DOI Heft:
July to December, 1851
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16608#0095
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
83
THE GREEN ONES.
The Vegetarians have dined with a moral end. As Zeal-in-the-land-
Busy ate roast pork publicly in Bartholomew Fair, to demonstrate unto
all men his abhorrence of Judaism, so have Mr. Brotherton and
friends shown their disgust of sarcophagi, by eschewing flesh, and con-
suming vegetables only; carrots being the roots of all _ goodness. _ We
cannot but feel great reverence for these public exhibitions of virtue.
If a man set up within himself any particular rushlight morality, the
taper burns with additional lustre, if burning before the mid-day
luminary. Why should excellence be its own dark-lanthorn ? We yet
hope tosee the time when all and every of the domestic virtues shall
have their public gatherings; and the Faithful Husband Club, and the
Affectionate Father Lodge, shall have their mid-day processions in
common with the Brass-workers and the Glass-blowers: nay, we shall be
only the more delighted, if, like those material artificers, they—the
moral doers—shall be able to carry before them some type and evidence
of their domestic worth and industry.
Now, taking it for granted that a man's household virtues—like a
man's clothes—are kept from the moth, by being occasionally turned
inside out to the sun, we object to the principle of the Vegetarians as
altogether short-coming of their avowed end. They declare the act
cruel and barbarous that turns sheep into mutton: they will eat of
nothing that has partaken of animal life. Why stop here ? Is vege-
table existence exempt from pain? Can Mr. Brotherton lay his
hand upon his heart or head, and declare his conscientious conviction
that there is no blood in a turnip ?—That a parsnip has no dilacerating
throes when torn from the bosom of its mother earth ? What says the
poet ?
" For 'tis my faith that ev'ry flow'r
Enjoys the air it breathes."
Have cabbages no hearts ? Are not heads of broccoli a household
figure of speech ? If Mr Brotherton gives up his mutton—if he
will no longer have a leg to stand upon—we cannot see how, as a man
of sensibility, he can honestly sit down to turnips : he cannot renounce
every morsel of gammon, without foregoing every blade of spinach.
Moreover, can Mr. Brotherton jocundly eat of any vegetable marrow,
without a thought of the animal blood transmuted into its green flesh?
Why, the Vegetarian may consume garbage at second hand. The very
priests of the Temple turntd a penny upon animal refuse: for, says a
Rabbi, "the bluod poured at the foot of the altar flowed into a pipe,
and emptied itself into the valley of Kedron; and it was sold to the
gardeners to dung their gardens." Now the blood of sheep, and now
the pulp of gourds.
Again, has Mr. Brotherton ever fairly balanced his mind upon a
cocoa-nut? Certain Indian sects have a poetical belief, that of the
refuse of the red earth of which Adam was made, was made the cocoa-
tree : a touching truth, marked and preserved in the cocoa-nut itself:
in its fibrous hair; in its marks of eyes and mouth. We have a lively
faith that it is only necessary to awaken the sympathies of Mr. Broth-
erton towards the claims of cocoa-nuts in general, to make him fear-
fully eschew them as most sinful food; as little other than the fare of
cannibals. Indeed, we believe that the same philosophy that renounces
animal food because of the pain inflicted upon animal sensation, has
only to follow its inductions, when it must give up the beans along
with the bacon. It may be that the Vegetarian hugs himself in the
belief of the innocence of his diet, because cauliflowers do not, like
capons, cry under the knife. But, it may be asked, do fish cry upon
the hook ? Still, we do not believe that the Vegetarian would eat even
carrots if, upon leaving the earth, carrots screamed like mandrakes.
As the Vegetarians spread their table-cloth in public, and osten-
tatiously display their capers (without the mutton) to the world, we
infringe upon no private right of stomach, by criticising the vegetable
fare. We merely contend that the Vegetarians do not go far enough :
they have not proved the want of sensation in the things they gather
for their plates. Hence, why should they not improve upon their
benevolent intentions, and, wholly eschewing green meat, try pebbles ?
In the last century, there was a man who distinguished himself bv
boarding upon stones ; a man, whose portrait has descended to us, as
The Stone Eater. Let the Vegetarians begin modestly with gravel;
and their next amended meal will, we doubt not, have, if possible, a
greater moral influence, and effect a more lasting social good, than their
late banquet on meal and lentils. Indeed, we yet hope to see the day,
when certain philosophers—for the benefit of the human race—will
entirely subsist, upon air. Nay, it is our belief that, in the next century,
children, set apart to become the sages and teachers of the world, will
be reared upon mere wind: yes, taken from the month, and brought up
by hand-bellows.
POPERY COURTING PERSECUTION.
To the Editor of the " Tablet:'
ONOTJRABLE SlR,—MlGHT I
ask you to consider, whether,
as a literary advocate of the
Popish cause, you do not
show rather more zeal than
discretion ? A recent number
of your paper contained a
statement of the objects and
intentions of a confederacy
calling itself the " Catholic
Defence Association." There
must be some mistake, loyal
Sir, in this title, I think. The
" Catholic Offence Associa-
tion," surely, is the proper
designation of this worthy
confraternity, organised as it
apparently is, to annoy and
exasperate to the utmost the
people of this country, and to
frustrate the laws of the
realm. I need not ask your
pardon for identifying you
with a body of which you are
ostensibly the mouth-piece.
You, then,—I address you
as the representative of
the Ca'holic Offenders —
have thought fit to proclaim
and publish to the world that
you are about to engage in a
determined struggle for the subjugation of the British nation to the
power of Rome.
Don't you think, my loyal Sir, that you had much better have kept
your designs to yourself? First, you announce, with a bravado which
I cannot but consider injudicious, that you must have the Ecclesias-
tical Titles Bill repealed; next, the penal laws against the Jesuits
abolished; and, lastly, the acts for securing the Protestantism of the
Regency, and of the Succession itself, done away with. You candidly
1 ell us, in fact, that, to use a sporting phrase, you mean to "go in" for
Papal Supremacy.
Now, loyal Sir, is it really your intention to procure, if possible, the
repeal of the Catholic Emancipation Bill ? Are you indeed desirous
that the people at large should rise, and demand the suppression of
all your monasteries, and the expulsion of your whole hierarchy from
the country ? Is it a fact that you are labouring to occasion a renewal
of the London riots ? Because, practically, these are most certainly
the results which your fine writing is calculated to produce.
Are you, on behalf of your co-religionists, making love to persecu-
tion and martyrdom ? Or can it be that you are the tool of some
enthusiastic but unscrupulous Protestants, and in that character are
doing your very best to rendir the Boman Catholic religion and its
professors as odious as possible ? A Bishop who, at, the instigation
of your church, was roasted alive, said, at the stake, that he should,
that day, light such a candle in England as should never be put out.
It strikes me that you are trying hard to kindle as lasting a con-
flagration.
Only let me advise you to mind what you say about meddling with
the succession. This is dangerous ground: another step or two,
and you will put your foot in it—perhaps not your foot only. Be
warned in time, loyal Sir, by your occasional reader,
A Vulgar Error.
On the appearance of the Lord Mayor in the streets of Paris, the
populace is stated by the papers to have shouted, " Five le Grand
Maire de Londres/" Was not, this a mistake ? Should it not have been,
" Vive la Grand-mere de Londres ? "
One of the Trials of Gentility.—Being had up at the Old
Bailey for throwing eggs.
Putting their Choler up.
It is said that Alderman Humphrey, having lost his luggage, was
Reason why the 1 Good Time" is so Long "Coming."—It started, I obliged to borrow a shirt in Paris. We are surprised at this, when it
very foolishly, by an Express Train on the South-Western; so it would I is generally understood that the Lord Mayor gave a-front to all his
be oremature to expect it for a long time yet! j brother Aldermen.
83
THE GREEN ONES.
The Vegetarians have dined with a moral end. As Zeal-in-the-land-
Busy ate roast pork publicly in Bartholomew Fair, to demonstrate unto
all men his abhorrence of Judaism, so have Mr. Brotherton and
friends shown their disgust of sarcophagi, by eschewing flesh, and con-
suming vegetables only; carrots being the roots of all _ goodness. _ We
cannot but feel great reverence for these public exhibitions of virtue.
If a man set up within himself any particular rushlight morality, the
taper burns with additional lustre, if burning before the mid-day
luminary. Why should excellence be its own dark-lanthorn ? We yet
hope tosee the time when all and every of the domestic virtues shall
have their public gatherings; and the Faithful Husband Club, and the
Affectionate Father Lodge, shall have their mid-day processions in
common with the Brass-workers and the Glass-blowers: nay, we shall be
only the more delighted, if, like those material artificers, they—the
moral doers—shall be able to carry before them some type and evidence
of their domestic worth and industry.
Now, taking it for granted that a man's household virtues—like a
man's clothes—are kept from the moth, by being occasionally turned
inside out to the sun, we object to the principle of the Vegetarians as
altogether short-coming of their avowed end. They declare the act
cruel and barbarous that turns sheep into mutton: they will eat of
nothing that has partaken of animal life. Why stop here ? Is vege-
table existence exempt from pain? Can Mr. Brotherton lay his
hand upon his heart or head, and declare his conscientious conviction
that there is no blood in a turnip ?—That a parsnip has no dilacerating
throes when torn from the bosom of its mother earth ? What says the
poet ?
" For 'tis my faith that ev'ry flow'r
Enjoys the air it breathes."
Have cabbages no hearts ? Are not heads of broccoli a household
figure of speech ? If Mr Brotherton gives up his mutton—if he
will no longer have a leg to stand upon—we cannot see how, as a man
of sensibility, he can honestly sit down to turnips : he cannot renounce
every morsel of gammon, without foregoing every blade of spinach.
Moreover, can Mr. Brotherton jocundly eat of any vegetable marrow,
without a thought of the animal blood transmuted into its green flesh?
Why, the Vegetarian may consume garbage at second hand. The very
priests of the Temple turntd a penny upon animal refuse: for, says a
Rabbi, "the bluod poured at the foot of the altar flowed into a pipe,
and emptied itself into the valley of Kedron; and it was sold to the
gardeners to dung their gardens." Now the blood of sheep, and now
the pulp of gourds.
Again, has Mr. Brotherton ever fairly balanced his mind upon a
cocoa-nut? Certain Indian sects have a poetical belief, that of the
refuse of the red earth of which Adam was made, was made the cocoa-
tree : a touching truth, marked and preserved in the cocoa-nut itself:
in its fibrous hair; in its marks of eyes and mouth. We have a lively
faith that it is only necessary to awaken the sympathies of Mr. Broth-
erton towards the claims of cocoa-nuts in general, to make him fear-
fully eschew them as most sinful food; as little other than the fare of
cannibals. Indeed, we believe that the same philosophy that renounces
animal food because of the pain inflicted upon animal sensation, has
only to follow its inductions, when it must give up the beans along
with the bacon. It may be that the Vegetarian hugs himself in the
belief of the innocence of his diet, because cauliflowers do not, like
capons, cry under the knife. But, it may be asked, do fish cry upon
the hook ? Still, we do not believe that the Vegetarian would eat even
carrots if, upon leaving the earth, carrots screamed like mandrakes.
As the Vegetarians spread their table-cloth in public, and osten-
tatiously display their capers (without the mutton) to the world, we
infringe upon no private right of stomach, by criticising the vegetable
fare. We merely contend that the Vegetarians do not go far enough :
they have not proved the want of sensation in the things they gather
for their plates. Hence, why should they not improve upon their
benevolent intentions, and, wholly eschewing green meat, try pebbles ?
In the last century, there was a man who distinguished himself bv
boarding upon stones ; a man, whose portrait has descended to us, as
The Stone Eater. Let the Vegetarians begin modestly with gravel;
and their next amended meal will, we doubt not, have, if possible, a
greater moral influence, and effect a more lasting social good, than their
late banquet on meal and lentils. Indeed, we yet hope to see the day,
when certain philosophers—for the benefit of the human race—will
entirely subsist, upon air. Nay, it is our belief that, in the next century,
children, set apart to become the sages and teachers of the world, will
be reared upon mere wind: yes, taken from the month, and brought up
by hand-bellows.
POPERY COURTING PERSECUTION.
To the Editor of the " Tablet:'
ONOTJRABLE SlR,—MlGHT I
ask you to consider, whether,
as a literary advocate of the
Popish cause, you do not
show rather more zeal than
discretion ? A recent number
of your paper contained a
statement of the objects and
intentions of a confederacy
calling itself the " Catholic
Defence Association." There
must be some mistake, loyal
Sir, in this title, I think. The
" Catholic Offence Associa-
tion," surely, is the proper
designation of this worthy
confraternity, organised as it
apparently is, to annoy and
exasperate to the utmost the
people of this country, and to
frustrate the laws of the
realm. I need not ask your
pardon for identifying you
with a body of which you are
ostensibly the mouth-piece.
You, then,—I address you
as the representative of
the Ca'holic Offenders —
have thought fit to proclaim
and publish to the world that
you are about to engage in a
determined struggle for the subjugation of the British nation to the
power of Rome.
Don't you think, my loyal Sir, that you had much better have kept
your designs to yourself? First, you announce, with a bravado which
I cannot but consider injudicious, that you must have the Ecclesias-
tical Titles Bill repealed; next, the penal laws against the Jesuits
abolished; and, lastly, the acts for securing the Protestantism of the
Regency, and of the Succession itself, done away with. You candidly
1 ell us, in fact, that, to use a sporting phrase, you mean to "go in" for
Papal Supremacy.
Now, loyal Sir, is it really your intention to procure, if possible, the
repeal of the Catholic Emancipation Bill ? Are you indeed desirous
that the people at large should rise, and demand the suppression of
all your monasteries, and the expulsion of your whole hierarchy from
the country ? Is it a fact that you are labouring to occasion a renewal
of the London riots ? Because, practically, these are most certainly
the results which your fine writing is calculated to produce.
Are you, on behalf of your co-religionists, making love to persecu-
tion and martyrdom ? Or can it be that you are the tool of some
enthusiastic but unscrupulous Protestants, and in that character are
doing your very best to rendir the Boman Catholic religion and its
professors as odious as possible ? A Bishop who, at, the instigation
of your church, was roasted alive, said, at the stake, that he should,
that day, light such a candle in England as should never be put out.
It strikes me that you are trying hard to kindle as lasting a con-
flagration.
Only let me advise you to mind what you say about meddling with
the succession. This is dangerous ground: another step or two,
and you will put your foot in it—perhaps not your foot only. Be
warned in time, loyal Sir, by your occasional reader,
A Vulgar Error.
On the appearance of the Lord Mayor in the streets of Paris, the
populace is stated by the papers to have shouted, " Five le Grand
Maire de Londres/" Was not, this a mistake ? Should it not have been,
" Vive la Grand-mere de Londres ? "
One of the Trials of Gentility.—Being had up at the Old
Bailey for throwing eggs.
Putting their Choler up.
It is said that Alderman Humphrey, having lost his luggage, was
Reason why the 1 Good Time" is so Long "Coming."—It started, I obliged to borrow a shirt in Paris. We are surprised at this, when it
very foolishly, by an Express Train on the South-Western; so it would I is generally understood that the Lord Mayor gave a-front to all his
be oremature to expect it for a long time yet! j brother Aldermen.