honoured me by entrusting to my care a collection of back numbers, with permission to select from their pages such portions as appeared likely to appeal to a larger public than that for which they were originally intended. The magazine in question was written by over twenty girls in the schoolrooms of their respective families, each number being composed of drawings and of stories and essays inscribed on detached pages; these were sewn into a cover by one of the joint-editors—not always an easy task, to judge by pathetic appeals for care occasionally interspersed amidst other matter, 'important pages' being sometimes lost in transit. The completed number was then circulated amongst the members, with blank pages left for written criticisms. These, as will be seen, were given with the utmost candour; it has been whispered that we praised our friends and abused those we did not like'; but surely such conduct was unknown amongst critics who had not yet failed in literature and art. Moreover, what was the use of the pseudonyms with which the contributions are rigorously signed, if any girl had a suspicion of another author's identity? A system of prizes allotted by vote, and of fines for failure to contribute, aided to keep up the interest, which was maintained for several years; in fact, till many of the contributors had left the schoolroom and come out.' The claims of a giddy world are, alas! found too exacting for the

regular exercise of literary and artistic talent, but most readers will agree that it would be sad if a few plums could not be rescued from a feast of which only intimate friends have hitherto been allowed fleeting glimpses. Nor need the discerning editor on the search for budding genius despair; these maidens are still in the first flush of youthful enjoyment; in a year or two the pen or brush may again reclaim them, and the promise which he will here perceive may be amply fulfilled.

Meantime the magazine exists only in manuscript, or occasional typoscript, none of the numbers having as yet been printed. The illustrations, unfortunately, cannot here be reproduced, but a few of the accompanying criticisms may give an idea of their motive. A lady is represented cycling. 'Fairly good,' says critic number one; 'where is the lady's left foot?' 'Good,' adds Dragon, though the lady's right hand looks rather big.' 'Criticisms should not be so captious. EXCELLENT!' remonstrates the third judge.

Some children in a basket, very prettily drawn by Edendough, are pronounced by one to be quite inartistic'; but another promptly throws herself into the breach with the query, Where does the inartisticness (sic) come in?' The Gorilla and Cinderella have several clever drawings, while Rhesus contributes a pretty sketch for Mary Queen of Scots, of which the Gnome cruelly writes, 'Rather hard luck on Mary Queen of Scots. Rhesus might have called it something else.'

A great controversy rages over two pencil drawings of Bruges by a young lady signing herself Chimpanzee, who rather draws down upon herself the flashes which she hoped to avert by writing underneath her sketches, 'Out of a rough sketch-book. We had one quarter of an hour to do these little things.'

'Not good,' says Tommy Atkins; Chimpanzee must have a great contempt for the M.M. if she only contributes scribbles out of a rough sketch-book.'

'I am so sorry,' apologises Chimpanzee; 'I thought they weren't so very bad' (they are not), but I'll never contribute again if T.A. doesn't like anyway not drawings.' Tommy Atkins was editor, but she does not seem to have secured military discipline, for another contributor ventures to write: Very good indeed. Why should Chimpanzee be so sat upon by the first critic? It shows all she knows about it.'

And so they continue; but we must turn from the artists, and give a slight idea of the efforts of the novelists.

Be it remarked in passing that the girls seldom indulge in poetry. A comment on this reticence elicited the explanation that when they did they were 'so awfully cut up' that they could not stand it. Would there be any advantage in starting a Monkey Magazine for older rhymesters ?

Fear of a like ordeal may account for a general absence of the sentimental style; the stories for the most part are rapid in action and very sensational-duels, burglaries, and sudden deaths predominate. A detective story is begun, and the various contributors are invited to supply endings according to fancy. In one a mysterious murder is thus explained by a faithful servant: 'I must tell you that madness is in the Seymour family. It is supposed to come out in one member in every third generation, and my poor mistress was no exception to the rule.' The madness in her case took the inconvenient form of killing 'the idol of her heart,' and Jane, hearing 'weird laughter,' arrived just in time to see this done and to lead the culprit back to bed. Fortunately her speedy death enables the servant to explain matters to the family, and as they decide to keep the secret the police are apparently accommodating enough to ask no further questions.

In another conclusion to the same story we are told how a young man was captured by banditti; he escaped, 'and while wandering in the mountains came upon a secret society for the overthrow of the Italian Government, and secured one of their papers . . . recognising the importance of the paper,' he kept it carefully, and left it to his son; the society made several offers for its recovery,' which of course,' says the wife of the man who secured it, we refused.' It does not appear what advantage accrued from its possession, but after the lapse of years, murder, and other catastrophes, 'the paper was given up to the Italian Government, but as no key could be found to the cypher its contents remain unknown.' Could Mrs. Gallup help the Italian Government? Criticism on this chapter should, however, be disarmed by the note appended by the author. I hope that the mems. of the M.M. will not think this solution too full of blood and murder, as I have made it end in the happiest manner I could.— BABOON.' Most of the critics are merciful and even laudatory, but one, presumably from a spirit of contradiction, pronounces, 'It is neither sensible nor probable, neither amusing nor tragical. It is indeed quite worthy of a Baboon.'

Another story, called the 'Wolf in Sheep's Clothing,' introduces a hero, son of a parsimonious peer, who, being landed in pecuniary difficulties, adopts the suggestion of his valet, who 'confided to Leslie that years ago he had been a burglar in a small way. . . . And so Horace Leslie became a burglar, and becoming also rich after two or three successful attempts, he once more went into society, and soon became one of the most popular members thereof,' utilising his opportunities to further his nefarious designs. One of the comments on the first instalment of this romance is, 'So far, so good. I hope it won't be too long, as one always forgets the first part if the story continues for months.'

In one cheerful tale a Professor leaves his child shut up with a

skeleton, and returns to find her a gibbering idiot: in yet another, a young lady, warned by a dream, gallops off on an early morning visit to her betrothed, and arrives to find that he has suddenly expired. She unhesitatingly adjourns to the roof of his castle, and commits suicide by throwing herself from the battlements.

“

Apparitions and ghostly presentiments are frequent enough to annoy Jacko,' who writes, 'What stupid subjects for this month! Can't the monkeys have a more interesting subject than ghosts and murder storys?' 'Will Jacko kindly suggest a better? I think ghosts a most interesting subject,' retorts Jenny Wren.

Probably the acrimony of Jacko was caused by the suggestion 'Do Ghosts Exist?' as subject for an essay. This is discussed by the girls with gravity befitting members of the Psychical Society rather than monkeys. On the whole their arguments are fairly well balanced, and Spes reasons the matter out with care, though she elicits the comment, 'We have almost enough to do with natural affairs, without too much endeavouring to understand or explain the supernatural.' Another philosopher plunges into the subject thus: 'It is almost wrong to say that ghosts do not exist, because we have so many sound proofs that they do ; but all the same I do not believe in them, and shall not till I have the misfortune to see one, which I hope I may never do. . . . I have heard there is a house,' she continues, 'where there is a haunted bedroom. Here no one will sleep, because every morning there is the impression as if some one had lain there! Once a maid was put there to sleep, and in the morning she was dead.' 'How tiresome of the maid to die and not tell why,' says a practical critic.

'Places I have seen' are well described by more than one contributor. Ythan becomes poetic in Genoa and Florence, and we may hope remains uncrushed by the remark, 'Fairly good; much the best thing Ythan has written in this "poetical" style, which personally I hate,' since other critics pronounce her essay to be exceedingly well written. Jenny Wren gives really entertaining accounts of Aden and Colombo, and wins the sympathy of at least one critic by concluding that no place ever looked so fascinating as Plymouth Harbour when she first saw England again after two years' absence.

'My Ideal Sitting-Room' gives occasion to several writers to mention their favourite authors and artists, amongst whom Ruskin, Walter Scott, Tennyson, George Eliot, Thackeray and Jane Austen, Burne-Jones and Rossetti hold honoured places. 'Can animals communicate with each other?' was plainly a congenial topic, and one can but admire the candour of the reasons for holding the affirmative view. To us human beings,' writes Elk, who are so fond of talking, it would be difficult to realise that animals have no power of communication, but perhaps "the wish is father to the thought."