“Eccentricity” or “individuality” are the marks of insular John 
Bull in the minds of continentals. On the whole, this notion 
confuses the Englishman of the past with the Englishman of the 
present. Intense class development, extreme division of labour and 
what is called “public opinion”, manipulated by the Brahmins of 
the press, have, on the contrary, produced a monotony of 
character that would make it impossible for a Shakespeare, for 
example, to recognise his own countrymen. The differences no 
longer belong to the individuals but to their “profession” and 
class. Apart from his profession, in everyday life one “respectable” 
Englishman is so like another that even Leibniz could hardly 
discover a difference, a differentia specifica, between them.* The 
individuality, so highly praised, is banished from every sphere of 
politics and society and finds its last refuge in the crotchets and 
whims of private life, asserting itself there now and then sans-géne? 
and with unconscious humour. Hence it is chiefly in the courts of 
justice—those great public arenas in which private whims clash 
with one another—that the Englishman still appears as a being suz 
generis. * 

This is the preface to a diverting courtroom scene that took 
place a few days ago in the Court of Exchequer.‘ The dramatis 
personae were, on one side, Sir Edwin Landseer, the greatest 

a See G. W. Leibniz, Nouveaux essais sur l’entendement humain. Livre deuxiéme ‘‘Des 
idées”, chapitre XXVII “Ce que c’est qu’identité ou diversité.”— Ed. 

b Brusquely.— Ed. 

© Unique of its kind.— Ed. 

d Marx uses the English name.— Ed. 

English painter of the present time, and, on the other, Messrs. 
Haldane, first-rate London tailors; Sir Edwin was the defendant, 
Messrs. Haldane the plaintiffs. The corpus delicti consisted of an 
overcoat and a frock-coat, valued at £12, for which the painter 
refused to pay. Sergeant* Ballantine pleaded for Landseer, 
Mr. Griffiths for Haldane. 

Haldane testifies: Sir Edwin Landseer ordered the two coats. 
They had been sent to him to try on and he had complained 
about the height of the collars. They were altered. Now he 
complained that he could not wear them without feeling hot and 
uncomfortable in them. In addition, they rubbed against the hair of 
his head. To please the defendant, various alterations were made. 
Finally, the plaintiffs refused to make any more alterations unless 
they were specially paid for. At that point Landseer sent the two 
coats back by his servant. The plaintiffs then sent him the following 
letter: ° 

“We beg respectfully to send you two coats, having again altered them 
according to the direction you last gave. The many alterations you speak of as 
being unsuccessful arise from your own fault. The coats when first tried on fitted 
remarkably well, but if you will place your body into the most unreasonable 
positions it will require something more than human science to fit you. (Laughter.) 
We have most unwillingly made the alterations you have required, believing them 
to be unnecessary and contrary to the rules of our craft, and we now find it 
impossible to please you. With reference to your demand that we should take the 
coats back, we cannot think of doing so. We therefore annex the enclosed 
statement and request prompt payment.” 

Sergeant Ballantine: You would not assert that the coats fit now? 
Haldane: That is what I assert. 

Ballantine: Were they not better before they were altered? 
Haldane: Yes. | 

B.: Coats are not your speciality. You are big in the trousers 
field, aren’t you? 

H.: Well, we are better known for trousers. 

B.: But not for coats? Did not Mr. Alfred Montgomery, who 
introduced Sir Edwin Landseer to you, warn him about your coats? 

H.: Yes, he did. 

B.: Did not you or your brother tell Sir Edwin that you would 
rather make the coats for nothing than not make them at all? 

H.: We said nothing of the sort. 

B.: What do you mean by “weakening” the collar? 

a Here and below Marx uses the English word.— Ed. 
6 Quoted from the report “Court of Exchequer, Feb. 1” published in The 
Times, No. 24159, February 3, 1862.— Ed. 

English 165 

H.: Sir Edwin complained that the coat collar irritated his neck. 
So we weakened the collar, that is, we reduced it to a smaller size. 

B.: And how much are you charging for this reduction? 

H.: Two or three pounds. . 

Sergeant Ballantine: Sir Edwin Landseer considered it necessary 
to complain of Haldane’s insulting letter. Mr. Montgomery advised 
Sir Edwin to entrust the lower part of his body to the Haldane 
firm, but by no means the upper portion. Although Sir Edwin is a 
great artist, he is a mere child in these things and so took the risk, 
and the jury sees what the consequences were. The plaintiff, 
whom the jurors have just seen on the witness stand, is also a 
great artist. But would a great artist ever remodel his work? He 
must stand or fall on his feeling of its excellence; but Haldane did 
not stand up for the excellence of his work. He acceded to 
alterations so long as they corresponded to his own principles. 
And then to ask two or three pounds for his botching! I have the 
honour of addressing a tribunal that wears coats; I ask it whether 
there is any greater torture in the world than a stiff collar on the 
neck? I hear that when Sir Edwin put on one of these coats, his 
neck was in a vice and England was in danger of losing one of its 
greatest artists. Sir Edwin consents to put the coats in question on 
before the court, and the gentlemen of the jury can then decide 
for themselves. I now call Sir Edwin as a witness, and he will tell 
you the story of the two coats. j | 

Sir Edwin Landseer: ... When I put the coats on—the collar was 
like this. (At this point Sir Edwin turned around and to loud 
laughter presented his back to the jurors, leaving the impression 
in their minds that he had suddenly suffered an apoplectic fit.) ... I 
offered to leave the decision to the arbitration of any tailor; but all 
the same any one must know best how his coat fits or where his 
shoe pinches. 

Mr. Griffiths: What did Mr. Montgomery say when he intro- 
duced you to the Haldane firm? 

He said to me: “Sir Edwin, you are usually not so fortunate with 
your trousers as your coats.” 

Griffiths: Would you try the coats on here? | 

Why not? (Puts one of the coats on.) Now look! (Laughter.) 

Baron Martin (the judge): There is a tailor among the jurors. 
Will the gentleman be good enough to look carefully at the corpus 
delicti? 

The aforesaid tailor leaves the jury box and goes over to Sir 
Edwin, has him put on the frock-coat and the overcoat, examines 
them expertly and shakes his head. 

Griffiths: Sir Edwin, do you consider the frock-coat too tight? 

Yes! (Laughter.) 

Too narrow? I ask. 

Well, I would have to take it off, if I had to eat luncheon in it. 

Ballantine: Then, Sir Edwin, you need not be stuck in it any 
longer. Emancipate yourself from it. 

I am much obliged to you. (Takes the coats off.) 

After moving pleas by the two attorneys and a comical 
summing-up by the judge, who stressed in particular that English 
comfort should not be sacrificed to the artistic ideals of the firm of 
Haldane, the jury found for Sir Edwin Landseer. 

aper 

time 

167 

Karl Marx