Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE AMERICAN DEBATE.

One night recently there was a famous debate oa American affairs — nominall}' a debate upon the defences of Canada, but really on American affairs generally. The speakers were many; only three or four of them, though, need be noticed here. Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald, ex-Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, appropriately opened the proceedings. Mr. Fitzgerald is a barrister, but has long since given up the Bar, and gone in, as is said, for politics. Mr. Fitzgerald's speeches are argumentative, acute, clear, wit,h a dash of passion in them when the political atmosphere is electric, But on this occasion there was no passion. The speech was wonderfully moderate. Part ot it Mr. Fitzgerald had the honour of delivering before the Prince of Wales. His Royal Highness came in and took his place below the bar, attended by the Duke of St. Albans. Mr. Forster also spoke. There is no man in the House who is less careful than Mr. Foster of the manner in which his speeches are delivered. He stands up in his place below the gangway, folds his arms across his breast, commences speaking, and lets his speuch run out, rarely, if ever, enforcing his words by emphasis of either action or voice. Perhaps he feels that he could not do the thing well, and, therefore, will not attempt to do it at all. And if this be so, he is wise. But his speeches are, nevertheless, always listened to with marked attention, and lor this reason — though he delivers them without the smallest attempt at oratorical action — though the language is simple and unadorned --ttie matter is always weighty, instructive, and impressive. And in the House of Commons- sense is valued much higher than sound, and instructive matter is preferred to the most accomplished and artistic manner. Five weeks of the session have passed away, and until this occasion the leader of her Majesty's Opposition had not spoken. There had been tempting occasions — debates in which he might have spoken, and was expected to speak with effect ; but still he remained silent. Irish wrongs moved him not ; on the malt tax he uttered s no opinion". Saxon and Celt, farmers and traders, struggled in combat; and still Achilles remained in his tent. On the night in question, however, Mr. ]T)i-'« raeli broke ground ; and when ho was seen to rise, menviers, whom the dull eloquence of Mr. Cardwell had either made restless or lulled to runose, rushed to their places or woke up to hear; and instantly there were silence and attention — all the more profound because the louder of the Oppo-

sition had been so long mute, and further^ because as yet on this American war h/i had uttered no opinion. Mr. Bentinck walked O,ut of the House. H<- always does this now when Mr. Disraeli rises. lie is malcontent— in chronic rebellion against his leader— and this is his way of entering his protest. This speech of Disraeli is said to have been one ot the wisest that he ever delivered. It was calm, thoughtful, and statesmanlike. The idea which men generally have formed of Disraeli is that he is not much more than a political gladiator ; hut on this occasion he appeared before the House as a prescient statesman and wise political strategist. Mr. Bright, everybody expected would speak, and he came down to the House prepared to speak ; but after Mr. Disraeli had given such a calm tone to the debate, and had thrown a wet blanket over the smouldering ashes on his side of the House, it is said that Mr. Bright changed his mind, and resolved to be silent, and only changed his mind again after that fiery Tybalr, Lord Robert Cecil, had addressed the House. If this be so, thanks to Lord Robert ; for it would have been a pity indeed if that speech had been lost to the country. The hon, member for Birmingham spoke for an hour and a quarter by the clock, and all that time the House listened with unwearied attention and unflagging interest. A.nd yet there was no attempt at oratorical display — little art used to make the speech impressive. The speaker was unusually calm and uniinpassioned; but still the House listened, and lost not a word. — Home News.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP18650601.2.10

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Issue 97, 1 June 1865, Page 2

Word Count
716

THE AMERICAN DEBATE. Evening Post, Issue 97, 1 June 1865, Page 2

THE AMERICAN DEBATE. Evening Post, Issue 97, 1 June 1865, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert