Springfield globe-republic. (Springfield, Ohio) 1884-1887, 1885-02-12
New York Sun.1

New York SUM-
Considering those members who have re-
pute as speakers, 1t will be found that great
difference exists between them in respect to
their method Of preparing a speech Of conss-
quence. Mr.. Carpenter spent days in the
most exhaustive study Of his subject matter.
he has been known to spend fifty-eight hours
at . time in his library, snatching but few
moments sleep. Books and all other author
tiles were ransacked, and he studied his sub
ject from all sides But he never gave .
moments thought to the arts of oratory.
After writing out complete syllabus, he
regarded himssH as thoroughly prepared.
Very much after the same manner Senator
Conkling prepared his speeches
Senator Edmunds' sole preparation for .
speech is the reading Of authorities. He sell
dom makes any notes except Of the refer
ence to the authorities, and never writes out
q speech, either in full or in part Mr..
Thurman's method Of preparation was al
most identical with that Of Senator Ed
mundA Mr.. Blaine, on the other hand, not
only very carefully prepared himself by ex-
haustive study Of the subject matter, but
also weighed his sentences, writing and re-
writing some Of them many times Many Of
his speeches were fully written out before
delivery, although he did not always confine
himself to his notes when on the floor. Mr.
Garfield took infinite pains with his speeches,
preparing them as much with a view to their
rhetorical effect as to their subject matter.
Mr.. Carlisle owes his prominence in the
house to the infinite pains with which he
prepared himself for his speeches, especially
that on the refunding bill four years ago.
which put him in the front rank, and that
sn the tariff. This preparation, however,
went no further than an exhaustive study Of
the original data. He accepted no mans
figures, but prepared his own from the off,
cial statistica For weeks and weeks he
spent every night at his desk computing,
comparing, figuring, and making his own
deductions He never gave q thought to his
diction, his gestures, or to any Of the arts OF
rhetoric.
Mr.. Hewitt and Mr.. Cox carefully
prepare all their speeches The uost
careful and elaborate preparations are
made by Senator Hoar when he purposes the
delivery of an important speech Having
thoroughly arranged his line of thought
after having his subject matter at hand, Mr..
Hoar, with most laborious pains, writes his
speeches out, turning sentences, twisting
words, rubbing and polishing until the die
tion and style are perfect in his estimation
Next the speech is carefully committed, and
finally practiced, with a view to perfecting
the gesticulation. Mr.. Hoar generally prae-
tices before q full-length mirror, and though
the witty Senator Vance always insists that
Mr.. Hoar got the idea from the famous
scene in tho @Rivals." where Bob Acres
strives to perfect himself in the art Of dane
ing by practicing before a glass, yet Nj.
Hoar's method is precisely identical with
that practised by one Of the great
est Of American orators, William Pinckoey.
In style and diction, the most noted Of re-
cent senators greatly differ. Mr.. Edmunds
style is that Of absolute simplicity. His sem
tences are short, his words express the exact
shade Of meaning he desires to convey. He
uses no metaphors. no Illustrations His
speech is as clear and as cold as ice. He never
Is animated, never but once betrayed emo
ton, but stands like a man in q witness-box,
his hands clasped together, occasionally
lifting the fore6nger Of his right hand.
Everyone listens, everyone understands,
many are convinced, but none are impressed,
and he never made a hearers pulse beat .
stroke quicker than usual, nor had an au-
ditor who held his breath. Mr.. Thurman,
somewhat like Mr.. Edmunds in his
utter simplicity and freedom from or
nament and his clearness, unlike Ed
munds, became heated, and at times vehe-
ment, and then would saw the air with
vigorous right-hand blows Mr.. Carpenter
trampied the traditions OF the schools under
his feet when he spoke. His style at times
was exceedingly embellished; metaphors
suggested themselves 10 nim as uniqueiy and
appropriately as they did to Carlyle, his
diction was pure and his sentences rhythmi-
cal 10 that AZ umes ne seemed almost 70 %
repesthg oiane verse. MS h,gn-Pitcneo
VOICE was slnguiariy Pieasing, aho was moo-
uiaeed win great SKILL WIN ms long, wnlte
iocks scatIeieo aii over ms nsao' ana sone-
tim.s over us eyes, nequehIiy VIII oIe VI
oo1n nanos thrust IN Ills pocAe's, son,e'in'eS
iranucany geSticuiAtlns, no ion1"eu nono
od inc iesSohs oi e.ocuIion' Lev ne was fe'
saIuoo 1S sin nsuiafy e!aceiui speaAeF'
Mr. Nonklhg seenneo 70 oengn' 10 Piay
wltn MS sentences ne spoke slowly, Mtn
long pauses pet"een nus sentences, WIN =
most re"arAaoie inUohauo'' WHICH 1ne curr
ous enuieia.oh sl =, nenry LYING nos' neaiy
sugges& Mr. OonIhs 1ehenoeu III IN
vowed sentences tne more iaoyrih.nihe t1e
oe'ter. Iartihg WIN h's suo!ec' no "ouiu
frequently insert parentnet,cai sentences
~ltn wn,cn no ~ouia uavei over au tne
perus OF the speecn, taxing ihVoiu'ions ",Inin
nsoiu'io,i'' u.i'n, J"'o as 10 eoeneu W no
become iost IN .ne laoaiyhle, ne "ouio
e"erse pluio NJ a ,iie PleuioaOe Ior 'ne ok
lnAi sen1ence. S very uanserous uao.S
never tllppea Mr. oonAlns; anu '"pusn
wiz any o.nei Ian ~ "o~u aa'e Don
teo,ous, ne was aoie W lnaAe us n0dieis
ratner IKE !"
Mr.. Bayard labors with voice that is
weak, almost effeminate. Yet he is regarded
"A one of the most graceful speakers in the
800 ua l. r,,ors d;g,.a in bis stvla than
-, -. ~. 80 I,;a.;o-, = s,,,,o,so.