DOI issue:
July 14, 1866
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16878#0027
July 14, 1866.]
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
19
PUNCH TO THE TORIES.
My dear Lords and Gentlemen, 85, Fleet Street, July 11,1866.
Here you are in. office again. Accept such congratulations as you may think the situation deserves. I know what three, or
four of yon are saying to yourselves in reply.
Now, listen to me, the Member for the United Kingdom.
I have, on former occasions of a similar character, given you advice and warning. I have been hideously abused by your organs, and I
shall be hideously abused again. But that is a trifle between friends and gentlemen. It is more to the purpose to remind you that you have
always split on the exact rocks which I have done myself the honour of pointing out. I daresay that you will do so again, but I shall do my
duty to yourselves, as I do to all my Sovereign’s subjects.
From neither Gladstone, Bernal Osborne, nor myself need you expect any Factious Opposition. From the third of these respected
parties you will receive absolute justice, and, if you deserve it, some little kindness. I like to see turn and turn about in office, occasionally.
It is astonishing what new lights on the claims of the nation gentlemen obtain when they have to make themselves amiable to the nation.
And, personally, I like some of you very well. So don’t say that I am unfriendly.
Yon will not remain in office very long. The country elected, last time, a Parliament in which you were in a minority of 60 or 7f. That
minority vanished during certain debates, but will reappear at need. If yon dissolve, you will be placed in a still less favourable position. I
do not wish to discourage you, but, though I think that you ought to be allowed fan play, it will not be constitutional to let you remain in place
long after February next.
But you may do yourselves an awful lot of good between this and then, if you mind my counsel.
You have nothing to do with a Reform Bill. We must have one, but you are not asked to make it. Dismiss that from your minds.
You cannot carry that measure. You will go down on it, if you try. Never mind Lord Westminster. He is not everybody.
Go to work directly, however, as you would if sure to be in office during the whole of next Session.
There are some large-minded men of business among you, and there is some new blood which ought not to fear Cant.
Address yourselves to the preparation of certain Domestic measures, which ought to be ready when you meet Parliament in the spring.
Firstly. Deal with Bumbledom and the Blackguardians of the Poor in a strong sound measure of Reform.
Secondly. Deal with Juvenile Crime and Destitution. Pitch all Cant to the First Whig, and prepare a scheme for the Compulsory
Emigration of Juveniles. Let obvious want be the qualification, and empower the authorities to rescue these unfortunate children from their
parents, and transmit the young “flesh and blood” to colonial reformatories, where a redeemed race may grow up to bless the old
country and to enrich the new.
Thirdly. Deal with the Church Rates. Abolish them altogether. The trumpery money is not worth a word. The surrender of the tax
by you, the Church’s friends and champions, will in itself be a victory to her. No one can say that it was forced from you. Lord Derby has
not been afraid in other days, of bowling over half a score of bishops, like nine-pins. Surely, he has lost no nerve.
Fourthly. Deal with the Needle-Gun question. This is the question of the day. _ If Jonathan Peel, who appears to be aware^of the
value of the invention, puts the terrible Zundnadelgewehr into the hand-* of our soldiers, in spite of the certain opposition of the Horse-Guards,
and vested jobbery, he will be the best War Minister we shall have had for half a century.
Now, there is a Quadrilateral for you, my Lords and Gentlemen. I do not say that you will be able to hold it, this time. But what a
splendid set of fortifications for you to return to hereafter, meantime claiming them as your own.
Only, be bold. These things must be done. Why should you not have the credit of initiating them? Vindicate your claim to be
considered as a constitutional power, whether in or out of office. You are pledged to nothing, you have nothing to fear. You must fall.
But leave those four monuments of your brief existence, and the Tory Eagle (if your infernal gamekeepers have not murdered him as they do
all the other eagles) may hereafter fly from point to point, and gaze fearlessly up at the Sun of Popularity.
And don’t say that I did not give you invaluable advice at the exact hour of need.
I drink your healths, and am, mv Lords and Gentlemen,
Your faithful friend.
To the New Government.
THE LAW WITH LONG EARS.
Mr. Bumble, the Beadle, is generally admitted to have had reason
on his side when he pronounced the Law to be an Ass. Since then,
the Law has, no doubt, become less asinine; but there are still par-
ticulars in which it exhibits extreme stupidity, in as far, at least, as
stupidity is evidenced by injustice. Nownere—extracted from a con-
temporary—is a case which, if brutal oppression is indicative of a
stupid beast, attests the yet considerable donkeyhood of the Law of
England:—-
“The Case of William Smith.—The case of the young man who was recently
tried for the murder in Cannon Street, and acquitted, still creates much sympathy
at Eton. A subscription was set on foot at the time of his trial, and although
liberally contributed to by the clergy and tradesmen of Eton, it scarcely reached to
£50, barely a third of the legal expenses, which altogether amounted to £150. A
Committee has been formed at Eton, consisting of four of the clergy and four of the
principal lay inhabitants, to make a more general appeal to the public.”
The verdict of “Not Guilty” for William Smith, at the Old Bailey,
meant the same that “ Not Guilty ” means hi Scotland. It meant more
than “Not Proven”—it meant the reverse of “ Gudty.” This verdict
of complete acquittal sent William Smith from the dock with his
innocence established,_ under a liability to £150 law expenses contracted
to establish it. Herein, then, the Law manifestly shows itself to be an
enormous Ass. What is the difference between an acquitted prisoner
and a victorious defendant ? Simply, that the prisoner—besides having
had to stand a trial, it may be for his life—has been unduly imprisoned
as well as put to expense. Is that any reason why he should be denied
his costs ? No ; but he is denied them because the Law is an incon-
sistent Ass.
In cases of criminal prosecution the Public is the plaintiff, for whose
good Lie prisoner is put on his trial. Who will deny that, as losing
plaintiff, the Public ought to reimburse the defendant whom it has
forced to incur the charges of self-defence ? Many highly respectable
people. They will deny that obligation on the part of the Public
because it would involve a payment to which they know they would
have to contribute, and by which they think it very improbable that
they would ever profit. This, indeed, is not what they will say. They
will answer the question of indemnifying acquitted prisoners with an
evasive or contemptuous interjection. Idiots as to moral sense, grin-
ning at the name of the thing wdiich they do not understand, they are
yet sharp enough to understand what acts are safe and what unsafe,
and they have a feai of punishment and of unpopularity that keeps
them in check and in a position of high respectability. They shrink
from doing the slightest wrong that might endanger themselves, but
would not stick at any which could answer their purpose. “ Sacrifice
individuals to the Public without scruple and without mercy.” That
is their rule. The exceptions tr it are cases wherein they perceive
that they themselves might suffer by its application. Otherwise, they
are disposed to take their chance. Their faith is pinned to the chapter
of accidents, and their morals consist in a purely selfish expediency.
They will of course urge that the nation cannot afford to compensate,
the multitude of sufferers such as William Smith. Are there, then,
so very many persons improperly committed for trial ? Then we are
very badly off for Justices. If that is so, not only is the Law an Ass,
but Midas, with his lorg ears, is the type of the British Magistrate.
“ A Charge of Horning.”
The Scotch papers retail a story about a cow, winch being in Mon-
trose the other day, suddenly dashed up the steps of the gaol, and bat-
tered to be let in. Of course, a Scotch mob could not comprehend a
novel idea, and ill-used the cow, instead of reverencing her feelings.
The cow had infringed the Rinderpest laws, and came to give herself
up. What a touching proof of the progress of intelligence among the
inferior creation ! But the world knows nothing of its greatest cows.
If this poor animal has not been killed, we advise the Montrose folk
to look after her, for she has evidently a deal more sense than the
framers of the regulations she had broken, and which have driven daft
half the farmers in the kingdom.
A STITCH IN TIME SAVES NINE.
Austria has been sewn up by the Prussian needle-gun. Had not
England better learn to take time by the firelock ?
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
19
PUNCH TO THE TORIES.
My dear Lords and Gentlemen, 85, Fleet Street, July 11,1866.
Here you are in. office again. Accept such congratulations as you may think the situation deserves. I know what three, or
four of yon are saying to yourselves in reply.
Now, listen to me, the Member for the United Kingdom.
I have, on former occasions of a similar character, given you advice and warning. I have been hideously abused by your organs, and I
shall be hideously abused again. But that is a trifle between friends and gentlemen. It is more to the purpose to remind you that you have
always split on the exact rocks which I have done myself the honour of pointing out. I daresay that you will do so again, but I shall do my
duty to yourselves, as I do to all my Sovereign’s subjects.
From neither Gladstone, Bernal Osborne, nor myself need you expect any Factious Opposition. From the third of these respected
parties you will receive absolute justice, and, if you deserve it, some little kindness. I like to see turn and turn about in office, occasionally.
It is astonishing what new lights on the claims of the nation gentlemen obtain when they have to make themselves amiable to the nation.
And, personally, I like some of you very well. So don’t say that I am unfriendly.
Yon will not remain in office very long. The country elected, last time, a Parliament in which you were in a minority of 60 or 7f. That
minority vanished during certain debates, but will reappear at need. If yon dissolve, you will be placed in a still less favourable position. I
do not wish to discourage you, but, though I think that you ought to be allowed fan play, it will not be constitutional to let you remain in place
long after February next.
But you may do yourselves an awful lot of good between this and then, if you mind my counsel.
You have nothing to do with a Reform Bill. We must have one, but you are not asked to make it. Dismiss that from your minds.
You cannot carry that measure. You will go down on it, if you try. Never mind Lord Westminster. He is not everybody.
Go to work directly, however, as you would if sure to be in office during the whole of next Session.
There are some large-minded men of business among you, and there is some new blood which ought not to fear Cant.
Address yourselves to the preparation of certain Domestic measures, which ought to be ready when you meet Parliament in the spring.
Firstly. Deal with Bumbledom and the Blackguardians of the Poor in a strong sound measure of Reform.
Secondly. Deal with Juvenile Crime and Destitution. Pitch all Cant to the First Whig, and prepare a scheme for the Compulsory
Emigration of Juveniles. Let obvious want be the qualification, and empower the authorities to rescue these unfortunate children from their
parents, and transmit the young “flesh and blood” to colonial reformatories, where a redeemed race may grow up to bless the old
country and to enrich the new.
Thirdly. Deal with the Church Rates. Abolish them altogether. The trumpery money is not worth a word. The surrender of the tax
by you, the Church’s friends and champions, will in itself be a victory to her. No one can say that it was forced from you. Lord Derby has
not been afraid in other days, of bowling over half a score of bishops, like nine-pins. Surely, he has lost no nerve.
Fourthly. Deal with the Needle-Gun question. This is the question of the day. _ If Jonathan Peel, who appears to be aware^of the
value of the invention, puts the terrible Zundnadelgewehr into the hand-* of our soldiers, in spite of the certain opposition of the Horse-Guards,
and vested jobbery, he will be the best War Minister we shall have had for half a century.
Now, there is a Quadrilateral for you, my Lords and Gentlemen. I do not say that you will be able to hold it, this time. But what a
splendid set of fortifications for you to return to hereafter, meantime claiming them as your own.
Only, be bold. These things must be done. Why should you not have the credit of initiating them? Vindicate your claim to be
considered as a constitutional power, whether in or out of office. You are pledged to nothing, you have nothing to fear. You must fall.
But leave those four monuments of your brief existence, and the Tory Eagle (if your infernal gamekeepers have not murdered him as they do
all the other eagles) may hereafter fly from point to point, and gaze fearlessly up at the Sun of Popularity.
And don’t say that I did not give you invaluable advice at the exact hour of need.
I drink your healths, and am, mv Lords and Gentlemen,
Your faithful friend.
To the New Government.
THE LAW WITH LONG EARS.
Mr. Bumble, the Beadle, is generally admitted to have had reason
on his side when he pronounced the Law to be an Ass. Since then,
the Law has, no doubt, become less asinine; but there are still par-
ticulars in which it exhibits extreme stupidity, in as far, at least, as
stupidity is evidenced by injustice. Nownere—extracted from a con-
temporary—is a case which, if brutal oppression is indicative of a
stupid beast, attests the yet considerable donkeyhood of the Law of
England:—-
“The Case of William Smith.—The case of the young man who was recently
tried for the murder in Cannon Street, and acquitted, still creates much sympathy
at Eton. A subscription was set on foot at the time of his trial, and although
liberally contributed to by the clergy and tradesmen of Eton, it scarcely reached to
£50, barely a third of the legal expenses, which altogether amounted to £150. A
Committee has been formed at Eton, consisting of four of the clergy and four of the
principal lay inhabitants, to make a more general appeal to the public.”
The verdict of “Not Guilty” for William Smith, at the Old Bailey,
meant the same that “ Not Guilty ” means hi Scotland. It meant more
than “Not Proven”—it meant the reverse of “ Gudty.” This verdict
of complete acquittal sent William Smith from the dock with his
innocence established,_ under a liability to £150 law expenses contracted
to establish it. Herein, then, the Law manifestly shows itself to be an
enormous Ass. What is the difference between an acquitted prisoner
and a victorious defendant ? Simply, that the prisoner—besides having
had to stand a trial, it may be for his life—has been unduly imprisoned
as well as put to expense. Is that any reason why he should be denied
his costs ? No ; but he is denied them because the Law is an incon-
sistent Ass.
In cases of criminal prosecution the Public is the plaintiff, for whose
good Lie prisoner is put on his trial. Who will deny that, as losing
plaintiff, the Public ought to reimburse the defendant whom it has
forced to incur the charges of self-defence ? Many highly respectable
people. They will deny that obligation on the part of the Public
because it would involve a payment to which they know they would
have to contribute, and by which they think it very improbable that
they would ever profit. This, indeed, is not what they will say. They
will answer the question of indemnifying acquitted prisoners with an
evasive or contemptuous interjection. Idiots as to moral sense, grin-
ning at the name of the thing wdiich they do not understand, they are
yet sharp enough to understand what acts are safe and what unsafe,
and they have a feai of punishment and of unpopularity that keeps
them in check and in a position of high respectability. They shrink
from doing the slightest wrong that might endanger themselves, but
would not stick at any which could answer their purpose. “ Sacrifice
individuals to the Public without scruple and without mercy.” That
is their rule. The exceptions tr it are cases wherein they perceive
that they themselves might suffer by its application. Otherwise, they
are disposed to take their chance. Their faith is pinned to the chapter
of accidents, and their morals consist in a purely selfish expediency.
They will of course urge that the nation cannot afford to compensate,
the multitude of sufferers such as William Smith. Are there, then,
so very many persons improperly committed for trial ? Then we are
very badly off for Justices. If that is so, not only is the Law an Ass,
but Midas, with his lorg ears, is the type of the British Magistrate.
“ A Charge of Horning.”
The Scotch papers retail a story about a cow, winch being in Mon-
trose the other day, suddenly dashed up the steps of the gaol, and bat-
tered to be let in. Of course, a Scotch mob could not comprehend a
novel idea, and ill-used the cow, instead of reverencing her feelings.
The cow had infringed the Rinderpest laws, and came to give herself
up. What a touching proof of the progress of intelligence among the
inferior creation ! But the world knows nothing of its greatest cows.
If this poor animal has not been killed, we advise the Montrose folk
to look after her, for she has evidently a deal more sense than the
framers of the regulations she had broken, and which have driven daft
half the farmers in the kingdom.
A STITCH IN TIME SAVES NINE.
Austria has been sewn up by the Prussian needle-gun. Had not
England better learn to take time by the firelock ?