National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-03-15
KEEP il dark.
What NIr. BeIford Meant.

Inc following ID an eXtract from tne Con-
gressional Record of Friday:
Mr.. Belford. They used to have a school Of phi
losophers in Greece who were called esoteric and
another VINO were called exoteric The latter
were public and general, while the former were
specialists. They had knowledge peculiar and
special Now, these gentlemen belong to that
esoteric school OF philosophers and they possess
knowledge that Is special to them and which the
rest of Us do not have. say no man can read
that provision and come to the conclusion an
nounced by the gentleman.
MT. Horr. The gentleman does not know what
he Is talking about.
To explain the passage more fully it should
be stated that the house was discussing the
postoffice appropriation bill in committee of
the whole, the clause under consideration
being that which relates to the compensation
of railroads for carrying the mails Mr..
Horn was pointing out the fact that the
Union Pacific and Central Pacific railroads
were placed on different footing from
others, when Mr.. Bedford came back at him
as above recorded. 1t will DO observed that
tho gist of the retort is in the happy allusion
to the school of philosophers in Greece, and
to the fine discrimination between the
'"esoteric" and the "exoteric" school of poll
tics as applied to the compensation of rail-
roads for mail service. 1t has been COM
monty supposed that the gentleman from
Colorado had devoted SO much time to the
study of financial questions. with special
reference to disposing of surplus revenues
and reducing plethora in the treasury, that
he could have had little or no time for
| classical reading or the study of an.
Client schools of philosophy. That
this is not true is shown by the graceful way
in which he dropped into the classical style,
and the perfect ease with which he intro
duced the ancient philosophers of Greece into
debate on an appropriation bill. Some men
would have lugged them in head and heels
Mr.. Bedford introduced them in such a
natural way that nobody could think OF
questioning their right to be there. 1t il
evident, however, that Mr.. Horr did no,
enjoy the classical allusion nor appreciate
the beauty of the illustration. When Mr.
Bedford had finished his remarks Mr.. Horl
simply said, "The gentleman does not know
what he is talking about" Whether Mr.
Horn meant That Mr.. Belford did not under
stand the provision Of the appropriation bill
which was under consideration, or tina
he did not understand the difference
between the esoteric and the exoteri
schools of philosophy, is not quite clear from
the report. Either construction is possible
and the beauty of Mr.. Horr's retort is that i
works both ways. 1t is double ender, as il
were. But wo are bound to admit that Mr.
Horr laid himself wide open; for If Mr.
Bedford had said you're another Their
would have been an end of the debate
There is still another view of the case, but
rests on an unfriendly sugges tion, if not
dark suspicion. 1t is that when MI
what he is talking about" he was 81 mpl
trying to conceal his own lack Of exaC
information concerning the ancient school
of philosophy This view of the case woul
imply that MT Horn resorted to the bold fguI
of speech of substituting himself for NJ
Beliord and that when he said "the gentle
man does not know what he is talking about
, he meant that he himself did not know whl
the gentleman was talking about. The POI
, ular verdict on this point might differ
Colorado and in Michigan, where each of II
} gentlemen has, respectively, large followin
Our own opinion is that If MIR, Bofords tin
. had been sufi GENTLY extended no could ha'