How many times a day do we hear that someone or other of our school fellows is a 'beastly swagger ?' We apologise to our readers for drawing their attention to the phrase. The truth remains unaltered. Now, without in the least wishing to read Marlborough a homily on the evils of 'swaggering,' much less to blame them for the hearty contempt which they always show for the article whether genuine or otherwise, we would ask, do half the schoolboys who use the phrase use it fairly?

Brown, Jones or Smith is a new boy: he comes with the reputation of a cricketer, gets into his house eleven, and in the moment of pride goes up to cricket without a coat: and the glories of his newly won sash are displayed to the jealous or unsympathetic gaze of his companions. He is dubbed a 'swagger': his fame spreads abroad through Upper School and he is generally barred from 'good' society. Now how petty and foolish this is: you cannot fathom his reason for appearing without a coat; supposing he wished to display his colours, what more does he do than a member of the XI, XXII or XV, or even a XL cap? Perhaps you would have

PRICE 3d.

the latter article enveloped in a night or dunce's cap. Yet the writer has heard the criticism times out of mind.

A

We don't wish to fall foul of present Marlburians when we attack a subject that has always proved so attractive to old Marlburians. Dress. Ah! the many heart achings that a pair of tight trousers has occasioned. Moreover it has caused much astonishment, so that we have seen perhaps two-thirds of the school gaze dumbdonkey fashion at the ill-starred possessor. walking stick, a stick-up collar, a ring, a red silk handkerchief, rouse indignation, but what words can describe the sensation produced by wearing your cap on the back of the head? We confess we never found much fault for this somewhat trivial breach of school etiquette. The abhorred fashion has the merits of being cooler, perhaps more convenient; certainly more elegant, for the college cap is at best sombre and colourless, whereas the human hair has a natural grace and-but we fear to run to personalities. We have seen a good many odd current notions of 'Swagger.' Marlborough once thought it 'swagger to wear an Eton collar inside an Eton jacket! Let us rejoice that they have thus (or otherwise) done away with the

disfiguring practice; but it was curious swagger' at the best. And now if some worthy prefect appeared in Sunday best top hat, stick and gloves, he would be doing only what was customary seven years back, and is legal now: it was never popular (we must confess our experience is limited), but gave the worthy Sixth Form a slight mark of distinction from a college waiter in full dress. Now we shudder to think what fate might await the wretch who dared the deed. Hitherto we praise the spirit of 'swagger,' we use the term in its Marlborough sense. It is unfettered, independent, liberal, and in some cases original. After all you cannot 'swagger' much if you are not allowed to attire yourself in a light suit and in other than 'Black or Dark Blue Oxford Ties.' What would be thought of Mr. Verdant Green's first suit of Oxford clothes?

So

So much for dress. Now if we said that half the charges of 'swagger' are based on a peculiarity of gait, we believe we should be doing justice to our friend, the critical schoolboy. Fortunately all men are not by nature equal. an orthodox gait has been assumed to be that which is most usual and straightforward. But some people are so nicely fashioned that their centre of gravity shifts as they move; they verge from side to side, forward and backwards, with a pendulum-like motion of head or arms. When motion ceases and they stand still, they are erect enough. Now some of these unfortunate gentlemen have won a certain fame to themselves, have won a XL cap or XXII cap at an unusually early age, and perhaps while actively engaged in displaying their skill in these games for others' benefit have forgotten how to walk. And so because as they do their very best to walk up the narrow avenue of court, or the gangway of chapel, their head favours impartially either side, they are said to 'roll,' that is to say, to adopt the most odious form of 'swagger.' Schoolboys have not delicate nerves, but if you started some of the hardiest to walk alone between 'quintuple rows of bright (with sarcasm) faces,' they would find it very hard to walk in the conventional, erect, orthodox Marlborough fashion. We called it erect, but to do justice to Old Marlburians it is considerably out of the normal; drooping head, downcast eyes, back bent at we know not what angle. And so let the critics hear our criticism: we detest a swaggering gait,

but after all we think they ought to look at home and make a more correct standard and set a better example.

But after all these are but a few instances of 'swagger' as compared with the numbers that one may collect any day at School. To say nothing of the boy who always comes into form late, if not last, or another who comes into chapel needlessly near stroke, and runs the whole course in solitary grandeur, the cynosure of neighbouring eyes.' All this is far more odious swagger than the other external details. Again, in what form is there not a professional 'funny joker,' nothing loath to quibble and argue with his master in order to display his ignorance, quite content if only his voice may be heard. He will never know anything or answer a question lest he may become usual: or he will answer one occasionally to draw down a magisterial sarcasm at his own expense. At least the form will laugh at him; and they do laugh at him. There is also the beaming face of the sharp lad; a delightful smile lights his face, when one less gifted boy makes a mistake. He takes care too that the master shall see the smile. We have known it fail

in some instances. The question missed is passed on to him, the smile grows sicklier and sicklier, and the unwelcome cry of 'next' turns the tables completely. If you are top of your form for the week always make it a golden rule, a law of the Medes and Persians, to ask everyone you meet where he is, and to tell everyone else where he is; especially your keen rival, if you know, as you probably will. The compliment is generally repaid and you' score.' If you are asked where you intend to be for the week, always say 'bottom:' what detestable impertinence to say 'top'! and yet one is 'swagger' and the other is not.

And now we have not put in a word for the professional talkers, who have always something to say in a loud voice, who secure the first intelligence and pride themselves on the acquisition and make capital of it. How much longer it would take for news to spread if it were not for these delightful a people. And 'swagger' is often at the bottom of this too. We have found this in high places: the earliest news, newest jokes, funniest sayings of masters and boys bruited forth in elegant polysyllables flavoured with a spice of original criticism, are sold cheaper by the great than by the small.

Further learn the various ways of the prize winner

If

on receiving the news of fresh triumphs. If he were simple and natural he would blush. If he did not expect the prize, he would perhaps smile. he did, he is at a loss: feign pleasure he can not; it is ridiculous to be pleased at so puny a success. He will look solemn: we have know him even frown, and above all he will attempt a look of innocent surprise. When his name is posted he will find a thousand excuses for being seen, especially at the notice board, and will bear unblushing honours thick upon him.

But, we are told, and even Marlborough has consented to confess, that'swagger' is venial in big fellows. We confess we thought it more peculiarly venial in small fellows. In the first place, if they are unusually precocious, they have more title to swagger than the critic's jealousy will allow him to suppose. They attract an attention which they deserve for being above the dead level of schoolboys in some respect. If they have no apparent motive and no justification, have you not, O readers, been thankful that they are small and can be brought low by a punishment, which fear, mastering our other feelings, will not let us inflict on the great ?

THE LIVERPOOL MATCH.

Whit-Monday was wet, and the Liverpool Match began and ended on Tuesday. J. R. Kewley had brought some old friends, reinforced by a fresh fast bowler. We were lucky enough to win the toss, and Meyrick and Rowell went in to the bowling of Hornby (slow left) from Lyne's, and Manson (fast right) from the Town end. The ground was decidedly adverse to run-getting, and very slowly the runs came, only one cut for two by Meyrick deserving notice before E. Steel displaced Hornby, off whose first ball Meyrick was caught. Lazenby also did his best to get himself run out from the first ball he had, and then played a good ball of Steel's

to the bank, and then made the first three of the match, after it had lasted an hour, off Eccles, whom Grimsdale, on 30 being telegraphed, superseded with slows. After Meyrick-Jones had smacked Hornby to the off, Rowell was bowled by a good ball, after playing in a most patient fashion for an hour and twenty minutes for 4, in which there was not a ghost of a chance—a most creditable debût for so small a performer. He and Meyrick may wear out the hearts of many a bowler before the season ends. A good one of Hornby's dismissed Ashfield, and then Meyrick-Jones was caught from a fine hit by Eccles in really splendid fashion. He ran a long way, jumped at the ball, just stopped it with his left hand, and caught it falling. Kitcat began with a clean square hit to the bank, and scored the first four off a full pitch from Hornby, but then narrowly escaped stumping through playing forward at a short ball, which he might have played back or gone out farther to meet. Meanwhile Poynton had done much the same thing to one of Grimsdale's, and had paid the penalty. Little followed suit-there being a horrid family likeness in the three strokes-but the umpire was favourable, and 60 went up at lunch time. After lunch time Manson and Steel bowled, and Kitcat, off the former's first ball, sent an easy chance to Dale, the second he sent to the steps, and the third clean bowled him. He had played in a nice free style, hut luckily. Bett hit Steel for two and three to leg and Manson for a couple of twos, but Little-essaying the same bad stroke as beforewas stumped. Bett put Steel away for three before he was well caught at cover, and the innings soon ended. Considering the state of the ground, and the bowling, of which Steel's seemed to us the deadliest, the batting was not bad, and justifies hope for the future.

That dangerous bat, Cox, with Dale, began the Liverpool innings, but soon succumbed to Hayhurst, and a ripper of Bett's sent home Dale. Manson and Steel gave more trouble. The former drove Bett to the off well for 3 and then lifted him for ditto near the pavilion before he was caught. Hornby at once began hitting. He lifted Bett to the hedge for 4, then got several 2's and an on 4 to the canvass, followed by a series of skyers. The bowling -not too soon-was changed, Poynton taking Bett's end and Robertson Hayhurst's. Hayhurst had been very short at first but had improved afterwards.

Hornby

Steel put Robertson over the bank for 4, and Hornby gave Poynton a chance off his own bowling, and then another—a hard one-to Rowell in the deep field. Then Steel was caught for a very careful 18. More skyers from Hornby, one of which Meyrick-Jones, dazzled by the sun, did not try, fell harmless, and after he had hit a 3 over the bank, Little missed a lofty one. Grimsdale drove a 3, and Bett and Hayhurst resumed the bowling, the former at this juncture signalising himself in the field. then hit him hard over his head and administered similar punishment to Hayhurst. He was at last easily caught by cover after a dashing but reckless exhibition. 118, 5, 63. Brown and L. Hornby soon departed, and after some genuine cricket, Grimsdale was nicely taken at mid-off, Hayhurst capturing three wickets for 4 runs. Eccles made a rattling drive for 5 over the bank-the hit of the match-and was then clean bowled by Robertson, who had come on again and bowled better from the town end. Kemble, after some smart and neat strokes, was nearly caught by Little, who tried well to take a difficult chance. Kewley should have been run out by Bett. He had given up his life meekly and was en route for the pavilion when Bett threw at the wicket instead of knocking the bails off. Result, a quarter of an hour's more fun and a 'not out' for J.R.

We hope there will be no chariness in changing the bowling this season. Both in that and in placing the field, the Liverpool captain set a wholesome example.

Appended is the score and analysis :

BAKER'S (Fleur-de-lys) v. COTTON HOUSE. This match was played on May 12th, and 18th, and resulted in an easy victory for Baker's by an innings and 47 runs. Baker's lost the toss but were put in by their opponents, a somewhat questionable policy. Kitcat and Miles opened the innings, and were not separated till the score had risen to 50, when Miles was caught in the slips after having compiled a steady 14. Prest followed, but soon lost the company of Kitcat, who was caught at coverpoint for a free and stylish 47. De Winton, who followed, was given out leg-before without scoring; of the rest Davies was the only one who rendered Prest any noteworthy assistance; the latter had been killing all bowling most vigorously, and it seemed as if he would obtain his century; but he was caught in the long field off Keeling, after making 77 without a chance. His cutting and leg hitting were very neat, and he promises well for the future. Davies played a pretty innings for 15, but ran himself out. The innings closed for 171. The match was resumed on May 18th, when Tuckett and Mavrogordato, who had batted steadily for the last half-hour on the previous day, brought the score up to 35, at which point Mavrogordato was well caught by

Ross at long leg. Watson stayed for a short time with Tuckett, but the rest, except Merry, who hit merrily, gave little trouble, and the innings closed for 82. Cotton house being in a minority of 89 were compelled to follow on. The wickets fell quickly at first, but later Keeling and Merry made a plucky stand and raised the score from 19 to 35, while Jowitt hit hard for 14. The innings closed for 42 leaving Baker's an easy victory. The fielding on both sides was fair, though Baker's missed a good many catches in the first innings. None of the Cotton House 'trundlers' had anything remarkable in the way of analysis, Keeling getting most wickets. For Baker's, Miles and De Winton got most wickets. Kitcat and G. P. Chappel were also successful.

PRESHUTE v. HART SMITH'S (MITRE). This game produced a complete surprise for all parties. To the losers it must have indeed been aggravating, as they were far and away the better eleven on paper and in our opinion on the field also. However Preshute won an interesting match by 14 runs, and deserve all praise for their steady play throughout.

In the first innings of Preshute, who won the toss and elected to bat on a very fast wicket, we noticed very little except the 20 of Belk, who played very

steady good cricket despite a chance. Martin made some good drives and Elder played with confidence, hitting very straight at anything he played. The innings closed for 69. Preshute were without the assistance of Lubbock on the first afternoon. Of Hart-Smith's bowlers Sale was disappointing.. Harvey got in some capital balls but did not keep his length. Poynton seemed most difficult.

Hart-Smith's opened with Meyrick and Poynton; the former misplayed a ball in the first over and was out. Martyn came in and distinguished himself by some really fine hitting. Poynton when just getting into form was out lbw. Sale and Martyn between them took the score to 98. Both deserve the greatest praise for their admirable play in both. innings. Martyn gave only one chance just before he was bowled. His innings included five 5's and one 6. Of the rest only Fisher (15) did anything. Total 130. Belk bowled best for Preshute.

In a minority of 61, Preshute went in again and at the end of the day had scored 118 for five wickets. Of these, Coape-Smith had made 38 by some fair play, though by no means faultless. But the best exhibition of batting except his namesake's was Martin's. Until resuming the next afternoon he played first-rate cricket, making some very fine drives. Elder gave trouble, but the rest of the eleven showed no form. Harvey, though much hit on the first day, was the most successful bowler in this innings.

With 100 to win the same pair started to face Lubbock and Belk, and the partisans of Hart-Smith's had an unpleasant surprise in store as Meyrick was bowled without scoring. Martyn came in, but soon lost Poynton. Joined however by Sale he raised the score to 61, of which he made a vigourous 40. Then a dreadful rot set in. Sale after displaying great care was bowled by Lewis, but the feature of the innings was Harrington's bowling, who captured all the last 5 wickets for 13 runs. Harvey made a plucky attempt to save the game, but he had only some very nervous novices to support him, and so Hart-Smith's were beaten by 14 runs.

There was nothing strikingly bad or good on the fielding of either side. Lubbock was very safe and many runs down the hill.

Poynton saved a great We should have been inclined to have sent in some of Hart-Smith's tail earlier, as they were palpably nervous, never having figured for the most part on upper game before.