K. K. K. sketches, humorous and didactic

by James Melville Beard

CHAPTER X.

THE LOYAL LEAGUE IN COUNCIL.

Speech of Hon. Bones Button before the State Council of the Loyal League—What followed—Amusing Contretemps.

Mr. Cheermon, and Gemmens: Der crisis am upon us. I repeats, surs, and wishes dat dis obserwashun should sink down into de conclusibness ob ebery individooal who heers me. Der Ku—crisis am upon us. As a member of dis spectifle body, I am de las’ pusson who would wish to use my perfesshun to cover up dis sollum trufe. We is stannin’, Mr. Cheermon, upon de ragged confouns ob de bloody kazzum; and I repeats, dat de question for us to solve dis ebenin’ is: Shall we go fowards, or be pushed fowards. [Sensation.] Fur be it frum me to “sing de song ob de sirum” when de liberties ob de black man am inwaded, and de nasshumal honor is bein’ piled in de dust by de rabble (rebel) asstocracy. But, surs, lookin’ up to de umbragus folds ob dat spar-strangled banner, I is impressed with anoder conclushun, and it is in dese wurds follerin, to wit: We is occupyin’ de ticklish edge ob a dillemmer, in de lite ob which de man who crossed de Rubimcom am but a faint epistle. Yes, my spectifle feller-bredren, to use a catephoricle flower ob de tropics, we have arriv’ at a tite spot. We am obfusticated, so to speak. [Assenting groans throughout the assembly.] Den de riddle for us to read dis ebenin’, in de light ob dese distressin’ surkumstances, is: What ar’ to be did? In addressin’ de collectiv’ wisdum of dis orguss resemblage, I axes, is we to go fowards? Is we to wait till de nex’ ebenin’ or de nex’ year? Is we to fold our hans behind our bax, and hole our bref suspinely until de Klu-Krux animile has squatted hisself squar’ down on our liberties? Is we, I ax, to bump down in de middle ob dat rode whar’ de Klu-Krux Juggernox goes tootin’ majestercally along over de dethroned carcasses ob de black man, and whar you may holler peace! peace! but you can’t be heard; and you wouldn’t be notissed if you was.

But, Mr. Cheermon, before perceedin’ fudder wid de docturnal pints of dis discusshun, I shall have sumfin to say in respex to Klu-Krux-Klam from a scienticular pint of obserwashun. How is dis, I ax? Whar is de gettin’ out place, de tail, so to speak, of dis conundrum? [A pause, during which several members are observed to scratch their heads meditatively.] Dar am a proverb which says, “Ketch a Klu-Krux before you puts him to def,” or words to dat effec. Dat feature of de bizness I disposes to ten’ to in pusson, Mr. Cheermon, and if I can git de contention of de brilyunt dissembly what sits in judgment upon dis and oder topics dis ebenin’, I will open de merits of dis opinyun to de verymost chile in understandin’. Sposen dat we takes dese wurds, “Klu Krux Klam,” as dey ’peers in de original Greek, and transplants dem into de original Inglish. Take de word Klu, dat wurd about which dare has been so much unsiantickle sputin, and what is dare in it? Is dare an individooal under de soun’ of my voice who duzzent know de orfograthy of a wurd of three monysimples? Is dare, I axes, in dis orguss body, a pusson who is sich a babe in understandin’ dat he duzzent know dat b-a-k-e-r spells baccer? Den I say to my spectifle feller-sitterzens, dat if you will take de wurd Klu, and hang its ole fashyun’d Inglish close on it, dat it will spell “clew,” and if dat is so, what fudder clew could you have to dis whole subjec’? [A member here rose to a point of order, objecting to the “orfograthy” of the Hon. Bones’ premise, and claiming that the word under discussion was not “klu,” but “ku.” There is no telling what this might have resulted in, if the individual had been provided with documentary proof of his statement; but as he was not, he was compelled to retire amid the jeers of the audience and the loud taunts of the speaker, who elevated himself on a bench in order that his rhetoric in this instance might have its full effect.] Den, my feller-sitterzens, if de wurd “klu” means what it says it duz, de wurd “krux” means krux, and de wurd “klam” means klam—dat is to say, if the wurd klu means clew, neither of dese wurds means nuffin’. Dat pint is suffishuntly clur to a man up a tree, and no doubt is understood by de gemmen who spells “klu” widout a l.

But, cummin’ back to de merits of de discushun, I disposes now, Mr. Cheermon, to angeline de word klu, which, as I has before tuk occashun to say, is de clew to dis whole mystery. Let us taik de consummant k, which is de indecks letter, and pints to what follers. Duz dis letter have any siggerfication apart from its connectin’ links in dis wurd, or duz it hav such a siggerfication? I beleevs dat de intellumgence of every pusson in dis orgunce, if I may except one individooal, will bar me out dat it duz. Dat pint bein’ settled in a excloosive way, which, I may sugges’, is much de smallest part of de wurk, we must now perceed to find de siggerfication aforesed, and de logickle delusions upon which it rests. What, may I ax, duz de letter k stan’ fur? Duz it stan’ for cow? Is dare a pusson in dis orgunce, who will lif’ his head and dissert that k stans for cow? Wall, if it duzzent stan’ for cow, is it a far prejux for crow? Would a cup set on its flatness, Mr. Cheermon, with rich a handle as k to it? Will the gemmen who spells klu widout a l, pertend to spell cat widout a c? I persoom not. Wall, then, my feller-sitterzens, if k duzzent stan’ for cow; if it is too crooked for cup; if it wooldn’t spell crow widout bein’ turned wrong side foremos’; if it duzzent suit the gemmen’s noshuns of cat; an’ is too crooked and not crooked enough for “crooked,” den what, may I ax, duz dis unekest of alfybetic frenonymongs outline wid de adumkate purpyscruity. If it am eber used as de forefix fur knife, knot, knob, knock-under, and sich like, it ar’ bekase its crookedness let it out’n de rite paf, and not ’kase it felt called on in de way of tendin’ to its own bizness.

But no diffunce if it do fail in oder respex, my feller-sitterzens, it won’t do to say dat dis consummant k am a failure, and ostrumsize it from de langwidge. I am not one ob dose dat am committed to de beleef dat it am a bow-legged nonjuscrip, a onaccountable freak of de English alfybet, an’ good for nuffin but to lean up agin more spectifle consummants, and thow de lines out’n shape.

An’ if dat be de sollum trufe, I pauses once more to ax whar is de stitch in de temple of langwidge dat dis alfumbettycle beformity was made to order to fit into, so to speak. What ar’ its mishun in de worl’, and how is we to arrive at dat pint. In diggin’ about de roots of dis boss conundrum, Mr. Cheermon, we wants to have nuffin to do wid scientifficle reductions, nor logickle abscraptions, as we understans de metumsquizzicle bearin’ ob dose terms; but, on de oder han’, if the court am exquainted wid her own diktum, and she think she do, we feels bemooved to argify strate to de pint in hand. Now, in respex to de consummant beforesed, I taiks de hi groun’ dat if dere is any offis dat it can fill better than any oder consummant, dat, dat am its mishun. Or to miscomterpret my persac meanin’ wid more purpyscruity, if dare is enny spot in de presinks of de langwidge dat can’t navumgate widout it, and dat it can’t navumgate widout, dat, dat am de shoo fur it to war. Havin’ adjostled dat pint to de weakes’ understandin’, we nex’ inquire if dere is enny wurd in de dickshummary dat can’t be spelt into a syllumble widout de ade of dis consummant. I taix it upon miself to say, Mr. Cheermon, dat dere is such a word, and widout enny furder surcumloscrution, or bein’ too pertickler about de orrytorrycal effec of mere metumsquorricle figgurs of speech, I will perceed to denounce it in your heerin’. (Sotto voce.) Kill. (A pause, followed by a lumbering sound and the disappearance of two woolly crowns.)

I trus’, Mr. Cheermon, dat dis am considered no interbumption, an’ if enny oder brudder should feel discomposed to roll off de bench jurin de fudder discontinuance of dese remarks, it won’t be tuk as no mark of misrespex to the gemmen who has de floor. But, to rejerk to de subjec’ in ban’. De bes’ excepted, and de only excepted, siggerfication of de consummant k, am de mistickle wurd just denounced in your hearin’, and I shall ax you to squeeze dat pint, while I maix a rapid sarch over dickshummary groun’ for de indecks belongins of de rejineder part of dis word klu, dat is, de consummant l, and de avowal u. In respex to de consummant l, I would wish to say in de fust place, fustly, dat the mixtur’ of learned doubts enterin’ into its conjugation am not near so obfusticatin’ as de las’ beforesed, an’ dat havin’ obtaned de persac fractional squantum of de befogoin, we can, as it wur, look fowards to subsumquent revolutions of de topic. Darfore, widout enterin’ into de rejux system of argyfyin fudder dan to appli de rools dat was foun’ to wurk so hamboniously in respex to de las’ named, we arrives at de delusion dat de mos’ acceptumble renderation of de consummant l is to be foun’ in de mistickle terms lick, licks, and “lick ’em,” or de las’ beforesed in purtickler, or all three in purpentickler. Now, if enny brudder whose sperience and obserwashun am purtickler sensitiv on dis pint, feels cauled upon to say dat de most pinted complication of dis consummant is to be foun’ in de word “lam,” or dat it was made to order for de word “lash,” or was put into de alfumbet wid special reffermence to de wurd “larrup,” or was made out’n whole clof as a prehitch for “lambaste,” I will ’low him dat privumlege, and widout been outdone in dishonorableness, will give him de floor when I discludes.