DOI issue:
March 22, 1862
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16869#0120
112
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[March 22, 1862.
feelings of the idle, dirty, lounging, gaping crowd that chokes up our
courts of justice, instead of minding its own business, which is, primd
facie, to wash itself. Lord Shaftesbury defended the Bill, and
sensibly, except that he contended that it was no proof of folly to sub-
scribe to a society for converting the Jews. Then came out Lord
Westbury in defence of his Bill, and charged Lord Chelmsford, and
his friends, with short memories, for objecting to the provision for
trying lunatics by Judges, when the same provision was introduced into
a Bill brought forward by Sir BLu&h Cairns when Lord Derby’s
law-officer. Lord Derby instantly retorted that the charge was un-
founded, and that the Chancellor’s Bill was peremptory, whereas Sir
Hugh’s was permissive only. There was some smart sparring, Lord
Westbury accusing Lord Derby of speaking on “imperfect infor-
mation.”
“ Friends meet to part. Love laughs at faith.
True foes, onee met, are joined till”
the next meeting of the upper division of the legislature. The Bill was
read a Second Time.
At length the Chinese Rebels are to be prevented from destroying
every place they can lay their hands on. They have ruined one of our
Treaty Ports, Ningpo, though the cruel dastards could have been blown
into Tartarus by a lew volleys from our marines. But now that they
threaten Shanghai, orders have been given, as Mr. Layard stated
to-night, that this place, which contains millions of British property, shall
be protected. The strange inconsistency which drives off these
scoundrels at one time, and at another permits every outrage, is only to
be explained by the fact that China is a long way off, and therefore it is
lucky that the new telegraph is likely to bring it a good deal nearer.
Lord Robert Montagu is a conscientious man, and is touched by
J the fact that though Parliament pretends to look after the public money,
j it really does not. He is also a man of the world, and knowing that
you might just as well expect Honourable Members’ wives to give up
crinoline (until ordered to do so by their milliners) as to expect
Honourable Members to give up their time to watching the disposal of
such money, he evasively proposes to appoint a Committee to do the
duty supposed to be done by the House, and to revise the accounts and
estimates. Needless to say that all the Men of Business were up in
arms, Sir F. Baring, Fred. Peel, Gladstone, all opposing the plan,
or that it was rejected by 96 to 31. Natheless, despite the men of
business, there was a good deal to be said in its favour, and one of these
days it will be discovered that amid all the complex machinery for
managing the national accounts, there is a Missing Link somewhere,
and that John Bull is done a good deal browner than is supposed.
Then began a solemn debate, originated by Mr. Horsfall, who is a
Conservative mercantile Candidate, and who will have the support of
the Cobden and Bright party—perhaps some other support, if Mr.
Disraeli sees fit to extend it. The question is one of International
Maritime Law. Privateering has been abolished—the abolition being
confirmed by the Declaration of Paris in 1856, to which Seven European
Powers are parties, but not America. Tne neutral flag covers an
j Enemy’s goods, except contraband of war, and the Enemy’s flag protects
| neutral goods, with the same exception. Now just remember this,
| Cox, because it is a bore to have to be always explaining to you that a
neutral bottom does not mean the bottom of the sea around neutral
! ground, and that a privateer does not mean the Private Tier of boxes.
1 Now, observe^ Mr. Horsfall, for Liverpool, and Messrs. Cobden
and Bright for others who recognise nothing except the interests of
trade, desire to go further, and propose that private property of au
enemy shall not be taken out of an enemy’s ship. Do you see what
this means ? It means that Britannia, who rules the waves, shall not
rule them any more, and that it shall cease to be any concern of any-
body’s save the professional combatants, whether war goes on or does
not. Lord Palmerston declared that the principle, if carried out,
■ would deal a fatal blow to the naval power of England, and be an act
| of political suicide So it was arranged to have a long debate on the
| subject, and the following Monday was fixed for that event, Mr.
Cobden “ having the floor.”
Wednesday. The Wife’s Sister was disposed of. The Widower is
{ not to marry her. There was a short debate. Mr. Monsell stated
his view of the marriage tie in the language of the poet,—
“ Wedded love with loyal Christian lady is a mystery rare,
Body, heart, and soul in union make one loving pair.”
but lie didn’t say whether “rare” meant “seldom found,” or
| “ exalted,” nor did he explain the difference between a loving pear and
a love-apple, though be talked some other nonsense, and instanced, as
! a possible result of an alteration of the present marriage laws, a case
j like that of the gentleman in Prussia, who sat down to play whist with
I his wife and two other ladies who had been his wives. As he was
quoting hereby without any particular application, he should have
cited from Sir Bulwer Lytton touching tins interesting partie carre,
j “ In the game called Woman
Diamonds are always Trumps for Hearts."
Sir William Jollitfe gave support to the Bill, Mr. Gregson said
that a million had petitioned for it, and only 110,000 against it, and
then the House threw it out by 116 to 118.
Mr. Bouverie brought in a Bill for relieving a clergyman, who
should happen to turn Dissenter, from his canonical obligations. At
present a Bishop can serve out such a schismatic rather severely. By
all means relieve conscience from all carnal fetters, but we suspect that if
a Bill could be passed for allowing Dissenting ministers to become
clergymen somewhat more simply than now, the Church would gain a
good many more recruits than it will lose by the above Bill. The fact
is that Dissent is not genteel, and Churchism is, and when a man gets
on in the world, and marries a lady, they find out that they owe it to their
family to get among the superior classes. Can’t the Bishops see this ?
Thursday — Lords Derby and Westbury went at it again, and after
some very sharp exchanges on both sides, delivered with the utmost
malice and suavity, Lord Westbury reproving the Lords for not
being able to sit still while he was speaking, and Lord Derby ironi-
cally observing that the Chancellor could not speak from imperfect
information, Lord Westbury felt compelled to allow that “ a small
ovation” was due to the Earl. This is the first turn-up that has
occurred between the two most fearless fighters and hardest hitters in
the House, and gives promise of much sport for the legislatorial Fancy.
The Commons availed themselves of Sir G. C. Lewis’s polite invi-
tation, and rescinded their vote against Sandhurst. Mr. C. Fortes-
cue explained that a system of local self-government is to be given to
the New Zealanders, and Mr. Henley, in speaking of education, venti-
lated an epigram of his own, describing tne present system as “ Cram and
Sham,” which was not so bad for our old friend Grumble and Stumble.
Friday. A short and decorous debate on the Revised Code. Lord
St. Leonards does not like the grouping of children by age, for
examination, and the Bishop of London thinks that there should be
two grants, one based on examination, the other on attendance. The
Bishop said that he knew much of the state of public feeling, and
believed it had undergone a great change, lately, in favour of the
Revised Code, which, with some modifications, would be perfectly
satisfactory. Such testimony is simply invaluable, and should settle
the question for all clerical malcontents—of course it must be fought
out with persons who make it a money discussion.
The Miscellanea of Friday night did not comprise much interesting
matter. Mr. Layard declined to ask the Italian Government any
more questions as to whether the Emperor of the French was trying
to obtain Italian territory, as satisfactory assurance to the contrary
had been already given. Mr. Layard also had an opportunity of de-
claring his belief that Turkey was going on well, that the new Sultan
was a wise man, that the finances of the country might easily be placed
in a sound condition, and that the Turks were honest men. “ He had
great hopes for Turkey.” An excessively unsatisfactory statement was
made by the Attorney-General on the subject of the Consolidation of
the Law, and we doubt whether i hree per cent, of our Acts will be
wiped out, so as to qualify the Statute Book to be called the Three Per
Cent. Legal Consols. Lord Palmerston regretted that the bigotry
of the Spanish priests prevented any successful interference for certain
Protestants who had been thrown into prison in Spain. We rather
think, however, that these unfortunate individuals had really been
breaking the laws of their country by reading the Bible to congrega-
tions, large or small, and though such a ground for imprisonment is
shocking to us, we ought to place ourselves in the position of a nation,
with a faith which a certain preaching is calculated to bring into con-
tempt. The Bible describes Popery as a lie. Are the Pope’s servants
impolitic or illogical in preventing the Bible froifi being read P Finally,
Mr. Cowper brought in a Bill for providing money for building new
Courts of Justice between the Strand and Carey Street. Have we uot
heard of something of this kind before ?
A Printing-House of Correction.
“ There is but one Journalist in France (said M. Jules Favre), and
that is the Emperor.” He is sometimes known, also, by the name of
“ Monsieur Communique.” However, not only is Louis Napoleon
a Journalist in his way, but he is likewise a Printer on the very largest
scale, for no one possesses in France to the same extent as himself the
power of stopping the press whenever he likes. But then this must be
said in the Emperor’s favour, he never thinks of stopping the press,
unless it is with the humane object of correcting it.
In more senses than one, Louis Napoleon is the Moniteur of
France.
“The Schoolmaster’s Abroad.”
At the time of his going, (and the Schoolmaster has been absent now
so long, that we fancy it is nigh time he returned home), he wrote in
chalk over his door:—“Back again in an Educational Minute.”
However, that minute, like a lady’s, when she says she won’t be a
minute putting on her bonnet, is such a precious long one, that we
confess we have nearly lost all patience in waiting.
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[March 22, 1862.
feelings of the idle, dirty, lounging, gaping crowd that chokes up our
courts of justice, instead of minding its own business, which is, primd
facie, to wash itself. Lord Shaftesbury defended the Bill, and
sensibly, except that he contended that it was no proof of folly to sub-
scribe to a society for converting the Jews. Then came out Lord
Westbury in defence of his Bill, and charged Lord Chelmsford, and
his friends, with short memories, for objecting to the provision for
trying lunatics by Judges, when the same provision was introduced into
a Bill brought forward by Sir BLu&h Cairns when Lord Derby’s
law-officer. Lord Derby instantly retorted that the charge was un-
founded, and that the Chancellor’s Bill was peremptory, whereas Sir
Hugh’s was permissive only. There was some smart sparring, Lord
Westbury accusing Lord Derby of speaking on “imperfect infor-
mation.”
“ Friends meet to part. Love laughs at faith.
True foes, onee met, are joined till”
the next meeting of the upper division of the legislature. The Bill was
read a Second Time.
At length the Chinese Rebels are to be prevented from destroying
every place they can lay their hands on. They have ruined one of our
Treaty Ports, Ningpo, though the cruel dastards could have been blown
into Tartarus by a lew volleys from our marines. But now that they
threaten Shanghai, orders have been given, as Mr. Layard stated
to-night, that this place, which contains millions of British property, shall
be protected. The strange inconsistency which drives off these
scoundrels at one time, and at another permits every outrage, is only to
be explained by the fact that China is a long way off, and therefore it is
lucky that the new telegraph is likely to bring it a good deal nearer.
Lord Robert Montagu is a conscientious man, and is touched by
J the fact that though Parliament pretends to look after the public money,
j it really does not. He is also a man of the world, and knowing that
you might just as well expect Honourable Members’ wives to give up
crinoline (until ordered to do so by their milliners) as to expect
Honourable Members to give up their time to watching the disposal of
such money, he evasively proposes to appoint a Committee to do the
duty supposed to be done by the House, and to revise the accounts and
estimates. Needless to say that all the Men of Business were up in
arms, Sir F. Baring, Fred. Peel, Gladstone, all opposing the plan,
or that it was rejected by 96 to 31. Natheless, despite the men of
business, there was a good deal to be said in its favour, and one of these
days it will be discovered that amid all the complex machinery for
managing the national accounts, there is a Missing Link somewhere,
and that John Bull is done a good deal browner than is supposed.
Then began a solemn debate, originated by Mr. Horsfall, who is a
Conservative mercantile Candidate, and who will have the support of
the Cobden and Bright party—perhaps some other support, if Mr.
Disraeli sees fit to extend it. The question is one of International
Maritime Law. Privateering has been abolished—the abolition being
confirmed by the Declaration of Paris in 1856, to which Seven European
Powers are parties, but not America. Tne neutral flag covers an
j Enemy’s goods, except contraband of war, and the Enemy’s flag protects
| neutral goods, with the same exception. Now just remember this,
| Cox, because it is a bore to have to be always explaining to you that a
neutral bottom does not mean the bottom of the sea around neutral
! ground, and that a privateer does not mean the Private Tier of boxes.
1 Now, observe^ Mr. Horsfall, for Liverpool, and Messrs. Cobden
and Bright for others who recognise nothing except the interests of
trade, desire to go further, and propose that private property of au
enemy shall not be taken out of an enemy’s ship. Do you see what
this means ? It means that Britannia, who rules the waves, shall not
rule them any more, and that it shall cease to be any concern of any-
body’s save the professional combatants, whether war goes on or does
not. Lord Palmerston declared that the principle, if carried out,
■ would deal a fatal blow to the naval power of England, and be an act
| of political suicide So it was arranged to have a long debate on the
| subject, and the following Monday was fixed for that event, Mr.
Cobden “ having the floor.”
Wednesday. The Wife’s Sister was disposed of. The Widower is
{ not to marry her. There was a short debate. Mr. Monsell stated
his view of the marriage tie in the language of the poet,—
“ Wedded love with loyal Christian lady is a mystery rare,
Body, heart, and soul in union make one loving pair.”
but lie didn’t say whether “rare” meant “seldom found,” or
| “ exalted,” nor did he explain the difference between a loving pear and
a love-apple, though be talked some other nonsense, and instanced, as
! a possible result of an alteration of the present marriage laws, a case
j like that of the gentleman in Prussia, who sat down to play whist with
I his wife and two other ladies who had been his wives. As he was
quoting hereby without any particular application, he should have
cited from Sir Bulwer Lytton touching tins interesting partie carre,
j “ In the game called Woman
Diamonds are always Trumps for Hearts."
Sir William Jollitfe gave support to the Bill, Mr. Gregson said
that a million had petitioned for it, and only 110,000 against it, and
then the House threw it out by 116 to 118.
Mr. Bouverie brought in a Bill for relieving a clergyman, who
should happen to turn Dissenter, from his canonical obligations. At
present a Bishop can serve out such a schismatic rather severely. By
all means relieve conscience from all carnal fetters, but we suspect that if
a Bill could be passed for allowing Dissenting ministers to become
clergymen somewhat more simply than now, the Church would gain a
good many more recruits than it will lose by the above Bill. The fact
is that Dissent is not genteel, and Churchism is, and when a man gets
on in the world, and marries a lady, they find out that they owe it to their
family to get among the superior classes. Can’t the Bishops see this ?
Thursday — Lords Derby and Westbury went at it again, and after
some very sharp exchanges on both sides, delivered with the utmost
malice and suavity, Lord Westbury reproving the Lords for not
being able to sit still while he was speaking, and Lord Derby ironi-
cally observing that the Chancellor could not speak from imperfect
information, Lord Westbury felt compelled to allow that “ a small
ovation” was due to the Earl. This is the first turn-up that has
occurred between the two most fearless fighters and hardest hitters in
the House, and gives promise of much sport for the legislatorial Fancy.
The Commons availed themselves of Sir G. C. Lewis’s polite invi-
tation, and rescinded their vote against Sandhurst. Mr. C. Fortes-
cue explained that a system of local self-government is to be given to
the New Zealanders, and Mr. Henley, in speaking of education, venti-
lated an epigram of his own, describing tne present system as “ Cram and
Sham,” which was not so bad for our old friend Grumble and Stumble.
Friday. A short and decorous debate on the Revised Code. Lord
St. Leonards does not like the grouping of children by age, for
examination, and the Bishop of London thinks that there should be
two grants, one based on examination, the other on attendance. The
Bishop said that he knew much of the state of public feeling, and
believed it had undergone a great change, lately, in favour of the
Revised Code, which, with some modifications, would be perfectly
satisfactory. Such testimony is simply invaluable, and should settle
the question for all clerical malcontents—of course it must be fought
out with persons who make it a money discussion.
The Miscellanea of Friday night did not comprise much interesting
matter. Mr. Layard declined to ask the Italian Government any
more questions as to whether the Emperor of the French was trying
to obtain Italian territory, as satisfactory assurance to the contrary
had been already given. Mr. Layard also had an opportunity of de-
claring his belief that Turkey was going on well, that the new Sultan
was a wise man, that the finances of the country might easily be placed
in a sound condition, and that the Turks were honest men. “ He had
great hopes for Turkey.” An excessively unsatisfactory statement was
made by the Attorney-General on the subject of the Consolidation of
the Law, and we doubt whether i hree per cent, of our Acts will be
wiped out, so as to qualify the Statute Book to be called the Three Per
Cent. Legal Consols. Lord Palmerston regretted that the bigotry
of the Spanish priests prevented any successful interference for certain
Protestants who had been thrown into prison in Spain. We rather
think, however, that these unfortunate individuals had really been
breaking the laws of their country by reading the Bible to congrega-
tions, large or small, and though such a ground for imprisonment is
shocking to us, we ought to place ourselves in the position of a nation,
with a faith which a certain preaching is calculated to bring into con-
tempt. The Bible describes Popery as a lie. Are the Pope’s servants
impolitic or illogical in preventing the Bible froifi being read P Finally,
Mr. Cowper brought in a Bill for providing money for building new
Courts of Justice between the Strand and Carey Street. Have we uot
heard of something of this kind before ?
A Printing-House of Correction.
“ There is but one Journalist in France (said M. Jules Favre), and
that is the Emperor.” He is sometimes known, also, by the name of
“ Monsieur Communique.” However, not only is Louis Napoleon
a Journalist in his way, but he is likewise a Printer on the very largest
scale, for no one possesses in France to the same extent as himself the
power of stopping the press whenever he likes. But then this must be
said in the Emperor’s favour, he never thinks of stopping the press,
unless it is with the humane object of correcting it.
In more senses than one, Louis Napoleon is the Moniteur of
France.
“The Schoolmaster’s Abroad.”
At the time of his going, (and the Schoolmaster has been absent now
so long, that we fancy it is nigh time he returned home), he wrote in
chalk over his door:—“Back again in an Educational Minute.”
However, that minute, like a lady’s, when she says she won’t be a
minute putting on her bonnet, is such a precious long one, that we
confess we have nearly lost all patience in waiting.