Crawford avalanche. (Grayling, Mich.) 1879-19??, 1892-03-24

4fummAr IN the House.
~ UR Washington
] ! ! ! ! ! ! !
correspondent says:
4 ~ dramatically the
%0lfi House is not q
[E3 failure; that is to
Z>zH77ES( say, the grammar OF
EMikiA the Fif ty-s econd
RXIINsM Congress is not as
-fEzSss5SSsss@ -fE,sS - ~ bad as might be ex-
XiiTf1I1lI&9 pected. The House,
vllllEa Eaaa1t1lI| as a rule, Is a curl
.wIEzru-[Ss GUS constructor OF
]. false syntax, and II
Uswis only a question
----ZE of degree as to now
T1- fmwuMuuw far tn o rules of
tmLulDe 1mFwr7. OF grammar are to
iplPlF be violated and all
WytA VEs dIIl' y order and prece-
WD dents shattered.
But In the matter of diction, to the
surprise of all mankind, the present
House Is far in advance of its immedi-
ate predecessor. Strangers in the gal
leries have watched with wonder the
lightning-like speed OF the sten6grsph-
ers taking down speeches which are
being made for the benefit OF the con-
stftuents of Buncombe County. They
have listened to members whose words
lap like shingles on a roof and whose
sentenoes are telescoped worse than a
railroad collision, and have marveled at
the skill OF the stenographers who make
such a speech appear verbatim in the
Record OF the following morning.
But all this Is as nothing compared
with the skill, diplomacy, and discretion
which has to be exercised by those same
stenoraphers to get these speeches ar
ranged in grammatical form. The sup
position the country around may be
that Congress, as it furnishes the laws
and the precedents in all parliamentary
matters, might be accepted as authority
on grammatical construction, and that
the standard diction as we'll as the law
of the nation might be found in the
House; but as a matter of fact civil
service reform, sound currency and
ethics of statesmanship Gas badly treat
ed as they are) are not as grossly as
saulted as is the English language-the
currency of speech. Every dialect that
the nation knows is exemplified in some
member of this assemblage of states
men.
AS general rule the intelligence of
Congress might be estimated by its
speech. III this test were to be applied
to the present Congress, 1 have the
word OF the stenographers for it, this is
far above the average. Some of our
ablest statesmen, however, have been
very rugged in speech, and therefore it
will not do in every case to let Con-
gress be judged by its grammar. The
stenographers tell me that the Fifty
first Congress was conspicuous for poor
grammar. Freely translated, the short
hand reports of the Fifty-first Congress
ha Ia
he that this Congress has not gone far
enough yet for fair comparison, but up
TO the present point very fair record
has been produced in the construction
of English sentences. The gift of CAB
has been bestowed freely upon the gem
tlemen in whose hands or upon whose
tongues rests the fate of this great and
glorious country temporarily. Yet
should report of one days proceedings
in Congress be printed in the very Ian
guage Of the House it would make GU
rious and very interesting reading.
Comparatively few even of the most
learned and intelligent men in Congress
follow a perfect diction in debate. The
stenographers make a report of every
word and almost every sound that oc-
ours upon the floor, though great deal
of editing is done before that copy is
sent to the printer. If In the mornings
Record the grammatical construction is
accurate, it is due to their careful super
vision, and 1t is curious what tact and
diplomacy has TO be exercised to bring
this about. The report of a speech is
generally submitted to the member de-
livering it for revision, il he desires, but
corrections of grammatical construction
are seldom made by members them
selves, and often it would be impossible
to get the consent of member for
correction of an obvious error. Usually
the stenographer makes these correc-
tions in transcribing his notes, and it Is
not infrequent for member to notice
the correction and take exceptions to
it, insisting upon being correctly report