DOI Heft:
June 26, 1869
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.16883#0264
June 26, 1869.] PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
259
THE BEARD MOVEMENT.
Policeman {invidiously). “ It’s puffectly Hoptional vith us, you know!”
[“ The Hairs them P'licemen give their selves,” John remarked afterwards, in
the Servants' Hall.
ODE TO UTILITY.
{On Mr. Cowper’s Commons Preservation Bill.)
Material Utility,
With what a wise servility
Tor thy substantial wages labour we,
And with no brute stupidity,
No grovelling cupidity,
All things of beauty sacrifice to thee 1
The progress of machinery
Is fast improving scenery
From off the face of this industrious isle.
The railways are victorious.
And architecture glorious
About each station thriving builders pile.
Where once, in ages drearier.
Stood groves, stand shops superior,
The public-house shoots up where bloomed the thorn.
Soon will arise dense villages
On land that under tillage is,
Where the red poppy clots the growing com.
The landscape, in the olden time.
By owls esteemed a golden time,
Adorned with spires that pointed to the sky,
Exhibits now, in lieu of them,
Tall chimneys, not a few of them,
Whose factory smoke conceals it from each eye.
Then with our whole ability
For thee we ’ll slave, Utility,
Using old England up by swift degrees,
All our green fields—coal measures too—
Yielding ourselves those pleasures to
Pigs which engross and make mankind Chinese.
Scan. Mag.
The disgraceful and contemptible figure cut now and
lately by so many insolvent sporting members of the
Peerage, suggests a question which Mr. Sothern, the next
time he plays Lord Dundreary, may ask as a “ widdle.” If
a nobleman who is a racing gambler were to take to honest
industry and turn respectable workman, what workman
would he begin with being ? A Turf-cutter.
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
It is universally admitted by all who have the faintest excuse for
calling themselves Rational Beings, that though it is entirely impos-
sible to predict the mode in which Mr. Punch will deal with any ques-
tion whatever, it is absolutely certain that such mode will be profoundly
wise and exquisitely graceful. With this wholly inadequate tribute to
himself, which does but echo the voice of admiring Creation, he takes
leave to introduce his account of the Great Debate which occupied the
House of Lords last week. He proposes in some degree to depart
from his ordinary—yet extraordinary—method of condensing Parlia-
mentary eloquence. He does this, partly because were he to deal out
but a Modicum—neuter Latin noun, signifying a little—of justice to
each of the orations which have been delivered by the Peers, his present
number would comprise nothing but Essence of Senate. Chiefly, how-
ever, because in the exercise of that brilliant and unerring judgment
which is among his myriad merits, the topic and tone of the debate in
question, do not lend themselves so readily to his coruscating wit and
scintillating sarcasm as do most discussions in both branches of the
Legislature. His lamented contributor and friend, the late Artemus
Ward, with much good taste, declined to make jokes about the
Rocky Mountains, as may be seen in his famous Lecture, just hand-
somely published. In the same spirit, Mr. Punch holds that though as
a rule the Peers themselves gain enormously by his criticisms, which
indeed have notoriously educated the House of Lords up to its present
standard, and kept it well with the nation, the present occasion is one
on wjiich he may satisfactorily discharge his magnificent duty by a
calm and just record of incidents. The Great Council has been worthily
discussing questions on which Mr. Punch never thinks lightly, and
i therefore never speaks lightly:
“ For Punch is He who always speaks his thougnr,
And always thinks the very thing he ought.”
The debate has been upon Mr. Gladstone’s Bill for Disestablishing
| and Disendowing the Protestant Church in Ireland. The question was
whether the Lords should read this Bill a Second Time, with a view to
the introduction of alterations which the Conservatives would consider
amendments, or whether the measure should be rejected altogether.
The battle raged for four long nights, and Thirty-Seven nobles spoke.
They may be assorted into three divisions. Ministerialists, under
Lord Granville, supported the Bill as a whole. Conservatives, under
Lord Derby (still the virtual head of the party nominally led by
Lord Cairns) opposed the Bill as a whole. Conservatives and some
Liberals, under Lord Salisbury, held, first, that the national will
had been so clearly expressed at the elections, and by the large
majority in the Commons, that it did not befit the Lords to reject
the Bill, and secondly, that they might obtain better terms for the
Church, and place themselves in a better attitude in regard to the
country, by accepting the principle of the Bill, altering it in Com-
mittee, and throwing upon the Ministers the responsibility of refusing
the amendments. An intelligent Public and a studious Posterity
will, by this exposition, precisely comprehend the struggle in June,
1869.
Some of the speeches will be Historical. To those only—with a lew
exceptions—is it Mr. Punch's intention to advert with any detail. But
it is due to every Peer who spoke in this debate to say that all appeared
to be impressed with a sense of the importance and even solemnity of
the theme, and. that though every legitimate weapon of attack and
defence was used with the best skill a combatant^ chanced to possess,
the battle was fought with chivalry. Both the Established Church of
Ireland, and the Irish People must feel that the case was amply and
admirably argued, that the very utmost was done on both sides, and
that this ought to be the Final Hearing of the great cause.
Monday. Earl Granville (Minister) proposed the Second Reading,
in a speech intended to be conciliatory, and therefore adroitly pitched
I in a lower key than was adopted by the Premier, when introducing
the Bill. Government, pledged to the principles ol the Bill, would
respectfully consider amendments of details.
The Earl of Harrowby, in a straight-forward, honest address, of
no merit beyond its earnestness, moved that the Bill be rejected.
259
THE BEARD MOVEMENT.
Policeman {invidiously). “ It’s puffectly Hoptional vith us, you know!”
[“ The Hairs them P'licemen give their selves,” John remarked afterwards, in
the Servants' Hall.
ODE TO UTILITY.
{On Mr. Cowper’s Commons Preservation Bill.)
Material Utility,
With what a wise servility
Tor thy substantial wages labour we,
And with no brute stupidity,
No grovelling cupidity,
All things of beauty sacrifice to thee 1
The progress of machinery
Is fast improving scenery
From off the face of this industrious isle.
The railways are victorious.
And architecture glorious
About each station thriving builders pile.
Where once, in ages drearier.
Stood groves, stand shops superior,
The public-house shoots up where bloomed the thorn.
Soon will arise dense villages
On land that under tillage is,
Where the red poppy clots the growing com.
The landscape, in the olden time.
By owls esteemed a golden time,
Adorned with spires that pointed to the sky,
Exhibits now, in lieu of them,
Tall chimneys, not a few of them,
Whose factory smoke conceals it from each eye.
Then with our whole ability
For thee we ’ll slave, Utility,
Using old England up by swift degrees,
All our green fields—coal measures too—
Yielding ourselves those pleasures to
Pigs which engross and make mankind Chinese.
Scan. Mag.
The disgraceful and contemptible figure cut now and
lately by so many insolvent sporting members of the
Peerage, suggests a question which Mr. Sothern, the next
time he plays Lord Dundreary, may ask as a “ widdle.” If
a nobleman who is a racing gambler were to take to honest
industry and turn respectable workman, what workman
would he begin with being ? A Turf-cutter.
PUNCH’S ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
It is universally admitted by all who have the faintest excuse for
calling themselves Rational Beings, that though it is entirely impos-
sible to predict the mode in which Mr. Punch will deal with any ques-
tion whatever, it is absolutely certain that such mode will be profoundly
wise and exquisitely graceful. With this wholly inadequate tribute to
himself, which does but echo the voice of admiring Creation, he takes
leave to introduce his account of the Great Debate which occupied the
House of Lords last week. He proposes in some degree to depart
from his ordinary—yet extraordinary—method of condensing Parlia-
mentary eloquence. He does this, partly because were he to deal out
but a Modicum—neuter Latin noun, signifying a little—of justice to
each of the orations which have been delivered by the Peers, his present
number would comprise nothing but Essence of Senate. Chiefly, how-
ever, because in the exercise of that brilliant and unerring judgment
which is among his myriad merits, the topic and tone of the debate in
question, do not lend themselves so readily to his coruscating wit and
scintillating sarcasm as do most discussions in both branches of the
Legislature. His lamented contributor and friend, the late Artemus
Ward, with much good taste, declined to make jokes about the
Rocky Mountains, as may be seen in his famous Lecture, just hand-
somely published. In the same spirit, Mr. Punch holds that though as
a rule the Peers themselves gain enormously by his criticisms, which
indeed have notoriously educated the House of Lords up to its present
standard, and kept it well with the nation, the present occasion is one
on wjiich he may satisfactorily discharge his magnificent duty by a
calm and just record of incidents. The Great Council has been worthily
discussing questions on which Mr. Punch never thinks lightly, and
i therefore never speaks lightly:
“ For Punch is He who always speaks his thougnr,
And always thinks the very thing he ought.”
The debate has been upon Mr. Gladstone’s Bill for Disestablishing
| and Disendowing the Protestant Church in Ireland. The question was
whether the Lords should read this Bill a Second Time, with a view to
the introduction of alterations which the Conservatives would consider
amendments, or whether the measure should be rejected altogether.
The battle raged for four long nights, and Thirty-Seven nobles spoke.
They may be assorted into three divisions. Ministerialists, under
Lord Granville, supported the Bill as a whole. Conservatives, under
Lord Derby (still the virtual head of the party nominally led by
Lord Cairns) opposed the Bill as a whole. Conservatives and some
Liberals, under Lord Salisbury, held, first, that the national will
had been so clearly expressed at the elections, and by the large
majority in the Commons, that it did not befit the Lords to reject
the Bill, and secondly, that they might obtain better terms for the
Church, and place themselves in a better attitude in regard to the
country, by accepting the principle of the Bill, altering it in Com-
mittee, and throwing upon the Ministers the responsibility of refusing
the amendments. An intelligent Public and a studious Posterity
will, by this exposition, precisely comprehend the struggle in June,
1869.
Some of the speeches will be Historical. To those only—with a lew
exceptions—is it Mr. Punch's intention to advert with any detail. But
it is due to every Peer who spoke in this debate to say that all appeared
to be impressed with a sense of the importance and even solemnity of
the theme, and. that though every legitimate weapon of attack and
defence was used with the best skill a combatant^ chanced to possess,
the battle was fought with chivalry. Both the Established Church of
Ireland, and the Irish People must feel that the case was amply and
admirably argued, that the very utmost was done on both sides, and
that this ought to be the Final Hearing of the great cause.
Monday. Earl Granville (Minister) proposed the Second Reading,
in a speech intended to be conciliatory, and therefore adroitly pitched
I in a lower key than was adopted by the Premier, when introducing
the Bill. Government, pledged to the principles ol the Bill, would
respectfully consider amendments of details.
The Earl of Harrowby, in a straight-forward, honest address, of
no merit beyond its earnestness, moved that the Bill be rejected.