Punch has never shown a more noteworthy example of its
happy knack of focussing "the better opinion" of the nation on some important issue than in its current number. In the Epilogue to the hundred and forty-fourth volume, entitled " Marconi Echoes," we get a criticism of the whole case which is not only brilliant and concise but just. We wish we had space to quote the whole of it, but must find room for the following passages. The conversation is between a Radical and a Tory on the deck of a houseboat at Henley :— " 'I don't see why Ministers shouldn't gamble if they want to. What have their private affairs to do with their publio duties ? '
' Well, we pay some of them 45,000 a year not to.' `No, we don't. We pay them salaries for the work they do. You'lltell me next that a Minister mustn't marry because marriage is notoriously a lottery.' . .
But seriously—we'll grant that your speculating friends in the Cabinet meant no harm, but mightn't they have been a little more frank about it all ?
But they were frank. They admitted their mistake when they saw what a mese it had got them into. But at the time— on October 11th—they naturally wanted to avoid the very appearance of evil. Appearances, as you know, are so deceptive.' I noticed, by the way,' said the Tory, ' that though these Members confessed a sort of regret for their errors, it was given out that if a majority of the House expressed itself as sharing that regret, they were prepared to resign. How do you explain that ? '
Oh, a very natural and pardonable vanity. They wouldn't care to have their own original views appropriated by a lot of other people. Besides, when I cry Peccuvi, I don't want you to answer, " So you have; I thoroughly agree with you." On tho contrary, I expect you to say, " Not at all, my dear fellow, not at all." 'Which is practically what the majority of the House did say.'" . . .
Previous page
