Punch (39.1860)

82

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.

[September 1, 1860.

of any sort will suffer it. As the Cat lias been considered one of the
worst hindrances to the manning of our fleets, Mr. Punch would give
due prominence to the above-recorded facts. He would note too, that
Lord Paget “could show, by sure statistics, that this degrading
punishment is steadily decreasing, and is gradually but certainly dying
out of the service.” So cheer up, my lads ! Take heart, ye hearts of
oak! Your old enemy is clearly now on its last legs. Although the
Cat may have as many lives as tails, there is no doubt, that common
sense will ere long be the death of it. “Jack Tar” is said to be
derived from jactari, to boast: and certainly our Jack Tars may boast
that by good conduct they are gradually driving the Cat out of the
service.

With the exception of a word or two about the Dean oe York, the
doubling of whose snug little salary Mr. Bernal Osborne spoke of
as “the great job of the Session,” the whole remainder of the evening
was occupied by what one can but call a Jolly Row, on the subject of
the Bill about the Roman Catholic Charities, which was proposed to be
“amended ” by striking out Clause I. Mr. Hennessy declared that
so far from being viewed as a charitable act, the measure now must
rather be regarded as a penal one; and although his name, he owned,
was on its back, he wished the Bill to be dishonoured and returned
with “no effects.” This wish was repeated by Cardinal Wiseman’s
echo (need Punch mention Sir George BowyerP), who indulged in
such a quantity of kind remarks about the Government, that the
Speaker had to tell him he was getting “unparliamentary,” and Lord
Palmerston accused him of “not being a master of his own
language,” which, as he talked the best of Billingsgate, was a rather
cruel cut.

Wednesday. In the Commons Mr. Cochrane wished to know if Mr.
Evelyn, “the fined old English gentleman,” would, because of his
high character, be let off paying the £500 imposed for his late lark at
Guildford. Whereto SirCornewall Lewis replied, he had no doubt
of the High Sheriff’s high character, but that was no apology for his
low behaviour. If he wanted to be let off, he should petition the
Home Secretary, and not bother the House; hut his better plan would
be to make two notes in Evelyn’s Diary: Mem. To fork out the Five
Hundred ; and Mem. Don’t insult a Judge again !

The Union of City Benefices Bill then came on for discussion, and
was eventually ordered to be reported, but actually not until no fewer
than fifty-nine short speeches had been made on it.

The House adjourned at o'IO, when the Government proceeded (by
a Citizen steamboat) to discuss by far the most important, business of
the day:—viz., their annual Whitebait Feed at the Trafalgar Hotel,
Greenwich. Covers were laid for thirty; nearly all of whom remem-
bered that punctuality is the soul of dining; the only late arrival being
i he Right Hon. William Gladstone, who, it was supposed, had
been at work upon the Paper Duties, and who was greeted with a shout
of “0, Willie, we have missed you!” Mr. Punch was the only

favoured visitor invited, and occupied the post of honour at the right-
hand of the Chair. The dinner that was served was worthy of the
occasion, and so was Mr. Punch's appetite, which indeed but rarely
fails him when there is something good to eat. It was, however,
noticed that the bait were rather large; another penalty entailed by a
late Session on our senators, and which, it may be hoped*, they will not
readily forget. The only toast worth recording was the health of Mr.
Punch; and this Lord Palmerston proposed in an elegant oration,
which Mr. Punch's modesty forbids him to report. Having gone into
Committee on the Provisional Expenses Bill, which was not laid upon
the table until rather a late hour, the Members of both Houses
adjourned to Mr. Punch's residence, where the sitting, like the Session,
had its end in smoke.

Thursday. Being up so late last night, both Houses adjourned early;
Lords knocking off at six, and Commons being actually Counted Out
at eight. But before they called their Hansoms, they passed the Bills
for Naval Discipline, and for Union of Benefices, and (in spite of Sir
G. Bowyer, who said that there was no morality in England now that
divorces had become as cheap a luxury as pine-apples) they read a
Second Time the Divorce Court Bill. Moreover, they found time for
lamenting with Lord Palmerston, that the Pasha of Egypt had been
sold by buyiog shares in the Suez Canal bubble ; and they listened for
some minutes 1o Sir de Lacy Evans, who wants to see a biggish fort
or two stuck on Shooter’s Hill, and if he gets them (as a tax-payer.
Punch wishes that he may !) will probably then ask to have the ditto
done for Primrose.

Friday. The Lord Chancellor brought in a Bill to repeal a heap
of statutes which, although as old and obsolete as a Court of Justice
jokes, have by some slip only been “impliedly repealed.” This Bill
he observed, would lop off a lot of useless limbs from the body of the
law, so that what is now so bulky will collapse into a moderate and
manageable size. His Lordship also called attention to the law
reforms which have been effected in the Session, and delivered an
affecting funeral oration upon such of his sixteen small legal children
as had died. Of these he specially lamented the fate of all his seven
little Criminal Innocents, who had been massacred most cruelly in the
other House.

At half-past six the Commons were again Counted Out, there being
only 3 and 20 Members present. This result was partly caused by some
curious remarks which were let fall by Sir George Bowyer, on the
subject of the doings of the hero Garibaldi ; whom, with singular
consistency he first of all denounced as an “unprincipled pirate,” and
then fittingly belikened to that “patriotic” person, Tantia Topee!
Mr. Punch of course could not stop to listen to such balderdash as
Bowyer’s, and so shut up his note-book, and hailed the nearest
Hansom: an example which the Commons showed their Commons
sense by following.

SHOCKING LANGUAGE IN THE LORDS.

he House of Lords
may assert its pri-
vileges; but if it
wishes them to be
respected, 1 it must
maintain its state.
Bearing this maxim
iu mind, let us exa-
mine the subjoined
remark, reported to
have been uttered
in the august assem-
bly above-named by
no less a person than
the President of
the Council. Is it
possible that Earl
Granville could
have allowed the
common, popular,

mechanical, indeed I might almost say improper expression, contained in these
words, to escape the enclosure of his Lordship’s teeth ?

“ The other House had been sitting for an unprecedented number of hours every day. and it
■would not look very well for their Lordships to strike work five or six weeks before the end of the
Session {Oh, oh!)—well, at any rate, a good month.”

“Well, indeed may the very ignoble idiom, employed by the noble Lord to
signify their Lordships’ discontinuance of their legislative exertions, have excited,
in the superior House of Parliament, the unusual exclamation of ‘Oh, oh!’
To speak of the cessation of labour as ‘ striking work ’ might not be astonishing
on the part of an individual of no rank or position in Society, addressing an
assembly of bricklayers; although indeed the adoption of the phrase would in that
’lase involve a peculiarly objectionable allusion. But are the functions of the

House of Peers to be degraded to a level with the manual
occupations of journeymen, by being characterised, and
that by a member of their own order, in language
borrowed from the workshop? In what stonemason’s
yard did Lord Granville learn to represent the Peers
of the Realm as proposing to ‘strike work?’ His
phraseology was even less decorous than it would have
been if he had described them as intending to shut up
shop !

“Earl Granytille’s mention of ‘striking work’ in
reference to noble Lords, was certainly calculated to elicit
ejaculations of remonstrance. But there is too much reason
to believe that the protest of ‘Oh, oh!’ had a much less
lofty meaning, and was intended to express, not, any dis-
approbation of the terms which the noble Earl condes-
cended to use, but, simply dissent from the statement
which those extremely vernacular terms served his Lord-
ship to convey. Where—as the late Mr. Liston might
have demanded—where is the dignity of recognising such
familiar forms of speech ? Familiarity doth breed contempt,
and contempt will entail political extinction. What would
the great Lord Chatham have thought of speaking of
the House of Lords as ready to ‘ strike work ? ’ He would
have probably fainted at the very idea, and thus have pre-
maturely afforded the subject which he furnished to the
pencil of Copley. At all events, before venturing to use
such an expression, he would undoubtedly have exchanged
the flowing and majestic wig of the statesman for the arti-
ficer’s quadrangular and brown-paper cap. I have the
honour to be eternally yours,

“ The Spirit oe Sir Charles Grandison.”

“ P.S. Make allowance for the Medium through whom J
communicate, and correct my spelling.”