Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1883-03-18
MEMPHIS APPEAL
SUNDAY, MARCH Is, 1883

SUNDAY. MARCH Is, 1883
THE SPEECH OF NE. PATTERSON
The speech Of Mr.. Patterson, delivered IN
the Legislature at Nashville, which the AP-
Pal has published, has excited the admira-
tion of all who have read it. Even those
who differ with the eloquent speaker in the
views be entertsins respecting the proposed
Railway Commission admire the candor, fair
ness and great ability with which the subject
was discussed in that speech. The real value
OF the speech, however, is just what the value
is Of the arguments it advances, the facts it
Introduces and the principles upon which it
based. So completely, as far as the sentj-
Inent and the purpose sought to be served,
are the APPEAL and the utterances of
Mr.. Patterson identical, that any ex-
preston Of our approval Is super-
huous, but we can point 10 one
f,ct that display, in a clear and unmistak
able manner, the excellence Of the speech
that aroused go much applause on is de-
Hvery-its merits az compared with the adj
dress recently delivered in Nashville by Col.
Cole. We desire TO avoid odious COMPARE
son, and shal not attempt to compare the
style or oratorical perfection Of either, the
comparison We have in view is as TO the
value of each as contributions toward form
ing Just opinion as to the matter in hand.
Col. Cole pleads his case with great ability,
he msrshsls his facts and pours 10 his argu-
ment with no small energy-but his address
is a failure in the sense we speak of. becaure
fact and law are at variance with the infer.
ences sought to be drawn. With Col. Cole
the State and It's Legislature have their
powers limited by what he calls a
contract" but which the words he
cites prove to be a Legislative re-
striction imposed upon the railroads by
the Legislature. The sovereign and in
alienable powers of the State are spoken Of
81 if they had no existence, although Stale
courts and the United States Supreme Court
have asserted and defined the police su-
thority OF the State in such matters as a. e
involved in the proposed commission bill.
So We might go all through Col. Coles ingeni-
ously constructed address, and point out false
differences and fallacious conclusions, adroitly
put, but au fond hollow and baseless. Con-
trast with it the clear cut, concise but power
full array of fact and law, and logical infer
ence, in the speech of Mr.. Patterson. Again
we will not branch out into eulogy, but will
call in other authority than our own. The
Nashville Banner, paper whose course has
shown more solicitude for the railroads th an
for their regulation on behalf of the people,
and of course opposed to Mr.. PattersOn's
views, reviewed his speech, bat failed
TO SLOW any mistake in his facts
or any law in his arguments, and finds
itself even constrained, by the cogency of his
reasoning, 10 acknowledge that "there is 70
doubt about the bill being in accord with the
provisions of the constitution" 1t sees
want of calmuess and consecutiveness, loo
much defamation and tendency to prejudice
the mind, and other things that shows bow
gladly it would seize upon any flaw or fall
ure, or baseless assertion on the part OF the
speaker, to n.utralizs the effect of his amin a.
ted language and just and forcible argument.
After exerting all its powers the Banner fails
to show more than that if it had con-
Btructed the speech, its construction would
have been different, which is undeniable.
This failure to convict the speaker of error
of fact or fallacy in argument is more
striking testimony to the power and succees
of his legislative address than any his warm
est admirer could contribute.