DOI Heft:
November 23, 1861
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16868#0215
November 23, 1861.]
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
:03
ST. DISRAELI TO THE RESCUE.
O the accomplished Author of
the Infernal Marriage
Ixion in Heaven, ana
other theological works
(need we name, Mr.
Disraeli), has been
delivering, before the
Bishop of Oxford, and
all sorts of Archdeacons,
a speech on Church
Matters. It was an ex-
tremely clever and effec-
tive performance, and
the lay orator walked
into the Essays and Re-
views with a far more
smashing criticism than
Mr. Punch has seen put
forth by any of the cle-
rical assailants of the
book, the Bishop-maker
included. This part of
the speech is so good
that Mr, Punch (who,
from circumstances over
which he has no control,
is infrequently permit-
ted the satisfaction of
applauding Mr. Dis-
raeli) inclines to im-
mortalise a few of his
sentences. After de-
claring his belief that
the principal Authors
of the Essays had en-
gagements with Society inconsistent with what was recommended in the book, (a
delicate way of saying, that people who took the Church’s honours and pay had no
right to discredit her doctrines), Mr. Disraeli gave a little sketch of German
theology. This, formerly Mysticism, became, he said. Critical, and was maintained
by the Rationalists:—
“But where is Rationalism, and where are Rationalists now? They have ceased to exist;
they have been erased from the intellectual tablets of living opinion. Another school of
philosophical theologians arose in Germany, and with profound learning and inexorable logic
they proved that rationalism was irrational—(laughter}—and they substituted for the rational
scheme of the interpretation of the Scriptures a new scheme called the
Mythical system. But if it be true, which undoubtedly it is, that the
mythical theologians triumphantly demonstrated that rationalism
was irrational, equally true is it that by this time the mythical system
has itself become a myth. (Cheers and la.ughter.) The most eminent
and most distinguished votaries of that school have enlisted their
energies and devoted their powers to a new and aH-triumphant deve-
lopement of German theology, which is now raging in that country,
and which, in deference to the spirit of progress, which is the charac-
teristic, as we are told, of the nineteenth century, and which generally
ends in a recurrence to ancient ideas—(cheers and laughter)—this new
system consists in a most able revival of pagan pantheism. (Cheers.)
Now, that is a literally true sketch of the various phases through
which the most intellectual opinion of Germany during the last
century has passed. (Hear, hear.) 1 ask you, is the Church to be
alarmed by such overreaching and capricious speculations as these ?
(hear)—and is society to be disturbed by a volume which is after all
but a secondhand medley of these discordant, inconsistent, and self-
destroying theories ? No religious creed was ever destroyed by a phi-
losophical theory. Philosophies destroy themselves. Epicurus was
at least as great a man, I apprehend, as Hkqel, yet it was not Epi-
curus that subverted the Olympian religion.”
So far, Mr. Punch has nothing but praise for his friend
Mr. Disraeli. He speaks like a scholar and an orator.
But on the other points on which it pleased the author of
Coningsby to champion the Church, Mr. Punch is by no
means so sure that the respected Lady will do well to
follow Mr. Disraeli’s advice. He certainly recommended
Unity, which is a very good thing in its way, but his coun-
sel to the clergy to stand shoulder to shoulder, and take
theological matters out of the hands of laymen, may not be
quite so prudent, in days when it is really only a question
of “ worth while” whether Lord Palmerston shall ecraser
the Parsons’ Parliament, Convocation, or not. And upon
the Church Bate Question, Mr. Punch submits that if the
Church should take the ground recommended by the author
of Tancred, and go in for the Rate in all its integrity and
accept no compromise, Archbishop Punch foresees great
trouble in his archiepiscopate. In fact the counsel of Mr.
Disraeli will exactly do what he said the Societies he was
addressing did—it will “Eorin one great whole ”—in which
hole the Church will find itself. However, we will talk over
this matter with him when we meet at Philippi; meantime
we compliment him on his brilliant speech, and fear he has
too much brains to fight decorously the battle of Bosh.
The Real Ruler of Prance.—By an Extraordinary
Gazette published in the Moniteur of November 14th,
“ M. Fould has been nominated Minister of Einance, in
place of Napoleon the Third resigned.”
SABBATARIAN ESPIONAGE.
On Monday last week, according to a police report at Hammersmith,
“ Mrs. Sarah Starbuck, the landlady of the Cannon public-house, Queen Street,
Hammersmith, was summoned before Mr. Dayman to answer the complaint of the
Police, for having her house open on Sunday morning, the 3rd inst., before one
o'clock.”
This charge was supported by the solitary evidence of a spy:—
“ The only witness in this case was Police Constable Woodbridge of the J Division,
a plain clothes officer of Notting Hill. On the Sunday in question he was employed
especially in the district of Hammersmith to watch the public-houses.”
Police-Constable Woodbridge swore that—
“ He saw thirteen men in the parlour or tap-room and ten men at the bar. This
was about half-past twelve o’clock. The door opened in consequence of a knock
from the outside, and he attempted to pass in, but was prevented. Though he
stated that he was a constable and showed his card, he was pushed out. He swore
that he succeeded in getting one leg and his head inside the door, and that in the
struggle he was able to count the men in the parlour and at the bar. He also saw
a man drinking from a pot full of beer.”
All these allegations Police-Constable Woodbridge deposed; and
on bis solemn oath—
“ He further stated that he remained outside until one o’clock, and that he saw
some of the same men come out of a private house in Ship Lane, a thoroughfare
running on the side of the public-house.”
Police-Constable Woodbridge having made the above statements
under the obligation acknowledged by kissing the Book, was then
cross-examined by Mr. Martin, and—
Admitted that Mr. Arnold, on the ground that he did not believe the evidence,
dismissed a similar complaint against another licensed victualler in Hammersmith
on Saturday.”
In contradiction of every word which the spy, Police-Constable
W oodbridge had sworn, three witnesses were called.
They swore that there were only three persons in the house at the time referred
to, namely, Mrs. Starbuck, the potman, who was placing his cans in the bar, and a
man who had returned a ladder he had borrowed. They also proved that there was
no outlet at the back, as the yard was surrounded by the walls of adjoining houses,
and that there were no windows or doors through which any man could leave. It
was denied that the constable showed his card.”
Moreover—
“ Inspector Hare said that he visited the house, accompanied by a constable, a
quarter of an hour before, and that he found no men there.”
Under these circumstances it was evident that Police-Constable
Woodbridge had sworn to tilings which he had either dreamt or
invented, and—
“ Mr. Dayman said it was an extraordinary case, and dismissed the summons.”
Of course the summons was dismissed—and perhaps an inquiry is
now pending to ascertain whether Police-Constable and spy Wood-
bridge is a dreamer of dreams, or a deponent of things which are not.
Under favour of the Magistrate, this was not altogether a very extra-
ordinary ease, by Woodbridge’s* own showing a similar case had
occurred on Saturday. Policemen in plain clothes appear to be not
uncommonly employed to watch public-houses on Sundays. It is not
unusual for them to inform against publicans for keeping open house at
unlawful hours. Nor does it not occasionally happen that an intelligent
stipendiary Magistrate nice Mr. Dayman as contradistinguished from
an unpaid old Sabbatarian blockhead of a Country Justice, dismisses the
information, doubting the informant’s evidence.
By many a County quorum of ’squires and parsons, and by many a
theocracy of municipal Mawworrns on a borough bench, every word
that a police spy and informer had the audacity to swear against a
publican accused of a breach of the Sunday laws, would be believed in
the face of any number of witnesses. Mrs. Starbuck, our hostess of
the Cannon, may rejoice in hanging out that warlike sign under the
reign of constitutional legality in free Hammersmith.
It cannot be under orders from the Home Office that policemen dis-
guised in plain clothes sneak about as spies commissioned to catch out
publicans in infringing a sectarian Act of Parliament, and for that
urpose themselves tempt them to infringe it by opening their
oors. Will the Government a moment longer encourage the fellows
to bear false witness against their neighbours on trumped-up charges
of profaning the so-called Sabbath day ?
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
:03
ST. DISRAELI TO THE RESCUE.
O the accomplished Author of
the Infernal Marriage
Ixion in Heaven, ana
other theological works
(need we name, Mr.
Disraeli), has been
delivering, before the
Bishop of Oxford, and
all sorts of Archdeacons,
a speech on Church
Matters. It was an ex-
tremely clever and effec-
tive performance, and
the lay orator walked
into the Essays and Re-
views with a far more
smashing criticism than
Mr. Punch has seen put
forth by any of the cle-
rical assailants of the
book, the Bishop-maker
included. This part of
the speech is so good
that Mr, Punch (who,
from circumstances over
which he has no control,
is infrequently permit-
ted the satisfaction of
applauding Mr. Dis-
raeli) inclines to im-
mortalise a few of his
sentences. After de-
claring his belief that
the principal Authors
of the Essays had en-
gagements with Society inconsistent with what was recommended in the book, (a
delicate way of saying, that people who took the Church’s honours and pay had no
right to discredit her doctrines), Mr. Disraeli gave a little sketch of German
theology. This, formerly Mysticism, became, he said. Critical, and was maintained
by the Rationalists:—
“But where is Rationalism, and where are Rationalists now? They have ceased to exist;
they have been erased from the intellectual tablets of living opinion. Another school of
philosophical theologians arose in Germany, and with profound learning and inexorable logic
they proved that rationalism was irrational—(laughter}—and they substituted for the rational
scheme of the interpretation of the Scriptures a new scheme called the
Mythical system. But if it be true, which undoubtedly it is, that the
mythical theologians triumphantly demonstrated that rationalism
was irrational, equally true is it that by this time the mythical system
has itself become a myth. (Cheers and la.ughter.) The most eminent
and most distinguished votaries of that school have enlisted their
energies and devoted their powers to a new and aH-triumphant deve-
lopement of German theology, which is now raging in that country,
and which, in deference to the spirit of progress, which is the charac-
teristic, as we are told, of the nineteenth century, and which generally
ends in a recurrence to ancient ideas—(cheers and laughter)—this new
system consists in a most able revival of pagan pantheism. (Cheers.)
Now, that is a literally true sketch of the various phases through
which the most intellectual opinion of Germany during the last
century has passed. (Hear, hear.) 1 ask you, is the Church to be
alarmed by such overreaching and capricious speculations as these ?
(hear)—and is society to be disturbed by a volume which is after all
but a secondhand medley of these discordant, inconsistent, and self-
destroying theories ? No religious creed was ever destroyed by a phi-
losophical theory. Philosophies destroy themselves. Epicurus was
at least as great a man, I apprehend, as Hkqel, yet it was not Epi-
curus that subverted the Olympian religion.”
So far, Mr. Punch has nothing but praise for his friend
Mr. Disraeli. He speaks like a scholar and an orator.
But on the other points on which it pleased the author of
Coningsby to champion the Church, Mr. Punch is by no
means so sure that the respected Lady will do well to
follow Mr. Disraeli’s advice. He certainly recommended
Unity, which is a very good thing in its way, but his coun-
sel to the clergy to stand shoulder to shoulder, and take
theological matters out of the hands of laymen, may not be
quite so prudent, in days when it is really only a question
of “ worth while” whether Lord Palmerston shall ecraser
the Parsons’ Parliament, Convocation, or not. And upon
the Church Bate Question, Mr. Punch submits that if the
Church should take the ground recommended by the author
of Tancred, and go in for the Rate in all its integrity and
accept no compromise, Archbishop Punch foresees great
trouble in his archiepiscopate. In fact the counsel of Mr.
Disraeli will exactly do what he said the Societies he was
addressing did—it will “Eorin one great whole ”—in which
hole the Church will find itself. However, we will talk over
this matter with him when we meet at Philippi; meantime
we compliment him on his brilliant speech, and fear he has
too much brains to fight decorously the battle of Bosh.
The Real Ruler of Prance.—By an Extraordinary
Gazette published in the Moniteur of November 14th,
“ M. Fould has been nominated Minister of Einance, in
place of Napoleon the Third resigned.”
SABBATARIAN ESPIONAGE.
On Monday last week, according to a police report at Hammersmith,
“ Mrs. Sarah Starbuck, the landlady of the Cannon public-house, Queen Street,
Hammersmith, was summoned before Mr. Dayman to answer the complaint of the
Police, for having her house open on Sunday morning, the 3rd inst., before one
o'clock.”
This charge was supported by the solitary evidence of a spy:—
“ The only witness in this case was Police Constable Woodbridge of the J Division,
a plain clothes officer of Notting Hill. On the Sunday in question he was employed
especially in the district of Hammersmith to watch the public-houses.”
Police-Constable Woodbridge swore that—
“ He saw thirteen men in the parlour or tap-room and ten men at the bar. This
was about half-past twelve o’clock. The door opened in consequence of a knock
from the outside, and he attempted to pass in, but was prevented. Though he
stated that he was a constable and showed his card, he was pushed out. He swore
that he succeeded in getting one leg and his head inside the door, and that in the
struggle he was able to count the men in the parlour and at the bar. He also saw
a man drinking from a pot full of beer.”
All these allegations Police-Constable Woodbridge deposed; and
on bis solemn oath—
“ He further stated that he remained outside until one o’clock, and that he saw
some of the same men come out of a private house in Ship Lane, a thoroughfare
running on the side of the public-house.”
Police-Constable Woodbridge having made the above statements
under the obligation acknowledged by kissing the Book, was then
cross-examined by Mr. Martin, and—
Admitted that Mr. Arnold, on the ground that he did not believe the evidence,
dismissed a similar complaint against another licensed victualler in Hammersmith
on Saturday.”
In contradiction of every word which the spy, Police-Constable
W oodbridge had sworn, three witnesses were called.
They swore that there were only three persons in the house at the time referred
to, namely, Mrs. Starbuck, the potman, who was placing his cans in the bar, and a
man who had returned a ladder he had borrowed. They also proved that there was
no outlet at the back, as the yard was surrounded by the walls of adjoining houses,
and that there were no windows or doors through which any man could leave. It
was denied that the constable showed his card.”
Moreover—
“ Inspector Hare said that he visited the house, accompanied by a constable, a
quarter of an hour before, and that he found no men there.”
Under these circumstances it was evident that Police-Constable
Woodbridge had sworn to tilings which he had either dreamt or
invented, and—
“ Mr. Dayman said it was an extraordinary case, and dismissed the summons.”
Of course the summons was dismissed—and perhaps an inquiry is
now pending to ascertain whether Police-Constable and spy Wood-
bridge is a dreamer of dreams, or a deponent of things which are not.
Under favour of the Magistrate, this was not altogether a very extra-
ordinary ease, by Woodbridge’s* own showing a similar case had
occurred on Saturday. Policemen in plain clothes appear to be not
uncommonly employed to watch public-houses on Sundays. It is not
unusual for them to inform against publicans for keeping open house at
unlawful hours. Nor does it not occasionally happen that an intelligent
stipendiary Magistrate nice Mr. Dayman as contradistinguished from
an unpaid old Sabbatarian blockhead of a Country Justice, dismisses the
information, doubting the informant’s evidence.
By many a County quorum of ’squires and parsons, and by many a
theocracy of municipal Mawworrns on a borough bench, every word
that a police spy and informer had the audacity to swear against a
publican accused of a breach of the Sunday laws, would be believed in
the face of any number of witnesses. Mrs. Starbuck, our hostess of
the Cannon, may rejoice in hanging out that warlike sign under the
reign of constitutional legality in free Hammersmith.
It cannot be under orders from the Home Office that policemen dis-
guised in plain clothes sneak about as spies commissioned to catch out
publicans in infringing a sectarian Act of Parliament, and for that
urpose themselves tempt them to infringe it by opening their
oors. Will the Government a moment longer encourage the fellows
to bear false witness against their neighbours on trumped-up charges
of profaning the so-called Sabbath day ?