13 MARCH 1847, Page 15

DA CAPO.

Ourt orators are much behind our musicians in one respect. If you look into a work of Handers time, you find that all the pieces are marked at the end "Da capo," so that every piece was repeated, besides an indefinite number of repetitions in detail. Thus, an opera lasted double the time that it would have done— half the time in uttering the set of ideas belonging to it, the other half in repeating that set—an universal and volunteered 'encore. Musicians have abandoned that poverty-stricken and wearisome practice. Not so the orators; who club together for a ceaseless round of repetitions. Every debate is a kind of fugue, with the same subject and the same phrases in every part of the gamut—Only not skilfully varied nor harmoniously combined. Were statistics of the kind possible, it would be amusing to have returns showing the number of times which each assertion or sachreflection has been used during the session ; how often iden- tical speeches have been repeated, distinguishing when the repe- tition was made by the same speaker, and when it was made by others. Were every proposition once uttered considered to be used up for the session, the speeches in Parliament would be re- duced to a small fraction of their present bulk, without any loss of ideas.

The truth, however, has penetrated into Parliament. Mr. Brotherton, after devoting years to topical remedies for mid- night legislation, has at last hit upon the root of the evil in one of its symptoms. On going into Committee of Supply the other night, several Members, abusing the old privilege of alleging grievances on such occasions, fell to discussing the details of the very matters to be afterwards handled in Committee. Thence Mr. Brotherton's new and valuable insight— He mast protest against these innovations upon the rules of Parliament, in discussing questions with the Speaker in the chair which ought to be discussed by the Committee. No result came from it; and when he moved the adjourn- ment at twelve o'clock, it was found that all the Estimates were to be taken, and all that had been said had to be repeated. He hoped that the House would pro- ceed to business in Committee, and that they would do the business in Committee.

Let us hope that Mr. Brotherton's hope will be realized. Of course it is useless to enforce the adjournment at twelve o'clock, if the talk before that hour is a mere dress-rehearsal of the real debate, or if every discussion is to be swelled by the incessant 'reiteration of the diffuse sentences said before, not only in this session, but any time within the memory of man. In some Continental operahouses they have, or used to have, a very ingenious plan of checking plagiarism : if one composer pil- fered from another, the audience would applaud the stolen bit, vociferating the name of the true author. If Mozart, for in- stance, had been poaching in Cimarosa's manor, the name of Mozart in the playbills would not deter the audience from crying, as they applauded, "Bravo, Cimarosa 1" if Rossini from Mozart, Mozart would receive the discriminating homage. Such a prac- tice would make sad havoc in some operahouses ; but, luckily, there are audiences not learned beyond the playbill. It might be introduced with effect into both Houses of Parliament, especially into the excessively verbose and plagiarizing Commons. We will not mention names—there will be no difficulty in perceiving instances in which it would apply. When Mr. — is speaking, the House should cry "Hear, hear !" naming the first owner of the good thing applauded. The practice might silence many Members ; but perhaps that would be no disadvantage. Without joking, Mr. Brotherton's discovery is worthy of prac- tical results. Let him see that it be not wasted. Let him pursue his new mode of preventing Members from saying that which must an hour or two later be said all over again. Let him extend the field of his utility in noting, and pointing out to general no- tice, such things as are reiterated so incessantly. The mere pointing out would do good.