Punch (44.1863)

Jtms 20 1863.] PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.

249

Front and Back view of a very Curious Animal that ivas seen going about loose the other day.
It has been named by Dr. Gunther “ Elephans Photographieus.”

A QUESTION FOR THE KING OF
PRUSSIA.

What wants a King, that lie may reign
Without a Constitution,

And gag the Press if it complain.

Yet fear no revolution,

His realm though he should isolate
^ From each enlightened nation,
Subserving one barbaric state
With base co-operation?

He wants an army staunch and strong,
Resistance prompt to stifle,

Support him, and enforce his wrong
With bayonet and rifle.

Obey their Monarch’s will as law
Superior to all other.

The trigger at his bidding draw,

And shoot down sire and brother.

He wants dragoons, to override
Their kinsmen, friends, and neighbours,
And right divine, by homicide
Impose with ready sabres;

And wealth he wants, to keep in pay
His host of gladiators,

And hold them true to him as they
To Fatherland are traitors.

To keep disfranchised subjects down,

O Majesty of Prussia!

Whilst you with law below your crown,
Betray the Poles to Russia,

May give the army you require
Some work; and you may rue it:

Have you one big enough, then, Sire,

And base enough to do it ?

PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.

June 8. Monday. A Polish debate in the Lords. The Earl op
Ellenborough demanded information as to the state of the negotiations
respecting Poland, and did not think the question premature, as the
rebellion which the Emperor had ordered his soldiers to put down in
ten days had lasted four months and a half, and was extending. The
Earl made an eloquent speech in behalf of Poland, and declared his
belief that she could never have a good Government under a foreign
despot. The Foreign Secretary said that France and England had
agreed upon proposals to be made to Russia, and that these were waiting
the approval of Austria. He therefore deprecated present discussion.
But, as Lord Ellenborough said, diplomatists are writing, while
Cossacks are massacring. The Duke of Rutland thought Lord
Ellenborough “hasty.” Dukes are usually slow, except when
running for stars and garters. Lord Brougham thought the Emperor
a good man, and that he ought to give an independent constitution to
Poland. The Great Eltchi, Lord Stratford, whose opinion is worth
that of several tons of dukes, did not see the value to Poland of the
Emperor’s alleged goodness, and was strongly in favour of an imme-
diate settlement ot the Polish question. Lord Denman talked
nonsense, as usual, and said that he did not speak to be reported, for
lie despised newspaper reports, but he was reported, nevertheless,
because a newspaper is bound to record everything from Denmanism
up to donkey-races, and Earl Grey, K.G. expectant, was dissatisfied
I with everything. Echoes of some of these speeches will ring round
Europe.

The ultra Protestant party opposed the Bill for sending Roman
Catholic chaplains to instruct Roman Catholic prisoners, but the Earl
of Derby, professing the greatest respect for the foolish opinions
of h is noble friends, argued at some length and with great fearlessness,
in favour of the Bill—could not shut his eyes to the fact that the
foundations of the Protestant and Catholic religions were the same,
and insisted upon the right of criminals to spiritual instruction. He
gave, he said, a conscientious and cordial vote for the Second Reading.
Mr. Punch was sorry to see Bishop Tait on the other side, and
imputing to the promoters of the measure a desire to conciliate Irish
politicians. The Tories may be playing this game, but the Bill is a
just one. Lord Derby’s adhesion of course settled the result, and
the Bill was read a Second Time by 65 to 30.

On the motion for Supply, Mr. Gregory moved the opening of the
Edinburgh Botanic Gardens on Sundays, after Service. The Lord
Advocate said, that the opinion of Scotland was against the step, and
also that the gardens, being two miles from Auld Reekie, and strictly
botanical, would not be available for the class who were supposed to

desire the opening. Mr. Stirling took the opposite view, and showed
that 36,000 adult males had petitioned for the opening, while the coun-
ter-petition had been signed by numbers of women and children. He
also inflicted a sharp rebuke on Candlish, whom he named The Frantic
Divine (an adhesive label), for his abuse of the Queen’s inscription on
the Albert Cairn. Dr. Candlish, by the way, seems not to know
that the Queen is the Head of the Church, and has taken the apocrypha
verse from a book whence the Church takes many of her Lessons for the
Day, so that the attack upon the Sovereign is absurd as well as imper-
tinent. Mr. Duff supported and Mr. Black opposed the opening,
and Mr. Kinnaird, also opposing, stated that the Edinburgh people
were not nearly so drunken as was supposed. If so, they deserw praise,
for there is no place where you can easily get such good liquor After
some other speeches. Lord Palmerston said that he thought tue open-
ing would be a good thing, but that as there was no doubt that the
feeling of Scotland was against it, there was no necessity for acceding to
the motion. It was put, and lost by 123 to 107. Then there was a
long debate on Sir Edwin Landseer and the Possible Lions, and Mr.
Cowper urged that genius ought not to be hurried, and that something
very good would come if Sir Edwin were allowed to satisfy himself
with his own work. Mr. Stirling assented to this liberal and gentle-
manly view, but thought that Sir Edwin, like the lions, would be none
the worse for being occasionally poked up.

Tuesday. Lord Cranworth opposed the Bill for Flogging Street
Ruffians, and talked about a panic. Lord Wodehouse supported it as
an experiment, as nobody could sympathise with the parties to be
operated on. Lord Granville thought that it would not be safe to
oppose the Bill, as the whip had been used on the promoters. Lord
Hardwicke, an old salt, explained, we presume for the information of
gaolers, that long lashes on a long handle were the things to use, short
handles and lashes being useless. Friends who, we hope, will keep at a
distance, will please accept this intimation that the former arrangement
will be adopted. The Bill was read a Second Time.

The Commons treated themselves to a theological debate. Mr.
Buxton wished to relieve the clergy from subscription—(by the way,
if the clergy would relieve the laity from subscription, instead of sending
us by every other post demands for money, perforated cards, petitions
for “ One Bob for a Building Fund,” and similar begging letters, it
would keep our waste-paper baskets emptier)—from subscription to
the Articles and Prayer Book. There was a good debate. The alle-
gation was, that this necessity of signature kept men out of the Church.
The answer was, that men were kept out by the fact that so much more
money was to be made in other professions. Mr. Gladstone had no
idea of relaxing the rule, and letting parsons preach what they chose,
for he said, “ the Liberty of the Clergy is the Slavery of the Laity.”