DOI Heft:
February 25, 1860
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16865#0089
February 25, 18G0.]
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
81
- .... ,
Our Artist Catches it again this Winter in the Highlands.
THE CAT IN THE CUPBOARD.
In speaking on the motion of our friend Mr. Williams for returns of the
numbers of British soldiers and sailors who, in the year of Christianity 1859,
had suffered torture by flogging, Colonel North is reported to have made the
following remark:—
“ If the honourable Member for Lambeth, or any other of the civilians who were always crying
out against flogging, would only devise some other punishment winch, while severe, would
keep the soldier but a short time from his duty, he would earn the gratitude of the whole Army ? "
Before attempting to earn the gratitude of Colonel North, and the whole of
that army in which he is a commanding officer, Mr. Punch would fain expostulate
with the gallant Colonel, on a certain form of words occurring in the above-
quoted passage. What does Colonel North mean in talking of “the civilians
who were always crying out against flogging?” The late Charles Mathews,
in one of his entertainments, used to create much laughter by exclaiming, on a
particular occasion, “ Confound that boy,—he’s always tying his shoe ! ” The force
of this exclamation lies in the word “always;” which implies a complaint of
weariness and consequent irritation. These are, perhaps, the feelings whicli
Colonel North means to express when he describes certain civilians as “always
crying out against flogging.” Everybody who is at all concerned with a class of
gentlemen whose highest moral quality is their self-respect, is familiar with this
use of the teim “alwais.” It is predicated of the kind of being styled by those
same gentlemen as a bore ; or, as many of them are accustomed to pronounce that
appellation, a baw.
Bores, however, or baws, Colonel, are useful things in their way. To bore is
the property of a gimlet; and the bore, otherwise called baw, often succeeds in
ultimately penetrating the very heart of a wrong. The Press is one of those
baws, or bores, that have been always crying out against flogging. It incurred
the disdain of the supercilious gentry by so doing, on the occurrence of the last
gross case in point. You heard Mr. Sidney Herbert, the other night, state
the result. According to report, he said:— •
“ As to the case that recently occurred, and excited some discussion, the Commander-In-Chief
was not iu England at the time : he arrived two days afterwards. I immediately called his
attention to it. The Duke of Cambridge ordered an inquiry into the case; and the resuit was,
that the officers conducting the punishment were severely reprimanded. Another result of the
inquiry was, the issuing of the general order that has been before referred to.”
If the Press had not cried out against flogging in this instance, would the case
have attracted any notice, and would the general order mentioned by Mr. Herbert
ever have been issued to limit torture by the lash ? Yet how boldly the Press was
accused of exaggeration and hollow sentimentality; and how contemptuously it
was informed, that stripes would of course draw blood, and that blood would
naturally trickle down to the ground, and form a puddle there !
Will Mr. Punch be rewarded with the gratitude of the whole Army for the sug-
gestion, that perhaps a good substitute for flogging might be found in the long-
continued stoppage of an offender’s pay? What punishment could be more severe
—if that is what, jou want? Think of the suffering which is inflicted by the
Income-Tax! To t lie stoppage of pay might be added reduction of rations, and the
stoppage of them also in the event, and during the continuance, of refusal to do duty.
And. ought not Mr. Punch, by this suggestion, to earn the
gratitude of the Navy as well as the Army ? Pay is the
main consideration which mans the Navy; would not the
privation of it be a sufficiently formidable punishment?
According to Lokd Clarence Paget, out of the whole
Channel Fleet, only three per cent,, of the men have been
placed in the class liable to corporal punishment. British
sailors therefore do not, seem to include a very large pro-
portion of blackguards; and if the cat, were altogether
thrown overboard, would it be missed ?
The whole merchant marine ought long ago to have-
gone to the deuce, if tough old commodores are right, and
flog ging is essential to discipline in the Royal Navy, and
the Royal Navy is like a certain place which is not to be
mentioned by Mr. Punch, and in which the crew can he
kept under control, only by terrific punishment. If this
were the case-^-which surely if, is not—we might reason-
ably be told to go to that place if we want to man our
Navy.
AY 11 AT NEXT ?
OR LIGHT WINDOWS AND LIGHT WEIGHTS.
Here’s a Bill of old Charles Burrell’s,
For punishing by law,
Maids of all work, sharp as squirrels
(But not quite so sure of claw)—
Who their lives and limbs go rishiug
To clean our window-sashes,
And in payment of such frisking.
Oft come to awful smashes.
Against such legislation,
An objection raised in limine’s,
That in this favoured nation,
“ Lex non curat de minimis.”
But none should raise objection,
(Sir Charles at lengtti maintains)
To making a connection
Between “penalties ” and “panes.”
One more reason we may summon,
^ (Though Sir Charles for it should scold one,)'
That, laws to guard yomg womeii,
May be best left to an old one.
But encouraged by example,
Of this Burrellesque law-making,
Comes Lord Redesdale next, his ample
Committee-work forsaking,
And would have it straight forbidden
(By a Bill last week made known).
That a race-horse should be ridden
By a jock below seven stone.
Now, if sharpers must be shackled.
And too weak the legal lock is—
There are light-weights to be tackled
In loaves as well as jockeys.
Thoroughbreds deserve affection ;
But let Redesdale if lie’s able.
Give us thorough bread protection.
In the bakehouse, not the stable.
Lest the turfites all unwilling
To submit to legal fetters,
Bid him mind his private hilling,
And leave public to his betters.
Personally Speaking.
England is Free, but in America one is not only Free,,
but apt very frequently to be a great deal too Free; in-
fact, more Free than welcome. To put it concisely :—
England is the Land of Liberty,
America is the Laud of Liberties.
Advice to Gas Monopolists.—“ Gentlemen, Flare up,
or jou may burn your fingers ! ”
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
81
- .... ,
Our Artist Catches it again this Winter in the Highlands.
THE CAT IN THE CUPBOARD.
In speaking on the motion of our friend Mr. Williams for returns of the
numbers of British soldiers and sailors who, in the year of Christianity 1859,
had suffered torture by flogging, Colonel North is reported to have made the
following remark:—
“ If the honourable Member for Lambeth, or any other of the civilians who were always crying
out against flogging, would only devise some other punishment winch, while severe, would
keep the soldier but a short time from his duty, he would earn the gratitude of the whole Army ? "
Before attempting to earn the gratitude of Colonel North, and the whole of
that army in which he is a commanding officer, Mr. Punch would fain expostulate
with the gallant Colonel, on a certain form of words occurring in the above-
quoted passage. What does Colonel North mean in talking of “the civilians
who were always crying out against flogging?” The late Charles Mathews,
in one of his entertainments, used to create much laughter by exclaiming, on a
particular occasion, “ Confound that boy,—he’s always tying his shoe ! ” The force
of this exclamation lies in the word “always;” which implies a complaint of
weariness and consequent irritation. These are, perhaps, the feelings whicli
Colonel North means to express when he describes certain civilians as “always
crying out against flogging.” Everybody who is at all concerned with a class of
gentlemen whose highest moral quality is their self-respect, is familiar with this
use of the teim “alwais.” It is predicated of the kind of being styled by those
same gentlemen as a bore ; or, as many of them are accustomed to pronounce that
appellation, a baw.
Bores, however, or baws, Colonel, are useful things in their way. To bore is
the property of a gimlet; and the bore, otherwise called baw, often succeeds in
ultimately penetrating the very heart of a wrong. The Press is one of those
baws, or bores, that have been always crying out against flogging. It incurred
the disdain of the supercilious gentry by so doing, on the occurrence of the last
gross case in point. You heard Mr. Sidney Herbert, the other night, state
the result. According to report, he said:— •
“ As to the case that recently occurred, and excited some discussion, the Commander-In-Chief
was not iu England at the time : he arrived two days afterwards. I immediately called his
attention to it. The Duke of Cambridge ordered an inquiry into the case; and the resuit was,
that the officers conducting the punishment were severely reprimanded. Another result of the
inquiry was, the issuing of the general order that has been before referred to.”
If the Press had not cried out against flogging in this instance, would the case
have attracted any notice, and would the general order mentioned by Mr. Herbert
ever have been issued to limit torture by the lash ? Yet how boldly the Press was
accused of exaggeration and hollow sentimentality; and how contemptuously it
was informed, that stripes would of course draw blood, and that blood would
naturally trickle down to the ground, and form a puddle there !
Will Mr. Punch be rewarded with the gratitude of the whole Army for the sug-
gestion, that perhaps a good substitute for flogging might be found in the long-
continued stoppage of an offender’s pay? What punishment could be more severe
—if that is what, jou want? Think of the suffering which is inflicted by the
Income-Tax! To t lie stoppage of pay might be added reduction of rations, and the
stoppage of them also in the event, and during the continuance, of refusal to do duty.
And. ought not Mr. Punch, by this suggestion, to earn the
gratitude of the Navy as well as the Army ? Pay is the
main consideration which mans the Navy; would not the
privation of it be a sufficiently formidable punishment?
According to Lokd Clarence Paget, out of the whole
Channel Fleet, only three per cent,, of the men have been
placed in the class liable to corporal punishment. British
sailors therefore do not, seem to include a very large pro-
portion of blackguards; and if the cat, were altogether
thrown overboard, would it be missed ?
The whole merchant marine ought long ago to have-
gone to the deuce, if tough old commodores are right, and
flog ging is essential to discipline in the Royal Navy, and
the Royal Navy is like a certain place which is not to be
mentioned by Mr. Punch, and in which the crew can he
kept under control, only by terrific punishment. If this
were the case-^-which surely if, is not—we might reason-
ably be told to go to that place if we want to man our
Navy.
AY 11 AT NEXT ?
OR LIGHT WINDOWS AND LIGHT WEIGHTS.
Here’s a Bill of old Charles Burrell’s,
For punishing by law,
Maids of all work, sharp as squirrels
(But not quite so sure of claw)—
Who their lives and limbs go rishiug
To clean our window-sashes,
And in payment of such frisking.
Oft come to awful smashes.
Against such legislation,
An objection raised in limine’s,
That in this favoured nation,
“ Lex non curat de minimis.”
But none should raise objection,
(Sir Charles at lengtti maintains)
To making a connection
Between “penalties ” and “panes.”
One more reason we may summon,
^ (Though Sir Charles for it should scold one,)'
That, laws to guard yomg womeii,
May be best left to an old one.
But encouraged by example,
Of this Burrellesque law-making,
Comes Lord Redesdale next, his ample
Committee-work forsaking,
And would have it straight forbidden
(By a Bill last week made known).
That a race-horse should be ridden
By a jock below seven stone.
Now, if sharpers must be shackled.
And too weak the legal lock is—
There are light-weights to be tackled
In loaves as well as jockeys.
Thoroughbreds deserve affection ;
But let Redesdale if lie’s able.
Give us thorough bread protection.
In the bakehouse, not the stable.
Lest the turfites all unwilling
To submit to legal fetters,
Bid him mind his private hilling,
And leave public to his betters.
Personally Speaking.
England is Free, but in America one is not only Free,,
but apt very frequently to be a great deal too Free; in-
fact, more Free than welcome. To put it concisely :—
England is the Land of Liberty,
America is the Laud of Liberties.
Advice to Gas Monopolists.—“ Gentlemen, Flare up,
or jou may burn your fingers ! ”