SPECIMENS NOT YET INCLUDED IN THE COLLECTION AT REGENT'S PARK. Printed by Joseph Smith, of No. 24, Holford Square, in the Parish of St. James, Clerkenwell, in the County of Middlesex, at the Printing Offices of Messrs. Bradbury, Evans, & Co.. Lombard street in the Precinct of Whitefriars, in the City of London, and Published by him at No. 85, Fleet Street, in the Parish of St. Bride, City of London.-SATURDAY, June 19, 1869. 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 impossible to predict the mode in which Mr. Punch will deal with any question 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, Parliamentary 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, however, 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 handsomely 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 which 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 therefore never speaks lightly: "For Punch is He who always speaks his thought, The debate has been upon MR. GLADSTONE'S Bill for Disestablishing and Disendowing the Protestant Church in Ireland. The question was VOL. LVI. ODE TO UTILITY. (On MR. COWPER's Commons Preservation Bill.) MATERIAL Utility, With what a wise servility For thy substantial wages labour we, All things of beauty sacrifice to thee! The progress of machinery From off the face of this industrious isle. 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 corn. The landscape, in the olden time, Adorned with spires that pointed to the sky, 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- Pigs which engross and make mankind Chinese. whether the Lords should read this Bill a Second Time, with a view to the introduction of alterations which the Conservatives would consider The battle raged for four long nights, and Thirty-Seven nobles spoke. amendments, or whether the measure should be rejected altogether. 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 Committee, 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. exceptions-is it Mr. Punch's intention to advert with any detail. But Some of the speeches will be Historical. To those only-with a few 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 in a lower key than was adopted by the PREMIER, when introducing the Bill. Government, pledged to the principles of 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. C C LORD CLARENDON (Minister) spoke for, and the DUKE OF RUTLAND against it. LORD STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFE, so long our famous Minister at Constantinople, "the great Eltchi" of MR. KINGLAKE, disbelieved that the Bill by itself would conciliate the Irish, but in presence of the elections verdict advised its being accepted, though he would reject it later unless much improved. LORD ROMILLY (Master of the Rolls) argued, as became a judge, that the measure was just. The ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (DR. TAIT) made the most important speech of the night. The Primate of All England accepted the Bill for the Disestablishment of the Church of Ireland, but he desired to make it much better. It must be made more acceptable to the Protestants of Ireland. Of the voluntary system he disapproved, as it put the minister in a false position in regard to the flock whom he ought to guide. LORD CARNARVON (Conservative) would endeavour to introduce more generous terms, but it was impossible to resist the Bill. The BISHOP OF DERRY (DR. ALEXANDER) utterly-and dashinglydenounced it. Tuesday. LORD LYTTON was expected to speak, but gave way to LORD GREY. The raising the question had done dire mischief in Ireland, but it was raised, and must be dealt with. A worse Bill would follow rejection. Let the Lords accept with dignity, and let not the Ministers be hard and arrogant. The ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN (DR. TRENCH) took an attitude of complaint against ungenerous and illiberal treatment of the Church. The BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S (DR. CONNOP THIRLWALL, b. 1797) made one of the great speeches of the debate. He tore to pieces the superstitions about sacrilege, praised St. Ambrose, who sold the holy vessels to ransom Christians, laughed at the idea of the POPE as a scare crow, and pointed out that Popery was crumbling in every civilised country. He thought the Irish Church unsuited for its purpose, and in the way of religious and political peace. By no means giving unqualified approval to the Bill, he would accept and amend it. The Law Lords, CHELMSFORD and PENZANCE (the latter the Judge in Divorce, who now made his maiden speech) argued, the first for, the second against the Bill, and the DUKE OF RICHMOND reluctantly separated himself from his Conservative friends, and was for reading the Bill, though it was one of violence, injustice, and spoliation. The BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH (DR. MAGEE) then delivered, against the Bill, one of the most splendid orations that ever delighted an assembly. Friends and opponents united in admiration of the eloquent Irishman. Let LORD DERBY, himself a master of oratory, and one who has heard all the great men of the last half-century, be the critic. "Its fervid eloquence, and impassioned and brilliant language have never in my memory been surpassed, and rarely equalled." The peroration was a most solemn reference to the one Tribunal that can judge the motives, as well as the actions of men. EARL DE GREY (Minister) supported, LORD CLANCARTY opposed. LORD MONCK (one of the proposed Commissioners under the Bill) denied that Voluntaryism had failed in Canada, of which he has been Governor. Thursday. The EARL OF DERBY, in a speech of touching earnestness, assailed the Bill with all his force, and thus ended : "My Lords, I am now an old man, and, like many of your Lordships, passed the allotted span of threescore years and ten. My official life is at an end; my political life is nearly closed, and, in the course of nature, my natural life cannot be long. That natural life commenced at the period of the great rebellion in Ireland, which immediately preceded the union between the two countries. God grant that it may not close with the renewal of rebellion. My Lords, I do not pretend to look at the prospect of the distant future. But, whatever may be the result of your Lordships' consideration of this measure, for my own part, if it be for the last time I now have the honour of addressing your Lordships, I declare that it will be to my dying day a satisfaction that I have been able to lift my voice against the adoption of a measure the political impolicy of which is only equalled by its moral iniquity.” LORD KIMBERLEY (Minister) supported the Bill, the BISHOP OF RIPON (DR. BICKERSTETH) thought it morally wrong, the DUKE OF CLEVELAND was in favour of it as a whole, LORD REDESDALE dwelt on the Coronation Oath, and quoted Malachi, the DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE disliked Voluntaryism, but disliked an anomaly more. The MARQUIS OF SALISBURY made one of the great speeches. He demolished the pleas raised on the Union, and the Oath, and held that it was the duty of that House to defer to the national will when it had been well ascertained. There was no honour in resisting the will of the nation. He was not afraid of any of the consequences that had been menaced in case of rejection, but he was afraid of the verdict of history, if the Lords should abandon their high rank and become a faction. The provision for the Church was ungenerous, and must be improved. LORD COLCHESTER opposed, LORD STANHOPE (LORD MAHON, historian) strongly supported a Second Reading, the BISHOP OF TUAM (DR. BERNARD) opposed, and LORD NELSON, who said he had always stuck by his party, and was no coward, would nevertheless read the measure a Second Time. Friday. EARL RUSSELL, who may have felt a sensation (only successes usually come too late for such feelings) on occasion of the great wish of his life being at last in course of accomplishment, delivered a long and interesting historical speech, which everybody should readdwelt on the fact that the Catholics were the great majority in Ireland, and demanded justice for them. He liked not the title of the Bill, nor the disendowment, nor the application of the surplus. The measure must be improved. The DUKE OF ABERCORN (late Lord Lieutenant) strongly opposed the Bill, and described it as the work of MR. GLADSTONE only. The DUKE OF ARGYLL, on the other hand, described it as the natural offspring of Emancipation. A closely reasoned speech, boldly delivered. The BISHOP OF LICHFIELD (DR. SELWYN, of New Zealand) was very manly and genial. He had lived and worked where there was no Establishment, and was impartial, but no case had been made out against the Irish Church. Like the other Bishops, he introduced humorous touches, and finished with a hope that religious conciliation was at hand, and that the dove of peace would build her mest in the tiara of a Disestablished Pope. LORD WESTBURY's was a sarcastic speech against the Bill, and he displayed much acquaintance with the language of Scripture. He was for distributing the Church property among all the religions. delivered a calm and able oration for the Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD HATHERLEY-MR. PAGE WOOD) LORD CAIRNS made an exceedingly long speech, in which he vigorously pleaded for justice to the Protestants of Ireland, who had been taken thither under a solemn compact that their religion should be and who represented nearly all that was good in Ireland. maintained, who had turned Ulster from a wilderness into a garden, EARL GRANVILLE replied, briefly (for he rose at a quarter to three on Saturday morning), and again asked the House to accept the Bill, "subject to any amendments which your Lordships may think fit to propose. The LORD CHANCELLOR put the question. "Your Voices, Lords." For the Second Reading Against it 179 146 Majority for Second Reading . . Thirty-Three. So ended the ablest debate which it has fallen to Mr. Punch to describe since he began the Immortal Analysis which is justly regarded as one of the chief institutions of the country. The Committee was fixed for Tuesday next, the 29th June. Cartoon so admirably that it is only necessary for Mr. Punch to record One episode varied the debate. It is explained and illustrated in the that the PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE thought proper to write a letter to Birmingham, calling the Lords not very wise, but hinting that out of their unwisdom profit might come to the people. late discussions on important questions which but for their Infatuation "If they delayed the Irish Church Bill three months, they would stimumight slumber for years.' manded, at the length of Chancery Interrogatories (as they used to be) Called over the coals by CAIRNS, who dewhether Ministers shared their colleague's sentiments, LORD GRANVILLE could but shrug his shoulders deprecatingly, and say that MR. BRIGHT was "John Bullish." LORD RUSSELL said that they might despise the irregular shot of an Awkward Volunteer who had fired without leave. That suffices-Punch dislikes Pleonasm. The Commons sat, but no man regarded them. They were doing their duty, however, with Bankruptcy, Endowed Schools, and other important matters, and their virtue must be its own reward, for Mr. Punch's lungs are full of the air of Olympus, and he cannot spend_his sacred breath in the plain. Liberality of Convocation. THE following item of intelligence, apart from any context, appears in a contemporary: "Convocation is to be asked to make a grant of £1,000 for apparatus for the new building for Experimental Philosophy, under the care of PROF. CLIFTON." There are, as everybody knows, Convocations and Convocations; but if Convocation were simply Convocation, you would wonder who could be simple enough to think of asking it to do anything so liberal and sensible as granting a sum of money for the promotion of practical science. A NEW USE FOR A BIRD'S NEST. LORD ROCHDALE. HERE are people who tinually taxed to bring out striking novelties, such as that which is thus noticed by a Paris Correspondent:"Nor must we forget to mention the birdsnest hats, a sort of puffs of moss with blades of grass and fern, and with delicate flowers, such as wood anemones and forget-me-nots. Upon the nest, there is a pretty little bird with out-spread wings. So far one has not yet imagined to put eggs within the nest. That will come perhaps; one will also, no doubt, put little fledglings in it, opening wide their beaks, to receive their food." Bird's-nest soup in China is a not uncommon delicacy; but until we read this extract, we never should have dreamed of seeing birds'-nest hats and bonnets. Strange are the uses of prosperity. You may use anything you please in any way you like, if you have but wealth or rank enough to influence the fashions. For the mere sake of the novelty, rich people put a thing to usage such as, but for their prosperity, would never have been dreamed of. Perhaps we next may hear of ladies wearing birds' nests on their heads, for the sake of carrying eggs about, to distribute to their friends when they pay a morning visit. This really would be useful, if not wholly ornamental; and, absurd as it may seem, we really see no reason to laugh at such a fashion. Morning callers, as a rule, are most insufferable bores; but we would summon our best smiles to welcome any lady who would visit us some day in a good big bird's-nest hat, filled up to the brim with a lot of nice fresh plovers' eggs, cooked ready for our eating. TEMPERANCE IN JERUSALEM. IN the Clerical House of Commons, which met in the Jerusalem Chamber on Tuesday last week, ARCHDEACON DENISON having said that he had a gravamen of his own to present, solemnly protesting against the principle of the Irish Church Bill: "After several petitions for the Reform of Convocation in respect of the representation of the clergy had been presented, the House took into consideration the report on intemperance, prepared by a committee of Convocation of which the ARCHDEACON OF COVENTRY was the chairman." Subsequently, notwithstanding this discussion touching the subject of intemperance, the excellent but irritable Archdeacon, first of those two above named, when, whilst he was speaking on the Irish Church Bill, some of his hearers cried "Question!" could not refrain from saying: "There are some cries of Question. Now let me say to you, that if you begin to call Question,' I shall stay here till to-morrow night. If you wish to save time, you had better listen to what I have to say." If it were possible and expedient that the Honourable Member for Birmingham should withdraw from the Board of Trade, his retention of some office in a Liberal Cabinet would be still desirable. Then, in that case, the position most suitable for him to occupy would clearly be that of the PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL. No doubt the present holder of that dignity would readily vacate it in favour of MR. BRIGHT who, of course, would have to be raised to the House of Lords. And why not? Because of his dyslogistic letter touching their Lordships? That is the very reason why he ought to have a seat among them, where he would be enabled to fill a part of the void, and perform one of the uses of BROUGHAM, in telling the Peers occasionally, unpleasant truths to their face. MR. BRIGHT might be created EARL OF ROCHDALE. Advice Gratis. To a Fool amongst Philosophers-Respect yourself in proportion to the contempt with which you are treated. mentioned, very well make him a Bishop. The report above quoted to the effect that all who supported the Bill should be cut Hereupon: "The Prolocutor rose and called the Doctor to order." It would not exactly do for the PREMIER to heap coals of fire on the bead of the clergyman who scolded him so violently in Convocation, by placing a mitre on that of DR. JEBB, because DR. JEBB could not possibly, by his own account, act with the ARCHBISHOP OF CANTER BURY or the BISHOP OF ST. DAVID'S, and perhaps would appear in too striking contrast with them, as well as with the BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH, with whom he could and would act, on the same bench. The subject of intemperance is one which Convocation may be congratulated on having discussed before that of the Irish Church Bill; for otherwise, after the outbreaks of ARCHDEACON DENISON, and considered that the less that had been said about the former in that Assembly the better. At a later period of the debate, wanting to speak again, amid cries DR. JEBB'S invectives upon the latter subject, most people would have of "Divide!" ARCHDEACON DENISON exclaimed:"You shall divide when I have spoken, but not before." "He would endeavour to be as moderate in his language as possible, for such were his feelings on this question that if he should speak the words which would most truly express his views, those words would be actionable." Accordingly, sailing not very far from the legal wind, the reverend Doctor went on as follows: "The Church of Ireland had no opportunity of expressing her views as a Church upon the matter which affected her so nearly, and the opportunity to do so had been refused by that man who had introduced this Bill, and he was one who had forfeited the respect of the country-(Order !)—and was not to be trusted with a single thing when the interests of two parties were concerned." After all this abuse, MR. GLADSTONE would show magnanimity in making DR. JEBB a Dean. He could not, for reasons presently to be The Wrong of Petition. In the notice of the debate in the House of Commons, on the question of Opening Public Museums, &c., on Sunday, the following instructive statement occurs:-"BIGG deposed that he had filled in 200 fictitious signatures [to a petition], and that at 13, Cook's Court, from 12 to 20 persons had been occupied for more than three weeks filling in fictitious signatures." Thus it seems that petitions as well as accounts can be cooked. THE ABUSE OF JUSTICE. THE Law Lords have been sitting for about twenty days hearing MISS SHEDDEN conduct her own case. Reasonably enough, they appear to have grown a little tired of such a S(b)eddentary life. TO ARTISTS WHO HAVE BIG PICTURES RETURNED ON THEIR HANDS :-" IF YOU CAN'T LIVE BY THEM, LIVE UNDER THEM!" But for ev'ry hard whack You give ten harder back That's what usually comes of a fight With JOHN BRIGHT 'Taint oft JOHN has the worst of the fight. Quaker breeding you 've had, JOHN BRIGHT, JOHN BRIGHTQuaker breeding you've had, JOHN BRIGHT But the mild Quaker creed In your own way you read, Nor turn left cheek to him who hits rightOf JOHN BRIGHT Nor turn left cheek to him who hits right. Man of peace though you be, JOHN BRIGHT, JOHN BRIGHTMan of peace though you be, JoHN BRIGHT Those who shake fists with you, Own, in black and in blue, There's no foe like a Friend who shows fight A la BRIGHT There's no foe like a Friend who shows fight. So you've whipp'd your way up, JOHN BRIGHT, JOHN BRIGHTSo you've whipp'd your way up, JOHN BRIGHT |