eling," said Lena; "but one can generally find out
beforehand what people's opinions--"

"My dear, the year before it was worse. It was Christian Science. Selina
Goobie is a sort of High Priestess of the Cult, and she put down all
opposition with a high hand. Then one evening, after dinner, Clovis
Sangrail put a wasp down her back, to see if her theory about the non-
existence of pain could be depended on in an emergency. The wasp was
small, but very efficient, and it had been soured in temper by being kept
in a paper cage all the afternoon. Wasps don't stand confinement well,
at least this one didn't. I don't think I ever realised till that moment
what the word 'invective' could be made to mean. I sometimes wake in the
night and think I still hear Selina describing Clovis's conduct and
general character. That was the year that Sir Richard was writing his
volume on 'Domestic Life in Tartary.' The critics all blamed it for a
lack of concentration."

"He's engaged on a very important work this year, isn't he?" asked Lena.

"'Land-tenure in Turkestan,'" said Lady Prowche; "he is just at work on
the final chapters and they require all the concentration he can give
them. That is why I am so very anxious not to have any unfortunate
disturbance this year. I have taken every precaution I can think of to
bring non-conflicting and harmonious elements together; the only two
people I am not quite easy about are the Atkinson man and Marcus Popham.
They are the two who will be down here longest together, and if they are
going to fall foul of one another about any burning question, well, there
will be more unpleasantness."

"Can't you find out anything about them? About their opinions, I mean."

"Anything? My dear Lena, there's scarcely anything that I haven't found
out about them. They're both of them moderate Liberal, Evangelical,
mildly opposed to female suffrage, they approve of the Falconer Report,
and the Stewards' decision about Craganour. Thank goodness in this
country we don't fly into violent passions about Wagner and Brahms and
things of that sort. There is only one thorny subject that I haven't
been able to make sure about, the only stone that I have left unturned.
Are they unanimously anti-vivisectionist or do they both uphold the
necessity for scientific experiment? There has been a lot of
correspondence on the subject in our local newspapers of late, and the
vicar is certain to preach a sermon about