DOI Heft:
February 15, 1862
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16869#0069
February 15, 1862.]
61
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
THE BIGGEST OF BUTCHER BOYS.
The author of a new life of Shakspeare, Mr. S. W.
Fullom, thinks there is no truth in the late Lord Camp-
bell’s supposition that the great dramatist was employed,
during his youth, in a lawyer’s office. Siiakspeare,
according to his latest biographer, was a butcher’s ap-
prentice, and learned what he knew of legal forms and
technicalities by attending the borough courts of Stratford-
on-Avon, and witnessing those law proceedings in which his
father was often involved. But he is far too minute and
copious in his law slang to have picked it up in that way;
and. besides he shows immense knowledge of sea-slang,
military slang, and many other slangs. His knowledge
cf slang, hi fact, was only part of his knowledge of things
in general, which he either acquired by the study of every-
thing, or possessed by intuition, or else Shakspeare
“ was a medium,” and spirits put universal information
into his head. A great objection to this latter theory is
the height to which his genius towers above the medi-
ocrity. that marks the utterances of the most eminent
“mediums.”
A hypothesis on which the extent of Siiakspeare’s
legal knowledge may be as satisfactorily accounted for as
it can on any other, consists very well with the surmise,
or fact, that he was a butcher-boy. As such he must have
been conversant with sheepskins. We have only to sup-
pose him endowed with the gift of natural clairvoyance, in
order ourselves to see clearly by what means he acquired
his familiarity with the law, and its phraseology. The
sheepskins presented themselves to his prevision in the
state of parchment, and he foresaw all the deeds which
were destined to be engrossed on them.
The clairvoyance of Siiakspeare may be supposed to
have enabled him to look into all manner of things, besides
the sheepskins which lie was accustomed to handle, and
thus obtain that acquaintance with human actions as well
as documentary deeds manifest in his writings. In a state
of trance or ecstacy, having his mind’s eye open, and scenes
of the past, present, or future revealed before it, how
often may Master William Shakspeare have stood
beside a street-door in his native town, with a blue frock
on, and a wooden tray containing a leg of-mutton upon his
shoulder, abstractedly whistling- an old English melody,
and shouting “But-cher!”
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
1862. February 6. Thursday. Parliament re-assembled. The first
paragraphs in the Royal Speech (delivered by the Chancellor) and
such portion of the debates as referred to them, demand graver record
than is usually made in these columns. The opening sentences of the
Speech alluded, with but little giace of expression, to the event of
the Fourteenth of December last. Leading speakers in the two Houses
offered tributes to the memory of the departed.
The Earl of Derby said—’
“ In the Prince Consort the Queen has lost the familiar friend, the trusted
counseUor, the never-failing adviser to whom she could look up in every difficulty
and in every emergency, and to whom she did look up with that proud humility
which none but a woman’s heart can know, glorying in the intellectual superiority
of him to whom her own will and her own judgment were freely put in subjection.”
Earl Gkanville said —
“ I can remember no one in any class of life who seemed so fully alive to keep
before him the highest standard of duty. His intellectual faculties and his powers
of conversation were remarkable. But though a man of strong will, conception,
j and character, he never obtruded his sentiments, nor sought to apply any objection
j he might entertain unless desired to do so.”
Earl Russell said: —
“ I happen to know from himself the views which he entertained upon the duty
j Sovereign. He stated to me not many months ago that it was the common
| opinion that there was only one occasion upon which the Sovereign ought to exer-
cise a decided po wer, and that was in the choice of the First Minister of the Crown,
that, in his opinion, was no occasion upon which the Sovereign ought to exercise a
control or to pronounce a decision. One party having resigned power from being
unable to carry on the Government, there was at all times another party to whom
the transfer of power might judiciously be made, and the transfer having once been
made, no matter to what political party the Minister happened to belong, the Sove-
reign was bound to communicate with him in the most confidential and unrestricted
manner.”
Mr. Disraeli said :—
“ The Prince whom we have lost not only was eminent for the fulfilment of his
duty, but it was the fulfilment of the highest duty: and it was the fulfilment of
the highest duty under the most difficult circumstances. Yet, under these circum-
stances, so difficult and so delicate, he elevated even the Throne by the dignity and
purity of his domestic life. He framed, and partly accomplished, a scheme of edu-
cation for the heir of England which proves how completely its august protector
had contemplated the office of an English king. He observed that there was a great
deficiency in our national character, and which, if neglected, might lead to the im-
pairing not only of our social happiness, but even the sources of our public wealth,
and that was a deficiency of culture. But he was not satisfied in detecting the
deficiency, he resolved to supply it. Those who move must change, and those who
change must necessarily disturb and alarm prejudices ; and what lie encountered
was only a demonstration that he was a man superior to his age. Prince Albert
was not a patron. He was not one of those who, by their smiles and by their gold,
reward exceUence or stimulate exertion. His contributions to the cause of pro-
gress and improvement were far more powerful and far more precious. He gave to
it his thought, his time, his toil; he gave to it his life.”
Lord Palmerston said
“ The Right Hon. gentleman, with an eloquence and a feeling which, I am sure,
must excite the sympathy and admiration of those who have heard it, dilated on the
eminent qualities of his late Royal Highness. It is no exaggeration to say that, so
far as the word ‘ perfect ’ can be applied to human imperfection of character, the
Prince deserved the description, because he combined qualities the most eminent,
and sometimes the most different, in a degree which was hardly ever equalled by
anybody in any condition of life. In domestic life he was most exemplary. It is
no exaggeration to say, that the domestic life of the Court has been of the greatest
value to the interests of the country, has, in times of difficulty, tended to cement
the link which unites the people to the Throne, and has rendered the most impor-
tant services to the country. Such being the Prince whom we have lost, we can
easily imagine what must be the grief and the sorrow to her who has lost him.”
Tlie evening was one of funereal oration rather than of debate—the
exceptions are mentioned hereafter. The Addresses were unanimously
voted, and the Houses adjourned early.
Lord Westburt informed us,
That we are at peace with all European powers and “ trust ” to
remain in that pacific condition.
That we have had a “question ” between us and the United States,
which has been satisfactorily settled by the restoration of the seized
men and the disavowal of the “act of violence.”
PITIABLE OBJECTS.
Mr. Done (to Mr. Dreary). “No! a don’t know how it is—but I ain’t the
THING SOMEHOW ! No EMBAWASSMENTS OR ANY THING O’ THAT SORT. Can’t MAKE
it out. S ’pose it’s Overwork/ ”
61
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
THE BIGGEST OF BUTCHER BOYS.
The author of a new life of Shakspeare, Mr. S. W.
Fullom, thinks there is no truth in the late Lord Camp-
bell’s supposition that the great dramatist was employed,
during his youth, in a lawyer’s office. Siiakspeare,
according to his latest biographer, was a butcher’s ap-
prentice, and learned what he knew of legal forms and
technicalities by attending the borough courts of Stratford-
on-Avon, and witnessing those law proceedings in which his
father was often involved. But he is far too minute and
copious in his law slang to have picked it up in that way;
and. besides he shows immense knowledge of sea-slang,
military slang, and many other slangs. His knowledge
cf slang, hi fact, was only part of his knowledge of things
in general, which he either acquired by the study of every-
thing, or possessed by intuition, or else Shakspeare
“ was a medium,” and spirits put universal information
into his head. A great objection to this latter theory is
the height to which his genius towers above the medi-
ocrity. that marks the utterances of the most eminent
“mediums.”
A hypothesis on which the extent of Siiakspeare’s
legal knowledge may be as satisfactorily accounted for as
it can on any other, consists very well with the surmise,
or fact, that he was a butcher-boy. As such he must have
been conversant with sheepskins. We have only to sup-
pose him endowed with the gift of natural clairvoyance, in
order ourselves to see clearly by what means he acquired
his familiarity with the law, and its phraseology. The
sheepskins presented themselves to his prevision in the
state of parchment, and he foresaw all the deeds which
were destined to be engrossed on them.
The clairvoyance of Siiakspeare may be supposed to
have enabled him to look into all manner of things, besides
the sheepskins which lie was accustomed to handle, and
thus obtain that acquaintance with human actions as well
as documentary deeds manifest in his writings. In a state
of trance or ecstacy, having his mind’s eye open, and scenes
of the past, present, or future revealed before it, how
often may Master William Shakspeare have stood
beside a street-door in his native town, with a blue frock
on, and a wooden tray containing a leg of-mutton upon his
shoulder, abstractedly whistling- an old English melody,
and shouting “But-cher!”
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
1862. February 6. Thursday. Parliament re-assembled. The first
paragraphs in the Royal Speech (delivered by the Chancellor) and
such portion of the debates as referred to them, demand graver record
than is usually made in these columns. The opening sentences of the
Speech alluded, with but little giace of expression, to the event of
the Fourteenth of December last. Leading speakers in the two Houses
offered tributes to the memory of the departed.
The Earl of Derby said—’
“ In the Prince Consort the Queen has lost the familiar friend, the trusted
counseUor, the never-failing adviser to whom she could look up in every difficulty
and in every emergency, and to whom she did look up with that proud humility
which none but a woman’s heart can know, glorying in the intellectual superiority
of him to whom her own will and her own judgment were freely put in subjection.”
Earl Gkanville said —
“ I can remember no one in any class of life who seemed so fully alive to keep
before him the highest standard of duty. His intellectual faculties and his powers
of conversation were remarkable. But though a man of strong will, conception,
j and character, he never obtruded his sentiments, nor sought to apply any objection
j he might entertain unless desired to do so.”
Earl Russell said: —
“ I happen to know from himself the views which he entertained upon the duty
j Sovereign. He stated to me not many months ago that it was the common
| opinion that there was only one occasion upon which the Sovereign ought to exer-
cise a decided po wer, and that was in the choice of the First Minister of the Crown,
that, in his opinion, was no occasion upon which the Sovereign ought to exercise a
control or to pronounce a decision. One party having resigned power from being
unable to carry on the Government, there was at all times another party to whom
the transfer of power might judiciously be made, and the transfer having once been
made, no matter to what political party the Minister happened to belong, the Sove-
reign was bound to communicate with him in the most confidential and unrestricted
manner.”
Mr. Disraeli said :—
“ The Prince whom we have lost not only was eminent for the fulfilment of his
duty, but it was the fulfilment of the highest duty: and it was the fulfilment of
the highest duty under the most difficult circumstances. Yet, under these circum-
stances, so difficult and so delicate, he elevated even the Throne by the dignity and
purity of his domestic life. He framed, and partly accomplished, a scheme of edu-
cation for the heir of England which proves how completely its august protector
had contemplated the office of an English king. He observed that there was a great
deficiency in our national character, and which, if neglected, might lead to the im-
pairing not only of our social happiness, but even the sources of our public wealth,
and that was a deficiency of culture. But he was not satisfied in detecting the
deficiency, he resolved to supply it. Those who move must change, and those who
change must necessarily disturb and alarm prejudices ; and what lie encountered
was only a demonstration that he was a man superior to his age. Prince Albert
was not a patron. He was not one of those who, by their smiles and by their gold,
reward exceUence or stimulate exertion. His contributions to the cause of pro-
gress and improvement were far more powerful and far more precious. He gave to
it his thought, his time, his toil; he gave to it his life.”
Lord Palmerston said
“ The Right Hon. gentleman, with an eloquence and a feeling which, I am sure,
must excite the sympathy and admiration of those who have heard it, dilated on the
eminent qualities of his late Royal Highness. It is no exaggeration to say that, so
far as the word ‘ perfect ’ can be applied to human imperfection of character, the
Prince deserved the description, because he combined qualities the most eminent,
and sometimes the most different, in a degree which was hardly ever equalled by
anybody in any condition of life. In domestic life he was most exemplary. It is
no exaggeration to say, that the domestic life of the Court has been of the greatest
value to the interests of the country, has, in times of difficulty, tended to cement
the link which unites the people to the Throne, and has rendered the most impor-
tant services to the country. Such being the Prince whom we have lost, we can
easily imagine what must be the grief and the sorrow to her who has lost him.”
Tlie evening was one of funereal oration rather than of debate—the
exceptions are mentioned hereafter. The Addresses were unanimously
voted, and the Houses adjourned early.
Lord Westburt informed us,
That we are at peace with all European powers and “ trust ” to
remain in that pacific condition.
That we have had a “question ” between us and the United States,
which has been satisfactorily settled by the restoration of the seized
men and the disavowal of the “act of violence.”
PITIABLE OBJECTS.
Mr. Done (to Mr. Dreary). “No! a don’t know how it is—but I ain’t the
THING SOMEHOW ! No EMBAWASSMENTS OR ANY THING O’ THAT SORT. Can’t MAKE
it out. S ’pose it’s Overwork/ ”