Evening star., 1924-06-29
Nominating Speeches.

ThOSe VINO reei that the EnSnSn IAN
guage is lacking in variety had but
to Hsten-in by radio during the last
few days while the Democratic con-
vention has been getting under way to
be convinced to the contrary. First
came the two keynote" speeches--for
really each chairman struck a key
note" though technically the tempo
rary is supposed to be more Of a key
noter" than the permanent-and then
came a bewildering burst Of nominal
ing and seconding oratory. More es
pecially in the discourses Of Thursday
and Friday as the candidates were
named was the language revealed in
all its force and beauty Of expression.
The "keynotes" are usually pitched
In tones of denunciation. The sins of
the opposition must be scored in all
their iniquity. The language then is
drawn upon for invective and con-
demnation. When it comes time to
urge the claims Of favorite sons words
must be found to win adherents and
supporters. They must be words of
taken for granted. The sterling quail
ties of the man who is to lead on to
victory over the forces Of wickedneas
must be painted in the most vivid
colors.
Perhaps those who listened-in dur.
ing these past few days did not ac-
quire many new words. Probably most
Of the parts OF speech they heard were
old acquaintances. But the combina-
tions were worth hearing. Such glow.
ing combinations. Every human virtue
was described. with every variant. A
score Of supermen were portrayed.
Not one fault was to be found with
eny of them. The plain positive would
not suffice. Cornparatives were too
mild. Only superlatives would At such
a situation.
In that part of the President-making
process which consists of lauding the
aspirants for party nomination it is
the unwritten law that nobody shall
be knocked" The nomina tor Orator
must ignore all others but his own
man. 1t is also the height Of good
form never to mention him by name
until the last moment. He must be
approached as a mystery, revealed as
a secret. His qualities must be de-
scrioed 40 those Of the ideal. Our
man "our candidate" are the usual
means of camoufage. 1t is supposed
to make for dramatic climax to hold
back the name until the concluding
words, then to spring 1t as a surprise
This method has become traditional.
1t has it's uses. 1t serves as a match
to the train Of demonstration. Down
in the arena sit the ranks of delegates.
Everybody is primed for the explosion.
The delegates Of the home state"
have their banners and flags and noise.
making implements all ready for use
when those syllables are sounded. Woe
hetide a nominating orator who looses
the magic name prematurely. He is
caught in the middle Of his speech by
tide of sound that sweeps him of
the platform.
OF course, everybody is supposed all
along to know who's who Could
anybody fail to recognize the paragon
of the virtues who is being SO minutely
. described? Yet when there are 30
many paragons as there have been
during these few days q listener-es.
pecAlly a listener -in-might be for
given for wondering now and then un.
tn that din.causing name sounds forth.
Do nominating speeches really nom.
mate, by virtue of their eloduence? 1t
may seriously be doubted. William
Jennings Bryan nominated himself in
1896 by a speech on the party's plat.
form. James A. Garfield nominated
himself in 1880 by his speech putting
John Sherman in nomination. Few
golden tongues have ever put the OBJ.
jects Of their eloquence into candi.
dacy. Brilliant as are the phrases Of
rfaise, the votes are cast finally for
the men who are the most available" /"
and frequently it has happened that
the man chosen has been most plainly
presented-or perhaps has never been
presented at all.