The morning call., 1893-06-27
DEPEW AND ROSEBERY.
Two Great After-Dinner Orators Dis.
Cussed by an English Newspaper.
London News.


Perhaps really gifted after-d dinner speakers
are more numerous in New York than in Lon.
don, although we have some remarkable speci-
mems in London OF the after-dnner speakers
with preparation and the after-dinner speakers
without preparation. The American after
dinner speakers OF The highest class would be
hard TO beat In any civilized society. II We had
not Lord Rosebery In London we should GER
tainly envy New York ChauDcey Depew. But
the American orators of the second class are
apt in their after-dinner speeches 10 soar
too much on the broad wings OF the
here at home are not inspired by any
ambition OF that Kind. They have that
great merit. at all events. Even
the inferior ones among them DO not seem 10
care about hyperbolic flights. 1t Is a curious
fact and worth contemplating that in England,
or at all events in London, every ant every
possession OF the finest after-dinner speaker
now living. man whose way OF life brings
him into occasional association with various
professions and occupations and who Is wei.
coined by all must meet every week in his social
course somebody who Is described to him as
the finest after dinner speaker now alive The
truth is, we fancy, that every profession and
art and business and clique does manage 10
bring out some brilliant after-dinner speaker OF
Its own, and each set is as we'll entitled TO pro-
claim It's champion The greatest in the world as
Don QuiXote was entitled TO proclaim his Dull
cinea the most beautiful OF all ladies on The
earth.
IHeNe are SkeptlcS WHO Will not dufilll tue ne
cesslty for aIter-dinner speeches at all. But
even these academical anarchists would be
ready TO acknowledge that II there must be
after dinner speeches the praise should be
given 10 tile men who speak the best, and who
can condenSe Wit, humor. paradox. Illustration
and eIoquence into 4 shorter speech than that
which another man requires In order TO show
that he can be dull.
No man can hammer or drill himself into
good after dinner speaker. 1t Is possible that
member of Parliament, for example. may be-
may tram himself by unwearied diligence. I'M
conquerable perseverance, Immortal self-con-
ceit, and at the expense of his audience to be
really powerful parliamentary debdter.
We all know The stories about the first at
tempt OF Sheridan and Dlsraei, and in later
Gays an example VIII occur to us of public
man no longer in the modest representative
chamber, WHO began by being the worst speak
er the House OF Commons had ever heard. and
who worked on TO be very telling and effective
deDater. But nothing OF this Kind can be done
by the afterdlnner speaker. II he Is not born
for the work il would be utterly in vain his try
Ing 10 outrage nature and force himself upon an
unwilling after-dnDer public. Nobody cares
for argument In an after-dinner speech No.
body wants 10 be instructed even Informed.
Nobody wants TO hayela moral eointed-unless
II be indeed by a pencie tipped with light.
You cannot say of IN afler-dlnner speaker as
you might of iaDy other orator: ''Well, l think
his manner was bad and his language was poor,
piece OF argument" No one wants even a
marvellous piece of argument from an after
dinner speaker. 1t would be as well TO expect
sermons from skirr-dancer. The afler-diuuer
speaker must not talk nonsense and must mol
talk about nothing. But he must seem to be
original, no matter what leisure he may have
given TO get at the sources-lbe lead waters of
MS good tnlngS-and he must be brilliant, even
though his Drilliance should have been care
fully thought out in the dark. wit is his prov
lnce more than wisdom. although dash OF lie
wisdom may be tolerated If 1t is brought
wrapped up In wit aud humOr, like the sword
of Harmoiius among the wreaibs of laurel.