Punch (67.1874)

August 29, 1874.]

PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.

85

STRICTLY

“ Family all out qf Town ! ”

“ I KNOW.

PROFESSIONAL.

But this is for you. It’s my Hoffer of my ’And and
’Art. I ’ll call for the Answer next Round ! ”

DEMOCRITUS AT BELFAST.

(See Report of Professor Tyndall’s Inaugural Discourse
to the British Association.')

Tyndall, high-perched on Speculation’s summit,

May drop his sounding-line in Nature’s ocean,

But that great deep has depths beyond his plummet,
The springs of law and life, mind, matter, motion.

Democritus imagined that the soul
Was made of atoms, spheric, smooth, and fiery:
Plato conceived it as a radiant whole—

A heavenly unit baffling Man’s inquiry.

Indolent Gods, immeasurably bored,

Beyond the blast of Boreas and Eurus,

Too lazy Man to punish or reward,

Such was the Heaven conceived by Epicurus.

If, as the wide-observant Darwin dreams,

Man he development of the Ascidian,

Methinks his great deeds and poetic dreams

Scarce square with his molluscous pre-meridian.

But, even as Milton’s demons, problem-tossed,

When they had set their Maker at defiance,

Still “found no end, in wandering mazes lost,”

So is it with our modern men of science.

Still in the “ Open Sesame” of Law,

Life’s master-key professing to deliver,

But meeting with deaf ear or scorn-clenched jaw,

Our question “ Doth not law imply law-giver ? ”

Betwixt the Garden and the Portico,

Thou, vacillating savant, often flittest,

And when we seek the source of law to know,

Giv’st us a phrase, “ survival of the fittest.”

Pray who may be the fittest to survive,

The spark of thought for coming time to kindle,

The sacred fire of science keep alive ?—

Plato, Agassiz, Humboldt, Huxley, Tyndall ?

If Tyndall’s last word he indeed the last—

Of Hope and Faith hence with each rag and tatter !
A black cloud shrouds our future as our past;

Matter, the wise man’s God: the Crowd’s-no

Matter!

OUTRAGE ON THE ARCHDEACON OE TAUNTON.

An outrage of studied atrocity has been practised on the sensi-
bilities of our dear Archdeacon Denison. The Venerable Arch-
deacon has described it as “Church-Breaking at East Brent.” It
was not the fault of our doughty champion of the Church militant
if it did not result in “ Head-Breaking at East Brent,” also. Its
particulars are related in a letter to the Bristol Times and Mirror,
signed “ C. B. Churchill, Churchwarden.” When it became
known at East Brent thqt the Public Worship Regulation Bill had.
passed the House of Commons, certain “most influential” inhabi-
tants of the parish actually desired Mr. Churchill to set the church
bells ringing; and Mr. Churchill is not ashamed to say that he
did set the church bells ringing accordingly. Everybody who knows
Archdeacon Denison’s principles must see that to cause his own
church bells to be rung for the passing a measure designed “ to put
down Ritualism,” was at once as gross and as refined an indignity
as could have been offered him. Suppose any Frenchman, but
particularly the Archbishop of Paris, heard the bells of Notre
Dame rung in honour of the anniversary of Sedan!

The ringing directed by this unfaithful Churchwarden aroused the
indignant Archdeacon. The Churchwarden had gone to get a key to
open the bell-chamber door, that he might inspect the bells, when
the Archdeacon appeared in the belfry, and the former, on his
return, found that the latter “ had frightened the ringers away.”
He had also locked the belfry-door, and taken away the key. Let
Mr. Churchill continue :—

“ Whereupon, thinking myself very improperly treated, I proceeded with
about one hundred of my fellow-parishioners to the church, and instructed
the village blacksmith to open the belfry-door, which he did, when, to o ir
astonishment, we discovered the Archdeacon, in conjunction with four or five
others, secreted behind it, armed with very formidable and dangerous wea-
pons. At this juncture the Archdeacon sprang to the doorway, brandishing a
big stick, with which he made the most strenuous efforts at resistance. How-
ever, as you are aware, an entrance was made, although in doing so one was

severely injured by an iron bar, used by one of those who resisted our
entrance.”

It thus appears that the valiant Archdeacon was overpowered by
numbers, and that the anti-Ritualistic ringing proceeded. Fancy
its effect on the feelings of an Archdeacon who regards triumphant
peals from Church towers as the music of a better day:—

“ When the Mass was sung and the bells were rung
And the feast eat merrily.”

The unblushing Mr. Churchill thus concludes his narrative :—

“ It will, I think, be most obvious that the above conduct is highly blam-
able, especially when we remember that it proceeds from a person holding the
office of Archdeacon.”

“ Partly proceeds ”—Mr. Churchill. It will, perhaps, be urged
on the other side, partly, or even mainly, proceeds also from a person
holding the office of Churchwarden. Many people will doubt which
side was the more to blame. Let us not attempt to compose such
great strifes. But it may be allowable to congratulate Archdeacon
Denison on the redoubtable attitude he assumed with the big stick,
confronting the audacious Churchill (whose name we have no
doubt the Archdeacon spells without the A). Mr. Punch would
suggest that the stout Archdeacon might well sit for the likeness of
St. Dunstan in a picture, to be painted by a competent artist, of the
famous exploit performed by that intrepid ecclesiastic with the red-
hot tongs on the nose of a certain antagonist. What a subject for a
Ritualistic memorial window in the Church of East Brent!

The Point of Attack.—Nothing can more clearly show the
Anti-Clerical malignity of Dissent than the fact that Dissentei’s
from the Turf assail even that Venerable Institution through its
Chaplin !

The Toast of the Thyme.—“ The Moor the merrier! ”