The Press. — London, England, 1857-02-21 00:00:00

FEBRUARY 21, 1857. MATERIALS FOR A " ROMANCE." THE PRESS. " JOHN CHINAMAN." There lived a nation in the West, A nation proud and high ; And they have sworn a solemn oath John Chinaman should die. They smuggled in a filthy drug To addle his poor head ; And they have sworn a solemn oath John Chinaman was dead. But when John felt the deadly ills That did thereby befall, John Chinaman rose up in wrath, Which sore dismayed them all. Says he, "You've filled your treasure-begs, And made us beasts enough ; You do without your silver ! And we'll do without your stuff! " Thereat that nation in the West, That nation proud and high, Sent fire-ships out, and swore amain John Chinaman should die. They hammered down his forts of stone, And all his cannon sunk; They cut off every pigtail, And they scuttled every junk. They took a seal and sealed him down. Put treaties on his head ; And they have sworn a solemn oath John Chinaman was dead. But, spite of drugs, and guns, and pens, And rebels in his land, John Chinaman got on his feet To make a further stand. Says John, " I want a pirate-wretch That rows in yonder boat; I ween a thief's no less a thief Though he wears an English coat." Now, when that nation heard of this, That nation proud and high, They gave up swearing solemn oaths John Chinaman should die. They swore instead, that opened wide John Chinaman should be; As never native oyster yet The eye of man did see. And with their cruel shot and shell They tore him part from part ; John Chinaman said but, " Well, well, This won't get at my heart." THE BOARD OF TRUTH. Who eould fill the post of President of the Board of Truth better than Mr. Roebnek.—Glebt, Wednesday. Scasx.—Downintsfrest. Dlisatvris PEnsonrE.—Lord Palmerston and the Treasury Editor. Lord PALMERSTON.—So. You have made another most absurd blunder. You have made two, indeed. EDITOR.—Really, my Lord, lam very sorry. What is the nature of the error ? Lord PALMERSTON.—Nature of the error! it's perfectly unnatural. You talk about a Board of Truth in connection with my Administra tion! You must be insane ! Her Majesty's Ministry pique themselves on the possession of certain strong :qualities ; but assuredly truth is not among them. EDlTOR.—Surely, my Lord, as even you can acknowledge an occa sional mistake, I may be permitted to blunder now and then? Lord PALMERSTON.-0, of course, of course. But this was so deucedly glaring. Two blunders —and both absurd. A Board of Truth in connection with our Administration ! And as to Roebuck— why, he's the last man I should like as President. EDITOR.—Why, my Lord? L. rd PALMERSTON —He's so awkward. It's no uce explaining to you, for awkwardness is your failing also. In the very same article you call my Government an " evanescent phenomenon." EDITOR.—My Lord, all Governments are more or less evanescent. Lard PAI.MERSTON.--One of your customary blunders. lam per manent. Anybody else may resign that likes. I won't. EDITOR.—What would you say to a vote of " want of confidence," my Lord? Lord PALMERSTON.—Say ! Say I'd confidence enough myself for all parties. But the thing's ridiculous. They never had any confidence ; and you can't feel the want of what never existed. But now, let me warn you not to talk any more about a Board of Truth. I'll tell you what we do want—a Board of Chaff. You may propose that, if you like. _ _ EDITOR.—I will, my Lord. How about the organisation? Lord PALM ERSTON.—First Lord of the Treasury—President, ex officio. We should have Bernal Osborne and Peel, of course. EDITOR.—Mr. Frederick Peel, my Lord? Lord PA I.MERSTON.—Fred Peel be hanged ! No, Bob jollifica• tion Bob; the fellow that always makes a favourable impression. He's after my own helm ; and if at this advanced period of my career I ventured to become prophetic.— E DITO R.—Well, my Lord - , L Lord PALMERsTON ( wit h much gravity).—l eh ould predict that that young man will be Premier of England in 1895. BEING A LETTER OF ADVICE FROM AN OLD HAND TO A YOUNG WRITER. My Dear Young Friend,—The fault, I repeat it, of all you inci pient—l was not going to write insipid—fictionists is, that you insist upon drawing upon your own invention, which must be at best a bank of very limited issue, instead of looking into society for your characters and incidents. You ask me to be frank, and I take you at your word. I have read your chapters of a Minister's life ; and, in charity to you, I have put the MS. where my housemaid will find nothing but ashes to-morrow morning. You had better let the subject alone. Sir Bulwer Lytton is a dangerous personage for you to come after, my dear boy, and Ido not think that you will easily eclipse "My Novel." But at least write truthfully; and I do solemnly assure you that the mid night meeting of your Secretary of State with the burglars in the Thames Tunnel, and the Opposition Bishop disguising himself as a policeman, is far from a natural event. The satire, if any, would be unfelt. But, my dear boy, if you must treat such subjects, take your notions from what is going on around you. The real events of the day are far more singular than any of your ideas. Sir George Grey, I dare say, was never in the Thames Tunnel in his life, and probably never spoke to a smaller rascal than an Irish Lord of the Treasury, nor, probably, did the Bishop of Exeter ever try on the uniform of A 150. But if they had, the story, though bizarre, would be simply dull. You want to show a Minister doing some extraordinary feat, and you can think of nothing better than that? Let's see whether an old hand can help you. Nov, if I wanted to describe a Minister doing a strange thing, I should in the first place try to give an idea—artistically—of the immense responsibility of his position, of the tremendous interests in his hands, of the solemn and sacred character of the national honour, of which he was custodian. Very well. Then, of course, I should not seat him, as you have done, at a window, looking on the moon and apostrophising the stars, be cause a man when he becomes an English Minister is usually at an age when he is liable to rheumatism, and when he is too sensible to address anything that cannot possibly hear him. But I will tell you what I would do. I would show the Minister in his place in the House of Commons during a grave debate upon the foreign policy of the nation. I would cause some one or other of the speakers to make a statement touching some act of the Cabinet—say the assenting to some treaty which, rightly or wrongly, pledged two or three great countries to a policy the reverse of that which the public supposed to be in course of adoption. I would show the startled audience eager for an explanation. Then, my dear boy, if I wanted thoroughly to " surprise "--mark you. I would make my Minister burst out into an insulting tirade against the speaker who had thus exposed his policy. I would make him launch all sorts of coarse and commonplace jokes against him, and then, when the impatience of men, angry at being treated like schoolboys, showed itself in menacing murmurs, I would make my Minister solemnly deny that any such treaty existed, and charge his accuser with inventing or retailing a Romance. You will reply to me, for you are a smart fellow, that such a thing is scarcely credible, that it is not likely that the destinies of a country would have passed into the hands of a man who could so treat such a subject. I answer that you do not use your eyes and ears. And if you startle at this incident, what will you say to the next I should introduce, namely, on another night the bringing the same parties together, rnd the making the accuser give the date of the treaty—the date of the very document that did not exist? Then I would have another dramatic surprise. My Minister should admit that he had been aware that such a treaty had been drawn up ; it was not a treaty, he should urge, only " a convention," but— " It was never Signed Here, I think. I could end a chapter with the cheers of the Minister's friends, the derisive laughter of those who heard a statesman venture to allege that a signature, more or less, altered a policy, and the graver bearing of more thoughtful men, who saw a bad sign for the nation in the fact that her guides and rulers could snatch such a miserable and technical triumph. Still you think the incidents improbable. Once more, my boy, use your eyes and ears, and then see what I would do on a third night. I would bring down my Minister once more, and I would make him who on the first night had showered ridicule, and utterly denied the document's existence, and talked of romance, and on the next night had sheltered himself under the plea that the document had not been signed, rise and say, " I have to beg pardon for a mistake. The convention was signed." And you say, my boy, that I should place the Minister in too humiliating a position, that no man who could play such antics with fact and truth would be tolerated in office, that, in short, I should exhibit him in so ridiculous and contemptible a light that the scenes would be improbable. All I can say is, my dear young friend, read the Parliamentary debates of the present session, and don't teach your grandmother to suck eggs. Your sincere well-wisher, HumniaNT Birnis• Paternoster•row, Saturday. 181