DOI Heft:
June 1, 1867
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16879#0229
June 1, 1867.]
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
223
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
Monday, May 20. Lord Lyveden complained that the statue of
George Canning was shoved away from its original site into a court
in the rear of George Street. Lord Derby said it could not be helped,
and that the statue would be seen very well in the new place. Statue
is derived from the Latin statua, statura, from statuere, and that from
■statum, past participle of stare, to stand. But if, as would appear from
sundry recent cases, a statue is to mean a thing that does not stand,
but walks about, we had better find another noun for the article.
Mr. Hardy, the new Home Secretary, vice the hydraulic Mr.
Walpole, stated that as he wished people’s minds to cool on the Park
question, he should not until after Whitsuntide press the Bill against
meetings. If he surpasses Canute, and repels the popular surge, we
-shall re-christen him as Hardycanute.
Lord Naas thought that the Irish Reform Bill should be postponed
until after the Whitsun holidays. N.B. The Commons are always
reckoning by their holidays. We wonder whether they carry notched
-sticks in their pockets, and cut away a notch for every day they have
to sit.
Mr. DrsRAELi, amid cheers, formally assented to Mr. Hodgkinson’s
proposal for killing the Compound Householder, and promised that if
technicalities did not prevent, the enactment should be inserted into
the Reform Bill itself.
Two very remarkable speeches were delivered to-night.
One was by Mr. Lowe. He made an elaborated protest against the
.present course of legislation, charged the Commons with blindly passing
enactments the action of which no one had tried to explain, and likened
the Reform Bill to the car of Juggernaut, crushing everybody. Igno-
rance and poverty were to be admitted to power, and though the Mass
had no politics yet, it would learn a policy, which would be that of
Socialism. It would demand the abolition of the taxes affecting itself,
and the throwing taxation on the rich. It would assuredly abolish all
but direct taxation. It would revolt against the National Debt, would
'have laws for increasing wages and limiting work-hours, and would
thus compel recurrence to Protection. Those who hoped to bribe the
lower class into voting rightly would get into a sea of corruption, and yet
would not accomplish their object. The standard of Parliament would be
lowered, when Members _ came as delegates of the poorest and most
ignorant, and had also paid for their seats. He depicted other disasters,
and ended with a fervid appeal to the Gentlemen of England not to
fling away all their advantages and honours, without the shadow of an
equivalent. The Liberals were going to ruin both their party and
their country.
_ Mr. Henley said that the situation had been brought on by succes-
sive declarations from the Throne that there ought to be extension of
franchise, and that it was more conservative to settle the question than
to let the Pot Boil Over.
After some speaking, of no particular mark
Clause 3 of the Reform Bill was carried, with cheers.
Ladies, your attention to your Champion.
The second remarkable speech of the evening was made by Mr.
Mill, who moved that instead of Man the word Person be introduced
into clause 4.
And now, Ladies, Mr. Punch does you the justice of believing that
you would like to know what arguments your Friend advanced. You
may be sure that all that could be said was said in the best manner by
Mr. Mill, and that such of you as wish to fight the battle may have
all the weapons, elegantly polished, at hand, Mr. Punch—your devoted
slave—lays them before you in the most.convenient form. Mr. Mill
urged that at present
Neither birth, merit, exertion, intellect, fortune, nor even accident
can enable any woman to have her voice counted in matters which
concern her and hers as nearly as any person in the kingdom.
It is not just to make distinctions between the Queen’s subjects,
| except for a positive reason.
Are women who manage property, or business, or teach more than
most male electors know, unfit for the function of voting ?
Would they be revolutionary ?
Taxation and Representation should go together. Women pay taxes?
The real difficulty felt is not a practical one, it is only a feeling of
( Strangeness.
That is a thing which wears off. What are the objections ?
1. Politics are not women’s business.
2. You don’t desire the suffrage.
3. You are sufficiently represented by your influence over male
relatives.
4. You have power enough already.
The answers are—
1. Nor are they man’s, unless he is a professional politician. He
has business of his own, which he does not neglect, for the
sake of voting, more than a woman would.
2. But many do, and others would but for fear of being ill thought
of. We are not to suppose that leading questions put to
ladies elicit their real sentiments. None are so well schooled
as women in making a virtue of necessity.
3. Does man apply this argument to rich men and others with
influence.
4. You have great power, but it is under the worst conditions, for
it is indirect, and therefore irresponsible. And he would have
you work by a manly exchange of opinions, and not by cajolery.
There is a feeling which men have, but are ashamed to express—this :
A woman lias no right to care about anything but how she may be the
most usef ul and devoted servant of some man.
Mr. Mill professed such indignation at this idea that he would not
argue about it.
In the old days woman and man lived apart—that is, the wife was a
plaything or an upper servant. His friends were men. This is changed.
The two sexes pass their lives together. The women of the family are
the man’s habitual society. The wife is his chief associate, most con-
fidential friend, most trusted counsellor.
Then, should a-man wish that such a companion should be studiously
kept inferior to himself, and taught ignorance or indifference about the
subjects among which his highest duties are cast ?
The time has come when, if women are not raised to the level of
men, men will be pulled down to theirs.
As to women being sufficiently protected, he would like a return of
the number of women annually beaten or kicked, or trodden to death
by their male protectors—of the cases when the dastardly criminal did
not get off altogether—of the cases in which such brutes received
lighter sentences than are awarded for trifling thefts.
Old educational endowments were for boys and girls alike. The
girls have been shut out, as at Christ’s Hospital, where there are 1100
boys and 26 girls.
The Doctors shut out the ladies.
The Painters do the same, excluding them from the associateship of
the Academy, because they were distinguishing themselves too much.
A husband can tear away every shilling of his wife’s and spend it
in debauchery, and even then, if she struggles and saves, he can pounce
on her earnings, unless she is judicially separated.
Your Champion, Ladies, wound up with an earnest assurance that
when the time should come, as come it would, for acceding to his
motion, we should never repent of the concession.
And Punch is sure that whether you want votes or not, you will say
that the cheers Mr. Mill gained were well earned.
Mr. E. K. Karslake thought Mr. Mill confounded the distinction
between man and woman.
Mr. Denman supported him, but thought the Bill already conferred
the suffrage.
Mr. Fawcett (a newly married man too) earnestly supported the
motion, and said that the time for chaff on the subject had gone by.
Mr. Laing talked nonsense about the ideal of woman, said that Juliet,
Ophelia and Desdemona had nothing to do with votes—the poets under-
stood woman better than Mr. Mill.
Sir George Bowyer, like a gallant Knight, supported your cause.
Lord Galway said the motion placed admirers of the fair sex in an
awkward position.
Mr. Onslow said that two young ladies had told him they would
vote for the man who gave them the best pair of diamond ear-rings.
Mr. Mill was pleased, as well he might be, at the fearful debility of
his opponents, and took the division, which was,
For the Ladies . . 73
Against. . . . 196
Majority 123 for keeping you out, dears.
This speech of Mr. Mill’s was the event of the week, and the rest
shall be tied up very tight indeed.
Tuesday. The Alabama quarrel is to be arbitrated. Mr. Mill
means to give London Municipal Reform.
Wednesday. The Derby was won by Mr. Chaplin’s Hermit. The
day was a detestable one.
Thursday. Habeas Corpus in Ireland to be again suspended. We
had a jolly row between Mr. Maguire, Mr. Roebuck, and Mr.
Bright. Again we got on Reform, and into a singular muddle about
the County Franchise.
Friday. Compound Householder not quite dead, and Mr. Disraeli
accused of attempting to retract—another storm in the offing. An
Indian Debate about Mysore, which is an eyesore to the old Anglo-
Indians.
Saturday. The Lords sat to pass the Irish Suspension Bill, as
such things are always left to the very last moment.
" NEW AMERICA.”
What Mr. Hepworth Dixon has made of his book about the
Mormons is a More-money Book.
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
223
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
Monday, May 20. Lord Lyveden complained that the statue of
George Canning was shoved away from its original site into a court
in the rear of George Street. Lord Derby said it could not be helped,
and that the statue would be seen very well in the new place. Statue
is derived from the Latin statua, statura, from statuere, and that from
■statum, past participle of stare, to stand. But if, as would appear from
sundry recent cases, a statue is to mean a thing that does not stand,
but walks about, we had better find another noun for the article.
Mr. Hardy, the new Home Secretary, vice the hydraulic Mr.
Walpole, stated that as he wished people’s minds to cool on the Park
question, he should not until after Whitsuntide press the Bill against
meetings. If he surpasses Canute, and repels the popular surge, we
-shall re-christen him as Hardycanute.
Lord Naas thought that the Irish Reform Bill should be postponed
until after the Whitsun holidays. N.B. The Commons are always
reckoning by their holidays. We wonder whether they carry notched
-sticks in their pockets, and cut away a notch for every day they have
to sit.
Mr. DrsRAELi, amid cheers, formally assented to Mr. Hodgkinson’s
proposal for killing the Compound Householder, and promised that if
technicalities did not prevent, the enactment should be inserted into
the Reform Bill itself.
Two very remarkable speeches were delivered to-night.
One was by Mr. Lowe. He made an elaborated protest against the
.present course of legislation, charged the Commons with blindly passing
enactments the action of which no one had tried to explain, and likened
the Reform Bill to the car of Juggernaut, crushing everybody. Igno-
rance and poverty were to be admitted to power, and though the Mass
had no politics yet, it would learn a policy, which would be that of
Socialism. It would demand the abolition of the taxes affecting itself,
and the throwing taxation on the rich. It would assuredly abolish all
but direct taxation. It would revolt against the National Debt, would
'have laws for increasing wages and limiting work-hours, and would
thus compel recurrence to Protection. Those who hoped to bribe the
lower class into voting rightly would get into a sea of corruption, and yet
would not accomplish their object. The standard of Parliament would be
lowered, when Members _ came as delegates of the poorest and most
ignorant, and had also paid for their seats. He depicted other disasters,
and ended with a fervid appeal to the Gentlemen of England not to
fling away all their advantages and honours, without the shadow of an
equivalent. The Liberals were going to ruin both their party and
their country.
_ Mr. Henley said that the situation had been brought on by succes-
sive declarations from the Throne that there ought to be extension of
franchise, and that it was more conservative to settle the question than
to let the Pot Boil Over.
After some speaking, of no particular mark
Clause 3 of the Reform Bill was carried, with cheers.
Ladies, your attention to your Champion.
The second remarkable speech of the evening was made by Mr.
Mill, who moved that instead of Man the word Person be introduced
into clause 4.
And now, Ladies, Mr. Punch does you the justice of believing that
you would like to know what arguments your Friend advanced. You
may be sure that all that could be said was said in the best manner by
Mr. Mill, and that such of you as wish to fight the battle may have
all the weapons, elegantly polished, at hand, Mr. Punch—your devoted
slave—lays them before you in the most.convenient form. Mr. Mill
urged that at present
Neither birth, merit, exertion, intellect, fortune, nor even accident
can enable any woman to have her voice counted in matters which
concern her and hers as nearly as any person in the kingdom.
It is not just to make distinctions between the Queen’s subjects,
| except for a positive reason.
Are women who manage property, or business, or teach more than
most male electors know, unfit for the function of voting ?
Would they be revolutionary ?
Taxation and Representation should go together. Women pay taxes?
The real difficulty felt is not a practical one, it is only a feeling of
( Strangeness.
That is a thing which wears off. What are the objections ?
1. Politics are not women’s business.
2. You don’t desire the suffrage.
3. You are sufficiently represented by your influence over male
relatives.
4. You have power enough already.
The answers are—
1. Nor are they man’s, unless he is a professional politician. He
has business of his own, which he does not neglect, for the
sake of voting, more than a woman would.
2. But many do, and others would but for fear of being ill thought
of. We are not to suppose that leading questions put to
ladies elicit their real sentiments. None are so well schooled
as women in making a virtue of necessity.
3. Does man apply this argument to rich men and others with
influence.
4. You have great power, but it is under the worst conditions, for
it is indirect, and therefore irresponsible. And he would have
you work by a manly exchange of opinions, and not by cajolery.
There is a feeling which men have, but are ashamed to express—this :
A woman lias no right to care about anything but how she may be the
most usef ul and devoted servant of some man.
Mr. Mill professed such indignation at this idea that he would not
argue about it.
In the old days woman and man lived apart—that is, the wife was a
plaything or an upper servant. His friends were men. This is changed.
The two sexes pass their lives together. The women of the family are
the man’s habitual society. The wife is his chief associate, most con-
fidential friend, most trusted counsellor.
Then, should a-man wish that such a companion should be studiously
kept inferior to himself, and taught ignorance or indifference about the
subjects among which his highest duties are cast ?
The time has come when, if women are not raised to the level of
men, men will be pulled down to theirs.
As to women being sufficiently protected, he would like a return of
the number of women annually beaten or kicked, or trodden to death
by their male protectors—of the cases when the dastardly criminal did
not get off altogether—of the cases in which such brutes received
lighter sentences than are awarded for trifling thefts.
Old educational endowments were for boys and girls alike. The
girls have been shut out, as at Christ’s Hospital, where there are 1100
boys and 26 girls.
The Doctors shut out the ladies.
The Painters do the same, excluding them from the associateship of
the Academy, because they were distinguishing themselves too much.
A husband can tear away every shilling of his wife’s and spend it
in debauchery, and even then, if she struggles and saves, he can pounce
on her earnings, unless she is judicially separated.
Your Champion, Ladies, wound up with an earnest assurance that
when the time should come, as come it would, for acceding to his
motion, we should never repent of the concession.
And Punch is sure that whether you want votes or not, you will say
that the cheers Mr. Mill gained were well earned.
Mr. E. K. Karslake thought Mr. Mill confounded the distinction
between man and woman.
Mr. Denman supported him, but thought the Bill already conferred
the suffrage.
Mr. Fawcett (a newly married man too) earnestly supported the
motion, and said that the time for chaff on the subject had gone by.
Mr. Laing talked nonsense about the ideal of woman, said that Juliet,
Ophelia and Desdemona had nothing to do with votes—the poets under-
stood woman better than Mr. Mill.
Sir George Bowyer, like a gallant Knight, supported your cause.
Lord Galway said the motion placed admirers of the fair sex in an
awkward position.
Mr. Onslow said that two young ladies had told him they would
vote for the man who gave them the best pair of diamond ear-rings.
Mr. Mill was pleased, as well he might be, at the fearful debility of
his opponents, and took the division, which was,
For the Ladies . . 73
Against. . . . 196
Majority 123 for keeping you out, dears.
This speech of Mr. Mill’s was the event of the week, and the rest
shall be tied up very tight indeed.
Tuesday. The Alabama quarrel is to be arbitrated. Mr. Mill
means to give London Municipal Reform.
Wednesday. The Derby was won by Mr. Chaplin’s Hermit. The
day was a detestable one.
Thursday. Habeas Corpus in Ireland to be again suspended. We
had a jolly row between Mr. Maguire, Mr. Roebuck, and Mr.
Bright. Again we got on Reform, and into a singular muddle about
the County Franchise.
Friday. Compound Householder not quite dead, and Mr. Disraeli
accused of attempting to retract—another storm in the offing. An
Indian Debate about Mysore, which is an eyesore to the old Anglo-
Indians.
Saturday. The Lords sat to pass the Irish Suspension Bill, as
such things are always left to the very last moment.
" NEW AMERICA.”
What Mr. Hepworth Dixon has made of his book about the
Mormons is a More-money Book.