DOI issue:
July 23, 1864
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16874#0047
July 23, 1864.]
PUNCH OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
39
gherita, you will hardly grudge a crowu to see Mbs. Charles Mathews,
and note the points wherein her conception of the character differs from
your pet’s. Moreover, you will find that her husband gives a thoroughly
new reading to the part of Mephistopheles, quite distinct from that
attempted by Gassier or Faure : and, as a further tempting novelty,
you will in Faust at the St. James’s, find the Foodie introduced, whom,
out of reverence for Gothe, Toby was particularly pleased and proud
to see.
As to the Princess’s play, it is certainly worth seeing, if only to rub
up one’s Spanish history a bit, and improve one’s acquaintance with
King Philip the Second and his father, Charles the Fifth. If,
from glancing at the playbill, you expect to see some likeness in his
Majesty, King Philip, to the actor, Mr. Vising, you will certainly be
disappointed, for, except perhaps in voice, there is no resemblance
whatever to be traced. The King looks as if he had been framed as his
own portrait, and had walked out of his frame, so like a fine old Spanish
picture does he look. Au reste, Ma’ahselle Stella Colas is a
graceful little person, and her attitudes are always pleasant to behold.
But though her admirers doubtless like to see as much of her as possible,
Me should not have been tempted to play two parts at once, for it
needlessly fatigues her, and must perplex the pit. I don’t want to find
fault though, for both parts suit her very well; and I very much prefer
to see her in a piece where (your pardon, Mr. French Author) the words
are of small consequence, than to see her make a talking ballet-girl of
Juliet, and to hear the charming poetry of Shakspeare spoiled by a
French accent and a somewhat mouthing voice.
One who Pays.
THE GREAT RESTORATIVE PARTY.
To Lord John Manners.
ONSERVATIVE
Lord, — Now the
Vote of Censure
has broken down,
allow me to tell your
Lordship what. Our
party must be re-
organised. We must
return to the old
ways. In the first
place, let us drop the
name of Conserva-
tives. What does
it mean ? Conserva-
tives of what ? Of
things as they are ?
Why then we con-
serve all the Liberal
legislation of the
last five-and-thirty
years. Conserve
roses and apricots !
Conserve my eye!
I call myself sim-
ply a Tory; always
did, always shall.
I don’t want to con-
serve the whole of
the present state of
things, by any
means. I wish to
rescind all of it that
is the work of Whigs and Radicals. In fact I may say I would if I
i could abolish the best part of it.
The so-called Conservative Party may get into office by a turn of
: luck, but it will never stay there. No party can keep in place now
except by concession to popular demands. The only difference between
j the Conservative and Liberal parties is, that the former party does that
with a bad grace, and the latter with a good grace. It must of course
be the favourite of the two.
Office is at least as hopeless for truckling trimming Conservatives as
it is for old Tories. But since we can’t get place, let us stand by our
principles. If all is lost but honour, we may anyhow as well keep
honour. Conservatives are upholding the very measures which they
denounced and opposed with all their might only the other day ! I call
that tergiversation. I say it is disgraceful. We may own that we have
been beaten, but ought to maintain that we were in the right. Let us
assert boldly that we were, and are, and always have been. They ask
what our policy is ? Let our straightforward answer be :—“ A retro-
grade policy.” Let us boldly proclaim that we desire to reverse all the
measures that our predecessors opposed ; restore the Test and Corpo-
ration Acts, repeal Catholic Emancipation and Reform, re-enact the
Corn Laws, re-establish Protection at large, exclude Dissenters again
from the Universities altogether, and subject all national education to
the Established Church.
If we cannot be content with the good old-fashioned name of Tories,
we might also call ourselves Restoratives; our avowed design being
the restoration, if possible, of the good old times.
My proposal is not Quixotic at all. I don’t expect that we shall
get into office, professing the objects and intentions which I avow.
But we have a better chance than your sneaking Conservatives.
America is going to the bad, the Continent of Europe, where not in
anarchy, is under oppression. Englishmen are frightened; reform has been
dropped ; reaction has begun ; it may end in the reascent of Toryism.
The prosperity of the country under Liberal Government is an insu-
perable fact to us at present; but prosperity is eating up the land • and
in the meanwhile benefits nobody but the commercial classes and the
common people. The dearness of butcher’s meat is owing to the rise
of wages ; and there are plenty of people who are sick of a prosperity
which is that of others. Prosperity will some day end in a crash. Let
us bide our time. Disraeli may not seem to see all this; very well,
then, we must depose him, and find another Ben whose Christian
name may be John, if your Lordship is of the same mind with your
humble servant,
Gatton Club, July, 1864. Megatherium.
ENGLAND AND THE ENEMY.
If you are, as you think yourselves, Europe’s Police,
Interfere with strong hand, and enforce Europe’s peace.
You ’re a pretty Policeman, John Bull, to allow
Those two fellows out yonder to kick up that row.
Ah ! yes, much, no doubt, old one, ’twould answer your ends
If I did put a stop to those games of your friends.
But one can’t collar two, and you know I should find
There’s another of your lot those parties behind.
That is all a pretence to excuse standing by.
Two to one ? Pack of stuff. Isn’t France your ally P
Of your backing out only Napoleon’s afraid;
If you ’ll go the whole hog, France will give you her aid.
Come, I say, now, you, whom I renounce and defy,
Do you think that you see any green in my eye ?
What a nice course is that you would have me pursue,
France does nothing for nothing as strictly as you.
Didn’t Yictok-Emmanui-l Napoleon employ?
And what had he to pay for it ? Nice and Savoy.
Let a generous idea your counsels inspire.
You have no end of guns, but you won’t open fire.
Though the weak are attacked, you exert not your might.
You have ships, you have soldiers, now why don’t you fight P
Either fight or disarm, you behave like a goose,
Keeping up these huge armaments—what is their use ?
Oh ! what, don’t you know that ? Well then, wait and you ’ll see.
In case any of those friends of yours molest me.
Now then, back, and be off, for your hoof I espy;
And you won’t humbug me, so it’s no use to try.
MRS. HARRIS BANGS THE BISHOPS.
We were afraid that the Conservative organs would be a little angry
at the overthrow of all their party hopes, and the falsification of all
their party prophecies, by the majority that has confirmed Pam in the
possession of office. But though we “ give the losers leave to chide,”
they should have a little decorum. Who so devout and devoted a
friend of the Church of England, who so reverent to its venerable
bishops “ sacred with the oil of the Apostolic succession,” as our reli-
gious friend the Standard? Who so piously indignant at Dissenters
and other atheists, who dare wickedly to think that bishops are only
men? But it seems that bishops are angels only when they vote with
.Lord Derby. Flear what the religious Standard says of the others:—
“ The Bench of Bishops is filled with the creatures of the Whig party, who openly
avow, with an elasticity of conscience to which only Episcopacy can attain, that they are
hound to vote even for a falsehood rather than not ‘ magnify their movers.’ ”
VYe shudder. This from the great Church of England organ! We
thought by the scoff at “ Episcopacy,” that we were reading the Pres-
byterian Record, but the words are the words of Mrs. Harris of Shoe
Lane. What shall be said unto her when she gets another religious fit,
and the venerable hierarchs of the Catholic and Apostolic Church be-
come angels again ? “ Elasticity of conscience to which only Episcopacy
can attain.” And this is the paper which the clergy are thought to
read, and to consider “ ably written.” It derides Episcopaey, and
profanely parodies the Bible ! Mrs. Harris, Mrs. Harris, why don’t
they keep the pens and ink from you when yon dre excited, M’ <n'!
PUNCH OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
39
gherita, you will hardly grudge a crowu to see Mbs. Charles Mathews,
and note the points wherein her conception of the character differs from
your pet’s. Moreover, you will find that her husband gives a thoroughly
new reading to the part of Mephistopheles, quite distinct from that
attempted by Gassier or Faure : and, as a further tempting novelty,
you will in Faust at the St. James’s, find the Foodie introduced, whom,
out of reverence for Gothe, Toby was particularly pleased and proud
to see.
As to the Princess’s play, it is certainly worth seeing, if only to rub
up one’s Spanish history a bit, and improve one’s acquaintance with
King Philip the Second and his father, Charles the Fifth. If,
from glancing at the playbill, you expect to see some likeness in his
Majesty, King Philip, to the actor, Mr. Vising, you will certainly be
disappointed, for, except perhaps in voice, there is no resemblance
whatever to be traced. The King looks as if he had been framed as his
own portrait, and had walked out of his frame, so like a fine old Spanish
picture does he look. Au reste, Ma’ahselle Stella Colas is a
graceful little person, and her attitudes are always pleasant to behold.
But though her admirers doubtless like to see as much of her as possible,
Me should not have been tempted to play two parts at once, for it
needlessly fatigues her, and must perplex the pit. I don’t want to find
fault though, for both parts suit her very well; and I very much prefer
to see her in a piece where (your pardon, Mr. French Author) the words
are of small consequence, than to see her make a talking ballet-girl of
Juliet, and to hear the charming poetry of Shakspeare spoiled by a
French accent and a somewhat mouthing voice.
One who Pays.
THE GREAT RESTORATIVE PARTY.
To Lord John Manners.
ONSERVATIVE
Lord, — Now the
Vote of Censure
has broken down,
allow me to tell your
Lordship what. Our
party must be re-
organised. We must
return to the old
ways. In the first
place, let us drop the
name of Conserva-
tives. What does
it mean ? Conserva-
tives of what ? Of
things as they are ?
Why then we con-
serve all the Liberal
legislation of the
last five-and-thirty
years. Conserve
roses and apricots !
Conserve my eye!
I call myself sim-
ply a Tory; always
did, always shall.
I don’t want to con-
serve the whole of
the present state of
things, by any
means. I wish to
rescind all of it that
is the work of Whigs and Radicals. In fact I may say I would if I
i could abolish the best part of it.
The so-called Conservative Party may get into office by a turn of
: luck, but it will never stay there. No party can keep in place now
except by concession to popular demands. The only difference between
j the Conservative and Liberal parties is, that the former party does that
with a bad grace, and the latter with a good grace. It must of course
be the favourite of the two.
Office is at least as hopeless for truckling trimming Conservatives as
it is for old Tories. But since we can’t get place, let us stand by our
principles. If all is lost but honour, we may anyhow as well keep
honour. Conservatives are upholding the very measures which they
denounced and opposed with all their might only the other day ! I call
that tergiversation. I say it is disgraceful. We may own that we have
been beaten, but ought to maintain that we were in the right. Let us
assert boldly that we were, and are, and always have been. They ask
what our policy is ? Let our straightforward answer be :—“ A retro-
grade policy.” Let us boldly proclaim that we desire to reverse all the
measures that our predecessors opposed ; restore the Test and Corpo-
ration Acts, repeal Catholic Emancipation and Reform, re-enact the
Corn Laws, re-establish Protection at large, exclude Dissenters again
from the Universities altogether, and subject all national education to
the Established Church.
If we cannot be content with the good old-fashioned name of Tories,
we might also call ourselves Restoratives; our avowed design being
the restoration, if possible, of the good old times.
My proposal is not Quixotic at all. I don’t expect that we shall
get into office, professing the objects and intentions which I avow.
But we have a better chance than your sneaking Conservatives.
America is going to the bad, the Continent of Europe, where not in
anarchy, is under oppression. Englishmen are frightened; reform has been
dropped ; reaction has begun ; it may end in the reascent of Toryism.
The prosperity of the country under Liberal Government is an insu-
perable fact to us at present; but prosperity is eating up the land • and
in the meanwhile benefits nobody but the commercial classes and the
common people. The dearness of butcher’s meat is owing to the rise
of wages ; and there are plenty of people who are sick of a prosperity
which is that of others. Prosperity will some day end in a crash. Let
us bide our time. Disraeli may not seem to see all this; very well,
then, we must depose him, and find another Ben whose Christian
name may be John, if your Lordship is of the same mind with your
humble servant,
Gatton Club, July, 1864. Megatherium.
ENGLAND AND THE ENEMY.
If you are, as you think yourselves, Europe’s Police,
Interfere with strong hand, and enforce Europe’s peace.
You ’re a pretty Policeman, John Bull, to allow
Those two fellows out yonder to kick up that row.
Ah ! yes, much, no doubt, old one, ’twould answer your ends
If I did put a stop to those games of your friends.
But one can’t collar two, and you know I should find
There’s another of your lot those parties behind.
That is all a pretence to excuse standing by.
Two to one ? Pack of stuff. Isn’t France your ally P
Of your backing out only Napoleon’s afraid;
If you ’ll go the whole hog, France will give you her aid.
Come, I say, now, you, whom I renounce and defy,
Do you think that you see any green in my eye ?
What a nice course is that you would have me pursue,
France does nothing for nothing as strictly as you.
Didn’t Yictok-Emmanui-l Napoleon employ?
And what had he to pay for it ? Nice and Savoy.
Let a generous idea your counsels inspire.
You have no end of guns, but you won’t open fire.
Though the weak are attacked, you exert not your might.
You have ships, you have soldiers, now why don’t you fight P
Either fight or disarm, you behave like a goose,
Keeping up these huge armaments—what is their use ?
Oh ! what, don’t you know that ? Well then, wait and you ’ll see.
In case any of those friends of yours molest me.
Now then, back, and be off, for your hoof I espy;
And you won’t humbug me, so it’s no use to try.
MRS. HARRIS BANGS THE BISHOPS.
We were afraid that the Conservative organs would be a little angry
at the overthrow of all their party hopes, and the falsification of all
their party prophecies, by the majority that has confirmed Pam in the
possession of office. But though we “ give the losers leave to chide,”
they should have a little decorum. Who so devout and devoted a
friend of the Church of England, who so reverent to its venerable
bishops “ sacred with the oil of the Apostolic succession,” as our reli-
gious friend the Standard? Who so piously indignant at Dissenters
and other atheists, who dare wickedly to think that bishops are only
men? But it seems that bishops are angels only when they vote with
.Lord Derby. Flear what the religious Standard says of the others:—
“ The Bench of Bishops is filled with the creatures of the Whig party, who openly
avow, with an elasticity of conscience to which only Episcopacy can attain, that they are
hound to vote even for a falsehood rather than not ‘ magnify their movers.’ ”
VYe shudder. This from the great Church of England organ! We
thought by the scoff at “ Episcopacy,” that we were reading the Pres-
byterian Record, but the words are the words of Mrs. Harris of Shoe
Lane. What shall be said unto her when she gets another religious fit,
and the venerable hierarchs of the Catholic and Apostolic Church be-
come angels again ? “ Elasticity of conscience to which only Episcopacy
can attain.” And this is the paper which the clergy are thought to
read, and to consider “ ably written.” It derides Episcopaey, and
profanely parodies the Bible ! Mrs. Harris, Mrs. Harris, why don’t
they keep the pens and ink from you when yon dre excited, M’ <n'!