Punch (75.1878)

November 16, 1878.] PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI. 217

A HOME IN THE GALTEES.

" TlS sweet to know there IS an eye will mark

Our coming, and look brighter when we come."—Byron.

WHO KNOWS BEST?

(A Question for the Commissioners)

Scene—The Interior of a Famous City Church.
Enter two Strangers.

First Stranger (looking round). Ah! the old walls still
stand, and time has dealt gently with the work. Faith
it was goodly work; and even now bears on it the stamp
of that vanished age !

Second Stranger. "Vanished age ? What do you mean,
Sir ? Where's your past here ?

First Stranger. Past ? Methinks, my good Sir, that
the epoch which saw this noble City rise, Phoenix-like,
from its ashes, might be held worthy of its memorials.
This church, for instance -

Second Stranger. Just so ; and we are going to restore
it—rather !

First Stranger. I am glad to hear it. The land-marks
of olden days should not be lost.

Second Stranger. Precisely. That's our motto. So
we 're going to get rid of. all that rubbishing old carv-
ing, scrape the chancel, pitch-pine the nave, sink the
floor, throw up the roof, pierce the sides, cut the whole
in half, then turn what's left inside-out, finishing off
with a dozen coats of pink and pea-green—and there
you are !

First Stranger [coldly). And you term this restoration ?

Second Stranger (ivarmly). And ain't it? It's our
firm's business. Our Governor's got dozens of churches
in hand.

First Stranger. The process likes me not. Methinks
it savours foully of sacrilege.

Second Stranger. Sacrilege! What do you mean,
Sir ? Why, we 're the Restorers ! And who, I should
like to know, are you ?

First Stranger. The Architect!

[Sir Christopher''s ghost vanishes.

Poet and Propket.

Burns, bard of Scotia's braes and banks,
Foretold Directors' recent pranks,

Though nane wad tent it—
And yet his verse each scribbler quotes—
" A chiel's amang ye takin' notes."

Sae it stands prentit!

A EE SPITE POR ROGUES.

Tou suspect your grocer, chandler, or general-dealer of having
watered his rum, sanded his sugar, wetted his tobacco, substituted
potato-starch for arrowroot, or mingled heterogeneous matters of any
description with his tea, coffee, tobacco, snuff, vinegar, and pepper.
Tou wish to ascertain whether or no these suspicions are just, to the
intent of pulling up a possibly dishonest tradesman under the Food
and Drugs Act of 1875.

You repair to his shop, you purchase a sample of a suspected
article, and take it away to get it analysed. Or you employ a
Sanitary Inspector, or some other professional analyst, to procure
and test it. But, by a special provision of the Act above named, the
purchaser having made his purchase, is required to tell the vendor
that the sample has been purchased for the purpose of analysis.

Another clause of that Act provides that, to constitute an in-
fringement of it, the sale of an adulterated article must be made
to the prejudice of the purchaser. What prejudice can you have
sustained from the purchase of a thing which you have bought
merely for the purpose of experiment ? The worse the better for
that. Fiat experimentum in corpore vili. Of course, d fortiori, an
adulterated article cannot be bought by any professional analyst,
in his professional capacity, to his own prejudice.

So says common logic. So do the Lord Chief Justice of England,
the Justiciary Appeal Court of Scotland, and Sir James Ingham,
Stipendiary Archbeak, read the Food and Drugs Act of 1875. His
Worship, following their Lordships, "has decided that the selling
of adulterated milk to a Sanitary Inspector is not an infringement
of the Act, inasmuch as the sale is not made to the prejudice of
the purchaser." (See The Lancet.) Here's "a go ! " as the school-
boys say. Every conviction obtained during three years under that
Act is wrong ; and every rogue, however deservedly fined, has,
been fined illegally. Whether or no the rogues could recover the
amount of their fines, may be a question which the legal sages
might or might not also rule in their favour.

So, then, Clause 14 (the Rogues' Clause) of the Food and Drugs
Act simply makes that enactment of none effect.

As early as possible next Session, of course, the Act will be ex-
purgated of the provision which renders it a dead letter. In the
meanwhile, dear friends and consumers, mind with whom you deal;
for, of course, between this and then fraudulent shopkeepers will
endeavour to make all the bad hay they can whilst their malific sun
shines.

HONOUR v. RIGHT.

(A Conscientious War-Song.)

From Shere Ali we 've met with a snub and rebuff,
For which we, perhaps, gave him reason enough ;
But, because we've not used him as well as we ought,
'Twill ne'er do to permit him to set us at naught.

We have made a mistake ; true, but what's done is done;
And we 're bound to proceed in the way once begun ;
Right or wrong, never mind—we must go in to win ;
Nor care more than King Richaed, though sin pluck on sin.

There is much on the other side, needs we must own,
To be said for our letting this Ameer alone ;
But " prestige " we may lose by forbearing to fight,
So we can't feel quite sure the wise course is the right.

To be just and fear nought may be policy sound,
As between man and man—but it won't do all round;
Christian ethics our conduct in private may rule,
But the Statesman whose acts they restrain is a fool.

Let's be bold, ever bold—we are out of harm's way—
Whilst from battle and murder deliverance we pray.
That's in church ; but man's blood without stint must be shed,
When a loss of " prestige " we have reason to dread.

There 's one fear a Briton can own without shame,
That's the fear of risking the national fame ;
Britain's Lion is brave as a Lion can be,
If his courage were moral no Lion were he.

VOL. LXXV.

u