disobliging.

5. "_Wine comes in, rubs off the acerbities, and brings all down to
the same level of good humour._" The end of such a happy party is, of
course, all under the table, smiling, but speechless.

Smiling, but beautiful they lay,
A gleam was in their half-closed eye,
But still they murmured with a sigh,
Hic-shelsher-wa'.

Dr. ROBERTS, as quoted by his _confrère_, ROBSON ROOSETEM PASHA,
appears to be a very sensible person. Dr. ROBERTS--he is not Dr.
ARTHUR ROBERTS, we believe--recommends the liqueur to be judiciously
taken at meal-times. And, by the way, as the knowledge of when to
cry, "Hold, enough!" is most useful, here is another test of sobriety
in this very word "judicious," which some, after a couple of glasses
(or more) of fine old cognac, will pronounce as though 'twere spelt
"seducious," and some will swear it ought to be "jusidious." When
nobody can pronounce "judicious" correctly, the _arbiter bibendi_,
if himself absolutely sober as a judge ought to be,--a man quite
"above-board," i.e., not yet under it,--such a one may pronounce that
the guests have had quite enough. It is a pity that so excellent
a writer on temperance should have the singular disadvantage of a
plural name. If, after dinner, a worthy convivialist observed, "I see
ROBERTS," would not the question naturally be, "How many of 'em?"
The Doctor can omit the "s," and, as perhaps he is already a little
singular in his carefully-advanced theories, why should he not
de-pluralise his surname? Do the Doctors R.R. and R. differ on this?
Then we must decide. In the meantime, to show our approval of this