The Hesperian / (Lincoln, Neb.) 1885-1899, May 15, 1896, Page 9, Image 9

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

Our contemporary remarks editorially: ult
is conceded by every fair-minded observer
that tho Kansas debaters had a more com
manding, polished and graceful stage bear
ing than our boys. Their ease upon the
stage, their self-possession, gesticulation and
iluency in language were quite noticablo,
showing tho caro and skill of a trained and
ready debater."
The "fair-mindod observer" caunot, injus
tice to our boys, admit anything of the kind.
We readily admit that Mr. McCall was en
titled to first place, but it is laughable to
cull his monotonous tick-tock delivery, ''pol
ished and graceful." Our Ajax undoubtedly
prancod around tho stage more than was
necessary, but it was the prancing of a war
horse in battle. In "self-possession," etc.,
Nowbranch and Quaintanco certainly com
pared favorably with McMurray and Guyor.
Quaintanco's bearing was entirely natural;
it was dignified, quiet and commanding.
Nowbranch, perhaps, pays too littlo atten
tion to rhetorical and elocutionary frills and
trimmings, but wo noticed that ho held tho
attention and commanded tho respect of tho
audience as well as any of his opponents.
In force, eloquence, fluoncy and especially
in commanding personality, our men were
clearly superior to their adversaries.
McOall's speech had evidently boon very
carefully thought out. He stated the ques
tion fairly and defined its terms to suit his
side. His speech was admirable as an open
ing Btatoment. It covered tho whole ground
and touched upon all tho arguments of the
affirmative. In clearness, in logical arrange
ment and especially in compactness it was
undoubtedly the speech of tho evening.
Kansas stock had risen several points when
he closed.
Weaver's opening speech was not so strong
as might reasonably have been oxpectsd of
him. Mr. Weaver is strong in answering
"points;" but ho skips too rapidly from ono
point to another and seems incapable of
mustering his points into solid ranks. Ho
presents each, argument clearly and forcibly
but be fails to unite his arguments into a
logical system. Ho covers tho whole ground
but ho does it in a hop-akip-and-jump fash
ion. His speech was disconnected, incoher
ent, "choppy." If printed it would have
made a largo number of short, disconnected
paragraphs of about four lines each. But
his confidence, his command of words and
his strong personality were more than enough
to compensate for this fault. Yet Nebraska
stock was on the decline before ho got
Mr. McMurray proved to be a bright, en
tertaining talker. The strong points of his
argument were that the Referendum would
check the prevailing tendency toward cen
tralization and would prove a valuable edu
cational factor. Most of his time was given
to answering "points" and to making fun of
Ajax. During the last three minutes, when
he reached his own argument, he showed
what ho might have done had he not thrown
away his chance. As it was, his speech was
pleasant but weak. Kansas stock went
Nowbranch 's strong point is logic. He
spoke for government by tho people through
the best representatives of tho people. In
this he undoubtedly struck tho key-note of
the question. Tho issue really was gov
ernment directly by tho people against gov
ernment by tho representatives of tho peo
ple. In confining his attontion to this point
Mr. Newbranch proved himself a clear
thinker and a shrewd debater. The ques
tion could not bo exhausted in a fifteen min
ute speech. Mr. Newbranch wisely selected
the point at issue and concentrated his ener
gies upon it. Ho assumed tho offensive and
produced a strong argument for the expert
theory of government. Nebraska stock went
up with a jump.
Guyer had his outline made and stuck to
it. Ho is a speaker of considerable force
and made a good impression. But he missed
his chance by not locking horns with New
branch on tho critical point at issue. Ehe
burden of proof was on tho affirmative and
that side could not hope to win so long as
Mr. Newbranch's argument on tho.theoreti-