[Some years ago I published in a volume of tales called The Wrong Paradise, a paper styled “My Friend the Beach-comber”. This contained genuine adventures of a kinsman, my oldest and most intimate friend, who has passed much of his life in the Pacific, mainly in a foreign colony, and in the wild New Hebrides. My friend is a man of education, an artist, and a student of anthropology and ethnology. Engaged on a work of scientific research, he has not committed any of his innumerable adventures, warlike or wandering, to print. The following “yarn” he sent to me lately, in a letter on some points of native customs. Of course the description of the Beach-comber, in the book referred to, is purely fictitious. The yarn of “The Thumbless Hand” is here cast in a dialogue, but the whole of the strange experience described is given in the words of the narrator. It should be added that, though my friend was present at some amateur séances, in a remote isle of the sea, he is not a spiritualist, never was one, and has no theory to account for what occurred, and no belief in “spooks” of any description. His faith is plighted to the theories of Mr. Darwin, and that is his only superstition. The name of the principal character in the yarn is, of course, fictitious. The real name is an old but not a noble one in England.]
“Have the natives the custom of walking through fire?” said my friend the Beach-comber, in answer to a question of mine. “Not that I know of. In fact the soles of their feet are so thick-skinned that they would think nothing of it.”
“Then have they any spiritualistic games, like the Burmans and Maories? I have a lot of yarns about them.”
“They are too jolly well frightened of bush spirits to invite them to tea,” said the Beach-comber. “I knew a fellow who got a bit of land merely by whistling up and down in it at nightfall. [{292}] They think spirits whistle. No, I don’t fancy they go in for séances. But we once had some, we white men, in one of the islands. Not the Oui-ouis” (native name for the French), “real white men. And that led to Bolter’s row with me.”
“What about?”
“Oh, about his young woman. I told her the story; it was thoughtless, and yet I don’t know that I was wrong. After all, Bolter could not have been a comfortable fellow to marry.”
In this opinion readers of the Beach-comber’s narrative will probably agree, I fancy.
“Bad moral character?”
“Not that I know of. Queer fish; kept queer company. Even if she was ever so fond of dogs, I don’t think a girl would have cared for Bolter’s kennel. Not in her bedroom anyway.”
“But she could surely have got him to keep them outside, however doggy he was?”