which candidates will be examined-hence it is necessary that they should be tolerably well acquainted with the Latin language. Candidates are, however, usually required to translate passages from the works of Sallust, Cicero, Virgil, Horace, &c.

CHAPTER II.

HOW TO BECOME AN ORATOR; WITH SELECTIONS FROM THE SPEECHES OF LORD BROUGHAM, PITT, CURRAN, DANIEL O'CONNELL, BURKE, THE LATE EARL OF DERBY, MR. GLADSTONE, MR. DISRAELI AND OTHERS.

STRICTLY speaking, it would be impossible to lay down any sure method to attain the point of true eloquence, though learned men of all ages have written a deal upon this subject. It is truly one of those endowments which are bestowed on mankind by the Almighty. Some endowments we know may be greatly improved or accelerated in a remarkable degree, and even such an exterior polish may be given as to conceal the true quality of the diamond; but when brilliancy, marvellous perception, animation, depth of thought, copiousness of language and clearness of voice are wanting, we feel that no man, be he a Demosthenes, a Cicero or a Brougham, is capable of imparting that invaluable gift which all must be thoroughly impressed is the work of the Most High!

We do not contend that chaste eloquence is a natural gift, for it may certainly be acquired; nor do we wish to say that a person comes into the world a perfect orator. What we do contend is, that if the foundation be there, the superstructure may be easily completed. Truly has it been said that "from man cometh instruction, but from God cometh speech." This quotation is so simple and yet so comprehensive, that an explanation is scarcely necessary: but still it may be gleaned that when a man has fluency of speech, he may cultivate his ideas and his language in the path of the able, learned and accomplished orators-from whose speeches, by the way, we shall in the course of our remarks select passages for the purpose of exemplifying our ideas.

It is almost impossible to point out the great value of fluency of speech, for it is of immense assistance, not only to barristers and solicitors, who are compelled to address assemblies, though of course in different respects and at different times, but also to men in society; for is not the man who can entertain his friends with graphic and graceful sketches of any topic much admired? We are even told that the eminent poet Coleridge was greatly admired, not only for his love of truth, rare simplicity of nature, warm affections, but for his most extraordinary power of eloquent talking without premeditation. Indeed, the latter was one of his most striking characteristics. Now, perhaps, our remarks will be the more appreciated when we say that very often a man is stigmatized as being extremely pedantic because he studies his language, that is to say, he arranges his ideas very slowly, and represents them in stiff, though perhaps not ungrammatical, language. It very frequently happens that this man, although an excellent,

and may be a polished and able scholar, has no fluency of speech, and has therefore to select his path with care. We do not, of course, refer to persons who unfortunately suffer from excessive nervousness; for we believe that this "drawback" vanishes with age and practice.

It will therefore be seen that we are particularly anxious to point out that fluency of speech is of great assistance to a man on all occasions. A person, in our opinion, should not speak more for the mere love of saying something than of saying anything well. Lord Brougham, than whom a greater orator never lived in modern times, contends that he who wishes to acquire a habit of easy speaking should attend debating societies, and hold forth without regard to what he says. In point of comparison, we feel ourselves like the rock on the sea shore beside the "lofty and majestic cliff hanging o'er the briny deep" in venturing to differ from him. But however great he may have been, however valuable are his models of oratory-indeed we admire them immensely-we feel bound to add that most eminent masters of the art and able rhetoricians have always advised students to pay the utmost attention to what they say. Is it not a fact that many objectionable habits work upon youths unless they be pointed out at an early period; and though there may be some exceptions to the rule, we are convinced that if once a youth falls into an awkward way of speaking, he will find the utmost difficulty in improving himself, if indeed he can ever do so at all.

The majority of learned writers and orators have, it may be seen, always selected the writings or speeches of their admired predecessors for the purpose of imitation; but then it must be remembered that they were themselves gifted. When Lord Brougham was asked how he managed to make his eloquent speech in behalf of Queen Caroline, he said, "I never should have made it but for Locke's Essay on the Human Understanding, to which I have given considerable attention." Whether this is so or not we really cannot say; we have certainly received the information from a reliable source. But we have positive proof that Lord Brougham was in the habit of taking the speeches of eminent men for his models, for when requested by Mr. Zachary Macaulay to give him some advice as to his son Mr. Thomas Babington Macaulay, who was even then a most talented writer, Lord Brougham said, after making a few preliminary remarks, "I do earnestly entreat your son to set daily and nightly before him the Greek models. First of all he may look to the best modern speeches (as he probably has already); Burke's best compositions, as the Thoughts on the Cause of the present Discontents; speech On the American Conciliation,' and 'On the Nabob of Arcot's Debt;' Fox's speech 'On the Westminster Scrutiny' (the first part of which he should pore over till he has it by heart); On the Russian Armament,' and 'On the War' 1803; with one or two of Wyndham's best, and very few or rather none of Sheridan's. But he must by no means stop here. If he would be a great orator, he must go at once to the fountain-head, and be familiar with every one of the great orations of Demosthenes."

6

Now every one must feel that models are the great guides in this subject; and without entering more fully upon this part of the question, we can assure our youthful readers that if they wish to attain the point of true eloquence they should study and ponder over the works of some of our most eminent writers and orators, selecting only such for their models as they may appreciate best.

With regard to the selection of ancient orators, some students may urge that they do not understand Greek and Latin sufficiently; but our answer ought strictly to be, that he who aspires to perfect himself in the art should set about studying these languages without delay. We do not, however, mean to say that an acquaintance with the speeches and writings of the Roman and Grecian orators is absolutely essential to the acquirement of an eloquent mode of delivery, but of course it is very advantageous. As a substitute we recommend the mere English scholar to read the works of those men who have themselves derived benefit from the Greek and Latin models, and though the ideas conveyed through a second channel may be somewhat marred, doubtless the course would render them incalculable benefit.

First of all we would advise the student to set about acquiring the art at an early age. Let him understand the syntax of his language, for the primary ingredient is grammatical language; then let him have much practice say in a debating club, taking part in as many discussions as possible; but let him consider well what he intends to say--not so much for the soundness of his arguments as for the acquirement of a fluent and easy delivery. Let him read the speeches of statesmen of the present day, and endeavour, if possible, to understand not only the subject of debate but also every phrase, every word in the debate. He would also do well to take five or six lines and pore over them for the purpose of seeing how they are constructed, but he must be sure not to imitate the speeches of those who have no reputation. We can with the greatest confidence and admiration for that able and eminent statesman, Mr. Disraeli, recommend his speeches to the student. It will be seen that we have selected a few passages from his speeches, which, we may add, have always been characterized as elegant and polished; indeed, we may liken his "phrases" to so many flowers in the garden. Is this an inappropriate simile, seeing that there is such an art as word-painting?

If a person wishes to improve himself, he must be a close observer - not merely reading a speech or a book for pleasure, but for the purpose of testing and examining every passage. There is certainly no ability in reading a work rapidly, as some persons think; indeed little is to be derived from a rapid perusal of a book. We have frequently been astonished at the state of the knowledge of a student who had informed us that he had read much. Doubtless he had read carelessly, mispronouncing words, and without paying the slightest regard to the beauty (sic) of the language. We quite admit that, as a rule, few persons read a novel for the purpose of learning the style of the writer; indeed we are very sorry to say that some styles are not worthy of being imitated.

Of course different men have, most naturally, different styles of speaking, notwithstanding they may have studied the same models. Some are admired for their forcible language, some for their simplicity and clearness, and some for their depth of thought. Every man has a different mode of striking the ideas or commanding the attention of his audience. For if a speaker wishes to impress them with an argument, he will probably say it in a lower but more distinct tone, as if the phrase were included within a parenthesis, resuming the tone which he discontinued before uttering the phrase (or the words within the parenthesis). Another may utter a phrase and then pause for a few seconds, giving his audience time to weigh his arguments in their

minds. These "pictures of oratory," it may be mentioned, are more applicable to a dramatic and lofty style, and can only be appreciated while we are listening to the speaker; hence we do not think it necessary to quote any passages in illustration.

It will be observed that some eminent debaters are continually in the habit of asking questions in the course of their speeches, and this, in our humble opinion, evinces considerable argumentative powers. We append a few very short passages, or rather sentences, selected from the speeches of accomplished orators. We fear that they are too short to afford any benefit or assistance beyond the object for which they are given, viz., to illustrate our remarks. The following is an extract from the speech of Curran delivered in defence of Mr. Rowan, who was charged in 1794 with having published a false, malicious and seditious libel against the government:

"Have any alarms been occasioned by the emancipation of our Catholic brethren? Has the bigoted malignity of any individuals been crushed? Or has the stability of the government, or has that of the country, been weakened? Or is one million of subjects stronger than four millions? Do you think that the benefit they received should be poisoned by the sting of vengeance? ... Are these the materials of which you suppose anarchy and public rapine to be formed? Is this the man on whom to fasten the abominable charge of goading on a frantic populace to mutiny and bloodshed? Is this the man likely to apostatize from every principle that can bind him to the state: his birth, his property, his education, his character and his children ?"

We also append an extract from the speech delivered by Mr. Disraeli at Manchester on Wednesday, April 3rd, 1872. In speaking of the use of a second chamber, he said:

"Gentlemen, I shall not stop for a moment to offer you any proofs of the advantage of a second chamber, and for this reason. The subject has been discussed now for a century, ever since the establishment of the United States, and all great authorities - American, German, French, Italianhave agreed in this, that a representative government is impossible without a second chamber. And it has been, especially of late, maintained by great political writers in all countries that the repeated failure of what is called the French Republic is mainly to be ascribed to its not having a second chamber. But, gentlemen, however anxious foreign countries have been to enjoy this advantage, that anxiety has only been equalled by the difficulty which they have found in fulfilling their object. How is a second chamber to be constituted? By nominees of the sovereign power? What influence can be exercised by a chamber of nominees? Are they to be bound by popular election? In what manner are they to be elected? If by the same constituency as the popular body, what claim have they under such circumstances to criticize or to control the decisions of that body? If they are to be elected by a more select body, qualified by a higher franchise, there immediately occurs the objection, why should the majority be governed by the minority?"

The following passage, selected from a speech delivered by the late Lord Derby during the debate on the "Coercion Bill," which had reference to Ireland, tends to further illustrate our ideas.

66

Now, sir, I beg the reflection of the House to what follows, because here the poet has borrowed, not his ideas only, but his very words from the honorable and learned member." After reading the poetry to the House, he said: "The foreign and proud invaders! Why, sir, can anyone fail to trace here the fiery denunciations of the honorable and learned gentleman against the foreign parliament-the Sassenach tyrants-the slavery under a foreign yoke? Who is it that furnishes to the ignorant people these topics of declamation and then condemns the outrages which have been caused by the spirit of hatred and discontent which he has himself excited?"

Again, William Pitt, premier of England, when speaking on the subject of the slave trade, said "Why ought the slave trade to be abolished? Because it is incurable injustice. How much stronger, then, is the argument for immediate than gradual abolition? By allowing it to continue even for one hour-do not my right honorable friends weaken-do not they desert their own arguments of its injustice? If on the ground of injustice it ought to be abolished at last, why ought it not now? Why is injustice to be suffered to remain for a single hour?"

Having given what we believe to be fair specimens of the manner in which some speakers frame questions in the course of their speeches, we next proceed to point out more elegant pieces of oratory. The following is the concluding passage of a speech made by Mr. Gladstone, the premier (when chancellor of the exchequer), on the bill for the "extension of the suffrage:"

"And now, sir, one word in conclusion. I believe that it has been given to us of this generation to witness advancing, as it were, under our very eyes from day to day the most blessed of all social processes, I mean the process which unites together not the interests only but the feelings of all the several classes of the community, and which throws back into the shadows of oblivion those discords by which they were kept apart from one another. I know of nothing which can contribute, in any degree comparable to that union, to the welfare of the commonwealth. It is well, sir, that we should be suitably provided with armies, and fleets, and fortifications; it is well too that all these should rest upon and be sustained, as they ought to be, by a sound system of finance and out of a revenue not wasted by a careless parliament or by a profligate administration. But that which is better and more weighty still is that hearts should be bound together by a reasonable extension, at fitting times and among selected portions of the people, of every benefit and every privilege that can justly be conferred upon them; and, for one, I am prepared to give my support to the motion now made by my honorable friend (Mr. Baines), because I believe and am persuaded that it will powerfully tend to that binding and blending and knitting of hearts together, and thus to the infusion of new vigour into the old, but in the best sense still young and flourishing and undecaying, British constitution!"

The following passage exemplifies the style of Edmund Burke. Speaking of Marie Antoinette, he said:

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the Queen of France, then the Dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her