Mr. Punch's History of Modern England, Vol. 3 (of 4).—1874-1892Graves, Charles L. (Charles Larcom)
History
Mr. Punch's History of Modern England, Vol. 3 (of 4).—1874-1892
Graves, Charles L. (Charles Larcom)
Great Britain -- History -- Victoria, 1837-1901 -- Humor
In this atmospheric context the question of London fog and the smoke
nuisance naturally emerges. The table of the total number of days
of fog in London from 1871 onwards published in the Meteorological
Society's Journal shows a decline in the 'seventies and a recrudescence
in the 'eighties and early 'nineties. In 1878 _Punch_ notes ironically
that the London fogs made it impossible to see colours at a
dressmaker's, but did not interfere with "doing" the Old Masters. There
are frequent allusions in his pages to the Conference on Smoke and
Fog held in 1880, but at the end of the decade, when the nuisance was
unusually acute, _Punch_ launched out in a long, sardonic, and spirited
doggerel tribute to the unimpaired sovereignty of the demon King Fog.
The occasion was the visitation of January 9th-13th, 1888, when a heavy
fog settled over England and a great part of Ireland, traffic by sea
and land being greatly impeded and many accidents reported from all
parts of the country. But London, as usual, suffered most. _Punch_
describes how King Fog, having summoned all his attendant demons,
determined to surpass all his previous efforts in torturing "miserable
mortals," and succeeded.
[Illustration: FERVOUR IN THE FOG
UNPROMISING INDIVIDUAL (_suddenly, his voice vibrating with
passion_): "She's moy Unney; Oi'm 'er Joy!"]
The fog of January, 1888, was equalled, if not eclipsed, by that of
Christmas, 1904, but the table of statistics already referred to
records a marked decline from 1900 onwards. Statistics, however, are
a poor consolation. The late Director of the Meteorological Society,
writing in 1910, frankly owns that no statistics of the "frequency
occurrence" of fog warrant the inference that the atmosphere of
London is approaching that of the surrounding districts as regards
transparency. It is true that an absolute approximation was made in the
spring and early summer of 1921, but it was purchased at a cost which
even in these days must be regarded as exorbitant.
Sir William Harcourt's Bill for the reform of the Government of London,
introduced in April, 1884, and withdrawn in July, fell between two
stools; it exasperated the Obstructives and failed to satisfy the
Reformers. _Punch_, however, seized the opportunity to indulge in
a burlesque prophetic account of the first meeting of the reformed
Corporation, illustrating the embarrassment created by the _damnosa
hæreditas_ of the Metropolitan Board of Works, and, in general,
indicating the immense amount of work to be done, and the rooted
disinclination of the old gang to undertake it. Yet when the new
authority was established five years later, and the first elections to
the London County Council were held in January, 1889, it cannot be said
that _Punch_ exhibited any great enthusiasm. It is true that in his
verses on the "London County Council Dream," widespread improvements
and reforms are foreshadowed, but they end up on a note of tempered
optimism.
[Sidenote: _A Mixed Epitaph_]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account