Punch: Punch (69.1875)

August 21, 1875.] PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI. 67

AN EVENING'S FISHING (BEHINO THE DISTILLERY AT SLIGO).

First Factory Lad. " Dom'nick, did you gkt e'er a BrTE at all?"
Second Ditto. " Sorra wan, Pat. Only wan small wan !"

First DMo. " YerrvhI Lave it thbre, an' come Home. Sbure you'il get more than that in Bed!"

the taking retainers in more cases than a man can attend to; the
employing of clerks to screw up their masters' fees, and so forth.
Barristers' fees, like physicians', once came under the description
of "honoraria" the honour of the recipient dispensing with the
need of legal bond between employer and employed. Physicians'
fees are now recoverable at law. No wonder if, under the influence
of such malpractices at the Bar as the above, a feeling is growing
up that the sooner Counsels' fees are made matters of common
contract—where money paid on the one hand means work done on
the other—the better.

With the Second Reading of the Appropriation Bill came the
Review of the Session—both sides of the shield. Lord Hartington
took the black, in discharge of his duty as Head of Her Majesty's
Opposition. Could he do less, after the stupendous coolness of that
Mansion-House mystification ?

"Labour Laws, about the best thing Government had done—but all
the good in them picked out of the pigeon-holes, or brains, of the
late Administration; Public Health Act, mere draughtsman's work;
Artisans' Dwellings Act a big Towns Improvement Bill made
general; Friendly Societies Act, great cry and little wool—without
security against dishonest, local administration, or provision for
trustworthy audit; Unseaworthy Ships Act, a stop-gap, run up in
a scare; the Judicature Act, another stop-gap, forced on Govern-
ment by a mutiny ; Agricultural Holdings Act, a law for Landlords
and Tenants to contract themselves out of; wasted time of the
Session, due not to the factiousness of Opposition, but to the feeble-
ness of Government.

" Summary of the Session:— Public business mismanaged; Par-
liamentary prestige lowered; Legislation emasculated."

Disraeli, 0_.C, contra:

" So much for Opposition's criticism on Government. Opposition
having been a nullity, Government cannot criticise Opposition.. Our
Labour Laws do embody a principle, and we did not find it in our
predecessors' pigeon-holes: it is Abolition of Imprisonment for
Breach of Civil Contract.

" Our Public Health Act is more than a consolidation. It contains

alterations and amendments of the existing law. If our Artisans'
Dwellings Act merely invites to Town Improvements, why did you
leave us to give the invitation i Besides, millions are waiting to be
invested under it. Our Friendly Societies Bill does all that was
practicable. Our own Merchant Shipping Bill Opposition amend-
ments forced us to give up, willy-nilly ; and we were very glad to
get the help of public excitement to save what we have saved out
of the wreck of it. Our Judicature Bill is, at least, an improvement
upon yours. If the Agricultural Holdings Act does little, you would
fain have had us do less ; you were always advising us to put it off
to another year. If our measures want the element of compulsion,
it is because we prefer that of persuasion. If time has been wasted,
it has been the fault chiefly of a headless Opposition. If the dignity
of the House has been lowered, thank the Members for Stoke and
Louth for it—not Her Majesty's Government, or me its head. What
case has the Honourable Leader of Her Majesty's Opposition made
out ? Has he proved that we have done nothing, or that it has done
anything ? "
Punch, C.J.:

" An unsatisfactory Session. Little to raise the credit of Par-
liament in the matter of Legislation—a great deal to lower it in the
manner. Her Majesty's Government and its Leader, and Her
Majesty's Opposition and its Leader, equally below the mark."

With this duello of the Leaders really ends the Session. No
Essence is to be extracted from the dregs and driblets of the last
few days—devoted in both Houses to Third Readings, and considera-
tion of Commons' Amendments by Lords, and Lords' by Commons.

Only on Monday, when the Session was real1 y over, and the House
had dwindled to the faggest of its fag-end, Lord G. Hamilton
brought in the Indian Budget. Mr. Fawcett moved a Resolution
oensuring the Government for this mockery.

Mr. Grant Duff, from his own experience, does not think the
House would pay a bit more attention to the Indian Budget if it
were brought in in the prime of the Session.

Much depends on its introducer.

Lord G. Hamilton had a pretty good account to render, with