DOI issue:
December 26, 1868
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16882#0274
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
271
December 26, 1868.]
LONDON ON LYNE.
{Some eccentric Lines.*)
Lather Ignatius the Deacon !
This is the subject to speak ou.
He isn’t a Priest,
No, not in the least,
Only Lather Ignatius the Deacon.
Dear me ! at some time or other
This gentleman called himself “ Brother
Now he would rather
Call himself “ Lather; ”
He’s Father Ignatius the Deacon.
There lately has been a slight row,
I think it is all settled now,
’Tw'as a lady who would make a vow—
She was but a young and a weak ’un:
So when she had made it, she took it
To Lather Ignatius, to book it,
Said she, “ He’s a Saint—don’t he look it ? ”
Dear Lather Ignatius the Deacon.
Oh Good Gracious!
Lather Ignatius,
Even young women are »2<???dacious.
Lor after this girl had made a vow.
To do or to don’t, I can’t tell now
What was its object, or how she spoke it;
Whatever it was, it’s certain she broke it.
Then Father Ignatius rose up in a rage.
And paced about like a man ou a stage ;
He called for his book,
And he called for his candle,
He called for his bell.
Which he held by the handle ;
When, just as the Acolyte lighted the taper,
Cries Ignatius, “ Stop ! bring to me pen, ink, and paper.”
With extracts, in Latin, made from a Missal,
Ignatius indited a sacred epistle.
The sum of the translation
Was “EXCOMMUNICATION ! ”
What did she do ? this girl of a vow ?
Did she at once to the sentence bow ?
Or grovel in ashes ?
Or answer with clashes ?
Or hang herself in a couple of sashes ?
No she did nothing at all of this sort:
She simply behaved as a good child ought.
She went to Mamma and showed her the letter.
Says Ma, “ I should just like to see him !! he’d better ! !”
“It’s like his impudence,” says she,
“ He’s not heard the first nor the last of me.
She called for her bonnet,
She called for her shawl,
She called for her servant
A cab to call,
And away they went to Fulham to see
The Bishop of London, Tait, A.C.
Archibald Campbell Tait is he
Who’s just appointed to Canterburie ;
“ I ’ve half a mind,” said he, with a frown,
“ To take away Brother Ignatius’ gown;
If Mr. Lyne
Were a Deacon of mine,
1 ’d very soon take him a peg or two down.
His teaching ’s not bad,
But his practice is awful.
This Excommu-’tis quite unlawful.”
So he writes to the Rector, Mr. Hill,
Whose church Ignatius used to fill.
To say the days of Ignatius are numbered,
“ I won’t have him preach in the street of the Lombard.
* The story of how Father Ignatius excommunicated a young lad}',
who appealed to her mother, who appealed to the BioHOR or London, has
appeared in several papers within the last fortnight.
“ The world is spacious.
Brother Ignatius
Can go and preach just where he may please ;
But he doesn’t come here.
That is, my dear
Mr. Hill, while I’m master in this diocese.”
Postscript ad Linum.
Mister Lyne, you’re a Christian, be a meek’un,
Behave as becomes a man and a Deacon.
You’re only a Deacon, think of that.
With just as much right
That note to indite
To that young lady, as my old hat.
Come, no more scandals,
Drop your sandals,
Your flowers and candles,
And be to our flocks a flaming Beacon,
As Parson Lyne,
Yon yet may shine,
If you drop this Father Ignatius the Deacon.
A LITTLE WORD EROM A LITTLE BIRD.
Please, Mr. Punch, why should a canary not be treated as kindly as
a cat ? This is not a riddle, but a question which was asked the other
day at Bow Street, where the Magistrate was requested to state if he
could punish a brute who “ tamed ” canaries by breaking both their
wings, and then showed the little crippled creatures in the streets,
where people paid their pennies to see how tame they were, and how
fond they seemed, because they did not fly away from him. I should
have thought that cruelty like this was legally forbidden; but, alas! I
find that—
“ Mr. Vaughan, after consulting the statutes, said that a bird was not an
animal within the meaning of the Act for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,
even if the specific act of cruelty alleged in this case could be proved.”
I often hear young ladies sing, “ Oh, would I were a bird ! ” but,
until the law be altered, they are surely very silly for expressing such
a wish. How would they like the cruel torture of having their poor
wings broken, so that they might seem tame, and then the farther tor-
ture of gaining a good living for the wretch who had thus crippled them,
and whose cruelty the law as yet is powerless to prevent! I know that
it is often rather hard to ascertain the “ meaning ” of an Act of Parlia-
ment, and, of course, I am aware that “ a bird is not an animal.” But
I can’t see why the law should not prevent a man from being cruel to
canaries, as well as dogs and cats ; and I hope Sir Richard Mayne
will get it altered for the sake of his small namesake.
Poor Dicky.
A BREAK-DOWN IN COURT.
The wisdom, humanity, and utility of keeping jurors confined all
night long, pending their detention on a trial for felony, has been beau-
tifully illustrated again. At the Central Criminal Court, the other
day, before Mr. Baron Cleasby, a man was indicted for forging a
will. The case not having concluded that day, the jurors were all
locked up for the night, of course. The next morning it was found
when they were placed in the jury-box, that one of them was too ill to
continue to perform his duty. A medical witness deposed that the
man was suffering from “disease of the lungs,” threatening hsemorrhage,
and pronounced the opinion “ that his life would be endangered if he,
was compelled to continue his attendance in the jury-box.” Accord-
ingly, the Judge discharged the jury and ordered a fresh trial, of
necessity sine die, to the relief of the prisoner’s mind, in case of his
innocence, no less than to the advantage and accommodation of the
witnesses and prosecution, whose time may be of no value to anybody,
not even to the owners.
All this is as it should be in all, if in any, judicial proceedings which
comprise juries. But what should be is only in cases of felony, and is
not, once more let us repeat, in cases of misdemeanour, though punish-
able with penal servitude. How long will the Legislature need to
have beaten into their heads the equal necessity of locking up j uries
together every night in cases of misdemeanour too, and together
with the gentlemen of the jury, of locking up my Lord Judge?
New Work on the Turf.
A party by the name of Browning has just published The Ring
and the Book. Judging by the turfy sound of the title, the author
must be the Mr. Dunn-Browning “ well known in racing circles,”
not the Mr. Robert Browning better known in literary. As both
are of the book-making fraternity, such a confusion is conceivable.
271
December 26, 1868.]
LONDON ON LYNE.
{Some eccentric Lines.*)
Lather Ignatius the Deacon !
This is the subject to speak ou.
He isn’t a Priest,
No, not in the least,
Only Lather Ignatius the Deacon.
Dear me ! at some time or other
This gentleman called himself “ Brother
Now he would rather
Call himself “ Lather; ”
He’s Father Ignatius the Deacon.
There lately has been a slight row,
I think it is all settled now,
’Tw'as a lady who would make a vow—
She was but a young and a weak ’un:
So when she had made it, she took it
To Lather Ignatius, to book it,
Said she, “ He’s a Saint—don’t he look it ? ”
Dear Lather Ignatius the Deacon.
Oh Good Gracious!
Lather Ignatius,
Even young women are »2<???dacious.
Lor after this girl had made a vow.
To do or to don’t, I can’t tell now
What was its object, or how she spoke it;
Whatever it was, it’s certain she broke it.
Then Father Ignatius rose up in a rage.
And paced about like a man ou a stage ;
He called for his book,
And he called for his candle,
He called for his bell.
Which he held by the handle ;
When, just as the Acolyte lighted the taper,
Cries Ignatius, “ Stop ! bring to me pen, ink, and paper.”
With extracts, in Latin, made from a Missal,
Ignatius indited a sacred epistle.
The sum of the translation
Was “EXCOMMUNICATION ! ”
What did she do ? this girl of a vow ?
Did she at once to the sentence bow ?
Or grovel in ashes ?
Or answer with clashes ?
Or hang herself in a couple of sashes ?
No she did nothing at all of this sort:
She simply behaved as a good child ought.
She went to Mamma and showed her the letter.
Says Ma, “ I should just like to see him !! he’d better ! !”
“It’s like his impudence,” says she,
“ He’s not heard the first nor the last of me.
She called for her bonnet,
She called for her shawl,
She called for her servant
A cab to call,
And away they went to Fulham to see
The Bishop of London, Tait, A.C.
Archibald Campbell Tait is he
Who’s just appointed to Canterburie ;
“ I ’ve half a mind,” said he, with a frown,
“ To take away Brother Ignatius’ gown;
If Mr. Lyne
Were a Deacon of mine,
1 ’d very soon take him a peg or two down.
His teaching ’s not bad,
But his practice is awful.
This Excommu-’tis quite unlawful.”
So he writes to the Rector, Mr. Hill,
Whose church Ignatius used to fill.
To say the days of Ignatius are numbered,
“ I won’t have him preach in the street of the Lombard.
* The story of how Father Ignatius excommunicated a young lad}',
who appealed to her mother, who appealed to the BioHOR or London, has
appeared in several papers within the last fortnight.
“ The world is spacious.
Brother Ignatius
Can go and preach just where he may please ;
But he doesn’t come here.
That is, my dear
Mr. Hill, while I’m master in this diocese.”
Postscript ad Linum.
Mister Lyne, you’re a Christian, be a meek’un,
Behave as becomes a man and a Deacon.
You’re only a Deacon, think of that.
With just as much right
That note to indite
To that young lady, as my old hat.
Come, no more scandals,
Drop your sandals,
Your flowers and candles,
And be to our flocks a flaming Beacon,
As Parson Lyne,
Yon yet may shine,
If you drop this Father Ignatius the Deacon.
A LITTLE WORD EROM A LITTLE BIRD.
Please, Mr. Punch, why should a canary not be treated as kindly as
a cat ? This is not a riddle, but a question which was asked the other
day at Bow Street, where the Magistrate was requested to state if he
could punish a brute who “ tamed ” canaries by breaking both their
wings, and then showed the little crippled creatures in the streets,
where people paid their pennies to see how tame they were, and how
fond they seemed, because they did not fly away from him. I should
have thought that cruelty like this was legally forbidden; but, alas! I
find that—
“ Mr. Vaughan, after consulting the statutes, said that a bird was not an
animal within the meaning of the Act for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,
even if the specific act of cruelty alleged in this case could be proved.”
I often hear young ladies sing, “ Oh, would I were a bird ! ” but,
until the law be altered, they are surely very silly for expressing such
a wish. How would they like the cruel torture of having their poor
wings broken, so that they might seem tame, and then the farther tor-
ture of gaining a good living for the wretch who had thus crippled them,
and whose cruelty the law as yet is powerless to prevent! I know that
it is often rather hard to ascertain the “ meaning ” of an Act of Parlia-
ment, and, of course, I am aware that “ a bird is not an animal.” But
I can’t see why the law should not prevent a man from being cruel to
canaries, as well as dogs and cats ; and I hope Sir Richard Mayne
will get it altered for the sake of his small namesake.
Poor Dicky.
A BREAK-DOWN IN COURT.
The wisdom, humanity, and utility of keeping jurors confined all
night long, pending their detention on a trial for felony, has been beau-
tifully illustrated again. At the Central Criminal Court, the other
day, before Mr. Baron Cleasby, a man was indicted for forging a
will. The case not having concluded that day, the jurors were all
locked up for the night, of course. The next morning it was found
when they were placed in the jury-box, that one of them was too ill to
continue to perform his duty. A medical witness deposed that the
man was suffering from “disease of the lungs,” threatening hsemorrhage,
and pronounced the opinion “ that his life would be endangered if he,
was compelled to continue his attendance in the jury-box.” Accord-
ingly, the Judge discharged the jury and ordered a fresh trial, of
necessity sine die, to the relief of the prisoner’s mind, in case of his
innocence, no less than to the advantage and accommodation of the
witnesses and prosecution, whose time may be of no value to anybody,
not even to the owners.
All this is as it should be in all, if in any, judicial proceedings which
comprise juries. But what should be is only in cases of felony, and is
not, once more let us repeat, in cases of misdemeanour, though punish-
able with penal servitude. How long will the Legislature need to
have beaten into their heads the equal necessity of locking up j uries
together every night in cases of misdemeanour too, and together
with the gentlemen of the jury, of locking up my Lord Judge?
New Work on the Turf.
A party by the name of Browning has just published The Ring
and the Book. Judging by the turfy sound of the title, the author
must be the Mr. Dunn-Browning “ well known in racing circles,”
not the Mr. Robert Browning better known in literary. As both
are of the book-making fraternity, such a confusion is conceivable.