Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-09-10
ABOUT TOM MARSHALL.

l notice going the rounds of the press a
most absurd account of how this dead
orator Of Kentucky got up and got of his
electric bursts of elo4uence we are told
that Tom wrote, rewi ote, studied, trimmt d
and at last reduced to writing his Grafton,
and then committed it to memory, and
practicing it in the woods, sought an op-
portupity among his boon companions to
let off the fireworks while pretending
drunkenness.
knew Tom Marshall intimately he was
man OF genius, erratic, willful, lazy and
Indifferent. Had he possessed any particle
Of the application and design implied in
this silly story he would have been recog-
nized as q statesman instead of brilliant
loafer an oratorical Bohemian, feared by
his friends, admired by his enemies and be-
loved by everybody.
To those who knew this remarkable man
personally, the thought of his pretending
drunk is to be relegated, as the Chinese
Government Commission said of Christian
ity, to things which amuse. The story is
enough to make mule laugh. Pretend
drunkenness / have seen Tom in a hun
dred, and they were the most positive,
solid, through-and- through DRINKS l ever
knew.
Tom was quick to learn and slow to
study. To singular quickness Of appre-
hension he added suggestiveness that was
at once original and true. He made these
qualities tell in the most striking manner
by powerful memory and the happiest
facility and felicity of utterance l ever
heard. In conversation, upon the stump
and on the floor of the House sentences
were struck out perfect in their construc-
ton. He never hesitatcd for a word or
amended a phrase.
The lie to this silly story the papers are
spreading is TO be found in the fact that his
happiest efforts were drawn out in debate
when the preparation charged was utterly
impossible. He was, in fact, more of
debater than an orator.
What a keen wit and delicious sense Of
humor the man possessed Strange TO say,
this quality of humor was not accompanied,
as generally is the case, with pathos. l
have heard Tom, grand in his utterance,
original, striking and witty. bnt l never
heard him pathetic. In this he differed
from his friend and rival Tom Corwin, of
Ohio The last named could pass from
laughter to tears, and from tears to the
widest fun, with the ease Of master.
Throughout Kentucky there yet lives an
admiration OF Tom Marshall's brilliant ut
terances, and stories are told to-day of his
wit and quickness in repartee.
There is one story SO illustrative of this
quality where once another got the better
OF him, that cannot refrain from repeat
ing it, although you are doubtless familiar
with the oft-told tale.
Tom was engaged in the trial of case
somewhere IN the interior of Kentucky,
when decision OF the Judge struck him as
so bad that he rose and said
There never was such ruling as that
since Pontius Plate presided on the trial of
Christ"
"Mr Clerk" responded the Judg..
g fine Mr.. Marshall $40 for contempt of
Court.
81 confess, your honor" continued Tom,
chat what l said was little hard en-
Pontius Plate but it is the first time in
the history OF Kentucky Jurisprudence that
it is held that to speak disrespectfnlly of
Pontius Plate is contempt of Court"
Mr. Clerk, make the fine twenty dol
lars for continuous contempt, SAID the
Judge solemnly.
well, Judge" Tom added, "as you
won all my money last night at poker, lend
me the twenty
"Mr. Clerk" cried the Judge hastily.
"remit the fine. The State can better
afford to lose the money than l can"
81 congratulate the Court upon its re-
turn to a sane condition." said Tom, re.
Stunning his seat amid roars of laughter
Dom Piatt.