New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-11-21
TINT" HUvOROUSp SPEECH

Exposition Bill, it must be confessed, was not n
complete success. We feared 1t would not be
when we saw it announced as beng IN course
of prenaration several days ago. Not but that
Mr.. Cox is a humOrist and a successful one
nobody who has ever known him as candl-
date for Speaker, or has heard him discourse
upon the prospects of his election, will raise
any question on that score. HIS two can
vases ior the SpeakershIp have been just as
funny as they could be, and in both cases the
humorous features eliminated IN lneXtinguish-
able laughter upon the counting OF the votes.
As a humorist he Is very dry-One OF the
driest. But, as we say, we did not expect that
the speech on the Paris Exposition Bill would
be one of his great successes. And this for
the simple reason that it had been an
nounced: and announced as carefully and
deliberately hnmOrOus--a speech that was
destined to burst the Congressional but
tons, and split the Congressional waist
band, set Congress in an uprOar Of
hlarity convuse the country with mer-
riment, and go into the Record fairly pitted
with parenthetical "lLaughlerl" The essen
tial element of humor being, according to the
prevalent popular notion, its meXpectedneSs
VIC IcdTcu IudJ lnt Btlidl OIitoI anu
list had made a mistake when he yielded to the
solicitations of the newspaper correspondents,
who insisted on knowing his intentions,
and permitted them to fling abroad to
the world the intelligence that he was about
to make humorous speech. Still, we were
not without some degree of confidence that
Mr. Cox, even after having been announced as
about to say something funny, would actually
rise up and do it, We believed that if any
body could DO it, it was Mr. Cox, and that
he would make somebody laugh, even though
he had to treat his subject seriously. Referring
to "A well-lnown authority on the subject OF
Humor, entitled "Why we Laugh" we found
it to be defined as follows: ilumOr lies in
"a forged tale; in puns and phrases; in ambi-
&" guities of sense, or affinity of sound; IN hui
"mOrous expressionwithoutt the humorous sense;
" in an odd trOpe in sly question; in smart
answer; in a quirllish reason; in a shrewd in
timation; IN cunning diversion, clever retort,
bold speech, tart irony, lusty hyperbOle plaus-
"ible reconciliation of contradictions. acute non
"sense, counterfeit speech, scenic representation
" of persons or things, affected simplicity, pre-
" sumptuous buntness, lucky and strange hits,
crafty Wrestling of obvious matter to the pur-
pose and rOvlngs of fancy and WlndlngS OF
language in fine, it breeds delight, sometimes
by surprises, and often by uncouthmeSs" This
exhaustive exposition" from DR.. Barrow is
accepted by the author of "Why we Laugh
We expected, accordingly to see some of the
qualities above described in the speech. They
are there. But its being announced before
hand forbade its giving delight by its " sur
"prises," whatever it did by its &" uncouth-
"ncss."
In saying that the speech was not COM
plete success, we must not be understood as
intimatng that Congress did not sit back
with its feet on the desk and laugh. Congress
was very much amused. Congress expected to
be amused. Congress fairly guffawed at his
picturesque treatment of the green-cOm ques-
ton, his. graphic portrayal of the Heather
"Chineer asking the "Mecan man" for
greenee cOrnee,n the corn-husking match in
France, and the wOOden-shoed girls of Marseilles
discovering red ears. The House of Representa-
tivcs, if we may credit the parentheses in the
report did seem to enjoy it. And we are not
about to say that the House of Representa-
tives is easily amused. On the contrary, we
say that body of men who can sit and listen
with sober faces to some of the speeches which
have been made on the financial question dur
ing this session, are pretty nearly humor-proof
No ordinary fun can disturb such profound
gravity Mr.. Cox is entitled to great credit for
having moved them to laughter. But
beyond the walls of Congress this great effort
cannot be accounted success. Very few
newspapers have published even an abstract
of it. The Journals of Mr. COx's own party
have notably omitted even an abstract
Whether this is attributable to mean jeal-
ousy of Mr.. Coxs talents az a humOrist, or
feeling of Indignation on the part of Demo-
cratic editors that he should have treated flip
PANTY the serious proposition of the great
Reformer, Mr.. Tilden, we do not know.
1t is certain, at any rate that the
Democratic press has suppressed him.
1t is by no means impossible that Mr..
Tilden himself, fearing the effect of the speech
upon the country, took measures through his
celebrated Literary Bureau before the speech
was made, to keep it out of Democratic news
papers. If Mr.. Tilden proposes, as now seems
probable, to 90 into the next Presidential cam
paign upon the broad platform, Corn on the Cob
" for All Nations he knows that the circu-
laion of Mr.. Coxs speech, in which the whole
subject of Corn is held up to ridicule, and
every kernel on the cob, and the very cob
itself jeered at and derided. would work seri-
GUS injury to himself az the candidate, and
Corn on the Cob as the cause. II is not UNI
likely then that Mr. Tilden has subsidized the
Democratic press of the country to keep the
speech from the public. 1t Will be something
of disappointment to Mr.. Cox to find HIM
self and his speech 80 completely ignored by
Al, ,,oss 90 he nortv hut IL will Ia nriufed