DOI issue:
March 8, 1862
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16869#0106
98
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[March 8, 1862.
Unsophisticated Uncle. “ Lupus Street, Lupus Street ? Down Pimlico way,
ain't it t ”
Nephew (shuddering). “ Nev-ar, my dear Sir—South Belgravia-h ! ”
A NECKLACE OF PEARLS.
For Morning and livening Wear.
Dancing is all important to a girl entering life. Ce
n’est que le premier pas [de danse') qui codte !
Give with discretion. It is not because it is less valuable
than pure gold, that women have a strong dislike to imita-
tion jewellery; but rather, because their highly sensitive
nature abhors a sham.
At sixteen a woman prefers the best dancer in the
room; at two-and-twenty, the best talker; at thirty tlie
richest man.
“ Love me, love my dog,” is old, and exploded. Love
me, love my milliner—is the modern version.
Accomplishments are more useful in married life, than
domestic qualities. The wife who sings divinely feeds the
Eride of her husband; whereas she who is only a hand at a
ght crust, merely contributes to his comfort. There are
wretches who ask why the hand that rattles off The Shower
of Pearls should be a stranger to pastry. Conceive Norma
dabbling with apple-dumplings!
The honeymoon is sober marriage tricked out in peacock
feathers.
To slave, and toil, and fret, is wretched woman’s lot.
She is ever dressing, lunching, receiving visitors, paying
visits; at ball, theatre, or rout— or, hapless creature,
doomed to spend an evening with her husband.
A gentleman who is courting a lady, is paying his re-
spectful addresses to her. Let the grocer’s man fall in love
with Betty at the area-gate, and he merely “ follows ” her.
“ Interesting events ” are occasions when a nurse takes
absolute possession of the house; and the husband sleeps
on the sofa.
Babies are the tvrauts of the world. The Emperor
must tread softly: baby sleeps. Mozart must hush his
nascent requiem-, baby sleeps. Phidias must drop his
hammer and chisel; baby sleeps. Demosthenes, be dumb
—baby sleeps !
The woman who tickles a man’s palate, has a stronger
hold on him than the sentimental creature who merely
l touches his heart.
SHAKSPEARIUS RESTAURATUS.
A Mr. Samuel Bailey has written a book On the Received Text
\ of Shakspeare’s Dramatic Writings and its Improvement. Mr. Bailey,
; like many other critics of logical and limited intellect, runs his
! little head against that stone of offence to the correct dulness of
commentators, the “ gross inconsistency,” as he calls it, in the famous
I lines:—
“ Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And, by opposing, end them.”
Of this portion of the received text of Shakspeare’s dramatic
writings, Mr. Bailey proposes an improvement, which he thus
praises :—
“The emendation is not inferior in tone of thought or force of expression to what
it displaces, or to the context in which it is inserted. It does not relax the tension
of the soliloquy, notwithstanding its taking away what may be dear to the ear of
many an admirer, the sounding phrase, a sea of troubles."
Mr. Bailey may call a sea of troubles a sounding phrase, but others
j who can distinguish sense from sound feel it to be a grand metaphor.
How has “ a sea of troubles ” come to be a stock expression, Mr.
Bailey, if it is only a sounding phrase ? There is doubtless a bull in
the figure of speech which makes a man think “to take arms against”
an enemy so very impersonal as “ a sea of troubles; ” but would not a
bull be very likely to be made by anybody talking to himself in that
state of mind in which he would be when meditating the commission of
suicide ? Shakspeare’s text, as it stands above, evinces a natural
confusion of fine ideas. As improved by Martinus Scrlblerus—no,
by Samuel Bailey, it stands thus
“ Or, to take arms against the seat of troubles,
And, by a poniard, end them.”
| Quite correct. A great improvement on Shakspeare, no doubt, in
the opinion of every stolid pedant. The play of Hamlet with the part
of Hamlet left out is matched by the speech of Hamlet divested of
Hamlet’s poetry.
O Sam Bailey !—unfortunate Sam Bailey !
ENGLAND’S ILL-WISHERS.
Among Reuter’s telegrams the other day, there came from Paris
one, epitomising a speech in the Senate, which struck us with the force
of a flash of lightning, and we wonder that it had not produced on the
electric wire, through which it ran, the effect of fusion. According to
that thundering telegram :—
“ M. de Boissy regretted that Prance had assisted England in revenging herself
on the Chinese. He was of opinion that the money expended in the Crimea and in
Italy would have been better applied towards a descent upon England.”
M. le Marquis de Boissy is a violent Ultramontane, and his
religion, or the passion of abject servility to the Pope which supplies
the place of it, is the cause of his hatred to England. It is that which
inspires him with the wish that we might be robbed and murdered.
There are perhaps too many gentlemen of M. de Boissy’s persuasion
in the Erench Senate, and certainly there are too many in the British
House of Commons, unless it may be said that their ravings in either
assembly serve to disgust humanity with them and their cause. Should
Major Myles O’Reilly be returned for Longford, we shall rejoice to
see him exhibit an exceptional rationality.
Why do the Ultramontanes detest England so bitterly ? England has
not despoiled the Pope or persecuted his adherents in these times ; has
allowed them to talk as much nonsense and sedition as they chose, and
in her foreign policy has carefully let the Holy Eather alone. England
does not even enforce the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and there is no
other Act by which she can have given the Pope’s people any offence.
The offence, however, which that Act has given them is mortal, no doubt
because it was a defeat which has greatly damaged Papal consequence
and credit in Europe. Political wiseacres sneer at the Ecclesiastical
Titles Bill and its authors, but Ultramontanes curse them.
A “ SELECT ” JOKE.
We hear that the Grand New Joint Stock Library Company have at
last selected their motto. It is Sic transit gloria Mudi.
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[March 8, 1862.
Unsophisticated Uncle. “ Lupus Street, Lupus Street ? Down Pimlico way,
ain't it t ”
Nephew (shuddering). “ Nev-ar, my dear Sir—South Belgravia-h ! ”
A NECKLACE OF PEARLS.
For Morning and livening Wear.
Dancing is all important to a girl entering life. Ce
n’est que le premier pas [de danse') qui codte !
Give with discretion. It is not because it is less valuable
than pure gold, that women have a strong dislike to imita-
tion jewellery; but rather, because their highly sensitive
nature abhors a sham.
At sixteen a woman prefers the best dancer in the
room; at two-and-twenty, the best talker; at thirty tlie
richest man.
“ Love me, love my dog,” is old, and exploded. Love
me, love my milliner—is the modern version.
Accomplishments are more useful in married life, than
domestic qualities. The wife who sings divinely feeds the
Eride of her husband; whereas she who is only a hand at a
ght crust, merely contributes to his comfort. There are
wretches who ask why the hand that rattles off The Shower
of Pearls should be a stranger to pastry. Conceive Norma
dabbling with apple-dumplings!
The honeymoon is sober marriage tricked out in peacock
feathers.
To slave, and toil, and fret, is wretched woman’s lot.
She is ever dressing, lunching, receiving visitors, paying
visits; at ball, theatre, or rout— or, hapless creature,
doomed to spend an evening with her husband.
A gentleman who is courting a lady, is paying his re-
spectful addresses to her. Let the grocer’s man fall in love
with Betty at the area-gate, and he merely “ follows ” her.
“ Interesting events ” are occasions when a nurse takes
absolute possession of the house; and the husband sleeps
on the sofa.
Babies are the tvrauts of the world. The Emperor
must tread softly: baby sleeps. Mozart must hush his
nascent requiem-, baby sleeps. Phidias must drop his
hammer and chisel; baby sleeps. Demosthenes, be dumb
—baby sleeps !
The woman who tickles a man’s palate, has a stronger
hold on him than the sentimental creature who merely
l touches his heart.
SHAKSPEARIUS RESTAURATUS.
A Mr. Samuel Bailey has written a book On the Received Text
\ of Shakspeare’s Dramatic Writings and its Improvement. Mr. Bailey,
; like many other critics of logical and limited intellect, runs his
! little head against that stone of offence to the correct dulness of
commentators, the “ gross inconsistency,” as he calls it, in the famous
I lines:—
“ Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And, by opposing, end them.”
Of this portion of the received text of Shakspeare’s dramatic
writings, Mr. Bailey proposes an improvement, which he thus
praises :—
“The emendation is not inferior in tone of thought or force of expression to what
it displaces, or to the context in which it is inserted. It does not relax the tension
of the soliloquy, notwithstanding its taking away what may be dear to the ear of
many an admirer, the sounding phrase, a sea of troubles."
Mr. Bailey may call a sea of troubles a sounding phrase, but others
j who can distinguish sense from sound feel it to be a grand metaphor.
How has “ a sea of troubles ” come to be a stock expression, Mr.
Bailey, if it is only a sounding phrase ? There is doubtless a bull in
the figure of speech which makes a man think “to take arms against”
an enemy so very impersonal as “ a sea of troubles; ” but would not a
bull be very likely to be made by anybody talking to himself in that
state of mind in which he would be when meditating the commission of
suicide ? Shakspeare’s text, as it stands above, evinces a natural
confusion of fine ideas. As improved by Martinus Scrlblerus—no,
by Samuel Bailey, it stands thus
“ Or, to take arms against the seat of troubles,
And, by a poniard, end them.”
| Quite correct. A great improvement on Shakspeare, no doubt, in
the opinion of every stolid pedant. The play of Hamlet with the part
of Hamlet left out is matched by the speech of Hamlet divested of
Hamlet’s poetry.
O Sam Bailey !—unfortunate Sam Bailey !
ENGLAND’S ILL-WISHERS.
Among Reuter’s telegrams the other day, there came from Paris
one, epitomising a speech in the Senate, which struck us with the force
of a flash of lightning, and we wonder that it had not produced on the
electric wire, through which it ran, the effect of fusion. According to
that thundering telegram :—
“ M. de Boissy regretted that Prance had assisted England in revenging herself
on the Chinese. He was of opinion that the money expended in the Crimea and in
Italy would have been better applied towards a descent upon England.”
M. le Marquis de Boissy is a violent Ultramontane, and his
religion, or the passion of abject servility to the Pope which supplies
the place of it, is the cause of his hatred to England. It is that which
inspires him with the wish that we might be robbed and murdered.
There are perhaps too many gentlemen of M. de Boissy’s persuasion
in the Erench Senate, and certainly there are too many in the British
House of Commons, unless it may be said that their ravings in either
assembly serve to disgust humanity with them and their cause. Should
Major Myles O’Reilly be returned for Longford, we shall rejoice to
see him exhibit an exceptional rationality.
Why do the Ultramontanes detest England so bitterly ? England has
not despoiled the Pope or persecuted his adherents in these times ; has
allowed them to talk as much nonsense and sedition as they chose, and
in her foreign policy has carefully let the Holy Eather alone. England
does not even enforce the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and there is no
other Act by which she can have given the Pope’s people any offence.
The offence, however, which that Act has given them is mortal, no doubt
because it was a defeat which has greatly damaged Papal consequence
and credit in Europe. Political wiseacres sneer at the Ecclesiastical
Titles Bill and its authors, but Ultramontanes curse them.
A “ SELECT ” JOKE.
We hear that the Grand New Joint Stock Library Company have at
last selected their motto. It is Sic transit gloria Mudi.