DOI issue:
January 5, 1861
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16867#0015
January 5, 1861. |
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
7
THE COMPACT LETTER-WRITER.
Fine letter-writing could not survive the establishment of the penny
post, but if elegant periods and a neat form of arriving at a conclusion
could have endured into the days when we have ten deliveries between
breakfast and dinner, the coup de grace would now have been given.
The Government, offices, beginning with the Horse Guards, announce
that in future “the purport of every letter sent to them is to be
briefly explained on the top left-hand corner.” How much more of
the letters will be read ?
Letters are confessedly among the great nuisances of the day, except
to people in love and other fools. Everybody in his senses would
rather not have a letter than have one, unless it contains a cheque.
But as people will scribble, Mr. Punch earnestly recommends that the
rule of the Government be adopted in private life. It will save so
much time and the expenditure of so much bad temper. For instance,
at Christmas time, when impositions are tolerated, Mother-in-law sends
a rigmarole of eight pages, with every other word underlined, and a
whole cataract of expressions of affection. About two-thirds through
i the bottle of hay is the needle, which is an appeal to tolerably
prosperous son-in-law to lend idle brother-in-law twenty pounds. Now,
the old lady adds insult to injury by the torrent of words which
i involve her petition. Does she know how tolerably prosperous son-in-
law (who puts away and keeps letters, in order to meet the certain
accusation, one of these days, of not doing much for his family), en-
dorses such an epistle. Mr. Punch will tell her :—
I “ Old girl, humbugging for £20
I for that ass Tom; sent it, like
another ass as I am.'’'’
How much more decorous it will be, when tolerably prosperous son-
in-law has been taken to Norwood, and his papers are overhauled, to
find, instead of such a note as the above, a few neat words at the upper
left-hand corner:—
Mamma petitions dearest Charles
for a little loan to kind, good, but
rather improvident Tommy.
Sent £20,
C. Soft.
An author, too, Mr. Punch has heard, has occasionally written to
an editor, requesting the latter to give a favourable review of the
former’s book. The way, Mr. Punch has heard, is to say something
to the effect that, though author is the last man to think much of
his own literary efforts, or to desire any notoriety, yet there have
been so many admirable articles in editor’s widely-circulated and
influential journal, bearing upon the very subject on which author has
been writing, that perhaps, in the interest of the public and of the
good cause which both of them have at heart, a notice of author’s work
might be opportune and acceptable. This is ail very nice; but the
note in the upper left-hand corner, and the endorsement, should run
thus:—
Chive us a puff for the Jaunt to
Jericho.
Saw him bloived first.
Ed. '
, Managers are much beset for Boxes at Christmas-time, especially by
rich people, who very properly say, that new pieces should be seen
while the dresses and decorations are fresh, and also while the children
(bless ’em) are home for the holidays, and therefore they beg the
Manager to give them the places that he can, just now, sell to great
advantage. Generally, the coolness of the note in which the demand
j is made by a Clapham or Bayswater demi-millionaire is suited to the
coolness of the request; or if the lady of the house writes, it is evi-
dently with the idea that she is doing the Manager a favour in bringing
her children to see a gratis sight. But sometimes she condescends to
be civil, and writes thus:—
“ Dear Mr. Spangleton,
“ I see by the papers, and I am delighted for your sake to see
it, that your new piece, the Mountebank of Madagascar, has been so
splendidly got up that it is sure to bring you crowded audiences for
many a night. You will, I am sure, remember me from having sat next
to me at our good friend, Mr. Badport’s, when you were so very kind
asi to say that I ought to come and see your theatre. I will now take
advantage of your kind offer, and as all my dear children are at home
for the holidays, I should like to give them the treat of coming to your
theatre on Saturday night, if you will be good enough to give me a
box. As we are a good many, and some young friends are staying
with us, I should like a double box, and please let it be near the centre ]
of the house, because 1 do get so nervous about the little ones leaning 1
over. Opposite the Royal Box if you possibly can, because if Her
Majesty should happen to come that night, we shall have the double
pleasure of seeing our Queen and your piece. Please to write by
return, as I should like to ask one or two friends, and as they may not
wish to come at once, please write ‘ any number at any hour ’ on the
card. As our posts are irregular, would you send the box by one of
the hundreds of men you must have idling about the theatre.
“Believe me, dear Sir,
“Yours sincerely,
“Peckham Rise.” “Sarah Clutcher.”
“P.S. Please also give four orders for the boxes, as we have two
faithful and attached servants who have been with us many years,
and I should like to give them a treat and let them take their sweet-
hearts.”
No Manager ought to resist such an appeal as this; but if Mrs.
Clutcher would break the thing at once to him by a note in the upper
left-hand corner, like this,—
Mrs. Clutcher, banker’s ivife,
friend of the Badports, wants box
and four orders.
if might prevent the Manager from being so rude as to write something
(as he otherwise may) like this:—
Fat woman, friend of house
where had that beastly ivine. Im-
pudent old party—sent the orders
only. Let her pay for her brats.
S.
Mr. Punch, highly commending the compact corner-note, hereby
announces that he shall notice no letter to himself unless that precis be
annexed.
A SPECIAL VERDICT.
The admiration of mankind is challenged for the subjoined verdict
of a British jury:—
“ We find for tlie plaintiff, but with this remark, that Dr. Clarke acted perfectly
bond fide ; and that upon the result of the evidence there was sufficient to justify
the course he pursued. Therefore we lay the damages at £10.”
This wonderful decision, if that is the correct word to apply to such
a finding as the above, raises (instead of settling) a legal question, of
which one view was naturally expressed by the defendant’s counsel:—
“ Mr. Asplaud. I submit that is a verdict for the defendant.”
whilst another was logically delivered from a higher authority:—
“ The Lord Chief Justice. I am of a contrary opinion.”
This case was an action for assault and false imprisonment, brought
by a woman who had been the defendant’s cook-maid, against her
former master, because he, a physician at Staines, had caused her to
be sent to the union workhouse, and confined there three weeks as a
lunatic. It was tried in the Court of Common Pleas at Westminster,
before Lord Chief-Justice Erle and a Special Jury. The speciality
of a special jury is supposed to consist in a degree of rationality and
intelligence superior to that with which common juries are endowed,
and likewise in a peculiar freedom from vulgar partiality and prejudice.
Here we have a special jury, finding, in the first place, that a physician
acted with good faith and sufficient justification, in giving his servant
into custody as a madwoman, and next that, in so doing, he had in-
curred £10 damages. If this is the verdict of a special jury in a case
wherein a gentleman is sued by a social inferior, what is to be expected
by anybody in the higher or middle orders, who may be so unfortunate
as to get involved in a lawsuit with another person in the lower ? Of
course that the case will be decided against him—the jury adding the
expression of their opinion, that the better educated and richer party was
in the right so far as law and evidence were concerned, but that they,
as sympathising with the masses, felt bound to give their verdict in
favour of the poorer and more ignorant. Common juries must not only
return verdicts at variance with reason and justice, but they must also
assign their motive for so doing, if they are to exhibit, in the discharge
of their duties, any intellectual as well as moral inferiority to special \
juries, such as special juries may be judged to be if the astounding
verdict above quoted is to be taken as an example of their wisdom and
righteousness.
A Likely Reform in the Law.
Among the contemplated Law Reforms of 1861, is an Act enabling
persons to establish their own sanity during their lifetime, in order
that, after death, they may not have their wills disputed on the ground
that when they made them they were out of their minds.
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
7
THE COMPACT LETTER-WRITER.
Fine letter-writing could not survive the establishment of the penny
post, but if elegant periods and a neat form of arriving at a conclusion
could have endured into the days when we have ten deliveries between
breakfast and dinner, the coup de grace would now have been given.
The Government, offices, beginning with the Horse Guards, announce
that in future “the purport of every letter sent to them is to be
briefly explained on the top left-hand corner.” How much more of
the letters will be read ?
Letters are confessedly among the great nuisances of the day, except
to people in love and other fools. Everybody in his senses would
rather not have a letter than have one, unless it contains a cheque.
But as people will scribble, Mr. Punch earnestly recommends that the
rule of the Government be adopted in private life. It will save so
much time and the expenditure of so much bad temper. For instance,
at Christmas time, when impositions are tolerated, Mother-in-law sends
a rigmarole of eight pages, with every other word underlined, and a
whole cataract of expressions of affection. About two-thirds through
i the bottle of hay is the needle, which is an appeal to tolerably
prosperous son-in-law to lend idle brother-in-law twenty pounds. Now,
the old lady adds insult to injury by the torrent of words which
i involve her petition. Does she know how tolerably prosperous son-in-
law (who puts away and keeps letters, in order to meet the certain
accusation, one of these days, of not doing much for his family), en-
dorses such an epistle. Mr. Punch will tell her :—
I “ Old girl, humbugging for £20
I for that ass Tom; sent it, like
another ass as I am.'’'’
How much more decorous it will be, when tolerably prosperous son-
in-law has been taken to Norwood, and his papers are overhauled, to
find, instead of such a note as the above, a few neat words at the upper
left-hand corner:—
Mamma petitions dearest Charles
for a little loan to kind, good, but
rather improvident Tommy.
Sent £20,
C. Soft.
An author, too, Mr. Punch has heard, has occasionally written to
an editor, requesting the latter to give a favourable review of the
former’s book. The way, Mr. Punch has heard, is to say something
to the effect that, though author is the last man to think much of
his own literary efforts, or to desire any notoriety, yet there have
been so many admirable articles in editor’s widely-circulated and
influential journal, bearing upon the very subject on which author has
been writing, that perhaps, in the interest of the public and of the
good cause which both of them have at heart, a notice of author’s work
might be opportune and acceptable. This is ail very nice; but the
note in the upper left-hand corner, and the endorsement, should run
thus:—
Chive us a puff for the Jaunt to
Jericho.
Saw him bloived first.
Ed. '
, Managers are much beset for Boxes at Christmas-time, especially by
rich people, who very properly say, that new pieces should be seen
while the dresses and decorations are fresh, and also while the children
(bless ’em) are home for the holidays, and therefore they beg the
Manager to give them the places that he can, just now, sell to great
advantage. Generally, the coolness of the note in which the demand
j is made by a Clapham or Bayswater demi-millionaire is suited to the
coolness of the request; or if the lady of the house writes, it is evi-
dently with the idea that she is doing the Manager a favour in bringing
her children to see a gratis sight. But sometimes she condescends to
be civil, and writes thus:—
“ Dear Mr. Spangleton,
“ I see by the papers, and I am delighted for your sake to see
it, that your new piece, the Mountebank of Madagascar, has been so
splendidly got up that it is sure to bring you crowded audiences for
many a night. You will, I am sure, remember me from having sat next
to me at our good friend, Mr. Badport’s, when you were so very kind
asi to say that I ought to come and see your theatre. I will now take
advantage of your kind offer, and as all my dear children are at home
for the holidays, I should like to give them the treat of coming to your
theatre on Saturday night, if you will be good enough to give me a
box. As we are a good many, and some young friends are staying
with us, I should like a double box, and please let it be near the centre ]
of the house, because 1 do get so nervous about the little ones leaning 1
over. Opposite the Royal Box if you possibly can, because if Her
Majesty should happen to come that night, we shall have the double
pleasure of seeing our Queen and your piece. Please to write by
return, as I should like to ask one or two friends, and as they may not
wish to come at once, please write ‘ any number at any hour ’ on the
card. As our posts are irregular, would you send the box by one of
the hundreds of men you must have idling about the theatre.
“Believe me, dear Sir,
“Yours sincerely,
“Peckham Rise.” “Sarah Clutcher.”
“P.S. Please also give four orders for the boxes, as we have two
faithful and attached servants who have been with us many years,
and I should like to give them a treat and let them take their sweet-
hearts.”
No Manager ought to resist such an appeal as this; but if Mrs.
Clutcher would break the thing at once to him by a note in the upper
left-hand corner, like this,—
Mrs. Clutcher, banker’s ivife,
friend of the Badports, wants box
and four orders.
if might prevent the Manager from being so rude as to write something
(as he otherwise may) like this:—
Fat woman, friend of house
where had that beastly ivine. Im-
pudent old party—sent the orders
only. Let her pay for her brats.
S.
Mr. Punch, highly commending the compact corner-note, hereby
announces that he shall notice no letter to himself unless that precis be
annexed.
A SPECIAL VERDICT.
The admiration of mankind is challenged for the subjoined verdict
of a British jury:—
“ We find for tlie plaintiff, but with this remark, that Dr. Clarke acted perfectly
bond fide ; and that upon the result of the evidence there was sufficient to justify
the course he pursued. Therefore we lay the damages at £10.”
This wonderful decision, if that is the correct word to apply to such
a finding as the above, raises (instead of settling) a legal question, of
which one view was naturally expressed by the defendant’s counsel:—
“ Mr. Asplaud. I submit that is a verdict for the defendant.”
whilst another was logically delivered from a higher authority:—
“ The Lord Chief Justice. I am of a contrary opinion.”
This case was an action for assault and false imprisonment, brought
by a woman who had been the defendant’s cook-maid, against her
former master, because he, a physician at Staines, had caused her to
be sent to the union workhouse, and confined there three weeks as a
lunatic. It was tried in the Court of Common Pleas at Westminster,
before Lord Chief-Justice Erle and a Special Jury. The speciality
of a special jury is supposed to consist in a degree of rationality and
intelligence superior to that with which common juries are endowed,
and likewise in a peculiar freedom from vulgar partiality and prejudice.
Here we have a special jury, finding, in the first place, that a physician
acted with good faith and sufficient justification, in giving his servant
into custody as a madwoman, and next that, in so doing, he had in-
curred £10 damages. If this is the verdict of a special jury in a case
wherein a gentleman is sued by a social inferior, what is to be expected
by anybody in the higher or middle orders, who may be so unfortunate
as to get involved in a lawsuit with another person in the lower ? Of
course that the case will be decided against him—the jury adding the
expression of their opinion, that the better educated and richer party was
in the right so far as law and evidence were concerned, but that they,
as sympathising with the masses, felt bound to give their verdict in
favour of the poorer and more ignorant. Common juries must not only
return verdicts at variance with reason and justice, but they must also
assign their motive for so doing, if they are to exhibit, in the discharge
of their duties, any intellectual as well as moral inferiority to special \
juries, such as special juries may be judged to be if the astounding
verdict above quoted is to be taken as an example of their wisdom and
righteousness.
A Likely Reform in the Law.
Among the contemplated Law Reforms of 1861, is an Act enabling
persons to establish their own sanity during their lifetime, in order
that, after death, they may not have their wills disputed on the ground
that when they made them they were out of their minds.