Punch (43.1862)

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.

105

September 13, 1S62.


A PARLIAMENT OF PUMPS.

observe that at a meet-
ing of the officious noodles
constituting the Interna-
tional Temperance and
Prohibition Conference,
assembled at the Hanover
Square Rooms, in the
course of the much speak-
ing by which those fussy
busybodies exposed their
folly, the following espe-
cially remarkable absur-
dities were uttered. Ac-
cording to report, in a
paper by the Dean of Car-
lisle on “Legislation on
the Liquor Traffic,” sug-
gested by the House of
Commons in 1834, which
was read by the Rev.
Canon Jenkins

“ The dean said that time had
exaggerated a hundredfold the
reasons for legislation which
existed in 1834.”

Considering the noto-
rious decrease of drunken-
ness which has taken place
during the last eight-and-
twenty years, Dean Close evinced little judgment in asserting that time had exaggerated the
reasons for legislation on the liquor trade. The less Close says about exaggeration of those
reasons the better. Time tells only the truth. We also read that

“ Mr. Haughton, of Dublin, could not understand on what principle of logic or common sense after
hundreds of Acts of Parliament, men could seek a continuance of restrictive measures.”

So far so wise. One wonders to hear such reason from the mouth of a teetotaller. One
thinks one has met with a sensible advocate of temperance. But in the very next sentence
Mr. Haeghton bewrayeth himself:—

“ They must have free-trade or prohibition—he said the latter.”

Anybody endowed with the least logic or common sense would say the former. If hundreds
of restrictive Acts of Parliament have failed, the presumption is, that a prohibitive Act of
Parliament would succeed no better. But Mr. Haughton comes from Dublin. A less
rational gentleman never came from Cork with his coat buttoned hind-part-before.

Teetotal Ireland having spoken by the mouth of Mr. Haughton :—

“ Dr. Fiqg, of Scotland, asked if it was not inconsistent with equity and British law that persons convicted
of crime committed whilst they were intoxicated should be subjected to punishment, and whether they ought
not to be treated as lunatics ? ”

Equity, Dr. Figg, has no jurisdiction in cases of drunkenness, and though the Lord
Chancellor may direct the disposal of a lunatic’s property, the Magistrate only can order an

investment, on the part of the drunkard, in the
Stocks. Drunken persons ought not to be
treated as lunatics when they get sober, and
whilst they are drunk they are liable to get shut
up as it is (as Mr. Punch has elsewhere recom-
mended that they should be). It is not only
consistent with British law, but it is a British
law-maxim, that drunkenness is no excuse for a
crime, but aggravates the offence. A very im-
becile person, who talks idiotic twaddle, ought
to be taken care of equally with a sot affected
with delirium tremens. Thou art answered, Figg,
according to thy figgery. A fico for thee, Figg !

The Bev. F. Bishop, speaking of the Maine
Law in Yankeedom, said that:—

“ The law was enforced at Worcester. He attended a
military festival there, at which sentiments were spoken
to without wine being drunk, and all the officers assem-
bled at breakfast next morning fr*e from headache.”

Wonderful! Does Mr. Bishop imagine that
officers are generally accustomed to get drunk at
military festivals overnight, and come down to
breakfast with a headache next morning ? And
are total abstainers never troubled with head-
aches—even after having listened to a long speech
made by a simpleton F

A dreadful witticism was perpetrated by
another reverend gent:—

“ The Rev. H. Gall objected to the disfranchisement of
publicans, which contemplated their existence, which it
was intended to terminate. (Laughter.)''

Mr. Gall apparently proposes to terminate
the existence of the publicans by starvation.
O Gall, thou didst make a bitter bad joke, and
art, indeed, the very gall of bitterness! Thou
also, Gall, art answered according to thy
quality.

After the inanities above quoted, we are happy
to present our readers with a bit of 1'ud, related
very seriously by a Mr. Sinclair:—

“ In explanation of the fact that liquors could be
obtained at Delavan House, New York, he said that Mr.
Delavan had let the house on a lease which stipulated
that intoxicating drinks should not be sold there, but the
tenant evaded the terms of the lease by purchasing the
next house and making a communication between them. ”

He knocked a hole through the wall. So, let
Mr. Sinclair and his allies be well assured, will
a coach-and-six, or a railway-train, be driven
through any Act of Parliament, bearing on the
liquor law, which interferes with the liberty of
the subject.

A TEMPTING OFFER FOR THE MILLION.

Here is an advertisement that has been running about the French
and English newspapers. It beats in coolness any day that we have
had this extra-hyperborean summer:—

WO BE SOLD, for 10,000,000 francs, the chef d’ceuvre of Raffaele and
-L of painting, an unknown original, representing the DEATH of ST. JOSEPH.
LThe person icho first ofiers the price demanded will possess the picture without competition.
The right of reproduction will be disposed of separately. On view at Paris, at the

Galerie -, 17, from 1 till 9 o'clock every day, except Sunday. Monday and

Thursday will be reserved for those who, wishing to see the picture at leisure, but
without exceeding half an hour, will pay five francs for admission.

•

We advise, therefore, all those who have 10,000,000 francs to spare,
not to lose a moment’s time, but to make an offer at once. He who
comes first will have the honour of being knocked down first. If the
second bidder were to make an advance of one, or two millions, his
offer would be indignantly rejected. The “competition” to possess
it is already so great, that if you hesitate one tidal train, the picture
may be for ever snatched from you. So attractive are its charms, that
you are not allowed to admire it for more than half an hour at a time.
Tarry one ecstatic minute longer, and you are infallibly charged an extra
five francs. If we hadn’t been to Paris already eight times this year,
we would rush over incontinently, without waiting to kiss the children or
say good-bye to Judy, purposely to see the chef d’oeuvre. It is true that

Moss. Paul de Saint "Victor says that the picture in question is not
worth 40 francs, but then Mons. Paul is an art-critic who does not
understand anything about it. It is very clear that he hasn’t ten
millions of francs to give, and, therefore, in his rage at not being able
to possess the invaluable treasure, he does his shabbiest to depreciate
it. It is the usual spite of the world. In our opinion, we have not the
slightest doubt that this highly-priced tableau, is in fact priceless—that
it is par excellence one of those master-pieces that no money can

purchase, and what is more, never will. If it is equal to the advertise-
ment, it must be a master-piece of the very highest colouring that
we are sure, cannot be matched for its boldness and daring effects all
over the world.

JUMP OUT OF THE BAG, PUSS !

“ President Lincoln has replied to Mr. Horace Greeley’s recent letter to him.
He says that he is emphatically for union, and that he would retain or destroy
slavery wholly or in part if union could be obtained by either means.”

This is what Lincoln writes to Horace,

Somebody make a glossary for us,

Ignorant owls we are:

For the North has been ranting, raving, blaring,

Scolding, swaggering, cussing, swearing,

Because Britannia was not sharing
In the Anti-Slavery War.

Bruin at Large.

In a list of fashionable intelligence we meet with the announcement
that:—

“ Prince Menschikoff has left C'^aridge’s Hotel for Germany.”

Left Claridge’s Hotel, has he? We thought that Menschikoff
had been staying in the Zoological Gardens.

A MATERIAL DISTINCTION.

Business and occupation are not synonymous terms.. The French
persist in the occupation of Rome; but they have no business there.