Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 April 1884 — REVELATIONS OF A PROOF-READER. [ARTICLE]

REVELATIONS OF A PROOF-READER.

Th* Copy Furnished by Senator*, BeprelenUtlTei, and PretldenU. • One of the chief proof-readers of the Government, a man who has looked over the copy of the great men of the past decade and more, gives me the following interesting facts about their handwriting and the publication of their speeches: “Most Congressmen,” ■aid he, “are very particular as to how their speeches are printed in the Congressional Record. They must have a proof sent them, and they often change words and ideas so that the matter which appears in the Record is entirety different from the words they uttered on the floors of Congress. Most of the long speeches, however, are written out before they are delivered, and this copy is handed over for publication. Some men, Eke Bayard and Edmunds, make their speeches off-hand and don’t trouble themselves about them after they are once delivered. I don’t think Conkling ever wrote a speech. At least we did not get it in his handwriting. Senator Blaine prepared some of his speeches very carefully, and they were well written. Once, I remember, he brought the manuscript to the office, and, finding that the foreman was not present, he cut it into takes himself and distributed it among the printers. On the foreman coming in he said: ‘I know what I am about; I am an old printer myself.’

“SenatorVoorhees writes his speeches on very large sheets of printing paper, all of the same size and neatly cut. He has used the same paper ever since he came to Congress, and his writing is not bad. Senator Call also uses printbig paper, but his hand is terrible to read. He writes two or three letters of a word and ends in a scrawl so that half •of his words look alike, and none of them are legible. Senator Beck gives the printers a good deal of trouble, but he is a favorite because his matter is largely made up of statistics and is consequently ‘fat.’ “Senator Logan writes a decent hand, but it is said his wife has a good deal to do with his speeches. She often came in times past to look over tho proofs. She knew as well as he what a good speech should be, and would correct to suit herself. “ Senator Sherman almost always dictated his speeches to his private secretary, but his copy was not good. It was interlined and reinterlined. Sherman is very particular about his expression, and not about the comfori of the printer. Senator Anthony furnishes much better copy, and has his pages always of the same size. “Senator Hawley trusts a good deal to the printer. He said once, ‘The printer is bound to have his own way about the punctuation, and there is no use in fighting against him.’ Senator Lamar is of a different make. He is very painstaking with his speeches before they go to print. When he has a speech to be published he a secretary to the Government Printing Of« fice, and the two stay there correcting and recorrecting till they get the speech to suit him. “When Senator Jones, of Nevada, delivered his big silver speech,” the proofreader laughed as he spoke, “he brought his secretary to the office with him. It was a long speech and it took, I think, 150 pages of the Congressional Record. During the reading the secretary ventured to advise some change, when Jones turned to him and said: ‘Who in the d —1 is making this speech ; you or me?’ Jones, they say, turned his whole salary over to his private secretary. He did not do it to have him write his speeches, I know.”

“How about the members of the House ?” “Sam Cox prepares poorer copy than any other Congressman. He writes on pieces of paper torn from envelopes, newspaper wrappers and scraps of all shapes and sizes. He pins these scraps together and thus sends them in to the printer. His hand is hard to read, and he corrects, interwrites, and recorrects, so that his proof takes more time than the first manuscript. “Sam Bandall used to rewrite his paragraphs very frequently when he was in the chair. Tom Reed never bothers the printers, but the average Congressman makes trouble. The worst men are those who doa’t know what they want to say till they see it in print, and some of them furnish terrible copy. I remember a man named Brooks, from New York, who was here in 1868,1 think. His writing was worse than Greeley's. The copy looked as though it had beean written with a rake. Wb couldn’t decipher a dozen words in it, arid one of the boys took it to Brooks to ask its translation. Brooks said, T should think you could make- it out by the sense.’ The printer replied: ‘We don’t see a darned.bit of sense in it,’ • “Same of those Congressmen are very particular. Some write ‘applause* so often that they might as well buy rubber stamps with the word marked on them to save time. Gne- member of the- Forty-fifth Congress made only one speech during a session, and that speech waa a remark of two- lanes. He came to the Government Printing Office in a. eaorriage with a secretary to correct it* -and at the close looked proudly around and said: “Well, I guess that will do; won’t it ?”

“What kind of eopy do the Presidents furnish ?” “Much of the manuscript that comes from the White House is written by secretaries. Arthur writes his messages on paper fourteen by seventeen inches, large foolscap, like some they use m the State Department. It is very plainly written. I set up some of Andy Johnson’s messages. They were written plain and clear, but I think he .dictated them. Hayes* hand was ra’ther pinched and eramped, Garfield’s waa good, and, as to Grant, he usually wrote most cd his matter on manifold, and did not call to correct it after he had it once prepared. ” It is well enough to talk about the mantle of charity, but it does seem as though some of it given to the poor widow and orphan was mighty thin to keep out the cold of winter. The mantle seems to have been used on the principle that charity begins at home and is worn out before it is given to the poor.