[Barrie Youde]

THE MOTHER OF PARLIAMENTS

Was ever Parliament in such a mess?
In truth, the future nobody can know.
The way ahead is anybody’s guess.
Dear Mother, haste ye not. Heed status quo.

Heed right and wrong, of course. That is your function.
And all things in between, yes, those as well.
Decision time is looming. That’s your function.
But what decision? Nobody can tell.

There is much doubt, d’you see? That much is clear.
The In and Out are fighting, Left and Right.
The mayhem is disastrous, seen from here.
A most unseemly and alarming sight.

I weep, dear Mother, at your indecision.
You better know than I do. That’s for sure.
But this I know, at least, with some precision,
That time is running out for thinking more.

The ship of state is running into danger.
Accordingly, the Rules are written. Note.
Slacken speed, or stop, or back the engine.
For God’s sake, keep the ship of state afloat.

BY
18.07.2018

 

[BobClay]

Barrie.
This reminds of a job interview I had when I left the sea (one of many.) It was with the Severn Trent Water Board and was for a telemetry technician.

After a number of technical questions which I half struggled with (I still wasn't in 'Interview' mode but I became better as time and unemployment moved on) one of the interviewers asked me this question:

"During the English Civil War, would you have fought for Parliament or the King ?"

I was a bit gobsmacked that this question because I'd just fluffed the previous question on a Darlington transistor (I was a bit valvey on that day.)

"Parliament," I answered.

"Why ?" (By now I'd decided I didn't want the bloody job anyway in order to preserve some dignity.)

"They won, and the King was a complete Walley." (The word Walley was very popular at the time, something akin to 'pratt' or 'bozo.')

I didn't get the job and as far as I know the Severn and the Trent are still flowing. (Jester)

 

[Barrie Youde]

Quite so!

Thanks, Bob.

I can but try.

 

[expats]

From MP Jo Swinson....

‏Verified account @joswinson
3 hours ago
Just how low will your govt stoop @Theresa_may? When @andrealeadsom delayed proxy voting motions, she *assured* those of us who were pregnant that we would be paired when necessary. Today your govt broke that agreement – @brandonLewis paired with me but voted. Desperate stuff.....................

If this is true, and I'd far rather trust Swinson than May, then this government has shown how little regard it has for the honesty and integrity of what makes the 'Mother of Parliaments' unique

 

[BobClay]

Maybe I would have fought for the King given this crew … (Jester)

 

[Barrie Youde]

Bob,

You raise an interesting question.

I grew up believing - and never seriously doubting - that I would have fought for the Crown. I also grew up largely in a state of historical ignorance and, on reading more in adult life about the Civil War, I realised that of course in many ways Charles I was outrageous and I might well have fought for Parliament, had I realised.

The broader consideration is of course that after a decade or so of Cromwellian Rule the Monarchy was restored by popular acclaim - which rather indicates that much blood was shed for nothing - and that the Monarchy is a good thing, after all.

Thus, the true answer to the question of which side would I have supported during the Civil War has to be - It would depend what I knew and understood at the time of the call to arms. It is a question which cannot be answered by hindsight alone. But I still rather hope that I would have fought for the Crown!

 

[Long gone]

I'm pretty sure that Charles 2nd wasn't restored under the same conditions as his father. He ruled from 1628 until 1640 without calling parliament, and it was only as a last resort for raising taxes to pay his English army fighting his Scottish subjects, as he'd exhausted every other avenue, that he recalled it. I'm sure that after the restoration, parliament could not be dismissed.

 

[BobClay]

I do agree about Cromwell, in that having a long established monarchy suddenly disappear leaves the classic post-revolutionary hole as to what you replace it with. And as we've seen many times, you usually end up with a dictator.

But the Civil War was not entirely in vain, because the fact is the monarchy never returned to its former power. The restored King Charles the Second had a good time for a while and was followed by his brother James the Second. And he started to go into the bad old Stuart ways, so what happened is they sacked him and looked for a more obedient monarch elsewhere (Europe as it turned out. )

That 'Glorious Revolution' as it became known was pretty much bloodless compared to the horrors of the English Civil War … which really was a brutal business as civil wars tend to be, and spread all across the British Isles, not just the English bit.

So, yes, with hindsight you are right about that, I'd have gone with Parliament … and I would rather have been under Cromwell as whatever else he was, he could certainly soldier.

 

[expats]

and I would rather have been under Cromwell as whatever else he was, he could certainly soldier.

Rubbish! He only had a 'model army'; I had one of those when I was a kid....(Jester)

 

[BobClay]

Rubbish! He only had a 'model army'; I had one of those when I was a kid....(Jester)

I never thought of that … :sweat:

One Dinky Toy Centurion Tank could have finished the Civil War in about 5 minutes ….

 

[Farmer John]

I would like to volunteer to support Nell Gwynne in her prime, in some small way.

The Cromwell problem was that he was "followed" by his son who was a hollow shell.

Better the devil you knows son than the devil who cancelled Christmas's son who you don't know.

Charles II turned parliament on and off as he wanted. If only we could do the same.

 

[Varley]

In Charles II time (and until George II) the King was the administration. His source of income was not only from taxes raised by parliament but also from his estates.

He may have switched of parliament when he didn't need money but the breaker was in when he did.

Has ES gone into apoplectic silence at the mention of Cromwell?

 

[BobClay]

Many years ago I bought a book into the house called 'Cromwell: Our Chief of Men' written by Lady Antonio Fraser, who was the wife of our local MP at the time. It was a long detailed biography in the form of a large paperback.

When my Mother saw it she threw a bit of a wobbler. She was Irish, born and bred on a hill farm in Co. Limerick.

So after 300 years or so there was still bitterness. History isn't always the dry stale subject of repute. It can get emotional. (Smoke)

 

[expats]

Many years ago I bought a book into the house called 'Cromwell: Our Chief of Men' written by Lady Antonio Fraser, who was the wife of our local MP at the time. It was a long detailed biography in the form of a large paperback.

When my Mother saw it she threw a bit of a wobbler. She was Irish, born and bred on a hill farm in Co. Limerick.

So after 300 years or so there was still bitterness. History isn't always the dry stale subject of repute. It can get emotional. (Smoke)

Many years ago. on a holiday in Ireland, we visited the Rock of Cashel. I asked the guide if the ruins were the work of Cromwell.
"No! he said, Local bishops used the stones, timbers and lead to build mansions for themselves but your guess was pretty good 'cos, in Ireland, if we get a puncture in a bike tyre we blame it on Cromwell"

 

[Barrie Youde]

Speaking of Cromwell, on 31st December 1999 the journalist Simon Jenkins published in The Times an account of an interview he had conducted with an elderly man who, as a young boy in 1923 had been told by an elderly lady (aged 90) - "Never speak ill of Cromwell. My husband's first wife's first husband knew Cromwell and liked him well!"

This extraordinary account is explained as arising from the following facts:-

Born in 1832, at the age of 16 (in 1848) she had married her husband, named Henry, who was then aged 80, having been born in 1768.

1n 1784 Henry (then aged 16) had married a woman aged 82 (for reasons which are not explained!).

In 1720 the woman (aged 18 - born 1702) had herself married an 80 year old man (born 1640) who had served Cromwell before his death in 1658 - and liked him well!


Trafalgar, anybody?

 

[Mad Landsman]

My Maternal grandfather, who I never met, was a catholic with the surname Garnet. It was said that his ancestors were related to Henry Garnet of gunpowder plot fame.
The consequence on my childhood was that there were definitely no Guy Fawkes effigies and Granny would get mightily cross at any mention of such.

 

[expats]

Speaking of Cromwell, on 31st December 1999 the journalist Simon Jenkins published in The Times an account of an interview he had conducted with an elderly man who, as a young boy in 1923 had been told by an elderly lady (aged 90) - "Never speak ill of Cromwell. My husband's first wife's first husband knew Cromwell and liked him well!"

This extraordinary account is explained as arising from the following facts:-

Born in 1832, at the age of 16 (in 1848) she had married her husband, named Henry, who was then aged 80, having been born in 1768.

1n 1784 Henry (then aged 16) had married a woman aged 82 (for reasons which are not explained!).

In 1720 the woman (aged 18 - born 1702) had herself married an 80 year old man (born 1640) who had served Cromwell before his death in 1658 - and liked him well!


Trafalgar, anybody?

I can't do Trafalgar but I remember many years ago the BBC showing some early footage (1900 ?) of Nicholas II reviewing a military event and being presented to a couple of old men who had supposedly been drummer boys at the battle of Borodino against Napoleon...

Seeing that reminded me how close we actually are to history

 

[John Jarman]

I can't do Trafalgar but I remember many years ago the BBC showing some early footage (1900 ?) of Nicholas II reviewing a military event and being presented to a couple of old men who had supposedly been drummer boys at the battle of Borodino against Napoleon...

Seeing that reminded me how close we actually are to history

And getting ever closer!!

JJ.

 

[Varley]

"..danced with someone who'd danced with someone at the ball before Waterloo".

(Can't remember where I got that but it was, I think in my lifetime).

 

[BobClay]

I remember sailing with a Geordie Chief who was heavily into 'The Wars of the Roses' and had a shelf full of books on the subject, including Thomas B. Costain's classic series on the Plantagenets.

He described to me how he had visited Bosworth Field and camped nearby and swore that during the night he could hear the clash of steel and the screams of men. He was of course a big fan and supporter of Richard III.

I'd like to see him again because there's now some dispute about the site of the battle, some historians insisting it was fought several miles from the currently recognized site.

Do you think ghosts can get lost too ? :sweat: