Punch (33.1857)

52

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.

[August 8, 1857.

opposition Eleven would not give the Government another innings all
night. Reasons as follows : —

Sir William Heathcote, because he is member for the University
of Oxford.

Me. Henry Dktjmmond, because he likes to talk scholarly theo-
logical mystification.
Me. Lygon, because marriage is a venerable institution.
Me. Pullen, because many parsons oppose the Bill.
Me. Wigram, because he is member for the University of Cambridge.
Me. Hatchell, because the Irish peasant girls are very virtuous.
Me. Bowyee, because he is the tool of the Romish priests.
Me. Malins, because he is an Opposition barrister.
Lord John Manners, because he is incapable of understanding the
uestiori.

Me. Gladstone, because he wanted to make a long speech at an
hour when the House would listen.
Me. Napier, ditto.

The last two demanded adjournment, to which Palmeeston had no
objection, but the House had a great one, and opposed it by 188 to
125. Anybody, however, can force an adjournment, and therefore one
was ultimately agreed to.

Friday. The battle was renewed. Mr. Gladstone delivered an
enormously long speech against the Bill; cited Latin, and Greek, and
the Bible/ Lord Stowell, Origen, Lactantius, and the Quarterly
Review, and made some amusing hits at the expense of the Attorney-
General, who had invented a new beatitude, " Blessed is the man
that trusts the Received Version." Sir George Geey rebuked Mr. G.
for his subtle exercitations on texts which may be made to mean any-
thing, and recommended common sense in preference, common sense
teaching you that where the essence of marriage has been destroyed,

the parties ought to be enabled to separate. Lord Lovaine opposed
the Bill, and urged the remonstrance of the Clergy. The new
Solicitor-General replied that the weight of authority among the
heads of the Church had already been thrown in favour of the Bill.
Mr. Henley grumbled about having more time. Mr. Walpole spoke
ably in favour of the measure, and was indeed the only speaker who
could or did worthily tackle Mr. Gladstone. Mr. Napier, as a
University iV! ember, took the clerical view, and the Attorney-General
in reply taunted Mr. Gladstone with opposing in 1857 the same Bill
which the Cabinet of 1854, of which he was a distinguished member,
had introduced. The second reading of the Divorce Bill was then
carried by 208 to 97 ; majority for it, 111.

Having told the story of the Divorce Bill, Mr. Punch will further
remark that on Priday night Lord Ellenborough had another shot
at the alleged inaction of the Indian authorities, and Lord Granville
brought up an unexpected ally in the person of Lucius JEmilius, who
remonstrated in the Roman Senate against criticisms in war-time.
Rather a smart debate followed, just enough to give their Lordships'
an appetite for dinner at 7'30.

In the Commons, before Divorce, Lord John Russell gave notice
of a new project for seating M. de Rothschild—a Select Committee
to consider whether the last act touching oaths affected the Parlia-
mentary oaths. A brief debate on the Indian Army brought out the
most explicit denials from the Government that they had ever the
slightest idea of spreading Christianity in India—they were indeed
quite indignant at so injurious an imputation.

" Pray let us see as much of you as possible, there's a dear, between
this and the 2ith, on which day we are going to Scotland," one of the
Princesses writes to Mr. Punch. Less than three weeks, therefore,
will again vest the kingdom in the Dictator, Palmerston. But all is
! serene,—Pam is King, but Punch is Viceroy over him.

ENCOUBAGEMENT TO WHOLESALE DEALERS IN BRUTALITY.

Every play - goer in
what are known to
actors as "the Pro-
vinces," must be well
familiar with The War-
lock of the Glen, a piece
in which, if we can
rightly recollect, the
prevalence of mystery
excites a " thrilling
interest." Another
Warlock has how-
ever come before our
notice, whose case, as
dealt with at the Wor-
ship Street Police
Court, seems more
mysterious by far than
that of his dramatic
namesake. Of the per-
formances of this
Warlock—Christian-
named as Robert—
the Times reports as
follows:—

" Mrs. Jane Peogwick,
a delicate-looking woman,
the wife of a tradesman
in the City Road, stated
that while passing through
Bishopsgate Street on Sa-
turday evening, leaning on
the arm of her husband ;
the prisoner, whom she

had never seen, before, as she believed, came suddenly in front of them, and, without saying a word, or any-
thing occurring to induce him to do so, struck her a heavy blow upon the bosom. She had previously suffered
much pain from her neck, but the blow tho prisoner dealt her had made it worse than it had ever been,
and even while giving hor evidence she was suffering great pain from it.

" The complainant's husband deposed to the unprovoked nature of the attack, the prisoner running away
the moment he had made it ; and Lambert, a constable attached to one of the theatres, deposed to seeing the
prisoner striking and kicking three officers who had secured him, and that, on his advising him to go quietly
and not resist the constable, the prisoner broke away from the officers, and knocked his hat off, and, on his
stoopiog to recover it, dealt him such a violent kick upon the temple that he had been unable to rest all
night, and could not touch his face from the pain he endured."

The denouement of this is considerably more farcical than seems to be appropriate, for we
find it next recorded that, after pleading drunkenness as an " extenuating circumstance,"

" The prisoner having declared that he had not the slightest recollection of anything that had occu'-red,
" Mr. D'Eyncourt seutenced him to pay penalties to the amount of £3, or, in default, to undergo six
■weeks' hard labour in the House of Correction."

What most puzzles us in this, is to find that the police assaults were leniently dealt with.
We are prepared to find a Magistrate awarding a light punishment for the trifling offence of
knocking down a woman, but when a policeman has so much as a whisker even ruffled, we

expect the heaviest sentence for the dastardly
attack. Yet here there was clear proof that the
prisoner had savagely assaulted four policemen,
and, by a most mysterious blindness on the
Bench, justice takes no heed of the quadrupled
enormity, and passes sentence only for the femi-
nine assault.

Por we cannot bring ourselves to the belief
that Mr. D'Eyncourt included in his £3 penalty
all the five assaults. This would have him
charging them at twelve shillings a-piece, which
would have been obviously much too low aj
figure. Or are we to infer that in the fines
which are imposed at our Police Courts there is
allowed a reduction to those who take a quantity ?
Certainly if Warlock's case be made a prece-
dent, the British ruffian will find it every bit as
cheap to commit a score of outrages as only one
or two. It wdl be to his advantage to deal his
blows and kicks in a more wholesale_ way than
formerly, 1'or the more assaults he is charged
with, the more discount he will get: and if his
brutalities be priced by Mr. D'Eyncourt, he
will find it save his pocket to have gone the
entire brute,

THE MEDICAL MAN TO HIS MISTRESS.

Upon one " fringed curtain "

Of thy so lustrous eyne,
Hath come, 'tis but too certain,

A residence for swine,
That eye, with tears suffusing,

Is plaintive in eclipse,
My tardy hand accusing,

Accuse me, too, thy lips.

Dearest, my willing lancet

Must yet delay its lunge ;
Somewhat thou may'st advance it

With poultice and with sponge.
One cut, a little later.

The blinding stye shall heal,
And make a new Spectator

With the gentle touch of SteeL

A Strong-Minded Woman's Sneer.—What
in a Woman is called " curiosity," in a Man is
grandiloquently magnified into the "spirit of
inquiry."