Book: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 4, Part 4

V >> Various >> Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 4, Part 4




See C.A. Lobeck, _Aglaophamus_ (1829); F.G. Welcker, _Die Aeschylische
Trilogie und die Kabirenweihe zu Lemnos_ (1824); J.P. Rossignol, _Les
Metaux dans l'antiquite_ (1863), discussing the gods of Samothrace (the
Dactyli, the Cabeiri, the Corybantes, the Curetes, and the Telchines) as
workers in metal, and the religious origin of metallurgy; O. Rubensohn,
_Die Mysterienheiligtuemer in Eleusis und Samothrake_ (1892); W.H. Roscher,
_Lexikon der Mythologie_ (_s.v._ "Megaloi Theoi"); L. Preller, _Griechische
Mythologie_ (4th ed., appendix); and the article by F. Lenormant in
Daremberg and Saglio, _Dictionnaire des Antiquites_.

[1] A grammarian of Patrae in Achaea (or Patara in Lycia), pupil of
Eratosthenes (275-195 B.C.), and author of a periplus and a collection of
Delphic oracles.

CABER TOSSING (Gaelic _cabar_, a pole or beam), a Scottish athletic
exercise which consists in throwing a section of a trunk of a tree, called
the "caber," in such a manner that it shall turn over in the air and fall
on the ground with its small end pointing in the direction directly
opposite to the "tosser." Tossing the caber is usually considered to be a
distinctly Scottish sport, although "casting the bar," an exercise
evidently similar in character, was popular in England in the 16th century
but afterwards died out. The caber is the heavy trunk of a tree from 16 to
20 ft. long. It is often brought upon the field heavier than can be thrown
and then cut to suit the contestants, although sometimes cabers of
different sizes are kept, each contestant taking his choice. The toss is
made after a run, the caber being set up perpendicularly with the heavy end
up by assistants on the spot indicated by the tosser, who sets one foot
against it, grasps it with both hands, and, as soon as he feels it properly
balanced, gives the word to the assistants to let go their hold. He then
raises the caber and gets both hands underneath the lower end. "A practised
hand, having freed the caber from the ground, and got his hands underneath
the end, raises it till the lower end is nearly on a level with his elbows,
then advances for several yards, gradually increasing his speed till he is
sometimes at a smart run before he gives the toss. Just before doing this
he allows the caber to leave his shoulder, and as the heavy top end begins
to fall forward, he throws the end he has in his hands upwards with all his
strength, and, if successful, after the heavy end strikes the ground the
small end continues its upward motion till perpendicular, when it falls
forward, and the caber lies in a straight line with the tosser" (W.M.
Smith). The winner is he who tosses with the best and easiest style,
according to old Highland traditions, and whose caber falls straightest in
a direct line from him. In America a style called the Scottish-American
prevails at Caledonian games. In this the object is distance alone, the
same caber being used by all contestants and the toss being measured from
the tosser's foot to the spot where the small end strikes the ground. This
style is repudiated in Scotland. Donald Dinnie, born in 1837 and still a
champion in 1890, was the best tosser of modern times.

See W.M. Smith, _Athletics and Athletic Sports in Scotland_ (Edinburgh,
1891).

CABET, ETIENNE (1788-1856), French communist, was born at Dijon in 1788,
the son of a cooper. He chose the profession of advocate, without
succeeding in it, but ere long became notable as the persevering apostle of
republicanism and communism. He assisted in a secondary way in the
revolution of 1830, and obtained the appointment of _procureur-general_ in
Corsica under the government of Louis Philippe; but was dismissed for his
attack upon the conservatism of the government, in his _Histoire de la
revolution de 1830_. Elected, notwithstanding, to the chamber of deputies,
he was prosecuted for his bitter criticism of the government, and obliged
to go into exile in England in 1834, where he became an ardent disciple of
Robert Owen. On the amnesty of 1839 he returned to France, and attracted
some notice by the publication of a badly written and fiercely democratic
history of the Revolution of 1789 (4 vols., 1840), and of a social romance,
_Voyage en Icarie_, in which he set forth his peculiar views. These works
met with some success among the radical working-men of Paris. Like Owen, he
sought to realize his ideas in practice, and, pressed as well by his
friends, he made arrangements for an experiment in communism on American
soil. By negotiations in England favoured by Owen, he purchased a
considerable tract of land on the Red river, Texas, and drew up an
elaborate scheme for the intending colony, community of property being the
distinctive principle of the society. Accordingly in 1848 an expedition of
1500 "Icarians" sailed to America; but unexpected difficulties arose and
the complaints of the disenchanted settlers soon reached Europe. Cabet, who
had remained in France, had more than one judicial investigation to undergo
in consequence, but was honourably acquitted. In 1849 he went out in person
to America, but on his arrival, finding that the Mormons had been expelled
from their city Nauvoo (_q.v._), in Illinois, he transferred his settlement
thither. There, with the exception of a journey to France, where he
returned to defend himself successfully before the tribunals, he remained,
the dictator of his little society. In 1856, however, he withdrew and died
the same year at St Louis.

See COMMUNISM. Also Felix Bonnaud, _Cabet et son oeuvre, appel a tous les
socialistes_ (Paris, 1900); J. Prudhommeaux, _Icaria and its Founder,
Etienne Cabet_ (Nimes, 1907).

CABIN, a small, roughly built hut or shelter; the term is particularly
applied to the thatched mud cottages of the negro slaves of the southern
states of the Unites States of America, or of the poverty-stricken
peasantry of Ireland or the crofter districts of Scotland. In a special
sense it is used of the small rooms or compartments on board a vessel used
for sleeping, eating or other accommodation. The word in its earlier
English forms was _cabane_ or _caban_, and thus seems to be an adaptation
of the French _cabane_; the French have taken _cabine_, for the room on
board a ship, from the English. In French and other Romanic languages, in
which the word occurs, _e.g._ Spanish _cabana_, Portuguese _cabana_, the
origin is usually found in the Medieval Latin _capanna_. Isidore of Seville
(_Origines_, lib. xiv. 12) says:--_Tugurium_ (hut) _parva casula est, quam
faciunt sibi custodes vinearum, ad tegimen seu quasi tegurium. Hoc rustici
Capannam vocant, quod unum tantum capiat_ (see Du Cange, _Glossarium_, s.v.
_Capanna_). Others derive from Greek [Greek: kape], crib, manger. Skeat
considers the English word was taken from the Welsh _caban_, rather than
from the French, and that the original source for all the forms was Celtic.

CABINET, a word with various applications which may be traced to two
principal meanings, (1) a small private chamber, and (2) an article of
furniture containing compartments formed of drawers, shelves, &c. The word
is a diminutive of "cabin" and therefore properly means a small hut or
shelter. This meaning is now obsolete; the _New English Dictionary_ quotes
from Leonard Digges's _Stratioticos_ (published with additions by his son
Thomas in 1579), "the Lance Knights encamp always in the field very
strongly, two or three to a Cabbonet." From the use both of the article of
furniture and of a small chamber for the safe-keeping of a collection of
valuable prints, pictures, medals or other objects, the word is frequently
applied to such a collection or to objects fit for such safe-keeping. The
name of _Cabinet du Roi_ was given to the collection of prints prepared by
the best artists of the 17th century by order of Louis XIV. These were
intended to commemorate the chief events of his reign, and also to
reproduce the paintings and sculptures and other art treasures contained in
the royal palaces. It was begun in 1667 and was placed under the
superintendence of Nicholas Clement (1647 or 1651-1712), the royal
librarian. The collection was published in 1727. The plates are now in the
Louvre. A "cabinet" edition [v.04 p.0918] of a literary work is one of
somewhat small size, and bound in such a way as would suit a tasteful
collection. The term is applied also to a size of photograph of a larger
size than the _carte de visite_ but smaller than the "panel." The political
use of the term is derived from the private chamber of the sovereign or
head of a state in which his advisers met.

_Cabinet in Furniture._--The artificer who constructs furniture is still
called a "cabinet-maker," although the manufacture of cabinets, properly so
called, is now a very occasional part of his work. Cabinets can be divided
into a very large number of classes according to their shape, style, period
and country of origin; but their usual characteristic is that they are
supported upon a stand, and that they contain a series of drawers and
pigeon-holes. The name is, however, now given to many pieces of furniture
for the safe-keeping or exhibition of valuable objects, which really answer
very little to the old conception of a cabinet. The cabinet represented an
evolution brought about by the necessities of convenience, and it appealed
to so many tastes and needs that it rapidly became universal in the houses
of the gentle classes, and in great measure took the impress of the peoples
who adopted it. It would appear to have originated in Italy, probably at
the very beginning of the 16th century. In its rudimentary form it was
little more than an oblong box, with or without feet, small enough to stand
upon a table or chair, filled with drawers and closed with doors. In this
early form its restricted dimensions permitted of its use only for the
safeguard of jewels, precious stones and sometimes money. One of the
earliest cabinets of which we have mention belonged to Francis I. of
France, and is described as covered with gilt leather, tooled with
mauresque work. As the Renaissance became general these early forms gave
place to larger, more elaborate and more architectural efforts, until the
cabinet became one of the most sumptuous of household adornments. It was
natural that the countries which were earliest and most deeply touched by
the Renaissance should excel in the designing of these noble and costly
pieces of furniture. The cabinets of Italy, France and the Netherlands were
especially rich and monumental. Those of Italy and Flanders are often of
great magnificence and of real artistic skill, though like all other
furniture their style was often grievously debased, and their details
incongruous and bizarre. Flanders and Burgundy were, indeed, their lands of
adoption, and Antwerp added to its renown as a metropolis of art by
developing consummate skill in their manufacture and adornment. The cost
and importance of the finer types have ensured the preservation of
innumerable examples of all but the very earliest periods; and the student
never ceases to be impressed by the extraordinary variety of the work of
the 16th and 17th centuries, and very often of the 18th also. The basis of
the cabinet has always been wood, carved, polished or inlaid; but lavish
use has been made of ivory, tortoise-shell, and those cut and polished
precious stones which the Italians call _pietra dura_. In the great Flemish
period of the 17th century the doors and drawers of cabinets were often
painted with classical or mythological scenes. Many French and Florentine
cabinets were also painted. In many classes the drawers and pigeon-holes
are enclosed by folding doors, carved or inlaid, and often painted on the
inner sides. Perhaps the most favourite type during a great part of the
16th and 17th centuries--a type which grew so common that it became
cosmopolitan--was characterized by a conceit which acquired astonishing
popularity. When the folding doors are opened there is disclosed in the
centre of the cabinet a tiny but palatial interior. Floored with alternate
squares of ebony and ivory to imitate a black and white marble pavement,
adorned with Corinthian columns or pilasters, and surrounded by mirrors,
the effect, if occasionally affected and artificial, is quite as often
exquisite. Although cabinets have been produced in England in considerable
variety, and sometimes of very elegant and graceful form, the foreign
makers on the whole produced the most elaborate and monumental examples. As
we have said, Italy and the Netherlands acquired especial distinction in
this kind of work. In France, which has always enjoyed a peculiar genius
for assimilating modes in furniture, Flemish cabinets were so greatly in
demand that Henry IV. determined to establish the industry in his own
dominions. He therefore sent French workmen to the Low Countries to acquire
the art of making cabinets, and especially those which were largely
constructed of ebony and ivory. Among these workmen were Jean Mace and
Pierre Boulle, a member of a family which was destined to acquire something
approaching immortality. Many of the Flemish cabinets so called, which were
in such high favour in France and also in England, were really _armoires_
consisting of two bodies superimposed, whereas the cabinet proper does not
reach to the floor. Pillared and fluted, with panelled sides, and front
elaborately carved with masks and human figures, these pieces which were
most often in oak were exceedingly harmonious and balanced. Long before
this, however, France had its own school of makers of cabinets, and some of
their carved work was of the most admirable character. At a somewhat later
date Andre Charles Boulle made many pieces to which the name of cabinet has
been more or less loosely given. They were usually of massive proportions
and of extreme elaboration of marquetry. The North Italian cabinets, and
especially those which were made or influenced by the Florentine school,
were grandiose and often gloomy. Conceived on a palatial scale, painted or
carved, or incrusted with marble and _pietra dura_, they were intended for
the adornment of galleries and lofty bare apartments where they were not
felt to be overpowering. These North Italian cabinets were often covered
with intarsia or marquetry, which by its subdued gaiety retrieved somewhat
their heavy stateliness of form. It is, however, often difficult to ascribe
a particular fashion of shape or of workmanship to a given country, since
the interchange of ideas and the imports of actual pieces caused a rapid
assimilation which destroyed frontiers. The close connexion of centuries
between Spain and the Netherlands, for instance, led to the production
north and south of work that was not definitely characteristic of either.
Spain, however, was more closely influenced than the Low Countries, and
contains to this day numbers of cabinets which are not easily to be
distinguished from the characteristic ebony, ivory and tortoise-shell work
of the craftsmen whose skill was so rapidly acquired by the emissaries of
Henry IV. The cabinets of southern Germany were much influenced by the
models of northern Italy, but retained to a late date some of the
characteristics of domestic Gothic work such as elaborately fashioned
wrought-iron handles and polished steel hinges. Often, indeed, 17th-century
South Germany work is a curious blend of Flemish and Italian ideas executed
in oak and Hungarian ash. Such work, however interesting, necessarily lacks
simplicity and repose. A curious little detail of Flemish and Italian, and
sometimes of French later 17th-century cabinets, is that the interiors of
the drawers are often lined with stamped gold or silver paper, or marbled
ones somewhat similar to the "end papers" of old books. The great English
cabinet-makers of the 18th century were very various in their cabinets,
which did not always answer strictly to their name; but as a rule they will
not bear comparison with the native work of the preceding century, which
was most commonly executed in richly marked walnut, frequently enriched
with excellent marquetry of woods. Mahogany was the dominating timber in
English furniture from the accession of George II. almost to the time of
the Napoleonic wars; but many cabinets were made in lacquer or in the
bright-hued foreign woods which did so much to give lightness and grace to
the British style. The glass-fronted cabinet for China or glass was in high
favour in the Georgian period, and for pieces of that type, for which
massiveness would have been inappropriate, satin and tulip woods, and other
timbers with a handsome grain taking a high polish were much used.

(J. P.-B.)

_The Political Cabinet._--Among English political institutions, the
"Cabinet" is a conventional but not a legal term employed to describe those
members of the privy council who fill the highest executive offices in the
state, and by their concerted policy direct the government, and are
responsible for all the acts of the crown. The cabinet now always includes
the persons filling the following offices, who are therefore called
"cabinet ministers," viz.:--the first lord of the treasury, the lord
chancellor of England, the lord president of the council, the lord privy
seal, the five secretaries of state, the chancellor of the exchequer [v.04
p.0919] and the first lord of the admiralty. The chancellor of the duchy of
Lancaster, the postmaster-general, the first commissioner of works, the
president of the board of trade, the chief secretary for Ireland, the lord
chancellor of Ireland, the president of the local government board, the
president of the board of agriculture, and the president of the board of
education, are usually members of the cabinet, but not necessarily so. A
modern cabinet contains from sixteen to twenty members. It used to be said
that a large cabinet is an evil; and the increase in its numbers in recent
years has often been criticized. But the modern widening of the franchise
has tended to give the cabinet the character of an executive committee for
the party in power, no less than that of the prime-minister's consultative
committee, and to make such a committee representative it is necessary to
include the holders of all the more important offices in the
administration, who are generally selected as the influential politicians
of the party rather than for special aptitude in the work of the
departments.

The word "cabinet," or "cabinet council," was originally employed as a term
of reproach. Thus Lord Bacon says, in his essay _Of Counsel_ (xx.), "The
doctrine of Italy and practice of France, in some kings' times, hath
introduced cabinet councils--a remedy worse than the disease"; and, again,
"As for cabinet councils, it may be their motto _Plenus rimarum sum_." Lord
Clarendon--after stating that, in 1640, when the great Council of Peers was
convened by the king at York, the burden of affairs rested principally on
Laud, Strafford and Cottington, with five or six others added to them on
account of their official position and ability--adds, "These persons made
up the committee of state, which was reproachfully after called the
_Juncto_, and enviously then in court the _Cabinet Council_." And in the
Second Remonstrance in January 1642, parliament complained "of the managing
of the great affairs of the realm in _Cabinet Councils_ by men unknown and
not publicly trusted." But this use of the term, though historically
curious, has in truth nothing in common with the modern application of it.
It meant, at that time, the employment of a select body of favourites by
the king, who were supposed to possess a larger share of his confidence
than the privy council at large. Under the Tudors, at least from the later
years of Henry VIII. and under the Stuarts, the privy council was the
council of state or government. During the Commonwealth it assumed that
name.

The Cabinet Council, properly so called, dates from the reign of William
III. and from the year 1693, for it was not until some years after the
Revolution that the king discovered and adopted the two fundamental
principles of a constitutional executive government, namely, that a
ministry should consist of statesmen holding the same political principles
and identified with each other; and, secondly, that the ministry should
stand upon a parliamentary basis, that is, that it must command and retain
the majority of votes in the legislature. It was long before these
principles were thoroughly worked out and understood, and the perfection to
which they have been brought in modern times is the result of time,
experience and in part of accident. But the result is that the cabinet
council for the time being _is_ the government of Great Britain; that all
the powers vested in the sovereign (with one or two exceptions) are
practically exercised by the members of this body; that all the members of
the cabinet are jointly and severally responsible for all its measures, for
if differences of opinion arise their existence is unknown as long as the
cabinet lasts--when publicly manifested the cabinet is at an end; and
lastly, that the cabinet, being responsible to the sovereign for the
conduct of executive business, is also collectively responsible to
parliament both for its executive conduct and for its legislative measures,
the same men being as members of the cabinet the servants of the crown, and
as members of parliament and leaders of the majority responsible to those
who support them by their votes and may challenge in debate every one of
their actions. In this latter sense the cabinet has sometimes been
described as a standing committee of both Houses of Parliament.

One of the consequences of the close connexion of the cabinet with the
legislature is that it is desirable to divide the strength of the ministry
between the two Houses of Parliament. Pitt's cabinet of 1783 consisted of
himself in the House of Commons and seven peers. But so aristocratic a
government would now be impracticable. In Gladstone's cabinet of 1868,
eight, and afterwards nine, ministers were in the House of Commons and six
in the House of Lords. Great efforts were made to strengthen the
ministerial bench in the Commons, and a new principle was introduced, that
the representatives of what are called the spending departments--that is,
the secretary of state for war and the first lord of the admiralty--should,
if possible, be members of the House which votes the supplies. Disraeli
followed this precedent but it has since been disregarded. In Sir H.
Campbell-Bannerman's cabinet formed in 1905, six ministers were in the
House of Lords and thirteen in the House of Commons.

Cabinets are usually convoked by a summons addressed to "His Majesty's
confidential servants" by the prime minister; and the ordinary place of
meeting is either at the official residence of the first lord of the
treasury in Downing Street or at the foreign office, but they may be held
anywhere. No secretary or other officer is present at the deliberations of
this council. No official record is kept of its proceedings, and it is even
considered a breach of ministerial confidence to keep a private record of
what passed in the cabinet, inasmuch as such memoranda may fall into other
hands. But on some important occasions, as is known from the _Memoirs of
Lord Sidmouth_, the _Correspondence of Earl Grey with King William IV._,
and from Sir Robert Peel's _Memoirs_, published by permission of Queen
Victoria, cabinet minutes are drawn up and submitted to the sovereign, as
the most formal manner in which the advice of the ministry can be tendered
to the crown and placed upon record. (See also Sir Algernon West's
_Recollections_, 1899.) More commonly, it is the duty of the prime minister
to lay the collective opinion of his colleagues before the sovereign, and
take his pleasure on public measures and appointments. The sovereign never
presides at a cabinet; and at the meetings of the privy council, where the
sovereign does preside, the business is purely formal. It has been laid
down by some writers as a principle of the British constitution that the
sovereign is never present at a discussion between the advisers of the
crown; and this is, no doubt, an established fact and practice. But like
many other political usages of Great Britain it originated in a happy
accident.

King William and Queen Anne always presided at weekly cabinet councils. But
when the Hanoverian princes ascended the throne, they knew no English, and
were barely able to converse at all with their ministers; for George I. or
George II. to take part in, or even to listen to, a debate in council was
impossible. When George III. mounted the throne the practice of the
independent deliberations of the cabinet was well established, and it has
never been departed from.

Upon the resignation or dissolution of a ministry, the sovereign exercises
the undoubted prerogative of selecting the person who may be thought by him
most fit to form a new cabinet. In several instances the statesmen selected
by the crown have found themselves unable to accomplish the task confided
to them. But in more favourable cases the minister chosen for this supreme
office by the crown has the power of distributing all the political offices
of the government as may seem best to himself, subject only to the ultimate
approval of the sovereign. The prime minister is therefore in reality the
author and constructor of the cabinet; he holds it together; and in the
event of his retirement, from whatever cause, the cabinet is really
dissolved, even though its members are again united under another head.

Copyright (c) 2007. knowncrafts.net. All rights reserved.