DOI issue:
November 11, 1882
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.17753#0226
220
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[November 11, 1881$.
ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
EXTRACTED FROM
THE DIARY OF TOBY, M.P.
THE NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE PRIZE PUZZLE : OR. HOW TO FIT IN THE SPEAKER.
House of Commons, Monday Night, October 30.—More than ever
impressed with the business capacity of House. Spent two hours
and. a half to-night on thrilling discussion as to whether the Closure
Question should be put by the Speaker or by a Minister of the
Crown. Had a dim fancy that had heard something of this before.
Possibly in some previous state of existence. Still, so entrancingly
interesting that no one could grudge repetition, and would look
forward with satisfaction to expectation of renewal away in the
ewigkeit.
At the end of two hours and a half, Stafford Northcote made
surprising aud pleasing discovery that in May last a similar Resolu-
tion been before the House, and debated at great length. The
Speaker admitted the fact, but ruled that since the terms were
enlarged, the Motion was not out of order.
Glad to hear this. Shall tack on another half-yard, and we ’ll
have it all over again next week.
Whilst away iu the dining-room, drawing up terms of my
Amendment, Captain Aylmer moved to restrict speeches to ten
minutes’ duration. Captain a little mixed as to where his Amend-
ment to come in. Got, as it were, between the legs of the First
Resolution. Apart from this little maladroitness, gallant Captain
ha,s hit the bull’s-eye. What we want is shorter speeches. Ten
minutes won’t do, but twenty would admirably. Remember late
Mr. Disraeli saying to me, “ Take my word for it, Toby, there’s no
man in the world, except Mr. Gladstone, who cannot say everything
he has to say, and say it at his best, in twenty minutes.”
Exception to disadvantage of Weg, a little spiteful. “ Ver-
bosity,” as Mr. Thomasson says, “is like drink, ft grows upon a
man. Just as one begins with a nip a day, and goes on to nineteen,
so some men begin with short speeches, and go on to windy
orations.”
But Weg can, and he will, make telling speeches within limits of
twenty minutes. See how, last week, he, in a single sentence,
showed absurd impracticability of Randolph’s Amendment about
Chairman of Committees consulting Speaker before putting Closure
question. Pity of it is Gladstone won’t. His example most per-
nicious. Debauches ingenuous minds like those of Joseph Gillis,
and once led him to make a speech fully four hours long.
Business done. — Members in remarks varying from twenty
minutes to three-quarters-of-an-hour, urged the primal necessity of
strictly limiting the duration of speeches.
Tuesday Night.—Grand Old Man made grand old speech. Didn’t
think it possible for any one to impart life into dulness of
debate. Gibson tried. Uplifted his voice, and moved Alderman
Fowler and Mr. Warton to tears by reference to “ this grand old
House of Commons of ours.” General effect little pulpy. Such a
speech as might have been made from a brief. Weg, on the con-
trary, was mightily in earnest, glowing with eloquence, and took the
House by storm.
“What’s matter?” said Cavendish Bentinck, wobbling in
with that remarkable stride, which suggests that his left leg wants
to carry him over to the Liberal majority, whilst his right is true
to the principles of the Constitution. “What’s matter? Has
G. 0. M. disestablished another Church ? ”
Well might the uproarious cheers recall greater debates.
“ It is gratitude makes them so jubilant,” said Hicks-Beach, in his
genial way. “ They weren’t sure after what Gladstone said last
Tuesday, whether he was going to stand by First Resolution or
not. Now they know it, their minds relieved from great weight.
When a Party’s got a Leader, it likes to be led.”
He was talking to W. H. Smith and quite sorry that Stafford
should have overheard him. “ Michael-and-all-Angels ” Mr. James
Lowther calls him, in reference to angelic sweetness of his
temper.
After Mr. Gladstone’s speech, House emptied. Members posi-
tively declined to hear any more. Thereby missed a good deal of
soothing eloquence. Amongst others Mr. Whitley was put up by
Mr. Warton, and smiled with unvarying sweetness upon the
Opposition, as he showed them how hopelessly they were in the
wrong. Mr. Warton had been carefully priming him all night.
Rations of snuff served out regardless of expense. On the whole,
result not quite commensurate with preparations. If Whitley has
Guying him ; or, The Fourth on the Fifth.
a fault, he’s a little bit too mild. Mr. Warton goaded him, as it
were, with cheers, and in the excitement of the moment took more
snuff than was good for him. Mr. Whitley had. also observed pre-
caution of placing himself immediately before his leader. Relying
upon this moral support, and assisted by the material support of the
Bench, he got advantageous start, but could not make the running.
“ I wonder,” said Sir Charles Forster, one of his few hearers,
“ that a man who calls himself the Universal Provider could not
provide himself with a better speech.”
PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI.
[November 11, 1881$.
ESSENCE OF PARLIAMENT.
EXTRACTED FROM
THE DIARY OF TOBY, M.P.
THE NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE PRIZE PUZZLE : OR. HOW TO FIT IN THE SPEAKER.
House of Commons, Monday Night, October 30.—More than ever
impressed with the business capacity of House. Spent two hours
and. a half to-night on thrilling discussion as to whether the Closure
Question should be put by the Speaker or by a Minister of the
Crown. Had a dim fancy that had heard something of this before.
Possibly in some previous state of existence. Still, so entrancingly
interesting that no one could grudge repetition, and would look
forward with satisfaction to expectation of renewal away in the
ewigkeit.
At the end of two hours and a half, Stafford Northcote made
surprising aud pleasing discovery that in May last a similar Resolu-
tion been before the House, and debated at great length. The
Speaker admitted the fact, but ruled that since the terms were
enlarged, the Motion was not out of order.
Glad to hear this. Shall tack on another half-yard, and we ’ll
have it all over again next week.
Whilst away iu the dining-room, drawing up terms of my
Amendment, Captain Aylmer moved to restrict speeches to ten
minutes’ duration. Captain a little mixed as to where his Amend-
ment to come in. Got, as it were, between the legs of the First
Resolution. Apart from this little maladroitness, gallant Captain
ha,s hit the bull’s-eye. What we want is shorter speeches. Ten
minutes won’t do, but twenty would admirably. Remember late
Mr. Disraeli saying to me, “ Take my word for it, Toby, there’s no
man in the world, except Mr. Gladstone, who cannot say everything
he has to say, and say it at his best, in twenty minutes.”
Exception to disadvantage of Weg, a little spiteful. “ Ver-
bosity,” as Mr. Thomasson says, “is like drink, ft grows upon a
man. Just as one begins with a nip a day, and goes on to nineteen,
so some men begin with short speeches, and go on to windy
orations.”
But Weg can, and he will, make telling speeches within limits of
twenty minutes. See how, last week, he, in a single sentence,
showed absurd impracticability of Randolph’s Amendment about
Chairman of Committees consulting Speaker before putting Closure
question. Pity of it is Gladstone won’t. His example most per-
nicious. Debauches ingenuous minds like those of Joseph Gillis,
and once led him to make a speech fully four hours long.
Business done. — Members in remarks varying from twenty
minutes to three-quarters-of-an-hour, urged the primal necessity of
strictly limiting the duration of speeches.
Tuesday Night.—Grand Old Man made grand old speech. Didn’t
think it possible for any one to impart life into dulness of
debate. Gibson tried. Uplifted his voice, and moved Alderman
Fowler and Mr. Warton to tears by reference to “ this grand old
House of Commons of ours.” General effect little pulpy. Such a
speech as might have been made from a brief. Weg, on the con-
trary, was mightily in earnest, glowing with eloquence, and took the
House by storm.
“What’s matter?” said Cavendish Bentinck, wobbling in
with that remarkable stride, which suggests that his left leg wants
to carry him over to the Liberal majority, whilst his right is true
to the principles of the Constitution. “What’s matter? Has
G. 0. M. disestablished another Church ? ”
Well might the uproarious cheers recall greater debates.
“ It is gratitude makes them so jubilant,” said Hicks-Beach, in his
genial way. “ They weren’t sure after what Gladstone said last
Tuesday, whether he was going to stand by First Resolution or
not. Now they know it, their minds relieved from great weight.
When a Party’s got a Leader, it likes to be led.”
He was talking to W. H. Smith and quite sorry that Stafford
should have overheard him. “ Michael-and-all-Angels ” Mr. James
Lowther calls him, in reference to angelic sweetness of his
temper.
After Mr. Gladstone’s speech, House emptied. Members posi-
tively declined to hear any more. Thereby missed a good deal of
soothing eloquence. Amongst others Mr. Whitley was put up by
Mr. Warton, and smiled with unvarying sweetness upon the
Opposition, as he showed them how hopelessly they were in the
wrong. Mr. Warton had been carefully priming him all night.
Rations of snuff served out regardless of expense. On the whole,
result not quite commensurate with preparations. If Whitley has
Guying him ; or, The Fourth on the Fifth.
a fault, he’s a little bit too mild. Mr. Warton goaded him, as it
were, with cheers, and in the excitement of the moment took more
snuff than was good for him. Mr. Whitley had. also observed pre-
caution of placing himself immediately before his leader. Relying
upon this moral support, and assisted by the material support of the
Bench, he got advantageous start, but could not make the running.
“ I wonder,” said Sir Charles Forster, one of his few hearers,
“ that a man who calls himself the Universal Provider could not
provide himself with a better speech.”