Page:Hudibras - Volume 2 (Butler, Nash, Bohn; 1859).djvu/210

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
364
HUDIBRAS.
[PART III.
Cut out more work than can be done
In Plato's year,[1] but finish none,
Unless it be the Bulls of Lenthall,
That always pass'd for fundamental:[2] 910
Can set up grandee against grandee,
To squander time away, and bandy;
Make lords and commoners lay sieges
To one another's privileges;
And, rather than compound the quarrel, 915
Engage, to th' inevitable peril
Of both their ruins, th' only scope
And consolation of our hope;
Who, tho' we do not play the game,
Assist as much by giving aim;[3] 920
Can introduce our ancient arts,
For heads of factions t' act their parts;
Know what a leading voice is worth,
A seconding, a third, or fourth;
How much a casting voice comes to, 925
That turns up trump of Ay, or No;
And, by adjusting all at th' end,
Share ev'ry one his dividend.
An art that so much study cost,
And now's in danger to be lost, 930
Unless our ancient virtuosos,
That found it out, get into th' houses.[4]
These are the courses that we took
To carry things by hook or crook,[5]

  1. The Platonic year, or time required for a complete revolution of the entire machine of the world, has by some been made to consist of 4000 common years: others have thought it must extend to 26,000, or still more.
  2. The ordinances published by the House of Commons were signed by Lenthall, the speaker: and are therefore familiarly called the Bulls of Lenthall. They were fundamental, because on them the new order in church and state was reared. Afterwards, when the Parliament became the Rump, the fundamentals acquired a new meaning.
  3. Or, in the bowler's phrase, by giving ground.
  4. The old members of the Rump were excluded from Cromwell's Parliaments. When they presented themselves with Prynne at their head, they were met at the door by Colonel Pride, and refused admittance.
  5. Crook and Hutton were the only judges who dissented from their brethren, when the case of Ship-money was argued in the Exchequer: which