aim-to maintain a proposition, to exhort to some duty, to warn against some sin. It should not be a vague declamation about religious matters in general, of which only a dim recollection can remain in the minds of the congregation, but a definite purpose that might be distinctly comprehended and carried away to suggest meditation thereafter. The preacher should study variety by drawing largely for illustrations from nature, from art, from books; he should cull the works of God and of man—the utterances of inspiration, and the inspirations of genius-to enforce his appeals. Nothing is foreign to the true pulpit orator: he may do anything but descend; he must not play the buffoon; he must not jest; he should not even provoke a smile, for this would be out of keeping with the place and the business of the assembly. It is permitted to him to be more flowery and poetical than other orators, but it is possible for him to err in excess of this species of ornament. His own good taste must guide him in that, for it is impossible to define the boundary by any rules. The conclusion should be a burst of eloquence, uttered with energy, and growing to a climax at the end, sending the hearers away excited and pleased. If the discourse has wandered somewhat in its progress, its close should be in strict accordance with its commencement, and concentrate in a few burning words the substance of the theme, bringing back the thoughts of the hearers to the point whence they had started.

The language of a sermon addressed to a miscellaneous audience should be distinguished for simplicity. The preacher should adhere as closely as possible to the vernacular. Far better that he should be too homely than too fine. Educated and uneducated can alike under

stand his Saxon words; the educated alone can understand his classical words. Even if he were compelled to choose between them, he should prefer to address himself to the poor, who cannot learn their duty from books, rather than to the educated, who can read better sermons than they are likely to hear.

I have thus hastily, and too briefly, noted the prominent features of pulpit oratory, because it was a necessary branch of the subject of these letters, half-adozen of which would have been demanded to enable me to do entire justice to the theme. But, as it has no direct interest for you, and concerns you only as helping you to form a critical judgment of the preacher, I pass from it now to the other branches of the art of oratory, in all of which you will, I hope, possess a direct and powerful interest.

248

LETTER XXXVIII.

THE ORATORY OF THE SENATE.

THIS part of my subject, like the Oratory of the Pulpit, I will treat of briefly, although, to do it justice, several letters would be required. For the present, at least, it has but a secondary interest for you. I hope the time may come when it will require from you a profounder study.

The Oratory of the Senate may be parcelled into four distinct classes. A further subdivision might be suggested, and in a more elaborate treatise would be desirable, but four will suffice for our present purpose.

The first is the Colloquial style; the second, the Business style; the third, the Oration; the fourth, the Reply. This classification is derived from a review of the various objects sought by speakers in the Senate. In practice, few are equally successful in all; some excel in one or more, and fail in the others; but your ambition should be, and your study should be directed, to do all well.

It is not commonly so thought, but there is a great deal to learn for mastering even the least of these ac

complishments. Many zealous members of Parliament, ambitious for fame, have set themselves to the assiduous study of the Art of Oratory; but, by neglecting the apparently insignificant exercises of it, have failed to win the prize for which they have striven. They have toiled hard to learn how to compose a speech, and how to speak it, and have neglected the less showy art of talking on a matter of business in a businesslike way. Inasmuch as this latter is required fifty times for once that an opportunity offers for an oration, they break down at the beginning of their careers, and acquire an ill repute as bores, which not even a good speech will afterwards suffice to remove.

By far the greater part of a senator's work is mere talk, conducted amid a Babel of tongues, and listened to by no ears but those of the reporters. This will appear

to be extremely easy, until you try it. Then you will find that to stand up and just say what you have to say

in the fewest words, and sit down when you have said it, is about the most difficult performance of a speaker. When you have trained yourself to do that well, you will have advanced far towards becoming an orator. Therefore to this you should sedulously direct your first endeavours.

The art of doing this is to do it without art. The common fault is an attempt to do it too well; picking words and turning sentences where these are not required, and indeed are out of place. The best rule for your guidance appears to me to be this :-forget that you are on your legs; suppose that you are sitting down and desire to make a communication to your neighbour on the other side of the table. As you would address him, so you should address "the House," in those conversational

dialogues that necessarily occupy so much of its time. and in which the greater portion of its actual business is transacted. You would not talk across the dinnertable in phrases or in formal sentences-that would be discoursing, not talking; and what can be more disagreeable? Neither should you talk so in the House when it is in conversation. The best practice for educating yourself to this is to act the part in your study at homesitting first, then standing, until you have schooled yourself not to change your manner with your position. If you still find the propensity adhering to you in your place in Parliament, do not be disheartened, but persevere; you will conquer at last, and you will know when you have conquered, by the wonderful ease of which you will be conscious as soon as you have learned to substitute sensible talking for misplaced speech-making.

The Business Speech is the next in frequency of demand. Its name describes generally its character. There is some work to be done, and the shortest way to the doing of it is the best. The British Parliament is essentially and substantially a place of business; the show days, the party fights, the speech-makings, are exceptional. An Oration upon a matter of business, however eloquent, would be properly deemed an impertinence, and perhaps the offender would be summarily put down by those who have come there for work, and will not have their precious time wasted by abstractions. It is in committee that the business speech is most in requisition and most esteemed, and the reputation of a young member in the House will depend upon the success with which he performs this part of his senatorial duties.

The style of the Business Speech will be gathered from this statement of its objects. It should be a clear.