TWELVE jurors good and true must be cursing the England cricket team for collapsing so spectacularly in the first Ashes Test.

A barrister was trying his best to speed up proceedings in a tedious trial at York Crown Court during what would have been day five at Lord's, and Judge Jim Spencer QC would not let him.

"What's the point?" his honour said lugubriously. "There's nothing to do at home. The Test is over."

Let's hope for the sake of jurors and judges everywhere that England prove more resilient in the Edgbaston Test from next Thursday.

WAR news, part one: Recent talk of the blitz set retired parson Leonard Rivett, of Woodthorpe, York, thinking how practical everyone was during the 1939-45 conflict.

His parent's home in Sheringham, Norfolk, was badly damaged when a German aircraft offloaded its remaining bomb as it flew home one night in 1944.

The blast even blew the oven door off its hinges.

They moved to a new house, taking the door-less oven with them.

By chance, their new neighbours had the same make of oven. So every time Mr Rivett's mum was about to start cooking she would call to her neighbour who would detach her oven door and pass it over the fence.

We can't see that happening in the age of the microwave somehow.

WAR news, part two: My thanks to EFH, who wrote in enclosing a letter from 1942, referring to the "Making Of Civilian Clothing (Restrictions) Order".

Who wrote it, and to whom, is not clear, but it is - if you'll excuse the pun - a belting example of wartime bureaucracy.

"I am to refer to your letter dated March 1 in which you make application for a licence to permit of a suit being made having more pockets than those laid down in the above mentioned order," the letter begins.

"It is noted that you do not require more than two pockets in the trousers, and that you would like, instead of the third pocket, to have an extra one in the jacket.

"I am to say that the Board are not prepared to consider the giving up of a pocket in one garment sufficient reason for the granting of an extra pocket in another garment, since the restrictions are imposed on the separate garment and not on the suit as a whole.

"The Board realise, however, that in certain circumstances it may be necessary to vary the restrictions and if you would state why you are unable to make use of the third pocket in the trousers (it is not necessary that this pocket should be a hip pocket, the restrictions do not in any way refer to the position of pockets but only to the total number in each garment), thus necessitating the extra jacket pocket, full consideration will be given to the issue of a licence.

"It would also be helpful if you were able to state the exact use to which the extra pockets you require in the jacket and waistcoat are to be put." This in the days before pocket calculators.

Updated: 09:22 Thursday, July 28, 2005