Oratory Sacred and Secular

PART II. A SERMON. — CHAPTER I. THE FOUNDATION—SUBJECT—OBJECT—TEXT. — CHAPTER II. THE PLAN—THOUGHT-GATHERING—ARRANGING—COMMITTING. — CHAPTER III. PRELIMINARIES—FEAR—VIGOR—OPENING EXERCISES. — CHAPTER IV. THE DIVISIONS—INTRODUCTION—DISCUSSION—CONCLUSION. — CHAPTER V. AFTER CONSIDERATIONS—SUCCESS—REST—IMPROVEMENT.

We have thus far discussed the subject of preliminary training, and have endeavored to show what natural qualities the preacher must possess, and how these can be improved by diligent cultivation. The importance of a wide scope of knowledge, and especially of that which bears upon oratory; of understanding and having some command of the powers of language; of having a personal experience of Christ’s pardoning love, and a heart filled with desire for the salvation of our fellow men; of believing that God has called us to the work of the ministry; has already been pointed out. When a man finds himself in possession of these, and is still a diligent student, growing daily in grace, he is prepared to preach the Gospel in “demonstration of the spirit and of power.” He is then ready to consider the methods by which all his gifts and acquirements may be made available, and wielded with mightiest effect in the service of his Master.

Some of the directions given in this and succeeding chapters are of universal application, while others are to be regarded only as suggestions, to be modified and changed according to individual taste, or particular circumstances.

A plan is necessary to every sermon. A rude mass of brick, lumber, mortar and iron, thrown together as the materials chance to be furnished, does not constitute a house, and is worthless until each is built into its appropriate place, in obedience to some intelligent design. A sermon must be 70constructed in a similar manner. It may contain much that is good, or useful, or striking, and be replete with sparkling imagery, and full of ideas that will command the attention of the audience, and yet completely fail. The only safe method is to have a well-defined plan marked out from beginning to end, and to work according to it.

It is always better to have this plan previously constructed. Sometimes when we speak on a subject we have often thought over, its whole outline will flash upon us in a moment, and we will speak as well as if we had employed months in preparation. But such cases are rare exceptions. The man who attempts, on the spur of the moment, to arrange his facts, draw his inferences, and enforce his opinions, will find the task very difficult, even if his memory promptly furnishes all the necessary materials.

Every discourse, of whatever character, should have a subject and an object. A sermon requires a text also, and these three constitute the foundation upon which it is built. We will consider them separately.

A good plan cannot be constructed without an object in view. Why is it that at a particular time a congregation assembles, and sits silent while a man addresses them? What is his motive in standing up before them and asking their attention? Many of the people may have been drawn together by the lightest influences, but the minister, at least, should be actuated by a noble purpose. If he has a clear aim before him, it will tend powerfully to give unity and consistency to his discourse, and prevent him from falling into endless digressions. It will bind all detached parts together, and infuse a common life through the whole mass. We cannot be too careful in the selection of such a ruling object, for it will affect the whole superstructure.

Our purposes should not be too general. It is not enough that we should wish to do good. Probably no minister ever preaches without that general desire. But the important question is, “What special good do I hope to accomplish by this sermon?” When he has decided this, he will then be 71prepared to adapt his means to the end proposed, and the whole discourse will acquire a definiteness and precision that would never otherwise have belonged to it. The more we sub-divide our objects, the more will this precision be increased, although there is a limit beyond which it would be at the expense of other qualities. If we desire the salvation of souls, it is well, and most powerful sermons have been preached with that object in view. But if we narrow our immediate aim, and keep in view only one of the steps by which the soul advances to God, it will give our discourse a keener edge, and we can plead with those who have not yet taken that step with more prospect of immediate success, than if we at once placed the whole journey before them. For example, many sermons may be preached with “repentance” as the central object, and this duty enforced by various motives and innumerable arguments. We may show that it is a duty, that man is lost without it, that Jesus calls him to it, that God assists, that salvation follows it, etc.

Our objects usually have reference to the action of those who hear us, and the more fully that action is understood, and the more earnest our desire to produce it, the greater our persuasive power will be. If we do not exactly know what we wish to accomplish, there is very little probability that our audience will interpret our thoughts for us. We may, it is true, labor to convince the judgment of our hearers, and make them understand truth more clearly than before, but this is usually because of the influence thus exerted on their actions.

The objects that should govern our sermons are comparatively few, and ought to be selected with great care. Much of our success depends on having the right one of these before us at the right time; for if we aim at that which is unattainable, we lose our effort. If we preach sanctification to a congregation of unawakened sinners, no power of treatment can redeem the sermon from the cardinal defect of inappropriateness. If we preach against errors which no one of our hearers entertains, our logic is lost, even if the 72very errors we battle against are not suggested. Let us carefully note the state of our audience, and select for our object that which ought to be accomplished.

There is a difference between the subject of a discourse and its object; the latter is the motive that impels us to speak, while the former is what we speak about. It is not uncommon for ministers to have a subject without any very distinct object. Their engagements require them to speak, and a subject is a necessity. That which can be treated most easily is taken, and all the ideas they possess, or can collect about it, are given forth, and the matter left. Until such persons grow in earnest, and really desire to accomplish something, they cannot advance the cause of God.

The object of a sermon is the soul, while the subject is only the body; or, we may say, the one is the end, and the other the means by which it is accomplished. After the object is fixed the subject can be chosen to much better advantage; for instance, if it be our object to lead the penitent to the Cross, we may select any of the themes connected with the crucifixion and dying love of Christ; we may show the sinner his inability to fulfill the requirements of the law, and that he needs an atoning sacrifice to save him from its penalty; we may show that the salvation purchased is full and free. Many other branches of the same great topic will be found suitable for the purpose in view.

This order of selection may sometimes be reversed to good advantage. When a minister is stationed with a certain congregation, there are many objects he wishes to accomplish, and often no strong reason for preferring one in the order of time to another. It will then be well for him to take that subject which may impress him, and bend his mind toward an object he can enforce most powerfully through it.

On other occasions there is a particular end to be attained, which is for the time all-important, and which thus furnishes the proper object. Nothing then remains but for the preacher to choose a subject through which he can work to the best advantage.

73This is one great advantage the Methodists have in protracted meetings. An object is always in view, and the congregation expect it to be pressed home with power. No plea of general instruction will then save a sermon from being thought worthless, if it does not produce an immediate result. And even the much calumniated “mourners’ bench” contributes most powerfully to the same result. There is something proposed which the congregation can see, and through it judge of the preacher’s success or failure. An outward act is urged upon the unbelieving portion of the audience, by which they signify that they yield to the power of the Gospel; and the very fact of having that before him as an immediate, though not an ultimate aim, will stimulate the preacher’s zeal, and cause him to put forth every possible exertion.

After all, the order in which subject and object are selected is not very material. It is enough that the preacher has a subject that he understands, and an object that warms his heart and enlists all his powers. Then he can preach, not as if dealing with abstractions, but as one who has a living mission to perform.

Every subject we treat should be complete in itself, and rounded off from everything else. Its boundaries should be run with such precision as not to include anything but what properly belongs to it. It is a common but grievous fault to have the same cast of ideas flowing round every text that may be preached from. There are few things in the universe that have not some relation to everything else, and if our topics are not very strictly bounded, we will fall into the vice of perpetual repetition. Thus, in a book of sermon sketches we have examined, nearly every one begins by proving that man is a fallen creature, and needs the helps or is liable to the ills mentioned afterward. No other thought is introduced until that primal point is settled. This doctrine is of great importance, and does affect all man’s relations, but we can sometimes take it for granted, without endangering the edifice we build upon it, and occasional 74silence will be far more impressive than that continual iteration, which may even induce a doubt of what seems to need so much proof.

Ministers sometime acquire such a stereotyped form of thought and expression that what they say in one sermon will be sure to recur, perhaps in a modified form, in all others. This kind of preaching is intolerable. There is an end to the patience of man. He tires of the same old ideas, and wishes when a text is taken that it may bring with it a new sermon. The remedy against this evil is to give each sermon its own territory, and then guard rigidly against trespass. It is not a sufficient excuse for the minister who preaches continually in one place, that what he says has a natural connection with the subject in hand, but it must have a closer connection with it, than with any other he may use. By observing this rule, we make each theme the solar centre around which may cluster a great number of secondary ideas, all of which naturally belong to it, and are undisturbed by satellites from other systems.

The subjects from which a preacher may choose are innumerable. The Bible is an inexhaustible storehouse. Its histories, precepts, prophecies, promises and threatenings, are almost endless. Then all the duties of human life, and especially those born of the Christian character; the best methods of making our way to the end of our journey; the hopes after which we follow; the dangers that beset our path; the mighty destinies of time and eternity, are a few of the themes that suggest themselves, and afford room enough for the loftiest talent, during all the time that man is allowed to preach on earth. If we would search carefully for the best subjects, and, when found, isolate them from all others, we would never need to weary the people by the repetition of thoughts and ideas.

While, as a rule, we ought to shun controversial points, we should not be afraid to lay hold of the most important subjects that are revealed to man. These will always command attention; heaven and hell, judgment, redemption, 75faith, the fall, and all those great doctrines upon which the Christian religion rests, need to be frequently impressed on the people. It is also profitable to preach serial sermons on great subjects. The rise of the Jewish nation and economy would afford a fine field for instruction. The life and work of Jesus Christ would be still better. This latter series might consist of discourses on His birth, baptism, temptation, first sermon, His teaching in general, some miracle as a type of all others, transfiguration, last coming to Jerusalem, Gethsemane, betrayal and arrest, trial, crucifixion, resurrection, ascension and second advent. Many other subdivisions might be made. Such linked sermons, covering a wide scope, instruct the people better than isolated ones could, and afford equal opportunities for enforcing all Christian lessons. Yet it would not be well to employ them exclusively, or even generally, as such a practice would tend to wearisome sameness.

The subject must be well defined. It may be of a general nature, but our conception of it should be so clear that we always know just what we are speaking about. This is more necessary in an extempore speech than in a written one, although the want of it will be felt severely even in the latter. A strong, vividly defined subject will give unity and life to a whole discourse, and often leave a permanent impression on the mind. To aid in securing this, it will be well for the preacher, when he has chosen a subject, to reduce it to its simplest form, and then by writing it as a phrase or sentence, stamp it on the mind, and let it ring in every word that is spoken; that is, let each word aid in carrying out the great idea, or in leading to the desired object, and be valued only so far as it does this. Those interminable discourses, that seem to commence anywhere and end nowhere, may be called sermons by courtesy, but they are not such in reality. The word “sermon” signifies “a thrust,” which well expresses the concentrativeness and aggressiveness that should distinguish it, and which nothing but a well-defined theme can give. It ought not to 76glitter with detached beauties, like the starry heavens, but shine with the single, all-pervading radiance of the sun.

This unity of theme and treatment is not easily preserved. It is hard to see in the mind’s eye what we know would please and delight those who listen, and turn away and leave it, but it is often necessary to exercise this more than Spartan self-denial, if we would not reduce our sermons to mere random harangues. Not that illustration should be discarded, for the whole realm of nature may be pressed into this service, and a good illustration in the right place is often better than an argument. But nothing, whatever its nature, should be drawn in, unless it so perfectly coalesces with the parent idea, that a common vitality flows through them. If this is the case, the unity will be unbroken, though even then it often happens that the idea would produce a better effect in connection with another theme, and should be reserved for it.

Usage has established the practice of employing a passage of Scripture as the basis of a sermon. This is of great advantage to the minister, for it gives the discourse something of divine sanction, and makes it more than a popular address. Opinion is divided as to whether it is best to select the text, and arrange the discourse to correspond with it, or reversing this order, to compose the sermon first, and thus secure the harmony that arises from having no disturbing idea, and at the last moment choose a text of Scripture that will fit it as nearly as possible.

No doubt the comparative advantages of these methods will be to a great degree determined by the occasions on which they are used. When a subject is of great importance, and we wish to be precise in explaining it, we may adopt the latter method, but the former is more generally useful. There are so many valuable ideas and important suggestions in the words of Scripture, that we can ill afford to deprive ourselves of this help. For the Bible, with all its ideas, is common property. No minister need fear the charge of plagiarism, when he borrows, either in word or 77thought from its inspired pages. He is God’s ambassador, with the Bible for his letter of instruction, and the more freely he avails himself of it, if it be done skillfully, the better for the authority of his mission. We may often select a subject that appears dark and confused, but when we have found a passage of Scripture embracing the same idea, there may be something in it that will solve every doubt, and indicate the very thoughts we wish to enforce. For this reason we believe that under ordinary circumstances, the practice of first constructing the sermon and only at the last moment before delivery, tacking on a text, is not the best.

Another reason in favor of previously selecting the text is worth consideration. The people, who are not supposed to know anything of the subject, expect, when we read a passage of Scripture, as the foundation of our remarks, that it will be something more than a mere point of departure. They anticipate that it will be kept always in view, and furnish the key-note to the whole sermon. This is but reasonable, and if disappointed, they will not so well appreciate what is really good in the discourse. We would not sacrifice unity to a mere rambling commentary on the words of the text. Let the subject be first in the mind and bend everything to itself. But let the text be next in importance, and the whole subject be unfolded with it always in view. It may be feared that the work of sermonizing will be rendered more difficult by observing this double guidance, but if a proper text be chosen—one that, in its literal meaning, will embrace the subject—the labor will be much lightened.

It is a common fault to take a passage of Scripture consisting of a few words only, and put our own meaning upon it, without reference to the intention of the inspired writer who penned it. This borders very closely on irreverence. If we cannot use God’s words in the sense he uses them, we had better speak without a text at all, and then our sin will only be a negative one. The taking of a few words divorced from their connection, and appending them to a discourse or 78essay, that has no relation to their true meaning, is not less a profanation than it would be to prefix the motto, “Perfect love casteth out fear,” to a fashionable novel. But when, on the other hand, we take a text that contains our subject, and expresses it clearly, we are prepared to compose a sermon to the best advantage. The subject present in our own mind runs through every part of the discourse, making it a living unity, instead of a collection of loose and disordered fragments; while the text, being always kept in view by the hearers as well as by the speaker, leads all minds in the same direction, and gives divine sanction to every word that is spoken. It is not without reason that the people, whose tastes are nearly always right, though they may not be able to give a philosophical explanation of them, complain of their preacher when he does not “stick to his text.” It is right that he should so adhere.

A man of genius may neglect this precaution, and still succeed, as he would do, by mere intellectual force, were he to adopt any other course. But ordinary men cannot, with safety, follow the example of Sydney Smith. His vestry complained that he did not talk about the text he took, and, that he might the more easily reform, they advised him to divide his sermons as other preachers did. He promised to comply with their request, and the next Sabbath began, “We will divide our discourse this morning into three parts; in the first place we will go up to our text, in the second we will go through it, and in the third we will go FROM it.” It was generally allowed that he succeeded best on the last division, but preachers who have not his genius had better omit it.

These rules in relation to the absolute sway of object, subject and text, may appear harsh and rigid, but cannot be neglected with impunity. A true discourse of any kind is the orderly development of some one thought, with so much clearness, that it may ever afterward live as a point of light in the memory; other ideas may cluster around it, but one must reign supreme. If it fails in this particular, nothing 79else will redeem it. Brilliancy of thought and illustration will be wasted, as a sculptor’s art would be on a block of clay.

A man of profound genius once arose to preach before a great assemblage, and every breath was hushed to listen. He spoke with power, and some of his passages were full of thrilling eloquence. He poured forth beautiful images and deep solemn thoughts, with the utmost profusion. Yet when he took his seat a sense of utter disappointment filled the hearts of all present. The sermon was confused. No subject could be traced that bound it together, and made a point of union to which the memory might cling. Had he not read his text no one could have guessed it. It was a most impressive warning of the necessity of laying a foundation before erecting a magnificent structure. Had he adhered to the thoughts expressed in his text, which was one of the richest in the Scriptures, his eloquence and power would not have been thrown away.

The logical order of sermon preparation is, first, to gather the materials of which it is composed; second, to select what is most fitting, and arrange the whole into perfect order; third, to fix this in the mind, thus making it available at the moment of use. These processes are not necessarily separated in practice, but may be best considered in the order indicated.

When we choose a subject for a sermon, and allow the mind to dwell upon it, it becomes a centre of attraction, and naturally draws all kindred ideas toward it. Old memories that have become dim in the lapse of time, are slowly hunted out and grouped around the parent thought, and each hour of study adds to the richness and variety of our stores. The relations between different and apparently widely-separated things become visible, just as new stars are seen when we gaze intently toward them. Everything that the mind possesses is subjected to a rigid scrutiny, and all that appears to bear any relation to the subject is brought into view. A considerable period of time is usually required for the completion of all this, and the longer it is continued the better, provided the interest felt is not abated.

Such continuous reaches of thought form a principal element in the superiority of one mind over another. Even the mightiest genius cannot, at a single impulse, exhaust the ocean of truth that opens around every object of man’s contemplation. 81And it is only by viewing a subject in every aspect, that we can guard against superficial and one-sided impressions. But the continued exertion and toil which this implies are nearly always distasteful, and the majority of men can accomplish it only by a stern resolve. This ability, whether acquired or natural, is one of prime necessity, and the young minister, at the very first, should learn to thoroughly investigate and finish every subject he undertakes, and continue the habit during life. This will generally determine the question of his success or failure, at least from an intellectual point of view. Thought is a mighty architect, and if you keep him fully employed, he will build up, with slow and measured strokes, a gorgeous and enduring edifice on any subject within your mental range. You may weary of his labor, and think the wall rises very slowly, and will never be completed, but wait. The work will be finished at last, and will be no ephemeral structure to be swept away by the first storm, but will stand unshaken on the basis of eternal truth.

M. Bautain compares the accumulation of thought around a subject, to the almost imperceptible development of organic life. Striking as is the illustration, there is one marked point of dissimilarity. The growth of thought is voluntary, and may be arrested at any stage. Even a cessation of conscious effort is fatal. To prevent this, and keep the mind employed until all its work is done, requires, with most persons, a regular and formal system. Profound thinkers, who take up a subject, and cannot leave it until it is traced into all its relations, and mastered in every part, and who have at the same time the power of long remembering the trains of thought that pass through their minds, may not need an artificial method. But these are exceptions to the general rule.

We will give a method we have found useful for securing sermon materials, and allow others to adopt it so far as it may prove advantageous to them.

Ideas are not always kept equally in view. Sometimes 82we may see one with great clearness, and after a little time lose it again, while another, at first invisible, comes into sight. Each one should be secured when it occurs. After the subject has been pondered for a sufficient length of time, write all the thoughts that are suggested on it, taking no care for the arrangement, but only putting down a word or brief sentence that will recall the idea intended. After everything that presents itself has thus been rendered permanent, the paper containing these items may be put away, and the subject recommitted to the mind. As other ideas arise, let them be recorded in the same way, and the process extended over days together. Sometimes new images and conceptions will continue to float into the mental horizon even for weeks. Most persons who have not tried this simple process, will be surprised to find how many thoughts they have on the commonest topic. If some of this gathered matter remains vague and indefinite, it will only be necessary to give it more time, more earnest thought, and all obscurity will vanish.

At last, there comes a consciousness that the mind’s power on that theme is exhausted. If we also feel that we possess all the requisite material, this part of our work is ended. But more frequently there will be a sense of incompleteness, and we are driven to seek what we need elsewhere.

The next step is the obtaining of new facts. We have thus far dealt with what the mind itself possesses, and have only sought to make that previously-accumulated knowledge fully available. But when this stage is reached, we hunger for more extended information. We read the works of those who have treated on the themes we are discussing, converse with well-informed persons, observe the world closely, and at last find the very idea we want. We receive it with joy, and from thenceforth it becomes a part of our being. We place the treasure on paper with other items, and continue to search until we have all we desire. It often happens that we do not find exactly the object of our search, but strike on some chain that guides us to it through the 83subtile principles of association. It is only the more welcome because we have thus traced it out.

We have on paper, at last, and often after much toil, a number of confused, unarranged notes. The whole mass relates to the subject, but much is unfitting, and all requires, by another process, to be cast into order and harmony. The first step in this direction is to omit everything not necessary to the purpose of the sermon. This is a matter of great importance. It has been said that the principal difference between a wise man and a fool is, that the one utters all his thoughts, while the other gives only his best to the world. Nearly every man has, at times, thoughts that would profit mankind, and if these are carefully selected from the puerilities by which they may be surrounded, the result cannot but be valuable. And if this cautious selection be needed on general topics, it is still more imperative in the ministry of the Word. The preacher must beware of giving anything repugnant to the spirit of his mission. And the necessity of a purpose running through his whole discourse, which we have before enlarged on, compels him to strike out each item at variance with it. It is well to carefully read over our scattered notes after the fervor of composition has subsided, and erase all that are unfitting. Sometimes this will leave very few ideas remaining, and we are obliged to search for others to complete the sermon. This can be continued until we have gathered a sufficient mass of clearly connected thoughts to accomplish the object in view.

Next follows the task of constructing the plan for the intended sermon. Unless this is well done, success is impossible. The mightiest results are obtained in oratory by the slow process of words, one following another. Each one should bear forward the current of thought in the right direction, and be a help to all that follow. And as, in extempore speech, these words are given forth on the spur of the moment, it becomes necessary to so arrange that the proper thought to be dissolved into words, may always be presented to the mind at the right time.

84In some cases this disposition of parts is quite easy. A course indicated by the very nature of the subject will spring into view, and relieve us of further embarrassment. But often this portion of our task will require severe thought.

Many different kinds of plans have been specified by writers on Homiletics. We will be contented with four divisions, based on the mode of construction.

The first, we may call the narrative method. It is principally used when some scripture history forms the basis of the sermon. In it the different parts of the plan are arranged according to the order of time, except when some particular reason, borrowed from the other methods, intervenes. When there are few or none of these portions which give it a composite character, the development proceeds with all the simplicity of a story. Many beautiful sermons have been thus constructed.

A second method is the textual. Each part of the sermon rests on some of the words or clauses of the text, and these suggest the order of its unfolding, although they may be changed to make it correspond more nearly to the narrative, or the logical methods. This kind of plan has an obvious advantage in assisting the memory by suggesting each part at the proper time.

The logical method is the third we will describe. A topic is taken, and without reference to the order of time or the words of the text, is unfolded as a proposition in Geometry—each thought being preliminary to that which follows, and the whole ending in the demonstration of some great truth, and the deduction of its legitimate corollaries. This method is exceedingly valuable in many cases, if not pressed too far.

The last method, and the one employed more frequently than all the others, is the divisional. It is the military arrangement, for in it the whole sermon is organized like an army. All the detached items are brought into related groups, each governed by a principal thought, and these again are held in strict subordination to the supreme idea; or, to change the figure, the entire mass resembles a tree, 85with its single trunk, its branches subdivided into smaller ones, and all covered with a beautiful robe of leaves, that rounds its form into graceful outlines, even as the flow of words harmonizes our prepared thoughts, into the unity of a living discourse.

A subject will many times arrange itself almost spontaneously into several different parts, which thus form the proper divisions, and these again may be easily analyzed into their subdivisions. Even when this is not the case, we will see, as we examine our jottings, that a few of the ideas stand out in especial prominence, and with a little close study of relations and affinities, all the others may be made to group themselves around these. The individual ideas which we put down on the first study of the subject, usually form the subdivisions, and some generalization of them the divisions.

It is well not to make the branches of a subject too numerous, or they will introduce confusion, and fail to be remembered. From two to four divisions, with two or three subdivisions under each, are in a majority of cases better than a larger number. The tendency to multiply them almost infinitely, which was formerly very prevalent, and is still too common, receives a merciless, but well-deserved rebuke from Stephens, in his “Preaching Required by the Times.” He is criticising a popular “Preacher’s Manual”:

“These more than six hundred pages are devoted exclusively to the technicalities of sermonizing. We almost perspire as we trace down the tables of contents. Our eye is arrested by the ‘divisions’ of a subject—and here we have no less than ‘nine kinds of divisions:’ the ‘Exegetical Division,’ the ‘Accommodational Division,’ the ‘Regular Division,’ the ‘Interrogative Division,’ the ‘Observational Division,’ the ‘Propositional Division,’ etc.; and then come the ‘Rise from Species to Genus,’ the ‘Descent from Genus to Species.’ And then again we have exordiums: ‘Narrative Exordiums,’ ‘Expository Exordiums,’ ‘Argumentative 86Exordiums,’ ‘Observational Exordiums,’ ‘Applicatory Exordiums,’ ‘Topical Exordiums,’ and, alas for us! even ‘Extra-Topical Exordiums.’ One’s thoughts turn away from a scene like this spontaneously to the Litany, and query if there should not be a new prayer there.

“But this is not all. Here are about thirty stubborn pages to tell you how to make a comment on your text, and we have the ‘Eulogistic Comment’ and the ‘Dislogistic Comment,’ (turn to your dictionary, reader; we cannot stop in the race to define), ‘Argumentative Comment’ and the ‘Contemplative Comment,’ the ‘Hyperbolical Comment,’ the ‘Interrogative Comment,’ and the list tapers off at last with what it ought to have begun and ended with, the ‘Expository Comment.’

“And even this is not all. Here is a section on the ‘Different kinds of Address,’ and behold the astute analysis: ‘The Appellatory, the Entreating, the Expostulatory, the Remedial, the Directive, the Encouraging, the Consoling, the Elevating, the Alarming, the Tender, the Indignant, the Abrupt.’

“This is the way that the art ‘Homiletic’ would teach us when and how to be ‘Tender,’ ‘Indignant,’ ‘Consoling,’ and even ‘Abrupt!’ ‘Nonsense!’

“Yes, ‘nonsense!’ says any man of good sense in looking at this folly: a folly which would be less lamentable if it could only be kept to the homiletic professor’s chair, but which has still an almost characteristic effect on pulpit eloquence—not only on the form of the sermon, but as a natural consequence on its very animus. This tireless author gives all these outlines as practical prescriptions. He even presents them in a precise formula. We must yield to the temptation to quote it. ‘There are,’ he says, ‘certain technical signs employed to distinguish the several parts of a discourse. The first class consists of the principal divisions, marked in Roman letters, thus: I., II., III., IV., etc. Next, the subdivisions of the first class, in figures, 1, 2, 3, etc. Under these, subdivisions of the second class, marked with a curve on 87the right, as 1), 2), 3), etc. Then, subdivisions of the third class, marked with two curves, as (1), (2), (3), etc.; and under these, subdivisions of the fourth class, in crotchets, thus: [1], [2], [3]. As—

“Mathematical this, certainly; some of Euclid’s problems are plainer. As a ‘demonstration’ is obviously necessary, the author proceeds to give the outline of a sermon on ‘The Diversity of Ministerial Gifts,’ from the text ‘Now there are Diversities of Gifts,’ etc. He has but two ‘General Divisions,’ but makes up for their paucity by a generous allowance of ‘Subdivisions.’ His ‘General Divisions’ are, I. Exemplify the Truth of the Text. II. Derive some Lessons of Instruction, etc.,—an arrangement simple and suitable enough for any popular audience, if he were content with it, but under the first head he has two ‘subdivisions,’ the first of which is reduced to thirteen sub-subdivisions, and one of these thirteen again to seven sub-sub-subdivisions! The second of his subdivisions again divided into eight sub-subdivisions, while the ‘homily’ (alas for the name!) is completed by a merciless slashing of the second ‘general division’ into no less than eight subdivisions. The honest author, when he takes breath at the end, seems to have some compunctious misgivings about this infinitesimal mincing of a noble theme, and reminds the amazed student that though the plan should be followed ‘in the composition of a sermon,’ the ‘minor divisions’ can be concealed from view in preaching; and he concludes the medley of nonsense with one sensible and very timely admonition: ‘If a discourse contain a considerable number of divisions and subdivisions,’ care should be taken to fill up the respective parts with suitable matter, or it will be, indeed, a mere skeleton—bones strung together—‘very many and very dry!’”

88When we have accumulated our materials, stricken out all not needed, and determined what shall be the character of our plan, the remainder of the work must be left to individual taste and judgment. No rules can be given that will meet every case. We might direct to put first what is most easily comprehended, what is necessary for understanding other portions, and also what is least likely to be disputed. But beyond these obvious directions little aid can be given. The preacher must form his own ideal, and work up to it. He may profitably examine sermon skeletons, to learn what such forms should be. And when he hears good discourses he may look beneath the burning words, and see what are the merits of the frame-work on which they rest. This may render him dissatisfied with his own achievements, but such dissatisfaction is the best pledge of earnest effort for higher results.

A certain means of improvement is to bestow a great deal of time and thought on the formation of plans, and make no disposition of any part without a satisfactory reason. If this course is faithfully continued, the power to arrange properly will be acquired, and firm, coherent, and logical sermons be constructed.

There are certain characteristics that each sermon skeleton should possess. It must indicate the nature of the discourse, and mark out each of its steps with accuracy. Any want of definiteness is a fatal defect. The orator must feel that he can rely absolutely on it for guidance to the end of his discourse, or be in perpetual danger of embarrassment and confusion. Each clause should express a distinct idea, and but one. If it contain anything that is included under another head, we fall into wearisome repetition, the great danger of extempore preachers. But if discordant and disconnected thoughts are grouped together, we are liable to forget some of them, and in returning, destroy the order of the sermon.

A brief plan is better than a long one. Often a single word will recall an idea as perfectly as many sentences would do, and will burden the memory less. We do not expect the draft 89of a house to equal the building in size, but only to indicate the position and proportion of its apartments. The plan cannot supply the thought, but, indicating what exists in the mind, it shows how to bring it forth in regular order. It is a pathway leading to a definite end, and like all roads, its crowning merits are directness and smoothness. Without these, it will perplex and hinder rather than aid. Every word in the plan should express, or assist in expressing an idea, and be so firmly bound to it that the two cannot be separated by any exigency of speech. It is perplexing in the heat of discourse to have a prepared note lose the idea attached to it, and become merely an empty word. But if the conception is clear, and the most fitting term has been chosen to embody it, this cannot easily happen. A familiar idea may be noted very briefly, while one that is new requires to be more fully expressed. Most sermon skeletons may be brought within the compass of a hundred words, and every part be clear to the mind that conceived it, though, perhaps not comprehensible by any other.

It is not always best to present the divisions and subdivisions in preaching. The congregation do not care how a sermon has been constructed, provided it comes to them warm and pulsating with life. To give the plan of a sermon before the sermon itself, is contrary to the analogy of nature. She does not require us to look upon a grisly skeleton before we can see a living body. It is no less objectionable to name the parts and numbers of the sketch during the discourse, for bones that project through the skin are very uncomely. The people will not suffer, if we keep all the divisions to ourselves, for they are only professional devices to render our share of the work easier. Much of the proverbial “dryness” of sermons arises from displaying all the processes we employ. A hotel that would have its beef killed and dressed before its guests at dinner, would not be likely to retain its patronage. Whenever we hear a minister state his plan in full, and take up “firstly” and 90announce the subdivisions under it, we prepare our patience for a severe test.

What the people need, are deep, strong appeals to their hearts, through which shines the lightning of great truths, and the sword of God’s spirit smites—not dry, dull divisions through which “it is easy to follow the preacher”—a compliment often given, but always equivocal. A tree is far more beautiful when covered with waving foliage, even if some of the branches are hidden. Let the stream of eloquence sweep on in an unbroken flow, bearing with it all hearts, but giving no indication of the manner in which it is guided; or, better still, let it move with the impetus of the cannon ball, overthrowing everything in its path, but not proclaiming in advance the mark toward which it is flying!

We should go as far in the plan as we intend to do in the sermon, and know just where to stop. Then we arise with confidence, for we are sure that we have something to say; we know what it is; and most important of all, we will know when it is finished. Most objections against extempore preaching apply only to discourses that have no governing plan. When this is firm and clear, there is no more danger of saying what we do not intend, or of running into endless digressions, than if we wrote every word. Indeed there is no better way to compose a written sermon, than by first arranging a plan.

But it may be urged that this laborious preparation—this careful placing of every thought—will require as much time as to write in full. It may at first. The mind needs to be trained in the work, and it will be of great advantage even as a mental discipline. But it grows easier with practice, until the preparation of two sermons a week will not be felt as a burden—will only afford grateful topics of thought while busied at other labor. The direct toil of a mature preacher may not exceed an hour per week.

The sermon is now clearly indicated. A plan has been prepared that fixes each thought to be expressed in its proper place. There is no further danger of the looseness 91and desultoriness that are not unfrequently supposed to be peculiar to extemporaneous speech. It is possible, in the moment of utterance, to leave the beaten track, and give expression to any new ideas that may be suggested. But there is a sure foundation laid—a course marked out that has been deeply premeditated, and which gives certainty to all we say.

But it is not enough to have the plan on paper. As it came from the mind at first in detached items, it must, in its completed state, be restored to it again. Some ministers are not willing to take the trouble of committing their skeletons to memory, but lay the paper before them, and speak on one point until that is exhausted, and then look up the next, which is treated in the same manner. This tends powerfully to impair the unity of the discourse, which should he unbroken, and to make each note the theme of a short, independent dissertation, rather than an integral part of the whole. The minister reaches a point where he does not know what is to come next, and on the brink of that gulf looks down at his notes, and after a search, perhaps finds what he wants. Had this latter thought existed in his mind, it would have been taken notice of in time, and the close of the preceding one bent into harmony with it. The direct address of the preacher to the people, which they value so much, is interfered with in the same way, for his eye must rest, part of the time, on his notes. The divisions also of the sermon are apt to be mentioned, for it is hard for the tongue to refrain from pronouncing the words that the eye is glancing over.

For all these reasons we believe that notes should seldom, if ever, be used in the pulpit. They remedy none of the acknowledged defects of extempore speaking, but add to them the coldness and formality of reading. Those who cannot trust the mind alone had better go further, and read their sermons with what earnestness they can command, and thus secure the elegant finish supposed to be attainable only in written compositions.

92But not all who use notes thus abuse them. Many employ them merely to prevent possible forgetfulness, and perhaps do not look at them once during the sermon. Yet it is still better to carry them in the pocket, and thus avoid the appearance of servile dependence, while they would still guard against such a misfortune as befel the Abbe Bautain, who, on ascending the pulpit to preach before the French king and court, found that he had forgotten the subject, plan and text!

By committing the plan to memory the mind takes possession of the whole subject. It is brought into one view, and if any part is inconsistent with the main discussion, the defect will be seen at once. If the plan is properly constructed, the mind is then in the best possible condition for speech. The object is fixed in the heart, and will fire it to earnestness and zeal, and the subject is spread out before the mind’s eye, while the two meet and mingle in such a way as to give life and vitality to every part. This is just what is needed in true preaching. The speaker’s soul, heated by the contemplation of his object, penetrates every part of his theme, investing it with an interest that compels attention. All the power he possesses is brought to bear directly on the people. We can scarcely imagine a great reformer—one who has shaken the nations—to have adopted any other method of address. Think of Xavier or Luther with their notes spread out before them, while addressing the multitudes who hung on their lips! The Presbyterian elder who once prayed in the presence of his note-using pastor: “O Lord! teach thy servants to speak from the heart to the heart, and not from a little piece of paper, as the manner of some is!” was not far wrong.

It is well to commit the plan to memory a considerable time before entering the pulpit. There is then less liability of forgetting some portion of it, and it takes more complete possession of the mind. This is less important when we preach on subjects with which we are perfectly familiar, for then “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” 93But we are not always so favored. Even if the salient features are well known, some of the minor parts may require close consideration. This cannot be so well bestowed until after the plan is completely prepared, for before that time there is danger that much of our attention may be given to some idea which may be ultimately rejected, or changed with the plan. But when the plan is finished, each idea has settled into its place. If obscurity still rests anywhere, it will be seen at once, and the strength of the mind brought to bear on that particular point. The impressions then made are easily retained, because associated with a part of the prepared outline. Such deep meditation on each division of the sermon can scarcely fail to make it original in the truest sense of the term, and weave it together with strong and massive thought.

After the plan is committed to memory, we can meditate on its different portions, not only at the desk, but everywhere. As we walk from place to place, or lie on our beds, or at any time find our minds free from other engagements, we can ponder the ideas that cluster around our subject until they grow perfectly familiar. Even when we are reading, brilliant thoughts may spring up, or those we possessed before take stronger and more definite shape.

This course we would strongly urge on the young speaker. If diligently followed, it will be invaluable. Arrange the plan from which to speak as clearly as may be, and memorize it; turn it over and over again; ponder each idea and the manner of bringing it out; study the connection between all the parts, until the whole, from beginning to end, appears perfectly plain and simple. This method of preparation has been so fully tested by experience, that its effectiveness is no longer questionable.

It is important to grasp the whole subject, as nearly as possible, in a single idea—in the same way that the future tree is compressed in the germ from which it springs. Then this one thought will suggest the entire discourse to the speaker, and at its conclusion will be left clear and positive 94on the hearer’s mind. It is true that some acute auditors may outrun a loose speaker, arrange his scattered fragments, supply his omissions, and arrive at the idea which has not yet formed itself in his own mind. Such persons often commend preachers who are incomprehensible to the majority of their audience. But it is not safe to trust their applause for they are exceedingly apt to be in the minority.

After the plan is memorized, it is often of advantage to sketch the discourse in full; if this is done in long hand, there is danger that its slowness will make it more of a word-study than what it is intended to be—a test of ideas. Here short hand is valuable; and its use in this manner will at once detect anything that may be wrong in the plan, for if all is well arranged there need be no pause in the most rapid composition. If we are able at one effort to throw the whole into a dress of words, we can be confident that with the additional stimulus supplied by the presence of a congregation, it will be easy to do the same again. There should be no attempt, at the time of speaking, to recall the terms used in writing, but our command of language is usually improved by having so lately used many of the terms we will need again. Frequently there are fine passages in the sermons thus struck off at white heat which we would not willingly forget, yet it is better to make no effort to remember them, for we are almost certain to rise even higher in the excitement of speech.

Those who cannot write at a speed approaching that of the tongue, and who wish a little more assistance than is furnished by the plan, can make a brief sketch of it—a compact and intelligible model of the whole subject. A discourse that requires an hour in delivery may be compressed into a wonderfully small compass, without a material thought being omitted or obscurely indicated. Such a sketch differs from the plan in clearly expressing all the ideas that underlie the discourse, while the latter would be unintelligible to any but the writer. The one is only a few marks thrown out into the field of thought, by which an intended pathway 95is indicated; the other is an exceedingly brief view of the thoughts themselves, without adornment or verbiage. Some speakers who might feel insecure in trusting the notes and hints of the plan, would feel free to enlarge on a statement of their thoughts, so brief as to require only two or three minutes for reading. But this is only an expedient, and need not be adopted by those who have confidence in their trained and cultivated powers.

The method of committing to memory a skeleton for the purpose of securing our accumulations, is widely different from the systems of Mnemonics that were once so current. Ideas are linked together by natural, not artificial associations. It is the grasping of one thought that points to another, or dissolves, as we gaze upon it, into minuter ones, and is, in most instances, based upon that rigid analysis which cannot be dispensed with even by those who would think exactly. All who write their sermons would do well to adopt it. Strict analysis and broad generalization are the foundation of all science, and if the preacher builds upon them the world of spiritual truth will yield him its treasures.

After a plan has been fully prepared it may easily be preserved for future use, by being copied into a book kept for the purpose, or, what is more convenient in practice, folded into an envelope, with the subject written on the back. By the latter means a large number may be preserved in such form as to be readily consulted. These can be improved as our knowledge increases, so as to be, at any time, the complete expression of our ability on the theme treated of.

It is an anxious moment when, after having completed his preparation, the preacher awaits the time for beginning his intellectual battle. Men who are physically brave often tremble in this emergency. The shame of failure appears worse than death itself, and as the soldier feels more of cold and shrinking terror while listening for the peal of the first gun, than when the conflict deepens into blood around him, so the speaker suffers more in this moment of expectancy than in any that comes after. He sees the danger in its full magnitude without the inspiration that attends it. Yet he must remain calm and collected, for unless he is master of himself, he cannot expect to rule the multitude before him. He must keep his material well in hand, that it may be used at the proper time, although it is not best to be continually conning over what he has to say. The latter would destroy the freshness of his matter, and bring him to the decisive test weary and jaded. He only needs to be assured that his thoughts are within reach.

It is very seldom possible to banish all fear, and it is to the speaker’s advantage that he cannot. His timidity arises from several causes, which differ widely in the effects they produce. A conscious want of preparation is one of the most distressing of these. When this proceeds from willful neglect no pity need be felt, although the penalty should be severe. If the speaker’s object is only to win reputation—to pander to his own vanity—he will feel more terrified than 97if his motive were worthy. Such is often the position of the uncalled minister. He can have no help from on high, and all his prayers for divine assistance are a mere mockery. But if we speak because we dare not refrain, a mighty point is gained, for then failure is no reproach. And the less of earthly pride or ambition mingles with our motives, the more completely can we rely on the help of the Spirit.

Another cause of fear is less unworthy. The glorious work in which we are engaged may suffer from our insufficiency; for, while God will bless the truth when given in its own beauty and power, there is still scope enough for all the vigor of intellect, and the strongest preacher feels the responsibility of rightly using his powers resting heavily upon him.

A general dread, that cannot be analyzed or accounted for, is perhaps more keenly felt than any other. Persons who have never spoken sometimes make light of it, but no one will ever do so who has experienced it. The soldier, who has never witnessed a battle, or felt the air throb with the explosion of cannon, or heard the awful cries of the wounded, is often a great braggart, while “the scarred veteran of a hundred fights” never speaks of the carnival of blood without shuddering, and would be the last, but for the call of duty, to brave the danger he knows so well. A few speakers never feel such fear, but it is because they do not know what true speaking is. They have never felt the full tide of inspiration that sometimes lifts the orator far above his ordinary conceptions. They only come forward to relieve themselves of the interminable stream of twaddle that wells spontaneously to their lips, and can well be spared the pangs that precede the birth of a profound and living discourse.

This kind of fear belongs to oratory of any character, but especially to that which deals with sacred themes. It resembles the awe felt on the eve of all great enterprises, and when excessive, as it is in some highly gifted and sensitive minds, it constitutes an absolute bar to public speech. But in most cases it is a source of inspiration rather than of repression.

There is a strange sensation often experienced in the 98presence of an audience before speaking. It may proceed from the united electric influence of the many eyes that are turned upon the speaker, especially if he catches their gaze. It may enchain him and leave him powerless, unless he rises superior to it, and, throwing it backward to its source, makes it the medium of his most subtile conquests. Most speakers have felt this in a nameless thrill, a real something, pervading the atmosphere, tangible, evanescent, indescribable. All writers have borne testimony to the effect of a speaker’s glance in impressing an audience. Why should not their eyes have a reciprocal power?

By dwelling on the object for which we speak, and endeavoring to realize its full importance, we will in a measure lose sight of the danger to be incurred, and our minds be more likely to remain in a calm and tranquil state. But no resource is equal to the sovereign one of prayer. The Lord will remember his servants when they are laboring in his cause, and grant a divine influence to prepare them for the work.

No change in the plan should be made just before speaking, for it will almost inevitably produce confusion. Yet this error is very difficult to avoid. The mind has a natural tendency to be going over the same ground, revising and testing every point, and is liable to make changes, the consequences of which cannot at once be foreseen. After all necessary preparation has been made, we should wait the result quietly and hopefully. Over-study is possible, and when accompanied by great solicitude, is a sure means of driving away all interest from the subject. If the eye be fixed too long upon one object, with a steadfast gaze, it will be unable to see at all. So the mind, if confined to one point for a great period, will lose its vivacity, and grow weary. Nothing can compensate for the want of elasticity and vigor in the act of delivery. It is not enough to enumerate a dry list of particulars, but we must enter into their spirit with the deepest interest. This cannot be counterfeited. To clearly arrange, and weigh every thought that 99belongs to the subject, lay it aside until the time for speech, and then enter upon it with only such a momentary glance as will assure us that all is right, is doubtless the method to make our strength fully available. To await the decisive moment with calm self-confidence, is very difficult, especially for beginners, but the ability to do it may be acquired by judicious practice and firm resolution. M. Bautain, whose experience was very extensive, says that he has sometimes felt so confident of his preparation, as to fall asleep while waiting to be summoned to the pulpit!

But those who misimprove the last moments by too much thought, form the smallest class. Many, through mere indolence, permit the finer lines of the future discourse, that have been traced with so much care, to fade out. This not unfrequently happens to those who preach a second or third time on the same subject. Because they have succeeded once, they imagine that the same success is always at command. This is a hurtful, though natural error. It is not enough to have the material for a sermon where it may be collected by a conscious and prolonged effort, but it must be in the foreground. There is no time, in the moment of delivery, for reviving half obliterated lines of memory.

We once witnessed an instance of most unexpected failure from this cause. The speaker was much engrossed with other duties until the appointed hour, and then, having no leisure for preparation, he selected a sermon he had preached shortly before, and with the general course of which he was no doubt familiar. Yet when he endeavored to produce his thoughts they were not ready. He became embarrassed, and was finally compelled to take his seat in the midst of his intended discourse.

It is well, during the last interval, to care for the strength of the body, for its condition will influence all the manifestations of mind. It is said that the pearl-diver, before venturing into the depths of the sea, always spends a few moments in deep breathing, and other bodily preparation. In the excitement of speech, the whirl and hurricane of emotion, it 100is necessary that our physical condition should be such as to bear all the tension put upon it. Mental excitement wears down the body faster than muscular labor. To meet all its demands we must reserve our strength for the time it is needed; for any illness will operate as a direct reduction of the orator’s power, and he must not hope, under its influence, to realize full success.

Holyoake makes the following pertinent observations in reference to this point:

“Perhaps the lowest quality of the art of oratory, but one on many occasions of the first importance, is a certain robust and radiant physical health; great volumes of animal heat. In the cold thinness of a morning audience, mere energy and mellowness is inestimable; wisdom and learning would be harsh and unwelcome compared with a substantial man, who is quite a house-warming.”

The picture painted in romances of a speaker with attenuated form, and trembling step, scarcely able to sustain his own weight as he ascends the platform, but who, the moment he opens his lips, becomes transfigured in the blaze of eloquence, is more poetical than natural. Let the instrument be in perfect tune, and then can the hand of genius evoke from it sweet and thrilling music.

As the time for speaking approaches every fatiguing exertion should be avoided.

In the “Rudiments of Public Speaking,” Holyoake gives a passage from his own experience which well illustrates this:

“One Saturday I walked from Sheffield to Huddersfield to deliver on the Sunday two anniversary lectures. It was my first appearance there, and I was ambitious to acquit myself well. But in the morning I was utterly unable to do more than talk half inaudibly and quite incoherently. In the evening I was tolerable, but my voice was weak. My annoyance was excessive. I was a paradox to myself. My power seemed to come and go by some eccentric law of its own. I did not find out till years after that the utter exhaustion of my strength had exhausted the powers of speech and thought, 101and that entire repose instead of entire fatigue should have been the preparation for public speaking.”

Absolute rest is not generally advisable, for then the preacher would enter the pulpit with languid mind and slowly beating pulse, and would require some time to overcome this state. A brisk walk, when the health is good, will invigorate and refresh all his faculties, and in part prevent the feebleness and faintness of a listless introduction, by enabling him to grasp the whole subject at once, and launch right into the heart of it. Should any one doubt the power of exercise to produce this effect, let him, when perplexed with difficult questions in his study, start out over fields and hills, and review the matter in the open air. If the minister cannot secure this kind of exercise he may easily find a substitute. If alone, he can pace back and forth, and swing his arms, until the circulation becomes brisk, and pours a stream of arterial blood to the brain that will supply all its demands.

Another simple exercise will often prove of great advantage. It is well known that many ministers injure themselves by speaking too much from the throat. This results from improper breathing—from elevating the upper part of the chest instead of pressing the abdomen downward and outward, causing the air to pass through the whole length of the lungs. To breathe properly is always important, and does much to prevent chest and throat diseases. But it is worthy of the most careful attention on the part of the speaker, for by it alone can he attain full compass and range of voice. But in animated extempore speech there is no time to think of the voice at all, and the only method possible is to make the right way so habitual that it will be adopted instinctively. This will be greatly promoted if, just before beginning to speak, we will breathe deeply a number of times, inflating the lungs completely to their extremities.

At this last hour, the speaker must not dwell upon the dangers he is about to encounter, or picture the desirability of escape from them. He has taken every precaution and 102made every preparation. Nothing remains for him but to put his trust in God, and bravely do his duty.

The order of opening services is different in the different churches, but in all they are of great advantage to the minister by overcoming excessive timidity, and giving an easy introduction to the audience. The hymn, or psalm, is to be read, which is not a very embarrassing task, and in doing it he becomes familiar with the sound of his own voice. Yet it requires many rare qualities to read well. Good sense and modesty are essential. The theatric method, sometimes admired, exaggerating every tone, and performing strange acrobatic feats of sound, tends to dispel the solemn awe and reverence that should gather around the sanctuary. Let the hymn be read quietly, with room for rise as well as fall, and all be perfectly natural and unaffected. The sentiment expressed by the voice should correspond with the meaning of the words. Even in this preliminary exercise, it is possible to strike a chord that will vibrate in unison through the hearts of preacher and people.

Prayer is still more important. When it is read, the same remarks apply as to the reading of the hymns. Each word should be made the echo of an inward feeling. But in most American churches prayer is extempore. The minister addresses heaven in his own words, on behalf of himself and congregation. The golden rule here is to pray really to God. That minister had no reason to feel flattered, whose prayer was commended as the most eloquent ever offered to a Boston congregation! The mass of humanity before us should only be thought of, in order to express their wants, and to intercede for them at a throne of grace. The simpler our language the better it is fitted for this purpose. Gaudy rhetoric, and even the charm of melodious words, if in the slightest degree sought for, is out of place. The only praise that should be desired from a congregation, in regard to their pastor’s prayers, is the acknowledgment that their holy yearnings and aspirations, as well as their needs, have been clearly expressed. All beyond this is disgusting.

103Neither should fervid utterance be strained after. If deep emotions arise, and express themselves in the voice, it is well. But without these, mere loudness of tone will be empty noise; the prayer will be the hardest part of the service; and complex metaphors and profuse poetical quotations will afford very inadequate relief. But if the heart be full it is easy to pray, and this renders all the remainder of the service easier. A bond of true spiritual sympathy unites the preacher with all the good in his congregation, and as he rises to speak, their prayers are given for his success.

The sermon is the culmination of ministerial labor. Other duties are important, but preaching is highest of all. Example, conversation, private influence, only prepare the way for the great Sabbath work. In it the minister can speak to the assembled multitude with the freedom and boldness of truth. The believer receives deeper insight into God’s ways, and directions for his own walk. The careless listen while he denounces impending wrath and shows the only means of escape. He wields tremendous power, and if sincere and unselfish, he cannot fail to win stars for his heavenly crown.

We will consider the sermon under the three parts of introduction, discussion and conclusion. It is often divided more minutely, but these will be sufficient for our purpose.

Nothing is harder to frame than a good introduction. It is indispensable, for, however we may approach our subject there is a first moment when silence is broken and our thoughts introduced. The rustle of closing hymn books and the subsiding murmur of the audience, tell the speaker that the time has come. If he be sensitive, or has never spoken before, his pulse beats fast, his face flushes, an indescribable feeling of faintness and fear thrills every nerve. He advances to the pulpit, and reads from the Bible the words that are to be the warrant for his utterances, and breathing a silent prayer for help, opens his lips, and hears the tremulous echo of his own voice.

There is a vast difference between reciting and extemporizing 105at first, and the advantage is all on the side of recitation. Every word is in its proper place, and the speaker is perfectly calm and self-confident. He is sure that his memory will not fail in the opening, and will usually throw his whole power into it, causing his voice to ring clear and loud over the house. But it is different with the extempore speaker. He is sure of nothing, and the weight of the whole speech is heavy on his mind. He is glancing ahead, striving to forecast the coming sentences, as well as caring for those gliding over the tongue, and his first expressions may be feeble and ungraceful. Yet this display of modesty and timidity will conciliate the audience and secure their good will. We can scarcely fail to distinguish an extemporized discourse from a recited one, by the difference in the introduction alone.

Some persons commit the opening passages of the sermon, to avoid the pain and hesitancy of an unstudied beginning. But while this may accomplish the immediate object, it is apt to be at the expense of the remaining part of the discourse. The mind cannot pass easily from recitation to extemporization, and the voice, being too freely used at first, loses its power. The hearers having listened to highly polished language, cannot so well relish the plain words that follow, and the whole sermon, which, like the condor, may have pitched from Alpine summits, falls fast and far until the lowest level is reached. A written introduction may be modest and unpretending, but unless it is exactly like unstudied speech there will be a painful transition.

A favorite method of avoiding these difficulties is to make no formal introduction, but plunge at once into the heart of the subject. Occasionally, this can be done to good advantage, and tends to prevent a monotonous uniformity. But as a rule it is better to prepare the minds of our hearers by all needed observations, and gradually lead them to our subject.

The introduction should not be left to the chance of the moment. It requires more careful study than any other 106part of the sermon, for the tide of speech, which may afterward bear us over many barriers, is not then in full flow. But the preparation should be general, and not extend to the words. A first sentence may be forecast, but much beyond this will do harm. For the introduction should not be the part of the discourse longest remembered. It would be better to omit it, than to have the attention distracted from the main subject. For this reason nothing far-fetched or hard to be understood should be admitted. But, beginning with some familiar thought closely connected with the text, it should remove difficulties and open the whole subject for discussion.

Much is gained if, at the outset, we can arrest the attention and win the sympathy of our hearers. They come together from many different employments, with thoughts fixed on various objects, and it is a difficult task to remove these distracting influences and cause the assembly to dwell with intense interest on one subject. Sometimes a startling proposition will accomplish this end. Earnestness in the speaker tends powerfully toward it. But sameness must be carefully avoided. If every sermon is carried through an unvarying number of always-expressed divisions and subdivisions, the hearer knows what is coming, and loses all curiosity. We have heard of a minister who made it a rule to consider the nature, reason and manner of everything he spoke of. He would ask the questions: “What is it? Why is it? How is it?” The eloquence of Paul would not many times have redeemed such an arrangement.

A considerable degree of inattention is to be expected in every audience at first, and the speaker’s opening words may be unheard by many and unheeded by all. It is useless to attempt by violent means and loudness of voice to awaken them from their indifference. The preacher may safely bide his time. If his words have weight and his manner indicate confidence, one by one will listen, until that electric thrill of sympathy, impossible to describe, but which can be felt as easily as an accord in music, will vibrate through the 107hearts of all present. Then the orator’s power is fully developed, and it is delightful to use it. This silent, pulsating interest is more to be desired than vehement applause, for it cannot be counterfeited, and indicates that the hearts of the assemblage have been reached, and fused by the fires of eloquence, and are ready to be molded into any desired form. Happy the minister who has this experience, for if his own heart is enlightened by the Holy Spirit, he can stamp on the awakened multitude the seal of undying truth.

The introduction should be plain, simple and direct. But its very simplicity renders it more difficult to construct. Preachers who are great in almost everything else, often fail by making their introductions too complicated, thus defeating their own purpose as surely as the engineer who gives his road such steep grades, that no train can pass over it. Others deliver a string of platitudes that no one wishes to hear, and the audience grows restive at the very beginning.

When from these or other causes, the sermon is misbegun, the consequences are likely to be serious. The thought is forced home on the speaker, with icy weight, that he is failing, and this conviction paralyzes all his faculties. He talks on, but grows more and more embarrassed. Incoherent sentences drop from him, requiring painful explanation to prevent them from degenerating into perfect nonsense. The outline of his plan dissolves into mist. The points he intended to make, and thought strong and important, now appear very trivial. He blunders on with little hope ahead. The room may grow dark before him, and in the excess of his discomfort, he ardently longs for the time when he can close without absolute disgrace. But, alas! the end seems far off. In vain he searches for some avenue of escape. There is none. His throat becomes dry and parched, and the command of his voice is lost. The audience grow restive, for they are tortured, as well as the speaker, and if he were malicious he might find some alleviation in this. But he has no time to think of it, or if he does, it reacts on himself. No one can help him. At last, in sheer desperation, he cuts 108the Gordian knot, and stops—perhaps seizing some swelling sentence, and hurling it as a farewell volley at the audience—or speaks of the eternal rest, which no doubt appears very blissful in comparison with his own unrest—then sits down bathed in sweat, and feeling that he is disgraced forever! If he is very weak or foolish, he resolves that he will never speak again without manuscript, or, if wiser, that he will not only understand his discourse, but how to begin it.

The passage from the introduction to the discussion should be gradual. To make the transition smoothly, and strike the subject just at the right point, continuing the interest that may have been previously excited, is a most important achievement. A strong, definite purpose materially assists in this, for it dwells equally in all parts of the sermon. The object is clearly in view, and we go right up to it with no wasted words, while the people cheerfully submit to our guidance because they see that we have an aim before us. But if this be absent we may steer around our subject, and are never quite ready to enter upon it, even if we are not wrecked at the outset. A careful preparation of the plan will do much to prevent this, but it is not enough, for the words and phrases are not to be prepared. With every precaution, the best of speakers may fail at this point, and the more brilliant the introduction the more marked will the failure be. When this danger is safely passed, he is in the open sea, and the triumphs of eloquence are before him.

There is great pleasure in speaking well. An assembly hanging on the words, and thinking the thoughts of a single man, gives to him the most subtile kind of flattery, and he needs to beware how he yields to its influence, or his fall will be speedy and disastrous. The triumphs of oratory are very fascinating. The ability to sway our fellow men at will—to bind them with the strong chain of our thought, and make them willing captives—produces a delirious and intoxicating sense of power. But this is very transient, and unless taken advantage of at the moment, to work some enduring result, it fades, like the beautiful cloud-work of morning, before the 109rising sun. Even during the continuance of a sermon it is hard to maintain the influence of a happy moment. Persons not unfrequently give utterance to some great and noble thought, that echoes in the hearts of the audience, and the nameless thrill of eloquence is felt, but some irrelevant phrase, or commonplace sentiment dissolves all the charm. To avoid this, the whole discourse must be of a piece, and rise in power until the object is accomplished.

Diffuseness is often supposed to be an essential quality of extemporaneous speech. It is not such, though many speakers do fall into it. The reason of this fault is that they are not content to place the subject in a strong light by one forcible and luminous expression, but say nearly what they mean, and continue their efforts until they are satisfied. They furnish no clear view of anything, but give a sort of twilight intimation of their idea. But serious as this fault is, it may easily be overcome. Exquisite finish, and elaborate arrangement are not to be expected in off-hand speech, but we may give force and true shading to every idea just as well as in writing.

To express exactly what we mean at the first effort, is one of the greatest beauties of a spoken style. The hearer is filled with grateful surprise when some new and living idea is placed before him, clothed in a single word or sentence. But a diffuse speaker gives so many premonitions of his thought, that the audience comprehend it before he is half through the discussion, and are forced to await his ending, in listless weariness. He never receives credit for an original idea, because his advances toward it call up the same thought in the mind of his hearers, and when formally presented it has lost all novelty, and seems to be trite.

The same study that will impart the power of condensation in writing will do it in speech, for it can only be obtained in either by earnest, persevering effort. Frequently forecast what to say, and drive it into the smallest possible number of vivid, expressive words; then, without memorizing the language, reproduce the same thought briefly as 110possible in the hurry of speech. It may be less compact than the studied production, but if so, let the effort be repeated with the knowledge of where the defect is, and this continued until it can be cast into bold, well-defined outlines at a single impulse. This process, often repeated, will give the ability to condense, but in order to exercise it successfully another quality is needed. We must be able to resist the seduction of fine language. No sentence should be introduced because it glitters or sparkles, for a single unnecessary word that requires others to explain its use, may damage a whole sermon. Let the best words be chosen with reference to beauty and impressiveness as well as strict appropriateness, but the latter must never be sacrificed. The danger of showy language in speech is greater than in a written composition, for if the writer be drawn too far away, he can go back and begin again, while the speaker has only one trial. If beauties lie in his way all the better, but he must never leave his path to search for them.

Bishop Simpson’s lecture on “The Future of our Country,” was a model of compactness. Every gaudy ornament was discarded, and short, simple sentences conveyed ideas that would have furnished a florid speaker with inexhaustible material. The whole discourse was radiant with true beauty—the beauty of thought shining through the drapery of words, and each idea, unweakened by any pause of expectation, struck the mind as new truth, or the echo of what was felt, but never so well expressed before.

We have seen directions for “expanding thought,” and have heard young speakers admire the ease and skill with which it was done. But thoughts are not like medicines which require dilution in order to be more certain in their effects, and more readily taken. It is far better to give the essence of an idea, and go on to something else. If thoughts are too few, it is more profitable to dig and delve for others, than to attenuate and stretch what we have. We need deep, burning, throbbing conceptions that will live without artificial aid.

111A similar error exists in regard to the kind of language best adapted to oratory. High-sounding epithets and latinized words are sometimes supposed to be the proper dress of eloquence. These might give an impression of our learning or wisdom to an ignorant audience, but could not strike the chords of living sympathy that link all hearts together. Language is only available as a medium, so far as hearer and speaker understand it in common. If we use a term the congregation have seldom heard, even if they can arrive at its meaning, it will lose all its force whilst they are striving to understand it. But one of the homely Saxon words that dwell on the lips of the people, will unlade its meaning in the heart as soon as its sound strikes the ear. For while uncommon words erect a barrier around thought, familiar ones are perhaps not noticed at all, leaving the feeling to strike directly to its mark.

The only reason why Saxon derivatives are so powerful, is because they are usually the words of every-day life. But the test of usefulness is not in etymology. If terms of Latin or French origin have passed into the life of the people, they will serve the highest purpose of the orator. Of coarse, all debased and slang words should be rejected. We do not plead for “the familiarity that breeds contempt.” The two great requisites in the use of words are, that they should exactly express our idea, and be familiar to the audience. Melody and association should not be despised, but they are secondary.

Every sermon should have strong points upon which especial reliance is placed. A general has his choice battalions reserved to pierce the enemy’s line at the decisive moment, and win the battle. It is important to know how to place these reserved thoughts, that all their weight may be felt.

A crisis occurs in nearly every sermon—a moment when a strong argument or a fervent appeal will produce the result intended, or when failure becomes inevitable—just as a vigorous charge, or the arrival of reinforcements, will turn the 112scale of battle, when the combatants grow weary and dispirited. The speaker, knowing what his object is, should so dispose his forces as to drive steadily toward it, and when within reach, put forth all his power in one mighty effort, achieving the result for which the whole speech was intended. If neglected, such chances seldom return, and an hour’s talk may fail to accomplish as much as one good burning sentence thrown in at the right time. This should be foreseen, and the idea, which we know to be the key of our discourse, carefully prepared—in thought, not word.

Quotations, either in prose or poetry, may be often used to good advantage, but should be short, appropriate and secondary. The grand effect of an extempore discourse must not depend on a borrowed passage, or its character will be changed, and its originality lost.

We have all along taken it for granted that deep thought underlies the whole discourse. Without this, a sermon or any serious address deserves no success. Under some circumstances nothing is expected but sound to tickle the ear. This is play, while the eloquence of the pulpit is solemn work. The very fact that the speaker has a solid and worthy foundation, gives him confidence. He knows that if his words are not ringing music, he will still have a claim on the attention of his auditors.

It is not necessary that our thoughts should extend far beyond the depths of the common mind, for the most weighty truths lie nearest to the surface, and within the reach of all. But most men do not dwell long enough on one subject to understand even its obvious features, and when these are fully mastered and presented in striking form, it is like a new revelation. A good illustration of this is found in the sublimity that Kitto imparts to the journeyings of the Israelites. Very few new facts are stated, but all are so arranged and vivified by a thoughtful mind, that the subject grows into new meaning. Let the preacher, by speaking extempore, save his time for investigation and study, and his sermons will soon have a charm beyond any jingling combination of words.

113Is the minister, as he stands before a congregation with their eyes fixed upon him, to expect them to be overwhelmed by his eloquence? Such a result is possible, but is seldom attained, especially when sought for. If persons attempt what is beyond their power, the only result will be to render themselves ridiculous. But good sense and solid usefulness are within the reach of all. Any man who studies a subject till he knows more about it than others do, can interest them in a fireside explanation, if they care for the matter at all. He communicates his facts in a plain style and they understand him. Many persons will sit delighted till midnight to hear a man converse, but will go to sleep if he address them half an hour in public. In the first case he talks, and is simple and unaffected; in the other he speaks, and uses a style stiffened up for the occasion. When Henry Clay was asked how he became so eloquent, he said he knew nothing about it; when he commenced an address he had only the desire to speak what he had prepared (not committed), and adhered to this until he was enwrapped in his subject and carried away, he knew not how. This is a characteristic of the modern, as opposed to the ancient, school of eloquence. The latter memorized, while our greatest speakers only arrange, and speak in a plain, business style, until hurried by the passion of the moment into bolder flights. If this does not happen, they still give a good and instructive speech.

These few considerations may be of use when the speaker stands in the pulpit, but he must rely on his own tact for the management of details. Closely observing the condition of the audience, taking advantage of every favoring circumstance, he moves steadily towards his object. With an unobstructed road before him, which he has traveled in thought until it is familiar, he will advance with ease and certainty. As he gazes into the intent faces around, new ideas arise, and, if fitting, are woven into what was previously prepared, often with thrilling effect. Each emotion kindled by sympathy will embody itself in words that touch 114the heart as nothing prepared could do, and each moment his own conviction sinks deeper in the hearts of his hearers.

There are three principal ways of concluding a sermon. The first, and most graceful, is to condense a clear view of the whole argument, and leave the audience with the comprehensive impression thus made. This is admirably adapted to discourses the principal object of which is to convince the understanding. To throw the whole sweep of the argument, every point of which has been enforced, into a few telling, easily remembered sentences, will go far to make the impression permanent.

The old plan of closing with an exhortation, is perhaps the most generally beneficial. An application is the same thing in substance, only a little less pungent and personal. In it the whole sermon is made to bear on the duty of the moment. It should be closely connected with what went before; for a general exhortation, fitting the end of every sermon, cannot well apply to any. All the sermon should be gathered up, as it were, and hurled as a solid mass into the hearts and consciences of those whom we wish to affect, thus making it a real “thrust,” of which the exhortation is the barbed point. It should be short, and no new matter introduced at the time the audience are expecting the end.

The third method is to break off when the last item is finished. If the lines of the argument are few and simple, or so strong that they cannot fail to be remembered, there is no need to recapitulate them. And if the exhortation has kept pace with the progress of the sermon, there is no place for it at the close. If both these coincide, a formal conclusion would be a superfluity. It is only necessary to finish the development of the plan, care being taken that the last idea discussed shall be one of dignity and importance. This is simply stopping when done, and is certainly an easy method of closing, though, in practice, too often neglected.

When we have concluded a fervent discourse, especially if successful, there comes a feeling of inexpressible relief. For the burden of a speech accumulates on the mind, from the time the subject is chosen, until it grows almost intolerable. When we begin to speak all our powers are called into play, and exerted to the limit of their capacity. The excitement of the conflict hurries us on, and although we may not realize the gigantic exertions we put forth, yet when we pause, with the victory won, the sense of relief and security is exceedingly delightful. Yet we must not indulge too deeply in the self-gratulation so natural at such a moment. If we have conquered, it has been in God’s name, not our own, and the first thing to be done is to offer him thanks for our preservation. This is but the complement of the prayers made at the beginning of the service, for if we ask help with fear and trembling, before the real perils of speech begin, it would be very wrong, in the hour of triumph, to cease to remember the arm upon which we leaned. But by pouring out our thankfulness to God, we are at the same time preserved from pride and undue exaltation, and encouraged to depend upon Him more fully the next time we speak.

If the effort has been an earnest one, both mind and body need rest. There are speakers who profess to feel no fatigue after an hour’s labor, but these seldom occupy a place in the first class. If the soul has really been engaged, and all the 116powers of mind and body bent to the accomplishment of a great object, relaxation must follow, and often a sense of utter prostration. It is well, if possible, to abandon ones-self to the luxury of rest—that utter repose so sweet after severe labor. Even social intercourse should be avoided. A short sleep, even if only for a few minutes, will afford great relief, and it is much to be regretted that circumstances so often interfere with the enjoyment of such a luxury. After the morning service, especially if the minister has to preach again in the evening, all labor, even in the Sabbath-school, should be avoided, although, before preaching, such toil will only form a grateful introduction to the duties of the day. No practice is more pernicious than that of inviting the minister to meet company, at dinner-parties or elsewhere, immediately after service. This is objectionable for two reasons; the conversation at such parties seldom accords with the sanctity of the Sabbath, and if unexceptionable in this respect, a continued tax is made upon the already exhausted brain—a tax greater during such a state of relaxation and languor, than ten-fold the labor would be at another period. Let the preacher, when he can, retire to the privacy of his own home, and there enjoy the freedom of untrammelled rest.

It is well to ponder closely the lessons derived from each new experience in speaking. The minister can never exactly measure his own success, and may often lament as a failure that effort which has accomplished great good. He has in his mind an ideal of excellence by which he estimates his sermons. If this be placed very low, he may succeed in coming up to it, or even pass beyond it, without accomplishing anything worthy of praise. But in such a case he is apt to be well satisfied with the result. And often the sermons with which we are least pleased, are really the best. For in the mightiest efforts of mind the standard is placed very high—sometimes beyond the limit of possible attainment, and the speaker works with his eye fixed upon the summit, and often, after all his exertions, sees it shining above him 117still, and closes with the conviction that his ideas are but half expressed. He feels mortified that there should be such difference between conception and execution. But his hearers, who have been led over untrodden fields of thought, know nothing of the heights still above the orator’s head, and are filled with enthusiasm, or have received new impulses to good. This is the reason why we are least able to judge of the success of sermons that have been long meditated, and are thoroughly prepared. The subject expands as we study it, and its outlines become grander and vaster, until they pass beyond our power of representation. And each separate thought that is mastered also becomes familiar, and is not valued at its full worth by the speaker. If he had begun to speak without thought, intending to give only the easy and common views of his subject, all would have been fresh to him, and if a striking idea presented itself, its novelty would have enhanced its appreciation. This is no reason against diligent preparation, but rather a strong argument in favor of it. It should only stimulate us to improve our powers of expression as well as of conception.

But with all these sources of uncertainty in our judgment of our own productions, we should not be indifferent to our perceptions of success or failure. In the greater number of instances will be correct, and we can very frequently discover the cause of either, and use this knowledge to future profit.

Even if we imagine our failure to be extreme, we have no need to feel unduly discouraged. God can, and does, often work with the feeblest instruments, and the sermon we despise may accomplish its purpose. The writer preached one evening when very weary, and almost unprepared. From first to last a painful effort was required to find anything to say, and to prevent utter failure the intended plan had to be abandoned, and new, detached thoughts thrown in as they could be found. And yet that discourse, which was scarcely worthy of the name, elicited warmer approval, and apparently accomplished more good, than any one from the 118same preacher ever given at that point. But such instances should never lead us to neglect all the preparation in our power, for usually when failure springs from a real defect, the verdict of the people will coincide with our own.

However we may judge of our success it is not wise to ask any of our hearers for their opinion. We may observe any indications of the effect produced, and, if the criticisms of others are offered spontaneously, it is not necessary to repulse them, especially if they are marked by a spirit of candor and good will; but all seeking for commendation is debasing. It is sweet to hear our sermons praised, and most of men can endure an amount of flattery addressed to themselves, that would be disgusting if applied to others; but if we indulge this disposition it will become ungovernable, and expose us to well-deserved ridicule. It is pitiable to see a man who is mighty in word and thought, who wields the vast powers of eloquence, stooping to beg crusts of indiscriminate praise from his hearers. Nothing contributes more to destroy our influence, and make our audience believe that we are merely actors, unaffected by the sublime truths we declare.

It is well to think over our sermons after they have been preached, and if any defect appear, amend it in the plan, and add all the new ideas that may have been suggested during speech. This prepares us to preach still better when we have occasion to use the same plan a second time.

Some ministers are accustomed to write their sermons after delivery. This may do well, especially when the theme is of great importance, but in general, it is questionable whether the advantage is great enough to warrant the expenditure of so much time.

But to review and correct a verbatim report of our sermons would be far more profitable. If some short-hand writer—a member of our family, or any other who is willing to take so much trouble—will preserve our words for us, a revisal of them on Monday would be of immense benefit. The offensiveness of pet phrases, which we might otherwise 119be unconscious of for years, would be detected at once. Faults of expression, and especially the profuseness of words, in which extempore speakers are apt to indulge, would be forced upon our notice; and if any really valuable ideas occurred, they could be preserved. There would be little use in writing the sermon over in full, for we would commonly find that it might be reduced to one-third or one-fourth its bulk without material injury. The habitual condensation of our sermons after delivery, would teach us to express our thoughts compactly even in speech.

The only difficulty in applying this capital means of improvement, is the small number of persons who can write short-hand with sufficient rapidity—a difficulty that may be less in the future than it has been in the past, and can now be obviated by the minister’s wife or daughters, who may have sufficient perseverance and devotion to master the laborious, but precious art for his sake.

PART III. MISCELLANEOUS ADDRESSES. — CHAPTER I. INSTRUCTIVE ADDRESS. — CHAPTER II. MISCELLANEOUS ADDRESS—LEGAL—DELIBERATE—POPULAR—CONTROVERSIAL.

We will give only a brief consideration to the various fields of oratory outside the pulpit, because the greater number of principles already laid down can be applied, with slight modifications, to any kind of speech. The different varieties of secular address may be divided as follows:

We apply the first term to all oral teaching, more connected than question and answer, and to all lectures that have instruction for their primary object. This species of discourse differs from the sermon in the absence of persuasion, rather than in its positive character. The lecturer should thoroughly understand the topic he attempts to unfold, and place it in the clearest possible light. Much illustration is needed, for the subject is usually a novel one to the greater portion of the audience, and can be best explained by comparison with familiar objects. It should have its strong central points, which can be easily remembered, and around which the minor parts of the discourse may be grouped, for if the whole consist of isolated facts poured 124forth without generalization or arrangement, no distinct impression will be left.

Appeals to passion and emotion are less necessary in lectures than in most other kinds of speech. Yet so closely are heart and intellect connected, that we can arouse attention, and secure a more durable result, if the facts we narrate are linked with the experiences and emotions of life.

The practice of writing is even more prevalent when applied to lectures than to sermons, and the reasons urged in its favor have more plausibility. As the lecturer does not aim to move his hearers to immediate action, the advantages of direct address are less required. Still he wishes to interest them, and it may be questioned whether this can, in any case, be so well accomplished from manuscript. But it is urged that in a scientific lecture there is often too great a number of detached facts to be easily remembered. This may be true, but it suggests another important question: if they cannot be recalled by the speaker who has reviewed them again and again for days together, how can it be expected that those who only hear them read over once, will retain any distinct impression? A clearer generalization of the whole discourse, and a proper arrangement of each fact under the principle which it illustrates, would go far to obviate both difficulties. Yet, in the use of statistics or other items, about which the speaker wishes to be precise, though he may only care to give the audience a general conception of them, notes will be a great relief to the memory, and the statement of principles deduced can be still made in direct address.

After a man has become so famous that each word he utters will be listened to with profound attention, because it comes from him, he may write safely. This is especially the case with those who have become authorities in their own departments of knowledge. What they say is received rather as a conclusion to argument, than as an assertion to be weighed, and the calm, deliberate reading of such final statements has all needed impressiveness. But if we have not 125attained this position, we had better employ every legitimate means to interest our audiences.

It is often claimed by the advocates of reading, that a literary lecture must be written to secure the polish and smoothness needful in the treatment of such themes. It will not do, say they, to give, in our words and manner, an illustration of the absence of the very qualities we praise. But surely men can speak on a subject they understand in good grammar and fitting language, without having first placed each word on paper! And if they attempt much beyond this they lead the mind of the hearer from the subject to a consideration of the skill of the lecturer. We are ready to grant that compositions should be read, not spoken, when ever they cease to instruct about something else, and become an exhibition in themselves. A poet is right in reading his poem; and even in prose, if we wish to call attention to our melodious words, and our skill in literary composition, instead of the subject we have nominally taken, it will be well to write. But the resulting composition will not be a lecture.

The field for instructive lectures is constantly enlarging. In former times they were monopolized by university professors, and very few persons sought to teach the people. But this has changed. There are now many more schools where courses of lectures are given on various topics, and every town of any pretension has its annual lecture course. Even these are not sufficient to meet the increasing demand, and, as every community cannot pay Beecher or Gough from one to five hundred dollars for an evening’s entertainment, there is abundant scope for humbler talent. Strolling lecturers, without character or knowledge, reap a rich harvest from the credulity of the people. Even the noble science of phrenology is often disgraced by quacks, who perambulate the country and pretend to explain its mysteries—sometimes telling character and fortunes at the same time. So far has this prostitution of talent and opportunity gone, that the village lecturer is often placed in a category with circus 126clowns and negro minstrels. But this should not be, and no class could do more to prevent it than the clergy. If they would each prepare a lecture or two upon some important subject they have mastered, they could extend their usefulness, and teach others besides their own flocks.

Lecturers are becoming more numerous and popular. New sciences and arts are continually springing into being, and there is no way that a knowledge of them can be so readily diffused among the masses of the people, as by public addresses upon them. Even the oldest of the sciences—Astronomy—has been brought to the knowledge of thousands who otherwise would have remained in ignorance of its mysteries. It was thus that the lamented General O. M. Mitchel succeeded in awakening public interest, and in securing funds for the erection of his observatory at Cincinnati.

Benefit lectures are very common. In these the services of the lecturer are given gratis, or for a nominal compensation, and persons are induced to purchase tickets that some good cause may be benefited by the proceeds. This is the most pleasant of compromises, and is surely better than fairs, gift drawings, etc., although when the patronage of the public is thus secured for a lecture that has no real merit, the benefit is more questionable.

The most important point in a lecture is that the subject be thoroughly understood, and so arranged that there may be no difficulty in grasping the whole thought. Vivacity and life will prevent the audience from growing weary; wit, if it be true and delicate, will add to the interest, and has a far larger legitimate sphere than in a sermon. Ornaments, too, may abound, provided they do not call attention away from the subject, or weaken the force of expression. The plan of a lecture may be constructed in a manner similar to that of a sermon, as the end in view is not very different. If this be well arranged, and all the principles, facts and illustrations be properly placed, no need of writing will be felt.

The speech adapted to the bench and bar presents some peculiar features. The lawyer deals with facts and living issues. He works for immediate results, and therefore uses the means best adapted to secure them. The use of manuscript, which increases in proportion as we remove from the sphere of passion, finds no place when life and property are at stake. The lawyer who would read his appeal to the jury in an exciting case, would have few others to make. At the bar the penalty for inefficiency is so rapid and certain, that every nerve is strained to avoid it. To argue with a lawyer against the use of written discourses, would be like proving the advantage of commerce to an Englishman. His danger lies in the opposite direction—that of caring too little for polish, and of making the verdict of the jury his only aim.

A lawyer should never contend for what he believes to be wrong. Yet the common estimate of the morality of attorneys is not based on fact. They may have greater temptations than some others, and many of them may fall, but another reason than this accounts for the grave imputations cast on them. In every suit, at least one party must be disappointed, and it is natural that, in his bitterness, he should throw discredit on all the agencies by which his hopes were destroyed. But this is most frequently groundless. The lawyer may be counsel for a man whom he knows to be in the wrong, but he ought never to take his stand on 128a false position. He may show any weakness in his adversary’s case, and see that all the provisions of the law are faithfully complied with, but must not endeavor to distort the truth. An adherence to this determination will soon give his words a power and influence that will more than counterbalance all disadvantages. Let him seek for the strong points in his own case, and then throw them into the simplest and boldest shape, not forgetting the importance of appealing to the heart, as well as head, of judge and jury.

The judge differs from the advocate in having both sides of the case to present, and in seeking truth rather than victory. As he stands upon the law, and unfolds its dictates, which are obeyed as soon as known, he has no need to appeal to passion, and can give his words with all calmness and certainty.

Under the most absolute monarchy there are always some things that men are left to settle according to their own pleasure, and when a number of persons have equal interest and authority this can only be done by discussion. In our own land the people bear rule, and the field of deliberation is almost infinitely widened. City councils, State and national legislatures, the governing societies of churches, parties, companies, and all organizations, have more or less of power to be exercised. If this were vested in a single will, silent pondering would determine each question, but in assemblies these must be decided by discussion, argument and vote.^[1]

There is one general peculiarity that marks the speeches addressed to such a body; their main object is to give information. All are about to act, and are supposed to be diligently looking for the best course to be taken. This secures an interest in everything that really throws new light on the subject, while it often renders such an assemblage intolerant of mere declamation. In representative bodies there is also constant reference to the opinions and wishes of those for whom they act.

129Such speeches are frequently intended to be read beyond the bounds of the audience where they are delivered, and for this reason are often elaborately prepared, and read at first. If they do truly give information, either in reference to principles or facts, they suffer from this less than any other class of addresses. They may be dry and unattractive in form, but if each concerned, feels that he is obtaining new facts for guidance, he will listen with patience. Yet, even then, a greater impression would be produced if the same accuracy and sureness of statement were embodied in spoken words. Let there first, be broad, statesmanlike views, a clear comprehension of the effects of measures, and perfect confidence in what we advocate, and then all the graces of speech may be added with the certainty that their effect will be that always produced by true eloquence.

A popular address differs from a lecture in having an element of persuasion in it. In fact, this is its principal characteristic. When we desire to incline the hearts of the people to some favorite cause, we assemble them together, and labor by all the arguments we can command, to induce them to adopt our views and enter on the course we recommend. Energy and earnestness are the qualities most uniformly successful. The people care little for the subtile niceties of speech, but they require that the man who addresses them should believe what he says, and feel the power of his own reasoning. A deep, strong, unfaltering conviction is always an element of strength.

Many speakers think it an advantage to flatter the prejudices of the people, but they are mistaken. Temporary applause may be won, but second thoughts are apt to detect the lurking insincerity, even if they do not overthrow the prejudice itself If the speaker be really under the influence of the same misconception as the audience, this is a different matter, for hearty devotion, even to the wrong, is contagious. But calm reasoning and truth are always best. These gave Abraham Lincoln the superiority over Stephen A. Douglas, making him more effective with the people than the latter 130was, not withstanding his fervid eloquence. The one appealed to the reason of the people, the other to passion.

Humor has a place in the popular address not second to any other quality. A telling anecdote, or a good illustration (the homelier the better, if it be not coarse), will arrest attention and dwell longer on the memory, than the strongest argument.

Controversial oratory partakes of the nature of a battle, but should be something more than strife for victory. There is little danger of languid attention in this species of address, for opposition arouses both speaker and hearer.

The golden rule in all controversies, is to be certain of a solid basis of fact, and follow the guidance of true principles. Then we deserve success. But fair means only should be employed. It is so hard to see an adversary triumph even, when convinced of the correctness of his position, that we can scarcely forbear employing every artifice to prevent such a result. But we should never misrepresent our opponent. Even if he has been unfortunate in his explanations, and leaves the way open for a natural misconception, we should use our best efforts to understand what he really means, and give him the credit of that. We must also allow his reasoning its due force. No just argument ought ever to be weakened. Let us bring forward our views, and, if possible, show that they are truer and more firmly based than his. And if we see that this cannot be done, there is only one manly course left—to surrender at discretion. If we cannot maintain our views by clear proof, we should abandon them, and seek others that need no questionable support.

PART IV. EMINENT EXTEMPORE SPEAKERS. — EMINENT SPEAKERS. — USE OF EXAMPLES. — EARLY PREACHING IN THE CHURCH. — AUGUSTINE. — LUTHER. — LORD CHATHAM. — WILLIAM PITT. — EDMUND BURKE. — MIRABEAU. — PATRICK HENRY. — GEORGE WHITEFIELD. — JOHN WESLEY. — SIDNEY SMITH. — F. W. ROBERTSON. — HENRY CLAY. — HENRY B. BASCOM. — JOHN SUMMERFIELD. — C. H. SPURGEON. — HENRY WARD BEECHER. — ANNA E. DICKINSON. — JOHN A. BINGHAM. — WILLIAM E. GLADSTONE. — MATTHEW SIMPSON. — WENDELL PHILLIPS. — JOHN P. DURBIN. — NEWMAN HALL.

Notwithstanding the popularity of unwritten speech, and the innumerable arguments in its favor, there is an impression in some quarters that the very highest excellence cannot be attained without the previous use of the pen. It may be shown that it is more natural to find the words in which our thoughts are clothed at the moment of expression; that a stronger and better frame-work of thought can be constructed, if the mind, in preparing for speech, is occupied with that alone; that the speaker and hearer may thus be brought into closer union; that this, in short, is the order of nature, which leaves the solid frame-work of the tree standing through many winters, but each spring bestows its graceful robe of leaves upon that which was prepared to receive it. But this is not enough to produce lasting conviction. It is still maintained, almost with obstinacy, that in the highest fields of oratory, words must be previously chosen, fitted together, and polished.

This nearly every speech-writer proves from his own experience. The efforts that have afforded him most satisfaction were those in which nothing had been left to the chance of the moment. But it is easy to see how even experience may mislead in this particular. We can judge the comparative merits of another in his different modes of address with some approach to accuracy, for our mental state—that of listeners—continues the same under them all. But it is different when we judge ourselves. When we extemporize, our best expressions 134fade from the mind after they have been given forth, and can only be recalled by a strong effort. On the other hand, when we have wrought our language slowly, and lingered over each sentence, we see all the beauty it contains, and begin to admire our own production. If we see anything faulty, instead of lamenting it, as we would an unfortunate, spoken sentence, we change it, and take credit for the keenness of our critical taste. Is it wonderful that when we come before an audience with an address made as nearly perfect as we can construct it in every line, and the whole clearly written, or firmly engraved on the memory, and then repeat it, with a full appreciation of each beauty as we pass along, that we consider it to be of far higher merit than the impassioned torrent poured forth on another occasion, when we scarcely knew that we were using words at all? If the people do not seem to appreciate it, their want of taste and culture affords a ready excuse for them, even if the speaker is not too much occupied with his own eloquence to notice them at all. He is always ready, too, with the examples of Massillon and Bossuet, or of Chalmers, to prove that it was thus the most powerful orators spoke.

We do not deny that great effects may be produced, under certain circumstances, by committed words. The fact that many actors have won great fame by repeating the words of others, proves how much may be done in this direction. It is but reasonable, that if some gifted minds can thrill an audience to tears, and rouse every feeling to its highest bent by merely copying others, that those who, in addition to this ability, possess the power of framing their own thoughts in suitable words, may accomplish as much. John B. Gough is an instance of the power that may be wielded in this manner. But such men cannot occupy the highest position in the temple of fame. They are but actors. When they speak they will be listened to with eagerness and pleasure, as great performers always are, but it will be as performers rather than as authorities. They have placed themselves on a level with those who deal in unreal things, and there 135they must be content to remain. Doubtless it is more noble to speak the sentiments and feelings that we once possessed, in the language adapted to that time, than to deal in those belonging to another person, but the resemblance between the two is very close, and the people feel it so acutely that they make no discrimination.

But we maintain that even in momentary effect—the quality which is supposed to belong peculiarly to the powerful declamation of prepared language—extempore speakers have passed beyond all others; while in power of thought and lasting influence, there can be no comparison. There is no single quality of speech that cannot be reached as well without writing as with it, while perpetual readiness, vast and profound knowledge (which writing extensively leaves no time to acquire), and weight and authority with the people, belong almost exclusively to the extemporizer.

These assertions may seem bold to many, but we are prepared to substantiate them. In the preceding pages we have aimed to show how this species of address may be acquired, and improved to an almost unlimited degree. The ideal thus sketched is not an impossible or imaginary one. It has often been attained, and for the encouragement of those who may be disposed to throw away their manuscripts, and trust to the method of nature, the following examples are selected. These are chosen because of their eminence, and also because of the wide variety of qualities displayed in their eloquence. Many more might be given, but these are sufficient for our purpose, which is to show that in every department of speech the highest eloquence that ever flowed from the lips of men has clothed itself in unpremeditated words.

In these sketches we, of course, make no pretension to originality, but have compiled what was adapted to our purpose from every available source. And as the matter so obtained has been frequently abridged, and two or three different accounts woven together, it has sometimes been impossible to give full credit. We are under especial obligation to 136the “New American Cyclopedia,” Mosheim’s Church History, Stevens’s History of Methodism, Harsha’s “Orators and Statesmen,” “Kidder’s Homiletics,” with the current biographies of the speakers treated of.

Much of the oratory of antiquity was recited. This has been used as an argument to prove the comparative inferiority of that speech which is the offspring of the moment, forgetting the great difference between ancient and modern life—a difference arising from the greater diversity of the latter, and the nobler aims to which it gives birth. The typical Grecian oration is as much a work of art as a statue. It was made to be admired, and if, by the beauty of its arrangement, the melody of its language, and the elegance of its delivery, this object was achieved, the orator was satisfied. It was so, to a less degree, in the classic age of Rome. The form of the oration was of greater importance than its matter, and it was judged that this would be best perfected by the use of the pen, and of the memory. Yet the practice of antiquity on this point was far from uniform. Some of the noblest orators spoke extempore, and have less fame than those who adopted the opposite plan, only because at that time the art of reporting was too imperfect to preserve their eloquence. The effect they produced remains, and from it we obtain a faint view of their greatness. Pericles spoke without previous writing, and the sway his speech established over his countrymen was more undisputed than that of Demosthenes. The latter had an assemblage of talents that, with his tireless industry, would have made him eminent in any mode of address that he might have adopted; but even he did not recite exclusively.

The great rival of Cicero, Hortensius, whose wonderful power excited the emulation of the former, spoke from the impulse of the moment, as did many of the more eminent of the Roman orators. Cicero was a man of tireless energy. He applied himself to the study and practice of eloquence with a singleness of aim, and a concentration of purpose that may well command our admiration. He accumulated vast 137stores of knowledge, perfected his logic, and improved his voice until it became music, and brought all the resources of a mighty mind to bear on oratory. It is not wonderful that he was listened to with profound attention, while he recited what he had previously composed. But some of his most brilliant passages were extemporaneous. The outburst that overwhelmed Catiline when he unexpectedly appeared in the senate, was coined, at white heat, by the passion of the moment.

The reason why so many of the ancients committed their speeches, was because they could not be preserved otherwise, unless the orator could remember and write down what he had said. Every unwritten speech perished, and left nothing but a dim memory of the results it had produced. This is the reason why the extempore speakers of the ancient world are less known than the reciters. But the art of short-hand has effected a revolution in this particular, and the most impassioned speeches are now photographed for the admiration of future generations. The man who wishes his speech preserved is no longer compelled to write it.

We may be sure that the preaching of Christ and the Apostles was without notes. It seems scarcely less than profanation to picture even the latter as reading from a previously prepared manuscript, after they had been promised the help of the Spirit in the hour when help was needed; and it is inconceivable that the Saviour should have taken any other mode of imparting His wisdom to men, than that of direct address. Paul deprecated the eloquence of mere words, although the sketch of his sermon on Mars’ Hill, with other addresses, shows that he did not neglect the eloquence of thought, and the strength of orderly, logical arrangement. We have no direct evidence of the manner of preaching in the first century, but from all intimations we are led to conclude that sermons were composed without the 138use of the pen, and consisted of easy, familiar scripture expositions and deductions of moral lessons. Origen, the most celebrated divine of the third century, preached without manuscript, and Eusebius says of him:

“Then, as was to be expected, our religion spreading more and more, and our brethren beginning to converse more freely with all, Origen, who they say was now more than sixty years of age, and who, from long practice, had acquired great facility in discoursing, permitted his discourses to be taken down by ready writers, a thing which he had never allowed before.”

This shows not only that he had been accustomed to preach extempore, but that he would not permit the sketches of his sermons which could be made by the imperfect reporting of that day, to be published until late in life. This would be very natural, when unstudied explanation was the main object of the address, but very unnatural if the sermon had been written according to the rules of rhetorical composition. In the sermons of Chrysostom there are many passages which could not, from their nature, have been precomposed, and these are among the most brilliant of all. But Augustine, who flourished in the fourth century, affords us a still more conclusive proof of the power of the natural mode of address.

The father of this great man was a pagan, but his mother was a Christian. She was a most remarkable woman, and from her he doubtless inherited some of the strongest elements of his character. Her prayers for his conversion were almost continual, but for many years produced no apparent result. He plunged into many excesses, and lived a most irregular life, but from this he was aroused by the death of his father, and by the study of philosophy. For a time the latter seemed to satisfy his ardent mind, but soon he saw its insufficiency, became an earnest searcher for truth, and explored 139the writings of the sages of antiquity without being able to find anything on which he could rest. The problems of life pressed upon him with a terrible weight, and he was too profound a thinker to be satisfied with any superficial explanation. The doctrine of the ancient Persians—that of the two antagonistic principles of good and evil in the world—for a while charmed his imagination, but its influence over him soon passed away. During all this time he was rising in fame as a teacher of rhetoric and eloquence, and had established a school in Rome which became widely celebrated.

His reputation as a teacher caused him to be summoned to Milan, where the Emperor then was. The great preacher, Ambrose, then in the zenith of his power, officiated in that city. Augustine heard him, and felt that his doubts were answered. But it required a terrible struggle before he could yield, and it was only after he had passed the whole series of Christian doctrines in review, and tested them by all his mighty power of argument, that he at last reposed in the truth. The joy of his good mother can scarcely be conceived at this answer to her unceasing prayer, and she soon passed away triumphantly. He spent a short period in seclusion and profound meditation, was then baptized, and four years after began to preach.

The success of Augustine was as great in preaching as it had been in teaching, and he was promoted to the office of Bishop. His power was soon felt all over the Christian world. He at once entered on a course of labor like that of Whitefield and Wesley, but still more varied. He preached once every day, and sometimes twice; visited the sick and poor with great assiduity; governed his diocese wisely; was the Christian champion against almost innumerable forms of heresy all over the world; composed some most beautiful hymns; wrote extensive commentaries that are still valued; kept up a vast correspondence with emperors, kings, and church dignitaries everywhere; and indited works of theology, literature, criticism, and philosophy in immense profusion. Some of these will live as long as the language 140in which they are written is known. For thirty-five years he remained at his post, and died at last, while his city was beleagured by a barbarian army, in time to escape witnessing the ruin that burst on the flock he had so long loved and served.

The power of Augustine as a preacher can scarcely be overrated. Everywhere the people flocked to hear him, and the most enduring fruits followed his ministry. His sermons were not calculated simply to win admiration for the preacher, but pointed to the holier life, and led men to love and strive after it. He was the real founder of what is known at the present day as Calvinism, and by his vast power made it the prevailing doctrine of the church for centuries after his death. There can be no question about his sincerity and earnestness, and just as little regarding the influence of his solemn eloquence. He quieted tumults, changed the opinions of whole towns, and wielded assemblies at his will. He left a large number of sermons in a fragmentary condition, but fully justifying all that his contemporaries have written of him.

It is not possible that such a man should have read or recited his discourses. To have done so would have left him no time for such grand works as the “Confessions,” “City of God,” and others too numerous to mention, which will endure while the world stands. But he has not left us in doubt as to his mode of preaching. He enjoins the “Christian teacher” to make his hearers comprehend what he says, “to read in the eyes and countenances of his auditors whether they understand him or not, and to repeat the same thing by giving it different terms, till he perceives that it is understood, an advantage which those cannot have who, by a servile dependence on their memories, learn their sermons by heart, and repeat them as so many lessons. Let not the preacher become the servant of words; rather let words be servants to the preacher.” In his charity, however, he does allow of reciting under certain circumstances. “Those who are destitute of invention, but can 141speak well, provided they select well written discussions of another man and commit them to memory for the instruction of their hearers, will not do badly if they take this course.”

The name of Luther is so well known that it will not be necessary to give more than a very brief sketch of his wonderful life. The peasant, who was raised by his virtues to more than kingly power, and to be the leader of the greatest religious movement of modern times, cannot be a stranger to the world. Luther was bred in the midst of poverty and almost of want. As he grew older, his father, who was a kind-hearted, though stern man, began to rise in the world, and found means to send him to school. The patronage of a wealthy lady named Cotta, was also of great benefit to him. He was distinguished very early for quickness and profundity of intellect, and the highest hopes were formed of him. But in the midst of flattering prospects, he was deeply convicted of sin, and terrified concerning his spiritual state. After he had spent a long time in mental struggles, full of agony, he resolved to become a monk, as the surest way of allaying all doubt, and obtaining the spiritual rest for which he longed. His father never forgave this step, until his son stood in direct opposition to the power of Rome. But the ardent heart of Luther could not find peace in the dull routine of a convent life, and every spiritual trial was redoubled. At last, while he was reading in an old copy of the Bible, which he had found in the library of the convent, the great doctrine of justification by faith dawned upon him with all the freshness of a new revelation. He at once began to teach the people the same blessed doctrine, with the most gratifying results. His preaching was marked by great power, and soon his sphere widened. He was made a doctor of divinity in the University of Wittenberg, and began to lecture on Paul’s Epistles, and the Psalms. He was still a devoted adherent of Rome, although he taught 142the students under his care to look to the Scriptures as the fountain of all authority. But the germs of the Reformation were already hid in his own mind, and it only required circumstances to bring them into vigorous life.

These were soon supplied. When a monk came to Wittenberg, selling pardons for every kind of sin, even that which was to be committed, Luther felt it his duty to warn the people against any dependence on such sources of forgiveness. The Pope took part with the monk in the strife that followed; and the contest went from one point to another, until the Pope hurled a decree of excommunication at Luther, which he burned, in the presence of his adherents, as a token of defiance and contempt. The reformation spread wonderfully, and although surrounded on every side by threatenings and enemies, the life of this great man was spared, and for years he exerted an influence in Germany not second to that of the Emperor himself. When he fell at last, in the midst of his labors, the people mourned for him as for a personal benefactor.

All through his life, Luther had the secret of reaching the hearts of the people in a wonderful manner. No other of the great men who abounded at that time possessed a tithe of his power in this respect. It has been said “that his words were half battles.” His discourses were not smooth or graceful, yet it was not for want of ability to secure these qualities, for he had great command of every style of language, and loved softer and more ornamented speech in others; but he was too much in earnest, with an empire, and the vastest hierarchy the world ever saw, arrayed against him, to stay to use them. Whenever he preached the people would flock together from great distances, and listen as to a prophet, while he unfolded the grand and simple plan of salvation in the plainest words. He had every element of a great preacher. His imagination was most vivid, and he did not fail to use it to the utmost. He could paint a scene in all the completeness of action before his hearers, and awaken their tears or smiles at his will. He used no manuscript, but 143spoke from the vast fulness of knowledge he possessed on every subject. His pen was employed as well as his voice. By it he not only produced a great number of books that advanced the cause of the Reformation almost as much as his spoken efforts, but by the combination of the two methods of expression, writing to meet the eye and speaking for the ear, he taught himself both accuracy and readiness, and was thus prepared for the part he was called upon to act. Added to these, were his strong emotions, and indomitable will, which gave him an energy that bore every thing before him. For beauty and grace in themselves he cared nothing, but when they came unbidden, as they often did, they were welcome. He rightly estimated his own character and work when he said “that he was rough, boisterous, stormy, and altogether warlike; born to fight innumerable devils and monsters, to remove stumps and stones, to cut down thistles and thorns, and to clear the wild woods.”

It may well be doubted whether the eloquence of this great and wonderful man did not surpass that of either Cicero or Demosthenes. It is certain that the effects he repeatedly produced have never been surpassed. And he had not to deal with a populace easily moved, although cultivated in some particulars, as they had; but his mightiest triumphs were won in the British Parliament, from an acute, critical, and often hostile assembly. His example, with that of his son, who was almost equally great, afford an irrefutable answer to those who doubt the capacity of unwritten speech to convey impressions as mighty as any ever produced by man.

He was born in 1708, and was educated at Oxford, quitting it without a degree, but with a brilliant reputation. Soon after he entered Parliament, and gained such power that he was shortly advanced to the office of Prime Minister. This was in the reign of George II. and at the opening of the Seven Years War, by which England won the province 144of Canada, and became the most powerful empire in the world. But when he took the reins of government it was far different. The armies of the nation had been beaten in every quarter, and the people were almost in despair. But he infused new spirit into them, and by his energy and farsighted combinations, won the most glorious series of triumphs that ever crowned the arms of England. His fame did not cease when he left the ministry, and, in America at least, he is best known for his friendly words to us during the revolutionary war. He opposed with all the strength of his wondrous eloquence the oppressive measures that provoked the colonists to revolution. Yet there was no element of fear or compromise in his disposition. He only opposed the ministry in their government of our country because he believed their measures to be unjust. But when, after seven years of defeat and disaster, the body of the nation became convinced that the Americans never could be conquered, and the proposition was made to recognize their independence, Chatham fought against the accomplishment of the separation with all his vigor. He made his last speech on this subject, and while the house was still under the solemn awe that followed his address, he was stricken down by apoplexy and borne home to die.

We have little upon which to base an estimate of this almost unequalled orator, save the effect he produced upon his contemporaries. Nothing has been preserved of his speeches, but a few passages that stamped themselves indelibly upon the minds of his hearers. Yet through his eloquence, backed by his strong will, he was for many years virtually dictator of England, and even when most alone, scarcely any one dared to meet him in debate.

Many curious instances are given of the uncontrolled ascendency he obtained over the House of Commons. His most celebrated rival was Murray, Earl of Mansfield, who had just been promoted to the office of Attorney-General, when the incident narrated below occurred. Chatham made a speech, really intended to overwhelm Murray, but on a 145totally different subject. Fox says “every word was Murray, yet so managed that neither he nor anybody else could take public notice of it or in any way reprehend him. I sat near Murray, who suffered for an hour. At its close he used an expression that at once became proverbial.” After the unhappy Attorney had writhed for a time, and endured the terrible, but indirect, satire of Chatham until endurance was scarcely possible any longer, the latter stopped, threw his piercing eyes around as if in search of something, then fixing their whole force on his victim, exclaimed, “I must now address a few words to Mr. Attorney; they shall be few, but they shall be daggers!” Murray was agitated; the look was continued, and the agitation became so uncontrollable as to be noticed by the whole house. “Felix trembles,” roared Chatham, in a voice of thunder, “he shall hear me some other day.” Murray was too completely stricken to attempt a reply.

On another occasion, having finished a speech, he walked out of the house with a slow step, being at the time an habitual invalid. There was a profound silence until he was passing through the door. Then a member started up, saying, “Mr. Speaker, I rise to reply to the right honorable gentleman.” Chatham caught the sound, turned back, and fixed his eye on the orator, who instantly sat down. He then walked slowly to his seat, repeating in Latin, as he hobbled along, the lines from Virgil, in which is described the terror of the Grecian ghosts when Æneas entered the dark realm:

Reaching his seat, he exclaimed in a tone that terrified the whole house, “Now let me hear what the honorable gentleman has to say to me.” There was no response, and the 146whole body was too much awed to laugh at the situation of the poor orator.

Yet he did not deal in the terrible and overpowering all the time. In a most eloquent speech in opposition to a measure that he believed violated the sanctity of the English home, he gave the following description of that privilege which is justly the proudest boast of an Englishman. A single passage is all that remains, but it will not soon be forgotten:

“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter!—all his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!”

Lord Macaulay, who was in no sense friendly to the great orator, gives him a glowing eulogy:

“His figure, when he first appeared in Parliament, was strikingly graceful and commanding, his features high and noble, his eye full of fire. His voice, even when it sank to a whisper, was heard to the remotest benches; when he strained it to its full extent, the sound rose like the swell of the organ of a great cathedral, shook the house with its peal, and was heard through lobbies, and down staircases, to the Court of Requests, and the precincts of Westminster Hall. He cultivated all these eminent advantages with the most assiduous care. His action is described by a very malignant observer as equal to that of Garrick. His play of countenance was wonderful; he frequently disconcerted a hostile orator by a single glance of indignation or scorn. Every tone, from the impassioned cry to the thrilling aside, was perfectly at his command.”

He was a truly extemporaneous speaker, and seldom attempted any other style. When he did he failed. His memory was strong and retentive, and his mind so fully stored with information on every subject that he was always ready for debate. Some of his grandest efforts were called forth by an unexpected circumstance, or a single glance of his eye. Once, while replying to Suffolk, he caught a view 147of the tapestry on which was painted some of the achievements of the ancestors of that lord, and instantly seized the hint it conveyed and gave expression to one of the noblest bursts of eloquence in any language. One of his contemporaries says:

“When without forethought or any other preparation than those talents nature had supplied, and education cultivated, Chatham rose—stirred to anger by some sudden subterfuge of corruption, or device of tyranny—then was heard an eloquence never surpassed either in ancient or modern times. It was the highest power of expression ministering to the highest power of thought.”

The manner in which the younger Pitt succeeded to the talents and position of the elder is one of the most wonderful things in history. His father trained him from his infancy in the models which he himself had imitated so successfully. Some of these means of improvement, which at least assisted in producing the peculiar character of the eloquence of father and son, are worthy of our attention. They both translated from the best classical authors, committed to memory choice passages from the poets, and prose writers they valued, thus acquiring great command of words. With such previous training, it would have been useless for them to write even in their most elaborate efforts.

When the younger Pitt had finished the traditional college course and was admitted to the bar, he also entered Parliament, being then only twenty-three years of age. He delivered his first speech, which was entirely unpremeditated, only about a month afterward. It took the house by storm. In the midst of that brilliant assembly, accustomed to the eloquence of Fox, Burke, and others worthy of any age, there was a universal burst of enthusiastic admiration. When some one remarked, “Pitt promises to be one of the first speakers ever heard in Parliament,” Fox replied, “He is so already.”

148When only twenty-four years of age he was made Prime Minister, and held the post for seventeen years. Although there is room for a wide difference of opinion regarding many of his acts during this time, there is none concerning his ability. Among other reforms that he advocated was the abolition of the slave trade. He made a speech on this subject that is still celebrated. Wilberforce said that “for the last twenty minutes he really seemed to be inspired.” Windham declares “that he walked home lost in amazement at the compass, until then unknown to him, of human eloquence.” Pitt died at the comparatively early age of forty-seven, holding the highest office in the gift of his country.

Brougham gives a glowing account of his power as an orator. “He is to be placed without any doubt in the highest class. With a sparing use of ornament, hardly indulging more in figures, or even in figurative expression, than the most severe examples of ancient chasteness allowed—with little variety of style, hardly any of the graces of manner—he no sooner rose than he carried away every hearer, and kept the attention fixed and unflagging until it pleased him to let it go; and then

“This magical effect was produced by his unbroken flow, which never for a moment left the hearer in pain or doubt, and yet was not the mean fluency of mere relaxation, requiring no effort of the speaker, but imposing on the listener a heavy task; by his lucid arrangement, which made all parts of the most complicated subject quit their entanglement and fall each in its place; by the clearness of his statements which presented a picture to the mind; by the forcible appeals to strict reason and strong feeling which formed the great staple of the discourse; by the majesty of the diction; by the depth and fullness of the most sonorous voice and the unbending dignity of the manner, which ever reminded us that we were in the presence of more than the mere advocate 149and debater, that there stood before us a ruler of the people. Such were the effects invariably of this singular eloquence; nor did anything, in any mood of mind, ever drop from him that was unsuited to the majestic frame of the whole, or could disturb the serenity of the full and copious flood that rolled along.”

Macaulay says: “At his first appearance in Parliament he showed himself superior to all his contemporaries in command of language. He could pour out a long succession of round and stately periods, without ever pausing for a word, without ever repeating a word, in a voice of silver clearness, and with a pronunciation so articulate that not a letter was slurred over.”

These men, father and son, were never excelled in debate. They were always ready. Every advantage that the occasion allowed was taken at the time, and the favorable moment never went by while they were preparing. They each attained a power they never would have possessed had it been necessary for them to use manuscript or depend on their memory. The time others have wasted in writing special orations, they employed in such wide culture, and in accumulating such vast stores of knowledge, that they were always ready. They were able to come to great intellectual contests with their minds fresh and un-fagged by previous composition.

But it may be said that with all their power they were destitute of polish and beauty. In such fragments of their speeches as have been preserved, it is true that gracefulness is less conspicuous than force, and the opponent of unwritten speech may imagine that this is a necessary consequence of the manner in which they spoke. The advantage they gained was worth the cost, even if this lack of the finer and more elegant qualities of speech was inevitable. But that this does not necessarily result from extempore speech, is abundantly proved by the example of their great rival—

This prince of imaginative orators was an Irishman. He was born in 1730, and graduated in Dublin University at the age of twenty. For a short time afterward he studied law, but soon grew weary of it and turned his attention to philosophy and literature. The productions of his pen speedily won an enviable reputation. A “Vindication of Natural Society” was speedily followed by the celebrated “Essay on the Sublime and Beautiful.”

His appearance in Parliament, the great arena of British eloquence, was comparatively late in life, but as soon as elected he gave promise of the great brilliancy he afterward displayed. For more than thirty years he had no superior in that august body, and scarcely an equal. He stood side by side with Pitt in defence of America, and endeared himself to every lover of liberty in both hemispheres. The great impeachment of Warren Hastings was mainly brought about by his influence, and afforded room for all his powers. The war with France was the last great theme upon which his eloquence was employed, and in it his strongly conservative views alienated him from most of his former friends.

During all this time his eloquence was a wonder both to friend and foe, and in its own style was never equalled in the House of Commons, or in the world. His speech on the impeaching of Warren Hastings, made at the bar of the House of Lords, was an unparalleled effort. It extended over a period of four days, and bore everything before it. On the third day of this great speech, he described the cruelties inflicted on some of the natives of India by one of Hastings’s agents, with such vividness that one convulsive shudder ran through the whole assemblage, while the speaker was so much affected by the picture he had penciled, that he dropped his head upon his hands, and was for some moments unable to proceed. Some, who were present, fell into a swoon, while even Hastings himself, who disclaimed all responsibility 151for these things, was overwhelmed. In speaking of the matter afterwards he says: “For half an hour I looked upon the orator in a revery of wonder, and actually felt myself to be the most culpable man on earth.” Lord Thurlow, who was present, declares that long after, many who were present had not recovered from the shock, and probably never would.

Soon after, the great speech of Sheridan was delivered. Like Burke’s, it was extempore, and no report of it, worthy the name, remains. It was only inferior to the mighty effort that preceded it. A clergyman who came to the house strongly prepossessed in favor of Hastings, said at the close of the first hour, to a friend who sat by him, “This is mere declamation without proof.” When another hour had passed, he remarked, “This is a wonderful oration.” Another hour went by, and again he spoke: “Warren Hastings certainly acted unjustifiably.” At the end of the fourth hour he said: “Hastings is an atrocious criminal.” When the speech closed at the end of the fifth hour, he vehemently declared, “Of all monsters of iniquity, Warren Hastings is certainly the most enormous.”

For seven long years this unprecedented trial went on. More than one-third of those who sat on the judge’s bench when it began were in their graves. When, at last it drew to a close, Burke made to the Lords a closing charge worthy of his genius:

“My Lords,” said he, “I have done! The part of the Commons is concluded! With a trembling hand we consign the product of these long, long labors to your charge. Take it! Take it! It is a sacred trust! Never before was a cause of such magnitude submitted to any human tribunal.... My Lords, it has pleased Providence to place us in such a stage that we appear every moment to be on the verge of some great mutation. There is one thing, and one thing only that defies mutation—that which existed before the world itself. I mean JUSTICE; that justice which, emanating from the Divinity, has a place in the breast of every one of us, given us for our guide with regard to ourselves 152and with regard to others; and which will stand after this globe is burned to ashes, our advocate or our accuser before our great Judge, when He comes to call upon us for the tenor of a well spent life.”

The effect of this speech upon the auditory was such that it was only after some time had elapsed, and after repeated efforts, that Fox, himself a giant in eloquence, could obtain a hearing.

The character of Burke’s eloquence is well summed up in the following account, given by Wraxall, one of his contemporaries:

“Nature had bestowed on him a boundless imagination, aided by a memory of equal strength and tenacity. His fancy was so vivid that it seemed to light up by its own powers, and to burn without consuming the aliment on which it fed: sometimes bearing him away into ideal scenes created by his own exuberant mind, but from which he, sooner or later, returned to the subject of debate; descending from his most aerial flights, by a gentle and imperceptible gradation, till he again touched the ground. Learning waited on him like a handmaid, presenting to his choice all that antiquity has culled or invented, most elucidatory of the topic under discussion. He always seemed to be oppressed under the load and variety of his intellectual treasures. Every power of oratory was wielded by him in its turn; for he could be, during the same evening, often within the space of a few minutes, pathetic and humorous; acrimonious and conciliating; now giving loose to his indignation or severity; and then, almost in the same breath, calling to his assistance wit and ridicule. It would be endless to cite instances of this versatility of his disposition, and of the rapidity of his transitions,

that I have, myself, witnessed. . . . What he was in public he was in private; like the star which now precedes and now follows the sun, he was equally brilliant whether he

or led on with a milder luster the modest hosts of evening.”

153A Frenchman gives a graphic description of one of his speeches. At first he was disappointed in his appearance.

“I certainly did not expect to find him in the British Parliament dressed in the ancient toga; nor was I prepared to see him in a tight brown coat, which seemed to impede every movement, and above all, the little hat-wig with curls. . . . He moved into the middle of the house contrary to the usual practice, for the members speak standing and uncovered, not leaving their places. But Mr. Burke, with the most natural air imaginable, with seeming humility, and with folded arms, began his speech in so low a tone of voice that I could scarcely hear him. Soon after, however, becoming animated by degrees, he described religion attacked, the bonds of subordination broken, civil society threatened to its foundation.... When in the course of this grand sketch, (to show that England could depend only on herself,) he mentioned Spain, that immense monarchy, which appeared to have fallen into a total lethargy: ‘What can we expect,’ said he, ‘from her?—mighty indeed, but unwieldy—vast in bulk, but inert in spirit—a whale stranded upon the sea shore of Europe.’ The whole House was silent; every mind was fixed; ... never was the electric power of eloquence more imperiously felt. I have witnessed many, too many political assemblages and striking scenes where eloquence performed a noble part, but the whole of them appear insipid when compared with this amazing effort.”

Burke was an extemporaneous speaker in the sense we have used the word in the preceding pages. He thought over the ideas of his speech as fully as his time permitted, and when he spoke, threw them into the language of the moment. At the conclusion of one of his speeches on the American question, his friends crowded around and urged him to write what he had said for the benefit of the world. He did so then, and also on five other occasions. Of the hundreds of other speeches he delivered only broken and imperfect fragments remain.

Burke exerted himself in conversation, and thus improved his powers of language in the method we have recommended. Dr. Johnson says of him in his oracular way:

154“Burke is an extraordinary man. His stream of talk is perpetual; and he does not talk from any desire of distinction, but because his mind is full. He is the only man whose common conversation corresponds with the general fame he has in the world. Take him up where you please, he is ready to meet you. No man of sense could meet him by accident under a gateway to avoid a shower without being convinced that he was the first man in England.”

The career of Mirabeau more resembles a strange romance than a sober history. He was of a good family, but during his childhood and early manhood his father treated him like a brute. His very appearance was peculiar. His head was of enormous size, his body so much misshapen that his father, who persecuted him for his deformity, declared that he looked more like a monster than a human being. The whole of his early life presents a picture of dreariness and misery exceeding that of almost any other man who has risen to greatness. Several times he was imprisoned—once for three years and a half—by order of his unnatural parent. Finally he began to use his pen, and soon won general admiration. His father, having failed to crush him, now became reconciled, and allowed him to assume the family name, which he had not permitted before. By this time he had a wide experience of vice, and was deeply in debt. His struggles for several years were still severe.

But at length the great revolution came, and he found his true element. The powers of speech which had already been displayed to a limited extent, were now exercised in a noble field. The people soon recognized in him the qualities necessary for a leader, and elected him to the General Assembly of France. Here he was feared and respected by all. He had no party to support him, but worked alone, and often by the mere force of his genius bent the Assembly to his will. During his whole career there, he was not an extremist, and for a time before his death was engaged in 155upholding the crown and the cause of constitutional government against the party of anarchy and death. This lost him his unbounded popularity with the fickle populace of Paris, and they began to shout for his blood. He was charged in the Assembly with corruption, and treason to the cause of liberty. This only prepared the way for his triumph. The very tree was marked on which he was to be hung. But he did not quail before the storm. When he reached the hall, he found himself in the midst of determined enemies already drunk with blood, and with no friend who dared to speak on his behalf. But the mere force of eloquence prevailed. He spoke in words of such power that the noisy multitude was stilled, and the tide turned.

After this triumph he took part in every measure, and was really the guiding power of the state. The king leaned on him as the only stay of his reign, and the moderate of every party began to look to him as the hope of France. Sometimes he spoke five times in one day, and at the sound of his magical voice the anarchical Assembly was hushed into reverence and submission. But his exertions were beyond his strength. At last he was prostrated. Every hour the king sent to enquire of his health, and bulletins of his state were posted in the streets. It seemed as if the destiny of France was to be decided in his sick chamber. He died, and the whole nation mourned, as well it might, for no other hand than his could hold back the reign of terror. It is indeed a problem whether that terrible tragedy would not have been prevented, if he had but lived a few months longer.

Some of the speeches of this remarkable man were recited, but in these he never attained his full power. A French writer well describes him:

“Mirabeau in the tribune was the most imposing of orators, an orator so consummate, that it is harder to say what he wanted than what he possessed.

“Mirabeau had a massive and square obesity of figure, thick lips, a forehead broad, bony, prominent; arched eyebrows, an eagle eye, cheeks flat, and somewhat fleshy, features 156full of pock holes and blotches, a voice of thunder, an enormous mass of hair, and the face of a lion.

“His manner as an orator is that of the great masters of antiquity, with an admirable energy of gesture, and a vehemence of diction which perhaps they had never reached.

“Mirabeau in his premeditated discourses was admirable. But what was he not in his extemporaneous effusions? His natural vehemence, of which he repressed the flights in his prepared speeches, broke down all barriers in his improvisations. A sort of nervous irritability gave then to his whole frame an almost preternatural animation and life. His breast dilated with an impetuous breathing. His lion face became wrinkled and contorted. His eyes shot forth flame. He roared, he stamped, he shook the fierce mass of his hair, all whitened with foam; he trod the tribune with the supreme authority of a master, and the imperial air of a king. What an interesting spectacle to behold him, momently, erect and exalt himself under the pressure of obstacle! To see him display the pride of his commanding brow! To see him, like the ancient orator, when, with all the power of his unchained eloquence, he was wont to sway, to and fro in the Forum, the agitated waves of the Roman multitude. Then would he throw by the measured notes of his declamation, habitually grave and solemn. Then would escape him broken exclamations, tones of thunder, and accents of heartrending and terrible pathos. He concealed with the flash and color of his rhetoric, the sinewy arguments of his dialectics. He transported the Assembly, because himself transported. And yet—so extraordinary was his force—he abandoned himself to the torrent of his eloquence, without wandering from his course; he mastered others by its sovereign sway, without losing for an instant his own self-control.”

The fame of this great man cannot soon be surpassed. He not only produced a great impression at the time he spoke, but had an agency, by his eloquent words, in bringing 157about the most important changes. He was more than the mouthpiece of the American Revolution. He not merely interpreted the feelings of the mass of the nation to itself, but in a large degree originated the enthusiasm that led them through war to independence. It is certain that the aristocratic and powerful colony of Virginia would have occupied a far different place in the struggle for liberty, if it had been deprived of his almost irresistible influence. It is hard to speculate on what might have been the result if temporizing measures had carried the day, and the union of the colonies been interfered with by want of cordial sympathy. The political wisdom of Franklin, and the military skill and constancy of Washington, did not contribute more to final success than the bold councils and fervent utterances of the country lawyer who is the subject of our sketch.

Patrick Henry was born in Hanover county, Virginia, in May, 1736. In childhood he acquired the common elements of education, and some knowledge of Latin and mathematics, and was not the ignorant youth that some of his admirers delight in representing him. But he was exceedingly fond of hunting and fishing, and would often spend the hours in this way, that might have been devoted to more useful employment. But he became a great day dreamer, thus at once revealing and exercising the unbounded imagination he possessed. He loved to wander alone, that he might give full play to the visions and reveries that floated through his brain.

When about fourteen, he heard the celebrated Presbyterian minister, Samuel Davies. His eloquence was the most powerful that Henry had hitherto enjoyed, and awakened in him a spirit of emulation. All his life Henry delighted to do him honor, and attributed the bent of his own mind to oratory and a large measure of his success to this man.

In business, the future statesman was uniformly most unsuccessful. He twice failed as a storekeeper, and once as a farmer. But all this time he was really studying for his future profession. He was fond of talk, and by indulging in it freely 158doubtless improved his power of language. He would relate long stories, and do it so well that those who thronged his counter took as little note of time as he did, and yielded their hearts as fully to him as larger audiences did afterward.

As a last resort he studied law, but for a time his success was no better in this than in his previous occupations. But after two or three years, during which he lived without practice, and in a dependent condition, he was retained in what seemed merely a nominal capacity—as defendant in the noted “Parsons case.” The preachers of the established church were paid so many pounds of tobacco per annum. But when the price arose, in a time of scarcity, the Legislature passed an act allowing all persons to pay their assessment in money at the rate of 2d per pound, which was much less than it was worth at that time. After an interval this law was declared void by the king and his council. Then the clergy instituted suit to recover what they had lost during the time the act was enforced. There was no doubt of the legality of their claim, although more of its intrinsic rightfulness, and the law question was decided in a test case, almost without controversy. This really surrendered the whole matter, and the only issue then was as to the amount of damage they had sustained—a very plain question, apparently affording no room for argument by the defense.

A vast array of the clergy were present, and on the bench was Henry’s own father. No circumstances could be imagined more unfavorable for the maiden speech of a young lawyer. The case for the plaintiff was clearly and forcibly stated by a leading member of the bar, and Henry began his reply. It is no wonder that he faltered, and that his sentences were awkward and confused. The people, who were present in great numbers, and who were intensely hostile to the preachers, hung their heads, and gave up the contest. The father of the speaker was shame-faced and dismayed. The preachers smiled in derision, and exchanged congratulatory glances. But it was too soon. The power of eloquence 159began to assert itself. The strong mind of Henry mastered all embarrassment, and was brought to bear, with irresistible force, upon his subject, and upon those around. All eyes were drawn to the almost unknown speaker. His rusticity of manner had disappeared; his form became erect, and his piercing eyes shot forth lightning. “A mysterious and almost supernatural transformation of appearance” passed over him. Every pulse beat responsive to his, and throbbed with his own mighty indignation. He turned his withering invective upon the clergy, speaking of their greediness, oppression, and meanness, until they fled from the court. Spectators say that their blood ran cold and their hair stood on end! When he concluded, the jury in an instant brought judgment for one penny damages! a new trial was refused, and the young but unparalleled orator was borne away in triumph by the shouting multitude.

His first appearance in the house of Burgesses was not less brilliant, and far more important in its results. The majority of the Assembly seemed to be bent on new petitions and remonstrances against the oppression of England, when Henry introduced his celebrated resolutions, declaring in plain phrases that the acts complained of were unconstitutional and void. This, which was little short of a declaration of war, was received, even by well-meaning patriots, with a storm of opposition. A most bitter debate followed. Henry at first stood almost alone, with the wealth and talent of the Assembly arrayed against him. But his clear conviction, determined will, and powerful eloquence turned the scale, and the resolutions passed, committing Virginia to the cause of resistance.

When Henry attended the first Congress he found an array of men, whose fame was already becoming world-wide. But he soon won his way to the very highest rank among them, and maintained it to the close. His extraordinary eloquence excited the same astonishment on this broader field, as in the seclusion of the Virginia hills. It was “Shakespeare and Garrick combined.” When he took his seat after 160his opening speech, the first speech that had broken the silence of the great assembly, there was no longer a doubt that he was the greatest orator in America, and probably in the world. This pre-eminence he maintained all through the exciting struggle. His voice was ever like an inspiration, and the people looked up to him almost as a prophet.

His vast power remained until the close of his life. The last great speech, made in a contest with John Randolph, when he was nearly seventy years of age, and only three months before his death, was equal to any of his former efforts. “The sun had set in all its glory.”

These few sketches will sufficiently illustrate the eloquence of this wonderful man. It only remains to state what is known in regard to his methods of preparation. He never wrote. His mightiest efforts were made in situations where the use of the pen would have been impossible. The Virginia resolutions were written on a blank leaf in a law book, and during the whole of the terrible debate which followed, he was ever ready, and mastered all opponents. He thought much, but wrote little. He spoke only on great occasions, while in political life, but gave attention to all that was passing, and by keen observation learned the characters of those upon whose minds he wrought. Thus he was prepared to drive every word home to its mark. He was a great student of history, and this knowledge doubtless contributed very greatly to the clearness and precision of his views upon the great struggle in which the country was engaged, as well as gave him an ample fund of illustration in his speeches. Study of character and of history, cultivation of the power of narration and of language, seem to have been the means by which his wonderful natural genius was fitted for its triumphs.

Few men of any age have been instrumental in accomplishing more good than the subject of our present sketch. Without deep logical powers, and with little claim to originality 161of thought, he chained vast multitudes by his eloquence, and was one of the foremost actors in a mighty religious movement.

None of the converts Whitefield gathered into the church ever passed through a more strongly marked experience in personal religion than he did. The agony of conviction he underwent was terrible, and he struggled long and desperately before he obtained peace. “God only knows,” he exclaims, “how many nights I have lain upon my bed groaning under what I felt. Whole days and weeks have I spent in lying prostrate on the ground, in silent or vocal prayer.” His mind almost failed under the violence of his mental conflicts, and he endeavored, by wearing the meanest apparel, and almost continual fasting, and many works of self-mortification to find relief. But all this was in vain. We see in it an indication of the terrible earnestness and sincerity of the man—qualities which never passed away from him. These months of vivid emotion affected his whole life, and imparted an intensity to his pictures of sin, and a vividness to his realization of its horrors, that he never would have had otherwise.

At last his health gave way beneath the pressure of his spiritual trials, and he fell into a long sickness. At the end of seven weeks he found peace, and his raptures became as great as the horrors of conscience had been. “But oh! with what joy, joy unspeakable, even joy that was full of glory, was my soul filled, when the weight of sin went off, and an abiding sense of the love of God and a full assurance of faith broke in upon my disconsolate soul.” This rapturous experience continued with few interruptions through life, and really formed the spring of his wonderful exertions. For thirty-four years his soul glowed in all the fervors that he had experienced at his first conversion, and he put forth his great strength in unwearied efforts to bring others to the same blessed enjoyment.

His career opened with wonderful brilliancy. The first sermon preached after his ordination as deacon, was said to 162“have driven fifteen persons mad,”—a kind of madness that soon became common in England. Everywhere the people flocked to hear him in crowds, and soon no church would contain the multitude, even when they were opened for him. Once, when preaching with “great freedom of heart and clearness of voice,” with thousands of persons standing outside of the church, after hundreds had gone away for want of room, he was struck with the thought of preaching the word in the open air. Friends discouraged, but the die was soon cast, and from that time forward his mightiest triumphs were won in imitation of his Master, “who had a mountain for His pulpit, and the heavens for a sounding board!” This was the proper theater for the display of his wonderful power, and his spirit felt the beauty and grandeur of the scene. Sometimes as many as twenty thousand people were gathered together.

The theater of his most marvelous triumphs was at Moorfields during the Whitsun holidays. The lowest class of London population was then poured forth, and the most riotous scenes enacted. He resolved to begin early, in order to secure the field before the greatest rush of the crowd. Ten thousand people were gathered impatiently waiting for the sports of the day. “He had for once got the start of the devil,” and soon drew the multitude around him. At noon he tried again. The odds against him were greater. Between twenty and thirty thousand people were present, and shows, exhibitors, and players were all busy. He shouted his text, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians,” and began the battle. It was waged fiercely, and stones, dirt, and rotten eggs, with every other means of annoyance, were brought to bear on the steadfast preacher. “My soul,” he says, “was among lions.” But soon his wonderful power transformed the multitude into lambs.

At night he renewed the assault on the stronghold of the adversary. Thousands had been added to the throng, and their leaders, who had lost much of their day’s gain by his preaching, were determined to endure it no longer. A harlequin 163attempted to strike him with a whip but failed. A recruiting sergeant, with many followers, and with drum and fife, made the next effort. But Whitefield called to the people to make way for the king’s officer, and the people yielded before, and closed up behind him, until he was in this manner conducted harmlessly out of the crowd. Next, a large number combined together, and taking hold of a long pole charged furiously on the assembly, roaring like beasts. But they too were foiled, and threw down the pole, many of them joining the hearers. At times the tumult rose like the noise of many waters, drowning the voice of the preacher, who would then resort to singing, until silence returned. He kept the field to the last, and gathered mighty spoil into his Tabernacle that night.

Very different were the sermons he preached at the mansion of Lady Huntingdon, but they were marked by the same power. Courtiers and noblemen joined in praising him, and Hume declared that he would go twenty miles to hear him. No one seemed to be impervious to his wonderful eloquence, and even in this selected circle he gathered trophies of the Cross.

He passed and repassed from England to America several times, and was everywhere as a flame of fire. The languid zeal of lukewarm churches was revived, and the careless and immoral led into new lives. He was soon looked up to as an apostle by thousands who dated their first religious impressions from the time when they listened to his fervid words. But opposition was not wanting, and once he very nearly received the crown of martyrdom.

After he had finished preaching in Dublin, he was attacked by an immense mob of infuriated Papists. His friends fled for their lives, and left him to the mercy of the rioters. Stones from every direction struck him, until he was breathless and dripping with blood. He found a momentary refuge, when almost at the point of death, but the inmates of the house which he had entered, fearing it would be demolished, entreated him to leave. He was offered a disguise, but refused 164it, and in his proper dress passed through whole streets of threatening Papists, and as soon as he had reached a place of safety, and had his wounds dressed, began to preach again!

Thus year after year passed, crowded full of labors. He considered it an indication of great feebleness that for a short time he could only preach one sermon a day. Thousands in Europe and America called him blessed, and everywhere countless multitudes crowded to hear him speak of the grace of God. For the lifetime of an ordinary generation his unequaled power and untiring labor continued. After speaking he frequently vomited great quantities of blood, which he regarded as relieving his over-taxed lungs.

His death was romantic and beautiful, as befitted such a life. There are few more touching, and yet more happy in the records of biography.

He preached his last field sermon at Exeter. It was continued for two hours, and was among his most powerful efforts. He reached Newburyport, Mass., the same evening, where he intended to preach the next day. While at supper, the pavement, and the hall of the house where he sat, were crowded with people impatient to hear the wonderful orator. But he was exhausted, and said to one of the clergymen who accompanied him, “Brother, you must speak to these dear people; I cannot say a word.” He took a candle and started for his room, but before he reached it, his generous heart reproached him for even seeming to desert the people who were hungering for the bread of life. He paused on the stairway, while the piece of candle he had taken when he started cast its flickering light on the crowd below, and began to speak. The people gazed with tearful awe and affection on his venerable form. His musical and pathetic voice flowed on in words of tenderness and exhortation until the candle went out in its socket. Before the morning he was dead!

His remembrance did not die with him. Europe and America vied together in mourning for him, and Methodists, Churchmen, and Dissenters revered him as a departed prophet.

165What was the secret of his unparalleled power with the people? Clearly its spring was his own profound and overwhelming emotions. It is sometimes thought that his almost perfect elocution explains the fascination he exerted, but it does not. He is classed by many as one who committed and recited his discourses. But it may be safely assumed that he could not have commanded one tithe of his success in that manner. He may have done this at the beginning of his career, before his marvelous genius was fully developed, but not after. It is indeed given as a reason of his embarrassment when he began to preach in the open air, that he had not long been accustomed to preach extempore. He says that often, in his own apprehension, he had not a word to say either to God or man. Think of a person who has a fully committed sermon, making such an assertion, and afterwards thanking God for giving him words and wisdom!

The very best possible evidence that his sermons took their external form at the moment, was that he complained of the reports that were made of them. If they had been written before preaching, he would have had the means of making these as perfect as desired. Yet he repeated sermons on particular subjects very often. Foote and Garrick estimated that they improved up to the thirtieth and fortieth repetition. Going over the same ground so often, many striking phrases would doubtless fix themselves in his mind, but he would still be free to introduce new matters as he wished. His illustrations, too, many of which were gathered from his own wide experience, would be given in nearly the same manner on successive occasions. But he was a fine talker, and by his unlimited practice in speech improved the power of language to such an extent that it was fully capable of expressing the ocean of feeling that flowed in his soul. His published sermons show few traces of the pen, but bear every mark of impassioned utterance. Untroubled by doubt, all that he preached was felt to be present reality. He was a pure and holy man, moved by the Spirit to the work he entered on, and endowed with a heart of fire, a soul of love, and a power of expression 166such as is given to few mortals. No wonder that the multitude felt him to be little less than inspired.

Both Henry and Whitefield were men of such vast genius as to be lifted above ordinary rules. When we look upon them we feel imitation to be almost hopeless. But we will give an instance of an altogether different kind, and thus show how easily unwritten speech may be the medium of every species of address. John Wesley was not an impassioned or impetuous orator, and yet he wielded an almost boundless influence. He was fluent and easy in his language, but exact and logical, leaving no careless word on which an enemy might seize. Yet his power was great, and even the scenes of excitement that marked the preaching of Whitefield, and other early Methodists, were even surpassed under his clear calm words.

We have no intention of sketching the life and great achievements of Wesley, but will only consider a few events that bear on his character as a preacher. Before he found peace in believing, which he did not until he had preached for years, his sermons were not characterized by any extraordinary power. They were strong, clear, fluent, and no more. But after his return from his final voyage to America, there was a great change. The external characteristics remained nearly the same, but the fervor and power of the spirit that breathed through his mildest words, soon produced the opposite effects of exciting bitter enmity and of drawing the hearts of the people toward him. It mattered not what the nature of his congregations might be, there was something in his manner and words adapted to all. He began field preaching about the same time that Whitefield did, and sometimes gathered as many as twenty thousand into one congregation. While he spoke the whole assembly was often bathed in tears, and frequently many fell down as dead. He gathered those who were convinced by his preaching into societies, and these soon spread over the whole country. 167He was thus required to exercise more authority in caring for them than any bishop of the Established Church. For upwards of fifty years he averaged fifteen sermons a week.

Although Wesley was the founder of Methodism, yet he differed widely from the typical Methodist preachers. He dressed neatly, was most courteous and polished in manners, graceful in the pulpit, and considered violent exertions of the voice or furious gesticulation to be little less than sin. His published sermons are models of thoughtful analysis, close reasoning, and orderly arrangement. Yet he always spoke without manuscript and without memorizing.

Wesley would certainly have been justified, if any person ever was, in reading his discourses. For he was surrounded by those who had been led into the way of life by him, and who treasured up every word that fell from his lips, while on the other hand, unscrupulous enemies misrepresented him continually, and sought for occasion to accuse him of teaching pernicious doctrine. Yet amid such ceaseless preaching, he was always able to command the very words to express his ideas, and was never compelled to retract an unguarded sentence. The volumes of sermons which he published are to be regarded as mere abstracts of his teaching, recorded for the benefit of his societies, and not as the very words he used upon particular occasions. In his later years he came before the people, as a father instructing his children, and imparted to them the weighty truths he thought they ought to know, in all simplicity, and without the slightest care for outward ornament or word-nicety.

This eccentric, whole-souled, humorous, and eloquent clergyman was born in 1771, and died in 1835. He graduated at Oxford, received a fellowship, worth five hundred dollars a year, and thought to study law, but at the instance of his father, changed his mind and entered the Church. In connection 168with three others he started the Edinburgh Review, and for years contributed sparkling articles that did much to establish its reputation and popularity. He also became known to a wide circle for his brilliant conversational powers, and, like so many extempore speakers, took great delight in this most pleasant means of improvement.

At first his preferment in the Church was slow, but his favor with the people was undoubtful. While he preached in London large and fashionable audiences were drawn wherever he officiated.

Finally he was presented with an obscure country living, and after some delay went to it. It was a desolate place, far away from all the centers of intellectual life, and previous incumbents had resided away from it for more than a century. He says, “When I began to thump the cushion of my pulpit, on first coming to Foston, as is my wont when I preach, the accumulated dust of one hundred and fifty years, made such a cloud that for some minutes I lost sight of my congregation.”

He soon made a change for the better in all the affairs of the parish; built an ugly but comfortable parsonage, and won the devoted affection of his people. He passed much of his time in literary avocations, and after fourteen years, received preferment to more desirable churches. During the remainder of his life he used his pen so as to greatly increase his already wide reputation, and became still more noted as a preacher. He was very witty, and cared little for the common rules of sermonizing, but had a power and earnestness that compensated for every defect. The following extract will indicate his method of preparation:

“Pulpit discourses have insensibly dwindled from speaking to reading; a practice which of itself is sufficient to stifle every germ of eloquence. It is only by the fresh feelings of the heart that mankind can be very powerfully affected. What can be more ludicrous than an orator delivering stale indignation and fervor a week old; turning over whole pages of violent passions, written out in goodly text; reading the tropes and apostrophes into which he is hurried by the ardor 169of his mind; and so affected at a preconcerted line and page that he is unable to proceed any further!”

No minister of the present generation has lived a purer life, or left the stamp of his thought more deeply on the public mind than the young incumbent of Trinity Chapel in Brighton. His sermons, not published until after his death, are meeting with an unparalleled sale, and every scrap of his sermon preparation, no matter how fragmentary, is seized for the press with the greatest avidity. He now addresses a far larger and more important audience than ever during his life time.

F. W. Robertson was born in 1816 and died in 1853—only thirty-seven years of age. He received the traditional English education at Oxford, and had a strong inclination for the military profession. This he was induced to renounce by the expressed judgment of his father—himself a military officer—that Frederick was better fitted for the Church. After he had received ordination, he acted as curate for twelve months at Winchester. His health being by this time broken, he took a trip to the continent under the advice of a physician. He was gone a year, and during this time entered into marriage. When he returned he served for four years in the parish of Cheltenham. Here the field for the exercise of his talents was comparatively narrow; but many persons were led to a higher life by his ministry—many more than he, with his habitual self-depreciation, was willing to believe until years had passed. After this he spent two months at St. Ebbs, in Oxford, receiving a miserably small salary. During this short time his talents became known, and he was offered the rich, aristocratic, and intellectual church at Brighton. The offer was refused at first, and was only accepted at last through the urgent solicitation of the Bishop, who felt that this was his proper field. Here his popularity became unbounded. The working people, who 170had almost deserted the Establishment, flocked to hear his bold, true words. His biographer says:

“His eloquence and originality could not fail to be marked. And if the congregation was intellectual he was pre-eminently so. The chapel became crowded. Sittings were scarcely ever to be had. For six years the enthusiasm never slackened: it grew and spread silently and steadily, and when he died broke out in a burst of universal sorrow.... But he put no faith in mere excitement, the eager upturned face, the still hush of attention. ‘What is ministerial success?’ he asks. ‘Crowded churches—full aisles—attentive congregation—the approval of the religious world—much impression produced? Elijah thought so; and when he found out his mistake, and discovered that the applause of Carmel subsided into hideous stillness, his heart well nigh broke with disappointment. Ministerial success lies in altered lives, and obedient humble hearts; unseen work recognized in the judgment day.’”

That success was his. James Anderson says:

“I cannot count up conquests in any place or by any man so numerous and so vast—conquests achieved in so short a period, and in many instances over the hearts and consciences of those whom, from their age or pursuits, it is always most difficult to reach—as were the conquests of that devoted soldier of the cross of Christ.”

But his labors were too great for his strength. For at least two years before his death he preached in continual pain, and yet there was no abatement in his power. Many of the sermons by which he is best known were then produced. We can scarcely realize as we read his calm sentences, radiant with beauty, and full of profound thought, that they were spoken during the ravages of a cerebral disease, that was soon to still his eloquent voice forever. When he died, having preached almost to the last, the city (containing sixty thousand inhabitants) was draped in gloom, and mourning was universal. A monument was erected, to which the working-men contributed a touching memorial.

The manner in which so many of Robertson’s sermons were preserved, is, when we consider his manner of preaching, 171very remarkable. He spoke extempore, and never wrote out a sermon before delivery. His leading thoughts were indicated by short notes, and the whole subject was carefully arranged in his own mind. But his words and his most powerful illustrations sprang from the inspiration of the moment. Usually he took a small piece of paper containing the headings of his thoughts with him into the pulpit, but never referred to it after the first few moments had passed. His sympathizing biographer thus describes him:

“So entirely was his heart in his work, that in public speaking especially, he lost sight of everything but his subject. His self-consciousness vanished. He did not choose his words or think about his thoughts. He not only possessed, but was possessed by his idea; and when all was over and the reaction came, he had forgotten like a dream, words, illustrations, almost everything.... After some of his most earnest and passionate utterances, he has said to a friend: ‘Have I made a fool of myself?’

“If the most conquering eloquence for the English people be that of the man who is all but mastered by his excitement, but who, at the very point of being mastered, masters himself—apparently cool, while he is at white heat—so as to make the audience glow with fire, and at the same time respect the self-possessed power of the orator—the man being always felt as greater than the man’s feelings—if that be the eloquence that most tells upon the English nation, he had that eloquence. He spoke under tremendous excitement, but it was excitement reined in by will. He held in his hand a small piece of paper with a few notes on it when he began. He referred to it now and then; but before ten minutes had gone by it was crushed to uselessness in his grasp; for he knit his fingers together over it, as he knit his words over thought. His gesture was subdued; sometimes a slow motion of his hand upward; sometimes bending forward, his hand drooping over the pulpit; sometimes erecting himself to his full height with a sudden motion, as if upraised by the power of the thought he spoke. His voice—a musical, low, penetrative voice—seldom rose; and when it did it was in a deep volume of sound which was not loud, but toned like a great bell. It thrilled also, but that was not so much from feeling as from the repression of feeling. Toward the close of his ministry he was wont to stand almost motionlessly 172erect in the pulpit, with his hands loosely lying by his side, or grasping his gown. His pale, thin face and tall, emaciated form, seeming, as he spoke, to be glowing as alabaster glows when lit up by an inward fire. And, indeed, brain and heart were on fire. He was being self-consumed. Every sermon in those latter days burned up a portion of his vital power.”

But though thus surrounded by an admiring congregation, and weekly giving out thoughts that were worthy of still wider notice, when some of his people, who realized that his words were too precious to die, raised a subscription to employ a short-hand reporter, with a view to the publication of his sermons, he refused to sanction the scheme, and wrote the parties a characteristic letter, telling them that he had no time to correct, and, without it, the discourses were not fit to be given to the public. Yet a number were preserved in this way, and though not published until after his death, they are almost faultless in form and expression. Other sermons were written out briefly by himself, after being preached, for the use of some private friends. It was thus that those almost incomparable discourses were preserved, which are without doubt the most valuable contribution that has been made to their department of literature during the present century.

We will give two extracts showing the power that may be wielded over language without the use of the pen. The first is from a speech made to a workingman’s institute opposing the introduction of infidel works into their library. He is speaking of the compassion that should be shown to the honest doubter:

“I do think that the way we treat that state is unpardonably cruel. It is an awful moment when the soul begins to find that the props on which it has blindly rested so long are many of them rotten, and begins to suspect them all; when it begins to feel the nothingness of many of the traditionary opinions which have been received with implicit confidence, and in that horrible insecurity begins also to doubt whether there be anything to believe at all. It is an awful hour—let him who has passed through it say how awful—when 173this life has lost its meaning, and seems shriveled into a span; when the grave appears to be the end of all, human goodness nothing but a name, and the sky above this universe a dead expanse, black with the void from which God Himself has disappeared. . . . I appeal (for the truth of the picture drawn) to the recollection of any man who has passed through that hour of agony, and stood upon the rock at last, the surges stilled below him, and the last cloud drifted from the sky above, with a faith, and hope, and trust, no longer traditional, but of his own, a trust which neither earth nor hell shall shake thenceforth for ever.”

The second passage we will quote is an illustration from a sermon on the doubt of Thomas, showing how weak are all arguments for immortality, except those that are exclusively Christian. He speaks of many things that are valuable as suggestions, but worthless as proofs, and next shows how the same suggestions may point the other way:

“Six thousand years of human existence have passed away. Countless armies of the dead have set sail from the shores of time. No traveler has returned from the still land beyond. More than one hundred and fifty generations have done their work and sunk into the dust again, and still there is not a voice, there is not a whisper from the grave to tell us whether, indeed, those myriads are in existence still. Besides, why should they be? Talk as you will of the grandeur of man; why should it not be honor enough for him—more than enough to satisfy a thing so mean—to have had his twenty or seventy years life-rent of God’s universe? Why must such a thing, apart from proof, rise up and claim to himself an exclusive immortality? . . . Why may he not sink, after he has played his appointed part, into nothingness again? You see the leaves sinking one by one in autumn, till the heaps below are rich with the spoils of a whole year’s vegetation. They were bright and perfect while they lasted, each leaf a miracle of beauty and contrivance. There is no resurrection for the leaves—why should there be one for man? Go and stand, some summer evening, by the river side; you will see the May-fly sporting out its little hour in the dense masses of insect life, darkening the air a few feet above the gentle swell of the water. The heat of that very afternoon brought them into existence. Every gauze wing is traversed by ten thousand fibres, which 174defy the microscope to find a flaw in their perfection. The omniscience and the care bestowed upon that exquisite anatomy, one would think cannot be destined to be wasted in a moment. Yet so it is. When the sun has sunk below the trees its little life is done. Yesterday it was not; tomorrow it will not be. God has bidden it be happy for one evening. It has no right or claim to a second; and in the universe that marvelous life has appeared once and will appear no more. May not the race of man sink like the generations of the May-fly? Why cannot the Creator, so lavish in His resources, afford to annihilate souls as He annihilates insects? Would it not almost enhance His glory to believe it?”

Such language Robertson was able to employ without the use of the pen. But the art was not attained without long and laborious toil. He committed much—memorizing the whole Testament, both in English and Greek, and storing his mind with innumerable gems from the poets. He also studied the modern languages, particularly German, and delighted to translate their treasure into his own tongue. He read much, but not rapidly, dwelling upon a book until he could arrange the whole of its contents with precision in his mind. Thus he attained an almost unequalled mastery of both thought and language. If he had been required to write every sermon, he could never have pursued such a thorough and long continued course of cultivation, besides mastering such a vast amount of knowledge.

We have dwelt less upon the general character of his preaching, with its strong originality, than upon the beauty, force, and accuracy of his language, because these are the qualities usually believed to be unattainable without written composition. But it is safe to say, that in these respects he has not been surpassed by any preacher ancient or modern.

We will take Henry Clay as an example of the American political eloquence of the last generation. He was one of a bright constellation of great men—most of them, like himself, extemporaneous speakers. In some respects he was, perhaps, 175superior to them all. His hold upon the public mind was great, and even yet he is regarded with love and reverence all over the Union. This, however, is not the result of his genius alone. In some points his great rivals were more unfortunate than himself. Calhoun’s influence was immense; but the effect of his teaching has been so deadly that it is not to be wondered at if his fame is of an equivocal kind. The badness of Webster’s private life, and his unfortunate course on some great questions, caused his reputation to decline, and his really great abilities to be undervalued. But the genial, large-hearted orator of the West is still a favorite with the people.

Clay was a Virginian by birth. His father was a Baptist preacher, very poor, who died when Henry was quite young, leaving a large family of children. Henry obtained all his schooling, which was meager enough, in a log school-house. The young boy was employed first as a clerk in a store, and afterward as an assistant in a lawyer’s office. Next he became an amanuensis to Chancellor Wythe, who treated him kindly and gave him an opportunity to study law. Finally, he was admitted to the bar, and removed to Kentucky. He immediately acquired practice, and met with a hearty welcome from the rough backwoodsmen of that section. He tells us how he acquired the ability to speak with fluency and power:

“I owe my success in life to one simple fact, namely, that at an early age I commenced and continued for some years the practice of daily reading and speaking the contents of some historical or scientific book. These off-hand efforts were sometimes made in a corn-field; at others in the forest; and not unfrequently in some barn, with the horse and ox for my only auditors. It is to this early practice of the art of all arts that I am indebted for the primary and leading impulses that stimulated my progress and have shaped and molded my destiny.”

An amusing instance is given of Clay’s first attempt at debate. He was so much embarrassed that he forgot where he was, and called the chairman “Gentlemen of the Jury.” 176Yet when this difficulty had been overcome, he soon made a powerful impression. In fact it was spoken of by some as not inferior to any of the addresses in which he achieved a national fame. The policy of emancipation was then under debate in Kentucky, and young Clay gave it his full support. But although he had almost unbounded influence on any other subject, the people of his State loved slavery better than any man, and the measure was defeated.

The vast power of Clay as an orator was early displayed. When only twenty-two years of age he, with another very able speaker, addressed a popular meeting. While the other spoke there was great applause and deafening acclamations, but Clay’s address was so much more thrilling and effective, that the popular feeling became too deep for utterance, and he closed amid unbroken silence. It was some moments before the crowd recovered sufficiently to give vent, in thundering cheers, to the emotion that he had kindled.

It is hardly necessary to follow the career of Clay through all the years that were devoted to the public service, for the country is still familiar with it. Many of the measures with which he was connected may not meet our approval, but no one will question the honesty of his motives, or the ability with which they were advocated. In Congress he had scarcely a rival. Calhoun was equally active, and more logical, but had not the magic of voice and eye, the nameless graces of delivery that distinguished the Kentucky orator. Webster spoke more like a giant, but was hard to call out in his full force, and on ordinary occasions did not speak nearly as well as Clay. The voice of the latter was an instrument of great power, and he well knew how to use it. “Nature,” he said on one occasion, referring to an effort made years before, “had singularly favored me by giving me a voice peculiarly adapted to produce the effects I wished in public speaking. Now,” he added, “its melody is changed, its sweetness gone.” These words were pronounced as if in mockery, in tones of exquisite sweetness. One who had heard him often, says:

177“Mr. Clay’s voice has prodigious power, compass, and richness; all its variations are captivating, but some of its base tones thrill through one’s whole fame. To those who have never heard the living melody, no verbal description can convey an adequate idea of the diversified effects of those intonations which, in one strain of sentiment, fall in whispering gentleness like the first words of love upon a maiden’s lips, and anon in sterner utterances ring with the maddening music of the main.”

A gentleman who witnessed an oratorical encounter between Clay and Webster describes it as inconceivably grand:

“The eloquence of Mr. Webster was the majestic roar of a strong and steady blast pealing through the forest; but that of Mr. Clay was the tone of a god-like instrument, sometimes visited by an angel touch, and swept anon by all the fury of the raging elements.”

Clay, Webster and Calhoun were all extempore speakers. Webster sometimes prepared very elaborately, but never confined himself to his preparation. And some of his very best efforts were made on the spur of the moment when circumstances conspired to arouse his vast but somewhat sluggish genius. Both the others prepared their discourses in thought alone, and those who were obliged to rely on their manuscripts or their memories stood no chance at all with them in the fiery debates through which they passed.

It may be doubted whether the late Bishop Bascom is properly classed among extempore preachers. His mode of preparation certainly bordered on the memoriter plan. But he did not write. He would first construct a skeleton, usually very simple, and then throw each point into words mentally. His memory was very great, and the fine expressions he coined, as he rode through the forest or meditated in his study, were impressed on his mind so strongly as to be recalled afterward. It was a common practice with him to repeat his sermons over and over again to himself, till every line of thought and every strong expression became perfectly 178familiar. Bascom once stopped at a backwoodsman’s house, and left it to take a short walk. Soon a neighbor came rushing in, declaring that he had seen a crazy man walking back and forth on the edge of the woods, swinging his arms wildly, and muttering to himself in a strange manner. The neighbor was told not to be alarmed, but to come to church the next day and he would see the crazy man again. He did so, and listened to strains of eloquence as admirable as ever charmed his ear.

The sermons which were thus prepared, were preached a great number of times, and each time reviewed and improved. Bascom traveled a vast extent of country, and the sermons which thus combined all the strength of his really powerful mind, for years together, soon became famous. Probably no preacher ever did so much with so few discourses.

His delivery was wonderful. Henry Clay, who was well qualified to judge, pronounced him the finest natural orator he had ever heard. His form was almost perfect, his carriage noble and graceful, every movement light and springy, so that, as some of his hearers have declared, “he scarcely seemed to touch the ground.” He dressed with great taste, and on this account was often objected to by the early Methodists, and came very nearly being refused admission into his Conference. But he soon became a general favorite with the people, who would throng to hear him from the whole country for miles around. When he entered the pulpit he seemed nearly borne down by the weight of his accumulations, and it was only after he had begun to make headway that he became easy and self-possessed. Then he poured forth torrent after torrent of highly wrought eloquence, until the hearers were lost in admiration of the vast powers he displayed.

A very partial biographer considers it as very strange that he took but little part in any Conference discussions, or debates on general topics. The truth is, that with his mode of preparation, carried as far as he carried it, he could not. There was no time to forecast his sentences, and 179slowly build up a gorgeous fabric, and he therefore remained silent.

He had a mighty imagination, and could so represent any object he undertook so describe, that it would live before the eyes of his hearers. But he cared so much for beauty that he wandered too far from his way to seek it, and the consequence was that the object of his discourse

and his hearers after recovering from their rapture and astonishment remained as they were before. He drew vast audiences together, wrought effectually for the building up of some colleges, collected much money for various agencies, was made a Bishop of the M. E. Church, South, in compliment to his eloquence, but in real work was far inferior to many a Methodist minister whose name is unknown to fame.

The eloquence of the good and noble, but early fallen Summerfield was in sharp contrast with that of Bascom. A lady who had heard them both, gave the preference, in some neat verses, to the latter, on the ground that he was more grand, awe-inspiring, and tempest-like. The melody and pathos of Summerfield she compared to the mild zephyr, and thought this was necessarily inferior to the earth-shaking storm. But the world has not agreed with her. Bascom held assembled thousands for hours beneath the charm of his voice, weeping, smiling, or shouting, at his will. Yet when all had passed, and the spell had been dissolved, the only impression that remained was one of simple wonder. The man and his own eloquence had risen so far above the subject he was to enunciate that the latter faded from the mind. More earnestness for truth and sympathy with it, would have enhanced his real power a hundredfold.

But it was very different with Summerfield. His soul was full of earnestness, and he moved in an atmosphere of tenderness and pathos. The eloquence of the great Whitefield 180might be compared to the whirlwind, prostrating everything in its path; that of Bascom to an iceberg glowing in the rays of the morning sun, displaying a thousand colors, but cold and impassive; and that of Summerfield to the light of the sun, calm and genial, shining on fields of green, filling the air with life and light. His speech was simple, easy, and unadorned, flowing right out of his own heart, and awakening an answering echo in the hearts of all who heard. The sermons which he has left are mere fragments—sketches such as he employed in his preparation, and of course give no idea of the real power he wielded.

Stevens thus describes his method of preparation:

“Though in the delivery of his sermons there was this facility—felicity we might call it—in their preparation he was a laborious student. He was a hearty advocate of extempore preaching, and would have been deprived of most of his popular power in the pulpit by being confined to a manuscript; yet he knew the importance of study, and particularly of the habitual use of the pen in order to success in extemporaneous speaking. His own rule was to prepare a skeleton of his sermon, and after preaching it, write it out in fuller detail, filling up the original sketch with the principal thoughts which had occurred to him in the process of the discourse. The first outline was, however, in accordance with the rule we have elsewhere given for extempore speaking, viz., that the perspective of the entire discourse—the leading ideas, from the exordium to the peroration—should be noted on the manuscript, so that the speaker shall have the assurance that he is supplied with a consecutive series of good ideas, good enough to command the respect of his audience, though he should fail of any very important impromptu thoughts. This rule we deem the most essential condition of success in extemporaneous preaching. It is the best guarantee of that confidence and self-possession upon which depends the command of both thought and language. Summerfield followed it even in his platform speeches. Montgomery notices the minuteness of his preparations in nearly two hundred manuscript sketches.”

This great man died at the very early age of twenty-seven, having preached seven years. But from the very first he produced a profound impression. Dr. Bethune thus describes 181one of his earliest efforts in this country. He was then scarcely known. It was at an anniversary of the Bible Society, and an able man had just spoken with great acceptance:

“The chair announced the Rev. Mr. Summerfield, from England. ‘What presumption!’ said my clerical neighbor; ‘a boy like that to be set up after a giant!’ But the stripling came in the name of the God of Israel, armed with ‘a few smooth stones from the brook’ that flows ‘hard by the oracles of God.’ His motion was one of thanks to the officers of the society for their labors during the year; and of course he had to allude to the president, then reposing in another part of the house; and thus he did it: ‘When I saw that venerable man, too aged to warrant the hope of being with you at another anniversary, he reminded me of Jacob leaning upon the top of his staff, blessing his children before he departed.’ He then passed on to encourage the society by the example of the British institution. ‘When we first launched our untried vessel upon the deep, the storms of opposition roared, and the waves dashed angrily around us, and we had hard work to keep her head to the wind. We were faint with rowing, and our strength would soon have been gone, but we cried, ‘Lord, save us, or we perish!’ Then a light shone upon the waters, and we saw a form walking upon the troubled sea, like unto that of the Son of God, and he drew near the ship, and we knew that it was Jesus; and he stepped upon the deck, and laid his hand upon the helm, and he said unto the winds and waves, Peace, be still, and there was a great calm. Let not the friends of the Bible fear; God is in the midst of us. God shall help us, and that right early.’ In such a strain he went on to the close. ‘Wonderful! wonderful!’ said my neighbor the critic; ‘he talks like an angel from heaven.’”

No minister now living has been heard by so many people in the same number of years, or has been the subject of so much controversy as Spurgeon. The great populace of London has been moved to its depths by his preaching, and he has met with the same enthusiastic reception wherever he has preached. He is yet very young—only thirty-four years 182of age—and had become celebrated before he was twenty-one. Such speedy recognition is certainly a proof of great merit, and his example is well worth our attention.

Spurgeon’s parents were poor but respectable—his father and grandfather being Independent ministers. He early felt it his duty to preach, and even when a child was accustomed to preach to his playmates. His father wished him to go to college to qualify himself for the work in regular form, but after giving the matter careful consideration he declined. Even when he became usher at Cambridge, and began to preach occasionally, he refused the tempting offer of a college course, and gave it as his opinion that he was called to go to the work at once, and not to waste years in preparation. We can hardly tell what effect a long course of training, that would have allowed time for his fervid zeal to cool, would have had upon his after life. About the same time he left the church of his fathers and united with the Baptists, believing that immersion was the proper baptism. His occasional ministrations were marked by modesty and good sense, as well as loving earnestness.

He was soon called to take charge of an old, but decayed church in London. Its forlorn condition did not dismay him, and under his vigorous care and mighty preaching the congregation became overflowing. The building was enlarged, but the congregation grew still larger. Immense public halls were taken, and these too were soon overflowed. His congregation built a new church of extraordinary size, which has been packed full on each preaching occasion ever since. Several volumes of his sermons have been published, and have met with a ready sale. He preaches nearly a sermon a day, corresponds with a newspaper, writes books, superintends a ministerial school, speaks for and aids a number of charitable institutions—altogether performing more labor than perhaps any other preacher of our day. Yet these multiform labors are performed with such ease and certainty that he hardly ever appears tired, and gives no indication of breaking down.

183What is the secret of the power by which this man has reached the hearts of the poor more fully than any other man for many years? It is admitted on all hands that he is not a man of profound intellect. There is no trace of unusual powers of thought either in his published or spoken sermons. But there is a more than ordinary force of arrangement, illustration and expression. He may not be in the first class of great men, but he is surely foremost in the second class. He also possesses wonderful enthusiasm. His faith is too clear for a doubt, and he is never troubled with any misgivings regarding his own power of presenting the truth. Confidence is a part of his nature, and enables him to bear unmoved any amount of opposition, and, while preaching, to follow out any suggestions of his genius. His power of language is very great. From beginning to end of his discourse he never falters, nor uses the wrong word. His voice is strong, clear, and melodious, making the tritest thought interesting. But above all, he is a good man, and works solely for the good of his hearers. This is the reason why he is not intoxicated by his great success. He feels that the Holy Spirit labors with him, and that the blessing of God rests upon him.

Spurgeon is an extempore preacher in the best sense of the word. He studies and meditates as fully as his time will permit, and at any period is ready to give what he thus masters to the public. “I can’t make out,” said a minister to him, “when you study, Brother Spurgeon. When do you make your sermons?” “Oh!” he replied, “I am always studying—I am sucking in something from everything. If you were to ask me home to dine with you, I should suck a sermon out of you.” One who had known him, thus writes:

“With respect to his habits of composition, he assured us that not one word of his sermons is written before delivery, and that the only use he makes of his pen upon them is to correct the errors of the stenographer. His happy faculty of mere mental composition, and of remembering what he thus composes, saves him much time and drudgery. He can 184exercise it anywhere; but probably with more success in the pulpit, while he is giving utterance to what he has prearranged in his mind. Learning not to read manuscript out of the pulpit is the best preparation for not reading it in the pulpit, and he who in his study can think well, independently of it, will, in the pulpit, think better without it; for the excitement occasioned by speaking what he has premeditated—if that excitement does not produce too deep feeling—will summon new thoughts to fill up the old ranks, and lead whole divisions of fresh recruits into the field.”

The almost irresistible attraction of Spurgeon’s ministrations may be inferred from the following facts:

“It was no unusual sight on a Sunday evening to see placards put up outside of the building (Exeter Hall) announcing that it was full, and that no more could be admitted. In his own church it has been found necessary for the police to be present at every service, and the pew-holders are admitted by ticket through a side door. This accomplished, at ten minutes prior to the commencement of the service, the doors are opened and a rush commences; but it is speedily over, for the chapel is full—not only the seats but every inch of standing-room being occupied, and the gates have to be closed, with an immense crowd of disappointed expectant hearers outside. The church has, indeed, reason to be deeply grateful that amid the vice and immorality of London, a voice so clear and loud has been lifted up for the cause of the Redeemer.”

Perhaps no American minister has ever become so well known to the whole body of the people as Henry Ward Beecher. He has been bitterly criticised and opposed even by members of his own denomination, but has triumphed over every attack, and won a proud place among preachers. He has even become a power in the political world, and his devotion to the cause of liberty has endeared him to thousands who might otherwise have never heard his name.

This great orator was born in 1813 in the State of Connecticut. His father, Lyman Beecher, was a clergyman of great force and celebrity. Young Beecher graduated at Amherst College at twenty-one, and studied theology with his father 185at Lane Seminary, Cincinnati. When this was concluded, he was first settled over a small Presbyterian church at Lawrenceburg, Ind., where he remained two years, and then removed to Indianapolis, and preached eight years with great acceptance. His first sermon was so earnest and powerful that it led to the conversion of twelve persons. A course of lectures, which he gave during this period to young men, attracted great attention, and he was soon after called to take charge of Plymouth Church in Brooklyn. It was then a feeble organization; but under his care has increased to vast proportions. It has now a membership of 1,700, and the largest regular congregation by far of any church in the land. The income of the church from the rent of pews is nearly $41,000!

As a lecturer, Beecher stands among the very first. He speaks every year, in nearly every prominent city of the Union, and thus contributes powerfully to the success of the various reforms he advocates. He early gave the anti-slavery movement the support of his powerful eloquence, and preached and lectured against the great evil so effectually that no man was more denounced and hated at the South than he.

In the heat of our civil contest he passed some months in England, and there spoke for the cause of liberty and Union. He met with the most embittered opposition; the rabble, who had been incited by handbills to come out and put him down, often roaring until his voice could no longer be heard. He would calmly watch them until the noise for a moment subsided, and then speak again with such effect that the victory was soon declared in his favor. No man contributed more powerfully to allay the prejudice of England against our nation during her sore contest.

We do not wonder at the great popularity of Beecher. He possesses much greater intellectual acuteness than Spurgeon, and is inferior in this particular to no one of the orators of the present day. The variety of topics he discusses is immense, and he brings such good sense and sound logic to bear on them, that the people feel him to be a teacher indeed. 186They go to hear him, expecting that he will apply high spiritual truth to every day life, and are not disappointed.

Beecher is a giant in reasoning power, and gives no light, superficial views of anything. His feelings are very acute, and by the mere force of sympathy he has the smiles and tears of his audience at command. His power of illustration is wonderful; the most abstruse subject grows plain under the light of his luminous comparisons. While his command of language is very great, and he never hesitates for a word, his taste is so pure that he never uses an unnecessary or objectionable term. In fact, he speaks for the press as much as for the congregation before him. For years his sermons have been taken down by short-hand writers, and read all over the world. Sometimes they do not even receive a final correction from him. This is a convincing evidence of his marvelous popularity. His sermons are first preached to a vast assembly, and then spread before hundreds of thousands of readers. Not only newspapers of his own denomination, but of others, count it a great attraction to be able to announce a weekly or semi-monthly sermon from this gifted man.

On several occasions we were privileged to hear him, and will give some account of the first time we listened to his eloquence. A large number of people gathered long before the hour for service, and waited impatiently for the opening of the door. Ten minutes before the hour the crowd was admitted, and every vacant pew almost instantly filled. Then seats were folded out from the ends of the pews into the aisles, and these filled until the whole vast space was one dense mass of living humanity; on the ground floor or in the second or third galleries there was no unoccupied space. Many even then were forced to turn away from the door. The preaching was plain, logical, deep, and clear rather than brilliant. There was no florid imagery, but the light of imagination gleamed through the whole discourse. The subject was naturally analyzed, every part powerfully illustrated, and the application pungent enough to reach every heart not entirely 187impervious. Several times a smile rippled over the faces of the congregation, but lasted only for a moment, and was generally the prelude for some deep and solemn impression.

Beecher prepares his discourses with care, but neither memorizes nor reads them. On one occasion we noticed him lay his manuscript on the desk before him and begin to read. The description was beautiful, but the congregation seemed indifferent, and gave no evidence of close attention. Soon he pushed the paper away. Then every eye was bent upon him with intensest interest.

Beecher’s ordinary lectures give but little indication of his real power. They are written and read in the same form to numerous audiences. But his genius finds free play only when the manuscript is abandoned. Then, when he speaks for a cause in which his heart is enlisted, we have an example of what mortal eloquence can be. We once heard him at a large meeting which he had visited as a listener. A long and rather dull speech had been made by the orator of the evening. But Beecher was seen, recognized, and called out. Every murmur was stilled. Laughter and tears succeeded each other with marvelous rapidity; but he closed by a daring apostrophe, spoken in a low tone, that thrilled to every heart, and held all spell-hound for some moments after he had ceased to speak! It seemed the full realization of every dream of the might and power of eloquence.

This lady was born in 1842, and while quite young became celebrated as a public speaker. She has not won her present position by a single brilliant effort, but by long continued exertions and the display of solid talent. She is a member of the Society of Friends, and early imbibed the hatred of oppression and slavery for which that denomination is distinguished. Her principal public speeches have been given in the service of freedom, and to secure a higher position and 188a wider range of employments for women. Her own example, as well as her teachings, has been one of great value to her sex.

When Miss Dickinson began to speak she had no powerful friends to aid, and for a time her audiences were quite small. But she was too firm and devoted to the cause she advocated to grow discouraged. And there was something so attractive in her manner, that opposition was soon overcome, and her audiences grew continually. She was so truthful, earnest, elegant, and strong, that before she was twenty-one years of age she was recognized as a power in the political world, and few voices more eloquent than hers were lifted up on behalf of liberty and justice during our civil war. She has also taken part in political canvassing with great success. Her reputation as a lyceum lecturer is fully established. In all the cities of the United States where she has spoken large and enthusiastic audiences have greeted her.

In speaking, she is modest, graceful, and unconstrained, with an air and manner of perfect naturalness. There is no elaborate ornament in her words, but they are always well chosen, and flow with the utmost ease. Her discourses are logical, and usually bear upon a single point with overwhelming force. Without the slightest attempt at stage effect, she frequently displays deep emotion, and becomes totally absorbed in her subject. Her voice is full, clear, melodious, and perfectly distinct; it is persuasive, well modulated, and equally capable of expressing pathos, and scorn, and command.

With such abilities she cannot fail to be popular, and her influence, which is always for good, is steadily widening. Yet in order to display her full power, she requires a subject that enlists her sympathies, and in a mere literary lecture, although always instructive, she does not produce the same vivid impression as when roused by some injustice, or pleading the cause of the oppressed and feeble.

The manner of preparation by which this lady, who takes rank with the best of American orators, has acquired such 189power over words and hearts, merits attention; in response to our inquiry, she says:

“For the first three years of my public life, speaking, with me, was absolutely extempore; that is, I gave a general look over the field before I rose to my feet, then talked. Since then, I consider my subject—let it lie in my mind, and gather fresh thoughts—statistics—what not—almost unconsciously—as a stone gathers moss.

“When I wish to make the speech, I arrange this mass in order and form—make a skeleton of it on paper, and leave the filling in till I reach the platform—then some things I have thought of are omitted, and others thought of at the time, are substituted. The speech changes here and there for some time, and then gradually crystalizes—that is all. I mean, of course, what is called a regular lyceum speech. The political speeches are made very much on my old plan.”

We selected one American political orator of the generation that has just gone by as a specimen of the capabilities of extempore speech, and will now give an instance of the present. The speaker we have chosen is widely known. Many have listened to his eloquent words, and in the stormy events of the last few years, his name has become a household word. We make this choice the more readily because the character of eloquence for which Bingham is noted, is that which many persons suppose to be most incompatible with a spontaneous selection of words—beauteous, elegant, melodious, and highly adorned.

Bingham graduated, was admitted to the bar, and speedily became a successful lawyer. He also turned his attention to political affairs, and became known as a most efficient public canvasser for the doctrines of the party with which he acted. This is one of the best schools in the world for ready and vigorous speech, but has a tendency to produce carelessness of expression, and to substitute smartness for logic and principle. This tendency he successfully resisted, and became distinguished for the deep moral tone, as well as for the beauty of the language of his addresses. He was elected to 190Congress from an Ohio district, and become known as one of the most eloquent members of that body. He took a prominent part in the opposition to the Kansas and Nebraska bill, and met the entire approval of the people. When the Southern States commenced to secede in the winter of 1860–61 he brought forward a force bill to compel them to submit to national authority. This was defeated by those who thought that other means would avail. Time proved the wisdom of his views.

All through the contest that followed, his voice was heard on the side of liberty and Union. He soon became known as one of the leaders of the Republican party, and has nobly held that position to the date of writing.

Mr. Bingham, in speaking, is calm, clear and pointed. His manner indicates confidence, and his words flow freely. Imagination is allowed full play, and the spirit of poetry breathes everywhere. He abounds in lofty and beautiful imagery, that places the truth in the clearest light. While the subject is never lost sight of, a thousand graces and beauties cluster around it from every hand. From the elevation and certainty of his language, many casual hearers have been led to imagine that his speeches were written and committed. But the reverse is the case. Some of his highest efforts have been made with no time even for the prearrangement of thought. This is one secret of his great success as a debater. He is always ready, with or without warning, to speak the thoughts that are in his mind. But he prefers, of course, to have time to arrange his matter in advance.

The following passage will illustrate the force of Mr. Bingham’s thought and expression. It is from a speech in reply to Wadsworth, and was entirely unstudied:

“As the gentleman then and now has chosen to assail me for this, I may be pardoned for calling his attention to the inquiry, what further did I say in that connection, on that day, and in the hearing of the gentleman? I said that every loyal citizen in this land held his life, his property, his home, and the children of his house, a sacred trust for the common defence. Did that remark excite any horror in the gentleman’s 191mind. Not at all I undertook, in my humble way, to demonstrate that, by the very letter and spirit of the Constitution, you had a right to lay the lives and the property and the homes, the very hearth-stones of the honest and the just and the good, under contribution by law, that the Republic might live. Did that remark excite any abhorrence in the gentleman, or any threat that fifteen slave States would be combined against us? Not at all. I stated in my place just as plainly, that by your law you might for the common defence not only take the father of the house, but the eldest born of his house, to the tented field by force of your conscription, if need be, and subject him to the necessary despotism of military rule, to the pestilence of the camp, and the destruction of the battle-field. And yet the gentleman was not startled with the horrid vision of a violated Constitution, and there burst from his indignant lips no threat that if we did this there would be a union of fifteen slave States against the Federal despotism. I asserted in my place, further, that after you had taken the father and his eldest born away, and given them both to death a sacrifice for their country, you could, by the very terms of the Constitution, take away the shelter of the roof-tree which his own hands had reared for the protection of the wife and the children that were left behind, and quarter your soldiers beneath it, that the Republic might live. And yet the gentleman saw no infraction of the Constitution, and made no threat of becoming the armed ally of the rebellion. But the moment that I declared my conviction that the public exigencies and the public necessities required, that the Constitution and the oaths of the people’s Representatives required, that by your law—the imperial mandate of the people—the proclamation of liberty should go forth over all that rebel region, declaring that every slave in the service of these infernal conspirators against your children and mine, against your homes and mine, against your Constitution and mine, against the sacred graves of your kindred and mine, shall be free, the gentleman rises startled with the horrid vision of broken fetters and liberated bondmen, treason overthrown, and a country redeemed, regenerated, and forever reunited, and cries, No; this shall not be; fifteen States will combine against you. Slavery is the civilizer; you shall neither denounce it as an ‘infernal atrocity,’ nor overthrow it to save the Union. I repeat the word which so moved the gentleman from his propriety, that chattel slavery is an ‘infernal atrocity.’ I thank God that I learned to lisp it at my mother’s knee. It is a logical sequence, 192sir, disguise it as you may, from that golden rule which was among the first utterances of all of us, ‘whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye so even unto them.’”

The second instance is taken from a speech on the proposal to furnish relief to the Southerners who were in a destitute and starving condition after the close of the war.

“No war rocks the continent, no armed rebellion threatens with overthrow the institutions of the country. The pillars of the holy temple of our liberties do not tremble in the storm of battle; the whole heavens are no longer covered with blackness, and the habitations of the people are no longer filled with lamentation and sorrow for their beautiful slain upon the high places of the land! Thanks be to God! the harvest of death is ended and the sickle has dropped from the hands of the ‘pale reapers’ on the field of mortal combat.

“Sir, you may apply in the day of war the iron rule of war, and say that the innocent and unoffending in the beleagured city shall perish with the guilty; but when war’s dread alarm has ended, as happily it has with us, when the broken battalions of rebellion have surrendered to the victorious legions of the Republic, let no man stand within the forum of the people and utter the horrid blasphemy that you shall not have regard for the famishing poor, that you shall not give a cup of water to him that is ready to perish in the name of our Master, that you shall not even relieve the wants of those who have never offended against the laws. The unoffending little children are not enemies of your country or of mine; the crime of treason is not upon their souls. Surely, surely they are not to be denied your care. The great French patriot, banished from the empire for his love of liberty, gathered little children around him in his exile at Guernsey, and fed them from his own table, uttering the judgment of our common humanity in its best estate; ‘Little children at least are innocent, for God wills it so.’”

This great statesman and orator is an extempore speaker, and one of the best in the world. He has not, perhaps, the fiery force of John Bright, who, like himself, speaks without previous preparation of words, but far surpasses him in variety 193and elegance. His speech, like a prism, reflects a thousand shades of color, and the dullest subject under his treatment blooms into life and light. His style is more like that of Cicero than of Demosthenes, being diffuse, sparkling, graceful—flowing like a river, that is always full to the brim. He is prepared at any hour of day or night to take part in any discussion of interest to him. Even when he is explaining details of finance, usually the driest of subjects, he is listened to with delighted interest. By the mere force of his talents he has raised himself to a commanding position in England, and as a writer has also attracted much attention.

Gladstone is of a light and nervous build, has a very sweet and attractive countenance, and a rich and fascinating voice. As a debater he is almost faultless, unless his want of harshness and maliciousness be called a fault. Sometimes, too, he shows a disposition to yield rather than contend, but never when principle is at stake. To him, perhaps more than any other, belongs the credit of the great reform bill which has almost changed the government of Great Britain.

The following extract from a communication on the subject of extempore speaking will be read with deep interest:

... “I venture to remark, first, that your countrymen, so far as a very limited intercourse and experience can enable me to judge, stand very little in need of instruction or advice as to public speaking from this side of the water. And further, again speaking of my own experience, I think that the public men of England are, beyond all others, engrossed by the multitude of cares and subjects of thought belonging to the government of a highly diversified empire, and therefore are probably less than others qualified either to impart to others the best methods of preparing public discourses, or to consider and adopt them for themselves.

“Suppose, however, I were to make the attempt, I should certainly found myself on a double basis, compounded as follows: First, of a wide and thorough general education, which, I think, gives a suppleness and readiness, as well as a firmness of tissue to the mind, not easily obtained without this form of discipline. Secondly, of the habit of constant and searching reflection on the subject of any proposed discourse. 194Such reflection will naturally clothe itself in words, and of the phrases it supplies, many will spontaneously rise to the lips. I will not say that no other forms of preparation can be useful, but I know little of them, and it is on these, beyond all doubt, that I would advise the young principally to rely.

This distinguished divine was born in Cadiz, O., in 1811, began to preach in 1833, and was elected Bishop of the M. E. Church in 1852. At the very beginning of his ministerial career, his sermons made a deep impression, and his early promise has been abundantly realized.

As a lecturer he has also acquired a deservedly high rank. During the war of the rebellion he delivered a discourse on the “Future of Our Country,” in the principal cities of the United States, which gave him a more than denominational fame. This lecture has probably never been surpassed as a summing up of the resources of the nation, and an application of the data to the prediction of the probable destiny and form of our government. As far as words were concerned, it was an extempore address, and had the peculiarity that might be expected from this fact, of being much better delivered, and therefore, of making a much more profound impression at some points than others.

Simpson travels continually, preaching at conferences, dedicating churches, and delivering lectures, thus being brought into close contact with the people in all parts of the country. He has little resemblance to the popular ideal of an orator. His action is ungraceful, and his voice low and almost monotonous. He is also hard worked, and not having the powers of endurance possessed by some of our incessant preachers, he usually appears tired and exhausted. Yet he has three qualities that go far to make up for these defects. He is intensely earnest and real. Before listening to him five minutes his hearers are convinced that he is speaking the very thoughts of his 195soul without evasion or pretense. He also has great imagination, and, as a consequence, the statement of facts, in which he abounds, is never dry or tedious. And lastly, he has great command of condensed and expressive language. What he wishes to say is said in a few words, and every sermon is filled with the materials of thought rather than with mere verbiage. These qualities atone for every deficiency of external grace, and place him among the most popular ministers of the Methodist Church.

Simpson preaches entirely extempore, having no time to write, even if he had the disposition. His memory is tenacious, and his power of observation keen, so that he is never at a loss for facts or illustrations. He has a tender heart also, and often appeals to his own vivid experiences, thus drawing the sympathies of the people with him.

There can scarcely be a doubt that Wendell Phillips is the greatest professional lecturer of the present day. He is always radical, and on the extremest verge of every question, although in many things the people have followed hard on his footsteps. As a speaker, he has great power, combined with unsurpassed elegance. His manner is calm, his voice of silvery sweetness, yet every rounded sentence is full of living flame, and no man is so unsparing in his denunciations. In a style as lucid, exact, and pure as that of a scholar who has been all his life secluded from the world, and busied with literature alone, he utters words and sentences befitting the stormiest revolution.

The lectures of Phillips, which are repeated again and again, are, of course, well studied and the language followed pretty closely, though not invariably. But like Mirabeau, it is in his unstudied speeches that he rises highest. The first address that gave him public fame was of this character. A meeting had been called in Boston to pass resolutions of indignation on the occasion of the murder of Lovejoy, who was killed in Illinois for his devotion to freedom. 196The whole business of the meeting was arrested, and the resolutions were on the point of being defeated by the powerful opposition of a leading politician, who feared even to say that murder was wrong. Phillips was present as a listener, but could keep his seat no longer, and, arising, gave vent to his feelings in a speech so full of thrilling and indignant eloquence, that the purpose of the meeting was at once secured, and he himself brought before the public as one of the first orators of the age.

In regard to the manner of his preparation Phillips himself refers to the celebrated letter of Lord Brougham to the father of Macaulay, on the training of his son in eloquence. The substance of Brougham’s advice is, to first acquire the power of speaking freely and easily before an audience, no matter at what sacrifice of accuracy and elegance. This, he says truly, can only be done by much practice. When this is accomplished, he recommends studying and committing to memory the orations of Demosthenes until their spirit is fully imbibed.

This traveler, scholar, and preacher, adds another one to the long and illustrious list of those who have triumphed over every hindrance and risen to eminence. He was born in 1800. A district school afforded him all the education he obtained before entering the Methodist itineracy, but while enduring the hardships of a pioneer minister he studied diligently, perusing his Bible and commentaries around the log fires of his parishioners whenever even this poor opportunity occurred. When he was appointed to Cincinnati a more promising field opened. He went to college during the week, and still filled his pulpit on the Sabbath. He soon after became a professor in a college, and afterward chaplain to Congress, where he was highly distinguished. Then he served a time as editor of the New York Advocate, and became President of Dickenson College. Next he traveled through the old world, as far as Egypt and Syria, and, returning, 197wrote a very interesting account of his journey. He was, lastly, elected Corresponding Secretary of the M. E. Missionary Society—a position which he has held for years, and which brings him into contact with large masses of people in every part of the country.

The merits of Durbin as an orator are many and high. He possesses deep feeling, and the tears of the people to whom he preaches are at his command. There is a greatness about his character that is always felt, and with it a childlike simplicity that endears him to every heart. There is an utter absence of the pretension we sometimes find about those who are conscious of the possession of great powers. His arrangement of every sermon is plain, simple, and easily remembered. His command of words is complete, and he always finds just the one he wants without hesitation. The tones of his voice are affectionate and pleasing, though when not called into animation by some subject worthy of his powers, a little monotonous, yet so strong that when he seems to be only talking at the pitch of common conversation, every word can be heard to the extremity of the largest church. But his voice can be raised to a thunder peal that is the more impressive because it is seldom employed. The perfect ease with which he preaches, is far different from the manner of those who have memorized every word and are full of anxiety for its effect. Often while he talks away with apparent indifference, every eye is fixed on his, or moistened with tears. When we heard him, some of his images were overwhelmingly sublime, and we held our breath in awe; at other times his explanations seemed to throw new and radiant light on what was before dark and obscure.

The mode by which Durbin attained his great success is worthy of careful attention. In a communication to the compiler of these notices, he says:

... “I never wrote my sermons—not more than two or three in my life—and these not till after I had preached them. My plan has been to have a well-defined topic, and only such subdivisions as naturally arise out of the topic. I 198generally put them down separately on a small piece of paper, which I take into the pulpit, but scarcely ever use. This is commonly called a skeleton. I do not write out anything I propose to say, but carefully think over the main points; but never commit them to memory. I keep within living touch of my skeleton, but depend on the natural consecutiveness of thought to enable me to clothe it with muscle; and I depend on the inspiration of the occasion to give it life and color. The inspiration is partly human and partly divine; arising from the combined action of the divine and the human spirit, which combined action constitutes the power of a preached gospel.

“So far as human ability is concerned, I believe that this is the secret of any success I have had in preaching the Gospel.”

The Evangelist gives Rev. Newman Hall’s account of how he learned extempore preaching, as follows:

“When I went to college, it seemed to me that I should never be able to say a word in public without writing. But I soon determined that if I was going to be a preacher, and particularly if I wanted to be anything like a successful preacher, I must form the habit of extemporaneous address. So I went into my room, locked the door, placed the Bible before me on a mantel, opened it at random, and then on whatever passage my eye chanced to rest, proceeded to deliver a discourse of ten minutes. This practice was kept up an entire twelve months. Every day, for a whole year, ten minutes were given to that kind of speaking, in my own room by myself. At first I found it very difficult to speak so long right to the point. But then if I couldn’t talk on the subject I would talk about it—making good remarks and moral reflections—being careful to keep up the flow, and say something to the end of the term allotted for the exercise. At the end of the twelve months, however, I found I could not only speak with a good degree of fluency, but that I could hold myself strictly to the subject in hand. You take this course. Don’t do your practising on an audience. That is outrageous.”

APPENDIX. — I. THE CHAIRMAN’S GUIDE. ORDER OF PROCEEDINGS IN VARIOUS MEETINGS. — RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLIES. — ANNIVERSARIES, CELEBRATIONS, ETC. — LITERARY AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETIES. — WARD, DISTRICT, OR TOWNSHIP MEETINGS. — DELEGATED BODIES. — CONTINUED MEETINGS. — II. GENERAL RULES OF ORDER. QUORUM—RULES—DECISION. — OFFICERS. — PRESIDING OFFICER. — RECORDING OFFICER. — MEMBERS. — MOTIONS. — PREFERRED MOTIONS. — DEBATE. — PUTTING THE QUESTION. — COMMITTEES.

When the business of an assembly is limited to hearing one man speak, there is little need of rules. But when there are several speeches, and various kinds of business are mingled with them, the subject of order becomes important. Many a fluent speaker may be embarrassed because he does not know just when he ought to speak, and how to introduce what he desires. A member of Congress, for instance, cannot be efficient, no matter what his talents, until he masters the rules of business. Even in smaller and less formal assemblies it is of great advantage to every one, especially if called upon to preside, as all may be in this land of discussions, to know just how to fulfil the duties imposed on him. In this short, and necessarily imperfect sketch, we will only aim to give those simple forms of parliamentary law that will often be needed by every man who essays to speak at all.

Every society has the right to form its own laws, and whenever it does positively determine any matter, the general rules of order are superseded to that extent. But it would be an endless task for any body to provide beforehand for every case that might occur, and the greater part of these are always left to be decided by general usage. This usage, which has been growing up for years, now covers 200almost every possible point. An eminent authority says: “It is much more material that there should be a rule to go by than what that rule is, for then the standard cannot be changed to suit the caprice or interest of the chairman, or more active members, and all are assured of justice.”

The same rules apply to all assemblies, with a few modifications, which are readily suggested by the nature of the assembly. We will give a few of the special applications first, and afterward the general rules.

The regular public service of churches which have a ritual is governed by it, and in those which have none, usage always fixes a course from which the preacher should not vary without good reasons. The most common mode of procedure in churches that are governed by unwritten custom is, first, a short invocation of God’s blessing on the service. This is omitted in the Methodist church and some others. Then follows the reading and singing of a hymn; prayer, the reading of a Scripture lesson (which is frequently omitted in evening service), singing again and preaching. There are several modes of closing. Sometimes the order is: prayer; singing a hymn, with doxology attached; and benediction. Sometimes singing comes first, then prayer, and the benediction pronounced while the congregation is in the attitude of prayer. Sometimes there are four distinct acts; singing a hymn; prayer; singing the doxology; and benediction. The order in which these modes of closing are stated is, in our opinion, also the order of preference.

Business and congregational meetings are governed by the common rules of order.

In meetings of this character, the object usually is to enjoy a pleasant time, hear speeches, and pass resolutions that have been prepared beforehand, and on which no discussion is expected. In Sunday-school celebrations, and other meetings 201of the same nature, let a programme be formed, with each performance in its order, and either printed and distributed or read as soon as the meeting is called to order. This must be done at the proper time by the superintendent, or some one appointed for the purpose, who will act as chairman, and introduce each speaker in his turn. Any resolutions offered should be in writing, and also read by him, and put to vote in the regular form. When the exercises are closed the meeting will be dismissed without waiting for a motion to adjourn.

In anniversary meetings of a more formal character, it is common to have each speaker supplied, in advance, with a resolution on which he is to speak. At the proper time he will arise, offer the resolution, and make his address. If it is desirable to have more than one speech on that resolution, the next can second the motion and speak in the same way. Then the resolution may be put in the common form. This can be continued until all the resolutions and speakers are disposed of.

In the societies usually attached to colleges, everything should be done with the most scrupulous regularity, and thus the rules of public business fully learned. It is well also for them to have a certain order by which all their exercises shall be governed, and everything made to move on with the regularity of clockwork. A committee can easily construct such a plan, and it can be amended as desired. It should always have a department for miscellaneous business.

Literary societies and debating clubs are very commonly formed in villages and school districts, and when properly carried on can scarcely fail to be profitable. Many a person has received his first lesson in eloquence in such a school, and the fluency and confidence a boy or young man can acquire in them may be of life-long advantage. Their organization may be very simple. A meeting has been called by some one who is interested in the matter, and when the people 202are met he calls them to order, nominates a chairman, puts the question, and at the request of the chair explains the object of the meeting. Some one then moves to appoint a committee to draft a Constitution and By-laws. It is best for the committee to have these previously prepared, that no time may be lost. The following form, taken from “How to Talk,” with a few modifications, will be all that is needed in most cases:

This Society shall be known as the      of     

The object of this Society shall be the improvement of its Members in debating, and the promotion of their intellectual, social, and moral advancement.

Any person of good moral character may become a member of this Society, by signing the Constitution and paying the initiation fee. [In some cases it may be necessary to receive Members by a vote of the Society, after being regularly proposed.]

The Officers of this Society shall consist of a President, a Vice-President, a Secretary, and a Treasurer; each of whom shall be elected by ballot, and their duties shall be the same as are generally required of such officers in similar societies.

No addition, alteration, or amendment shall be made to this Constitution without a vote of two-thirds of the Members present, and no motion to amend shall be acted upon at the same meeting at which it is proposed.

Sec. 1.—This Society shall meet on the      of each      for the promotion of its objects and the transaction of business.

Sec. 2.—There shall be an annual meeting on the      of      for the election of Officers, and to hear the reports of the Secretary and Treasurer.

Sec. 3.—Special meetings may be called by the President at the request of Members.

All persons received into this Society shall pay the sum of      on signing the Constitution.

All Members shall pay the sum of      per month, to be appropriated, with the initiation fees, to defraying the expenses of the Society; and no Member who may be in arrears for dues more than two months shall be allowed to speak or vote on any question till such arrearages shall be paid.

Any Member who shall refuse to conform to the Constitution and By-laws, or shall be guilty of repeated disorderly conduct, shall be subjected to expulsion by a vote of two-thirds of the Members present; but no motion to expel a Member shall be acted upon at the same meeting at which it is offered.

The same rule in reference to amendments shall apply to the By-laws as to the Constitution.

The Constitution when presented may be discussed, and put to vote, altogether, or article by article; if adopted, it becomes the law of the meeting. A list of members will then be made out, including all who desire to be enrolled, and are willing to pay the initiation fee. Then a new election of officers should be held, with those only who are members voting. The old chairman will retain his seat until the new one is elected. When it is intended to have performances of different kinds, as essays, orations, debates, etc., it is well to appoint a committee to draw up a regular order in which these will be called for. The society being now organized, may proceed to business, or fix the time for next meeting and adjourn.

When one or more persons desire to call a meeting for any purpose, there is often great confusion and uncertainty as to the mode of procedure. A few simple rules will go far to obviate all difficulty. In the call, those only who are favorable 204to the intended object should be invited, and if others attend, they should take no part in the meeting, unless challenged to discussion.

The responsibility for the guidance of the meeting until its regular organization, rests on those who have called it. When the people have met at the appointed time, one of these will ask them to come to order, and will then nominate a chairman; when this is seconded, he will put it to vote, and call the man elected to the chair, who will put all other motions. A secretary also should be elected, and then the meeting is regularly organized. The chairman next states the object of the meeting, or if he prefers, calls upon one of those interested to do it.

Some one will then move the appointment of a committee (which is said to be the American panacea for everything) to prepare resolutions expressive of the wishes or opinion of the meeting. If the names of the persons to compose the committee be not mentioned in the original motion, it is usual for the chairman to name them, putting the name of the mover first on the list. The chairman may, for good reasons, excuse any one of the committee from acting, if there be no objections on the part of the assembly. But if there are, he can only be excused by vote. The committee then require some time to make their report, and it is common for the chairman to call on some one, who ought to be notified beforehand, for a speech. When the committee have finished their business they will return, and waiting until no one is speaking, their chairman will address the chairman of the meeting, telling him that they are ready to report. If no objection is made, the resolutions prepared are then read, and are at the disposal of the meeting. They may be treated separately, or together, amended, adopted or rejected. The resolutions may be prepared beforehand, in which case the appointment of the committee may be dispensed with. If the resolutions should not be satisfactory, they may be recommitted.

When the resolutions have been disposed of, the speaker 205will announce that there is no business before the house, which will either bring a motion to adjourn, or new business.

All legislatures, boards of directors, etc., hold their power only in trust for others who are not present, and are therefore held to stricter limitations in the performance of business than those assemblies which act only for themselves. In case the right of any delegate is disputed, this must be settled as soon as possible. In nearly all such meetings it is also provided that many things shall not be considered as determined until referred back to those by whom the members were chosen. With these exceptions, and the special rules that such bodies may provide, they are under the strict government of parliamentary law.

When any body holds sessions at intervals, it becomes necessary to bear in mind what has been previously done. This is accomplished by having the minutes of each meeting read at the beginning of the next, and if any mistakes exist they are corrected. This enables the assembly to take up the business where it closed, and proceed as if there had been no interruption. It is also well to have a certain order of business fixed, which shall always suggest what is proper to be done and prevent confusion. This order will necessarily differ in the various kinds of meetings. Legislative bodies, from the great variety of business brought before them, can seldom fix on any order that can be followed from day to day, but they often establish a regular order for a certain time. Matthias suggested the following arrangement for business meetings of bank directors, railway stockholders, etc.:

1. Presenting communications from parties outside of the meeting. A communication is read, and motions for action on it may be made, amended, and passed or rejected. After 206this has been done, or if no motion is made, the next communication is taken up.

2. Reports of standing committees. The chairman will call for these in their order, and each one, if prepared, will be read by the chairman of the committee. It should close with a resolution of some kind, and when it is moved and seconded that this be adopted, it may be discussed and determined as the assembly see fit. The minority of a committee may make a separate report if they wish.

3. Treasurer’s report.

4. Unfinished business.

5. New business.

1. In bodies which have a fixed number of members, a certain proportion most be present to make the transaction of business valid. The number may be fixed by the expression of the assembly, or its general custom. In the absence of any other rule, a majority is sufficient. The chairman should not take his seat until he sees that a quorum is present, and if the assembly is at any time reduced below this number, nothing but adjournment is in order.

2. The assembly may make its own rules in whole or in part, but whatever it does not determine, shall be subject to the common rules of order.

Any member has a right to insist on the enforcement of the rules, but this duty belongs especially to the chair.

3. In the absence of any special rule, the consent of a majority of the members voting is requisite to determine any point. A plurality, where more than two issues are presented, is not sufficient.

Presiding and recording officers are necessary in every meeting, and must be chosen by an absolute majority. When the assembly has financial matters to manage, a treasurer must also be elected.

This officer is known by various titles, such as chairman, president, speaker, moderator, etc. We will use the first. The chairman represents the assembly, declares its will, and 208obeys it implicitly. He must be treated with great respect, although his power is only a delegated one, and may be set aside by the declared will of the assembly. His principal duties are:

1. To begin the session by taking the chair and calling the members to order.

2. To announce business in its order.

3. To submit all motions and propositions.

4. To put all questions and announce the result.

6. To restrain members within rules of order.

6. To receive all communications and announce them to the assembly.

7. To sign public documents.

8. To decide points of order, subject to an appeal to the assembly.

The chairman should fully understand all the rules of business, be kind and courteous to all, but prompt and firm, for on him, more than any other, the order and harmony of every meeting depends.

In the absence of the chairman, the vice-president takes the chair, and when there is no such officer, a temporary chairman must be elected.

The chairman may read while sitting, but should rise to state a question or take a vote.

Secretary or clerk is the name usually bestowed on this officer. We will employ the first. It is his duty to keep a true record of all that is done in the assembly. Speeches and motions that do not prevail, need not be recorded. But it is sometimes customary, when it is intended to publish the proceedings, and no reporter is present, for the secretary to make the minutes take the form of a journal.

2. The secretary must keep all papers that belong to the society in safety; read them when ordered; call the roll; notify committees of their appointment and business; and sign all orders and proceedings of the assembly.

2093. A temporary secretary must be elected during the absence of the permanent one, unless there is an assistant to take his place.

4. The secretary should always stand in reading, or calling the roll.

1. All members are on a footing of absolute equality, and in every form of business the same courtesy and attention should be shown to each one by the chair and by all other members.

2. Every member is expected to observe strict decorum in his behavior. Standing, walking about, interrupting speakers, hissing, whispering, taking books or papers from the speaker’s table, are all breaches of decorum.

3. Any member accused of disorderly behavior may, when the charge is stated, be heard in his own behalf, and is then required to withdraw, until the assembly decides as to his guilt and punishment. He may be reprimanded, required to apologize, or expelled.

1. Business can only be introduced into an assembly by a motion. Persons, not members, may make communications, or send petitions asking for the doing of certain things; but these must be taken by one of the members, and by him read or presented to the assembly. It is then before the body for consideration, but nothing can be done with it until a motion is made by some one belonging to the assembly.

2. An assembly expresses its opinion by a resolution, commands by an order, and determines its own action by a vote. A member who wishes to secure either of these, draws it up in the form he desires it to bear, and moves that the assembly adopt what he proposes. He must first obtain the floor. This is done by rising and addressing the chairman by his title. If there be no previous claimant, the chairman responds by mentioning the speaker’s name, when he is at liberty 210to go on. When he has made his motion, another member must second it before the assembly will receive it or pay any attention to it. The chair or any member may insist on the motion being written, unless it is one of the kind that have a certain form, such as to adjourn, etc. The motion when seconded, is to be stated by the chair, when it becomes the property of the assembly, and is ready for debate or such other action as may be preferred. Suggestions and modifications of the motion may be made, or it may be withdrawn altogether, before this; but not after, without leave of the assembly formally expressed. No other motion, with some exceptions to be hereafter explained, can be entertained until the first is disposed of.

When a motion is made the assembly may do one of five things with it.

1. Decide it in the shape it then has.

2. Suppress all consideration of it or action on it.

3. Postpone it until a future time.

4. Refer it to a committee to be put in a better form.

5. Amend it themselves before deciding it.

We will consider these different ways of treating a question in their order.

1.—DECISION.

It is always to be taken for granted that the assembly is willing to decide a motion at once, unless some one moves to adopt one of the other courses. It may be repeated first, and when no one rises, the chair asks if they are ready for the question; if no one responds, it is put to vote.

2.—SUPPRESSION.

1. Sometimes the assembly does not wish to discuss a motion at all. In that case a member may move that it be indefinitely postponed. If this is debated, the matter remains as it was before. If it prevails, the matter is ended, and can only be brought up as a new question.

2. The motion to lay a subject on the table has nearly the 211same effect. If it prevails, the subject cannot be taken up without a motion to that effect.

3. The famous “previous question” has a totally different purpose in this country and England. There it is used to postpone a question. Its form is, “Shall the main question now be put?” and it is moved by those who wish to obtain a negative decision, the effect of which is to remove the question from before the house for that day, and by usage for the whole session.

4. In this country it is used to prevent debate, and is only moved by those who wish an affirmative decision. When this is carried the question must be voted upon without further remarks. A majority ought to use this power of stopping debate very sparingly, and never without good reason.

3.—POSTPONEMENT.

If the assembly is not prepared to act upon a question, or has more important business before it, the proper course is for some one to move that it be postponed until a certain time. If no time is fixed the question is suppressed altogether. If the assembly is dissolved before the appointed day, the effect is the same.

4.—COMMITMENT.

If the form of the motion is crude, it may be given into the hands of a committee to perfect. If it first came from a committee, it may be given back to them, which is called a recommitment. The whole or a part of a subject may be committed, and the assembly may, by vote, give such instructions as it desires. This motion is sometimes made use of for the purpose of procuring further information.

5.—AMENDMENT.

The assembly may alter, increase, or diminish any proposition at its pleasure. Its nature is often changed entirely.

2121. Every complicated question may be divided by a regular vote. This is usually done, if no objection is offered, without a vote, but it cannot be required by a single member as is sometimes stated. A motion to divide should specify the manner of division.

2. If blanks are left in resolutions, these must be filled by motion. If these embrace figures, and several numbers are proposed, that which includes the others may be put to vote first. But it is usually as well to put first that which is moved first.

3. All motions to amend, except by division, must be to amend by inserting or adding, or by striking out, or both.

4. An amendment may be accepted by the mover of a resolution, if no objection is made, for then general consent is presumed; but not otherwise.

5. It is strict parliamentary law to begin with the beginning of a proposition, and after the latter part is amended, not to return to a former part; but this is seldom insisted on in common societies.

6. Every amendment is susceptible of amendment, but this can go no further. But the second amendment may be defeated, and then a new one made to the principal amendment.

7. Whatever is agreed to, or disagreed to by the acceptance or rejection of an amendment cannot again be changed.

8. What is struck out cannot be inserted by another amendment, unless with such additions as to make it a new question. Neither can what is retained be changed.

9. Before putting the question on an amendment, the passage should be read as it was; then the amendment; lastly the passage as amended.

10. A paragraph that is inserted by vote Cannot be changed, but it may be amended before the question is put.

11. When the amendment is both to strike out and insert, these two may be divided by vote or general consent, and then the question is taken first on striking out.

When a motion is before the assembly, it must be disposed of before anything else can be brought forward, with the exception of three classes of questions. These are privileged, incidental, and subsidiary questions.

1.—PRIVILEGED QUESTIONS.

1. The motion to adjourn takes precedence of every other, except when it has been moved and defeated, when it shall not be moved again until something else has been done. It cannot be moved while a member is speaking, or a vote being taken. But to be entitled to such precedence, it must be a simple motion to adjourn, without question of time or place. If these are added, it must take its regular turn. An adjournment without any time being fixed, is equivalent to a dissolution, unless this has been provided for by custom or especial rule. At adjournment every pending question is taken from before the assembly, and can only be brought up again in the regular way.

2. Any question affecting the rights and privileges of members, as in quarreling, the intrusion of strangers, etc., comes next in order to adjournment, and displaces everything else.

3. If the assembly fix on an order of business for a certain time, when that time arrives, a motion to take up this order has precedence of all questions, but the two preceding.

2.—INCIDENTAL QUESTIONS.

Incidental questions are those that grow out of other questions, and must be decided before them.

1. Questions of order. If there is a breach of rules it is the duty of the chair to enforce them, and any member to call for their enforcement. This should be done at once. When there is a doubt as to what constitutes a breach of the rules, it is first decided by the chair, subject to an appeal to the assembly, which may be put in this form, “Shall the 214decision of the chair stand as the decision of the assembly?” On this the chair may debate as well as others, but the vote is final.

2. When papers are laid on the secretary’s table for the information of the assembly, any member may demand to have them read; but other papers can only be read after a regular motion is carried to that effect.

3. After a motion is stated by the chair, permission may be given to withdraw it by a regular vote.

4. A rule that interferes with the transaction of any business may be suspended by a unanimous vote, or in accordance with the provisions of a special rule which points out the majority requisite, such as two-thirds, three-fourths, etc.

3.—SUBSIDIARY QUESTIONS.

These relate to the principal question as secondary planets do to their primaries. They are of different degrees among themselves, and with a few exceptions are not applied to one another.

1. “Lie on the table.” This takes precedence of all the subsidiary motions. If carried, it takes the principal question and all that belongs to it from the consideration of the assembly, and they can only be brought up by a new motion. If decided in the negative, this question, like all the others of the same class, except the previous question, has no effect whatever.

2. “Previous question.” This motion can only be superseded by that to lay on the table. If lost, the question is not before the house for the remainder of that day.

3. A motion to postpone may be amended by fixing the time or changing it. If several days are mentioned, the longest time should be put first.

4. A motion to commit takes precedence of a motion to amend, but stands in the same rank with the others, except to lay on the table, and cannot be superseded by them, if moved first.

5. A motion to amend may be amended. It is not superseded 215by the previous question, or a motion for indefinite postponement, but is by a motion to postpone till a time certain, or to commit.

It is very important that the order of these secondary questions be carefully observed, as there may be many of them pending at once.

Debate in a society organized for the purpose of discussion, and in a deliberative body are quite different. In the former reply is expected, and may be bandied back and forth several times. In the latter the object is supposed to be giving information, and each member is limited to one speech, unless special permission is received to speak again. The chair must not take part in debates.

1. When a member wishes to speak, he obtains the floor in the same manner as if to offer a motion. The mover of a resolution is usually allowed the floor first, but this is a matter of courtesy rather than right.

2. When a speaker gives up the floor for any purpose, he loses his right to it, though as a favor he is often allowed to continue his speech.

3. No names are to be used in debate, but when it becomes necessary to designate an individual, some description may be used, as, the gentleman on the right, etc.

4. Every member must stand, when speaking, unless sick or disabled.

5. Motions to adjourn, to lay on the table, for the previous question, or the order of the day cannot be debated.

6. No member shall use abusive language against any of the acts of the assembly, or indulge in personal denunciations of other members. Wrong motives must not be attributed to any one. If a speaker digresses widely from the subject, and appears to misunderstand its nature, he may be called to order.

7. A member who is decided to be out of order loses his right to the floor, but this is seldom insisted on.

2168. A member cannot speak more than once on the same question without special permission, which must not be given until all have spoken; but he may speak on amendments, and on the same subject, when it is returned from a committee.

10. A member who has been misrepresented has the right to explain, but not to interrupt any one who is speaking for that purpose.

11. Debate may be stopped by the previous question; by determining in advance that at a certain time, the question shall be decided; or by adopting a rule limiting each member to so many minutes. In the latter case, the chair announces the expiration of the time, and the member takes his seat.

12. Every member should be listened to with respect, and no attempt made to interrupt him, unless he transgress the bounds of order. Calling for the question, hissing, coughing, etc., should be restrained by the chair if possible. The speaker may learn from these things that the assembly does not wish to hear him, but he is not bound to heed them. If necessary, the chair will name the obstinate offenders for punishment, who may be heard in their own defence, but must then withdraw while the assembly determines what punishment should be inflicted. But if all means of preserving order fail, and the chairman’s repeated calls are unnoticed, he is not responsible for this disorder, although it would be better then to resign an office that he can no longer make respected, unless so bound by public duty that he cannot take this course.

13. If a member in speaking makes use of disorderly words, notice should be taken at once. The words used, if the offence is serious, should be reduced to writing while fresh in the memory of all. If necessary, the assembly may determine what words were used, whether they were offensive or not, and at its pleasure require an apology, censure, or expel the offender. If other business is done before attention is called to the disorderly words, they cannot again be taken up.

When discussion and all preliminary matters are finished, the next step is to ascertain the will of the assembly. There are six ways of doing this. We will put first those that are most used:

1. The chair asks, “Are you ready for the question?” No objection being made, he first puts the affirmative, asking those who favor the motion to say, “Aye;” those who are opposed, “No.” He judges from the volume of sound, and declares which he believes has the majority. If any one doubts this, he may require the vote to be taken in a more exact way.

2. In place of saying “aye,” the affirmative may be asked to hold up their hands; then when these are down the same is asked of the negative. The determination in this case is the same as in the former case.

3. The affirmative may be required to rise to their feet and be counted; and when seated the negative will rise. These will also be counted, and this is the mode most commonly resorted to, when the result as declared by the chair, from the former methods, is doubted.

4. In this the affirmative and negative may stand up at once, but in different parts of the house, and be counted. This is a real “division.”

5. The method by ballot may be employed; each man writing his wish on a ticket. These are collected and counted. This mode is often employed in the election of officers, but seldom in the determination of simple questions.

6. The roll may be called by the secretary, and each man in his place answer, “Aye,” or “No.” These are marked by the secretary, and others who keep tally, and the result announced. Sometimes the names are entered on the journals, in two lists of “Aye” and “No.” The word “Yea,” is often used in place of “Aye.”

The chair has a casting vote in case of equal division.

A member who voted with the affirmative may move the 218reconsideration of any question, and if his motion is carried, the whole matter is opened up as it was at first, and may be discussed as before.

The use of a committee is to give a subject more careful consideration than it could receive in a full assembly. They are of three kinds. From their great importance they are said to be the eyes and ears of the assembly.

1. Standing committees are those that are appointed to take charge of all subjects of a certain character during a session, or other specified time.

2. Select committees are appointed to take charge of some one thing, and when that is finished they are dissolved, although they may be revived again by a vote of the assembly.

In appointing a committee, the first thing is to fix on a number: if several are named, the largest should be put first. The committees may be chosen by ballot; appointed by the chair; or elected by nomination and vote. The latter is the regular mode when there is no special rule, but the second is most frequently practised. Sometimes a committee is appointed to nominate all other committees, but this is not usually the case. The mover and seconder of a resolution should have place on a committee appointed to consider it, and, as a general rule, none but those who are friendly to the object to be accomplished should be appointed. Those opposed can make their opposition when it is returned to the assembly.

It is the duty of the secretary of the assembly to make out a list of the members of a committee, and hand to the person first named on it, who is its chairman, unless the committee shall choose to elect another.

The assembly can fix the times and places of the meeting of a committee; if this is not done, it can choose for itself, but cannot sit while the assembly is in session without a special order.

In all forms of procedure the committee is governed by 219the same rules as the assembly, but a little less strictness is observed in their enforcement.

Disorderly conduct in a committee can only be noted down and reported to the assembly.

When any paper has been referred to a committee, it must be returned as it was, with proposed amendments written separately. They cannot reject any matter, but can return it to the assembly without change, stating their reasons for taking no action.

When a committee is prepared to report, its chairman announces the fact, and he, or an other member, may make a motion that the report be received at that, or some other specified time. If nothing is said, it is assumed that the assembly is ready to receive it immediately.

At the time fixed, the chairman reads the report, and passes it, with all the papers belonging to it, to the secretary’s table, where it awaits the action of the assembly.

Any report from a committee may be treated by amendment, etc., just as if it originated in the assembly.

The final question is on the adoption of the report; if this is agreed to, it stands as the action of the whole assembly.

3. The third form of committee is the “committee of the whole.” It embraces the entire assembly. When the assembly wishes to go into committee, a motion to that effect is made, seconded, and put; if carried, the chairman nominates a person as chairman of the committee, who takes his seat at the secretary’s table. The chairman of the assembly must remain at hand in readiness to resume his seat when the committee shall rise. The secretary does not record the proceedings of the committee, but only their report. A special secretary must be appointed for their use.

The following are the main points of difference between the “committee of the whole” and the assembly:

1. The previous question cannot be moved, but the committee may rise and thus stop debate.

2. The committee cannot adjourn; it may rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.

2203. In committee a member may speak as often as he can get the floor; in the assembly, but once.

4. The committee cannot refer a matter to another committee.

5. The chairman of the assembly can take part in committee proceedings.

6. The committee has no power to punish its members, but can report them.

When the committee is prepared to close, a motion is made and seconded that it rise; if carried, the chairman leaves his seat, the chairman of the assembly takes his usual place, and the committee report is given in the same form as from a special committee.

This brief synopsis has been compiled from various sources. The excellent manuals of Cushing and Matthias have been especially consulted. It is believed to embrace all that is essential for conducting business in ordinary assemblies. The man who masters these simple rules, which may be done in a few hours, is prepared to assist in the performance of any public business, and if called upon to act as chairman, as any one may be, he will be free from embarrassment.

American Phrenological Journal and Life Illustrated.—Devoted to Ethnology. Physiology, Phrenology, Physiognomy, Psychology, Sociology, Biography, Education, Art, Literature, with Measures to Reform, Elevate and Improve Mankind Physically, Mentally and Spiritually. Edited by S. R. Wells. Published monthly, in quarto form, at $3 a year, or 30 cents a number. It may be termed the standard authority in all matters pertaining to Phrenology and the Science of Man. It is beautifully illustrated. See Prospectus.

Constitution of Man; Considered in Relation to External Objects. By George Combe. The only authorized American Edition. With Twenty Engravings, and a Portrait of the Author. 12mo. 436 pp. Muslin. Price, $1 75.

The “Constitution of Man” is a work with which every teacher and every pupil should be acquainted. It contains a perfect mine of sound wisdom and enlightened philosophy; and a faithful study of its invaluable lessons would save many a promising youth from a premature grave.—Journal of Education, Albany, N. Y.

Defence of Phrenology; Containing an Essay on the Nature and Value of Phrenological Evidence: A Vindication of Phrenology against the Attack of its opponents, and a View of the Facts relied on by Phrenologists as proof that the Cerebellum is the seat of the reproductive instinct. By Andrew Boardman, M. D. 12mo, 222 pp. Muslin. Price, $1 50.

These Essays are a refutation of attacks on Phrenology, including “Select Discourses on the Functions of the Nervous System, in Opposition to Phrenology, Materialism and Atheism.” One of the best defences of Phrenology ever written.

Education: Its Elementary Principles founded on the Nature of Man. By J. G. Spurzheim, M. D. With an Appendix by S. R. Wells, containing a Description of the Tem craments, and a Brief Analysis of the Phrenological Faculties. Twelfth American Edition 1 vol. 12mo. 334 pp. Illustrated. Price, $1 50.

It is full of sound doctrine and practical wisdom. Every page is pregnant with instruction of solemn import; and we would that it were the text-book, the great and sovereign guide, of every male and female in the country with whom rests the responsibility of rearing or educating a child.—Boston Medical and Surgical Journal.

Education and Self-Improvement Complete; Comprising “Physiology—Animal and Mental”—“Self-Culture and Perfection of Character,” “Memory and Intellectual Improvement.” One large vol. Illus. Muslin, $4.

This book comprises the whole of Mr. Fowler’s series of popular works on the application of Phrenology to “Education and Self-Improvement.”

Lectures on Phrenology.—By George Combe. With Notes. An Essay on the Phrenological Mode of Investigation, and an Historical Sketch. By Andrew Boardman, M. D. 1 vol. 12mo, 391 pages. Muslin, $1 75.

These are the reported lectures on Phrenology delivered by George Combe in America in 1839, and have been approved as to their essential correctness by the author. The work includes the application of Phrenology to the present and prospective condition of the United States, and constitutes a course of Phrenological instruction.

Matrimony; Or, Phrenology and Physiology applied to the Selection of Congenial Companions for Life, including Directions to the Married for living together Affectionately and Happily. Thirty-Fourth Edition. Price, 50 cents.

A scientific expositor of the laws of man’s social and matrimonial constitution: exposing the evils of their violation, showing what organizations and phrenological developments naturally assimilate and harmonize.

Memory and Intellectual Improvement, applied to Self-Educational and Juvenile Instruction. Twenty-Fifth Edition. 12mo. Muslin, $1 50.

This is the third and last of Mr. Fowler’s series of popular works on the application of Phrenology to “Education and Self-Improvement.” This volume is devoted to the education and development of the Intellect; how to cultivate the Memory; the education of the young; and embodies directions as to how we may educate OURSELVES.

Mental Science. Lectures on, according to the Philosophy of Phrenology. Delivered before the Anthropological Society of the Western Liberal Institute of Marietta, Ohio. By Rev. G. S. Weaver. 12mo, 235 pp. Illustrated, $1 50.

This is a most valuable acquisition to phrenological literature. It is instructive and beneficial, and should be made accessible to all youth. Its philosophy is the precept of the human soul’s wisdom. Its morality is obedience to all divine law, written or unwritten. Its religion is the spirit-utterings of devout and faithful love. It aims at and contemplates humanity’s good—the union of the human with the divine.

Phrenology Proved, Illustrated and Applied; Embracing an analysis of the Primary Mental Powers in their Various Degrees of Development, and location of the Phrenological Organs. Presenting some new and important remarks on the Temperaments, describing the Organs in Seven Different Degrees of Development: the mental phenomena produced by their combined action, and the location of the faculties, amply illustrated. By the Brothers Fowler. Sixty-Second Edition. Enlarged and Improved. 12mo, 492 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

Self-Culture and Perfection of Character; Including the Management of Children and Youth. 1 vol. 12mo, 312 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

This is the second work in the series of Mr. Fowler’s “Education and Self-Improvement Complete.” “Self-made or never made,” is the motto of the work which is devoted to moral improvement, or the proper cultivation and regulation of the affections and moral sentiments.

Self-Instructor in Phrenology and Physiology. New Illustrated. With over One Hundred Engravings, together with a Chart for the Recording of Phrenological Developments, for the use of Phrenologists. By the Brothers Fowler. Muslin, 75 cents; Paper, 50 cents.

This is intended as a text-book, and is especially adapted to phrenological examiners, to be used as a chart, and for learners, in connection with the “Phrenological Bust.”

Moral Philosophy. By George Combe. Or, the Duties of Man considered in his Individual, Domestic and Social Capacities. Reprinted from the Edinburgh Edition. With the Author’s latest corrections. 1 vol. 12mo, 884 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

This work appears in the form of Lectures delivered by the Author to an association formed by the industrious classes of Edinburgh; they created at the time considerable excitement. The course consisted of twenty consecutive lectures on Moral Philosophy, and are invaluable to students of Phrenology, Lecturers on Morality and the Natural Laws of Man. Address, Samuel R. Wells, No. 389 Broadway, New York.

Annuals of Phrenology and Physiognomy.—By S. R. Wells, Editor of the Phrenological Journal. One small yearly 12mo volume. For 1865, ‘66, ‘67 and ‘68. The four, containing over 200 illustrations, for 60 cts. For 1867, one small 12mo vol., 58 pp. Containing many portraits and biographies of distinguished personages, together with articles on “How to Study Phrenology,” “Bashfulness, Diffidence, Stammering,” etc., 20 cents. For 1868, 12mo, 70 pp. Containing an elaborate article on “The Marriage of Cousins,” etc., etc., 25 cents.

Charts for Recording the Various Phrenological Developments.—Designed for Phrenologists. By the Brothers Fowler. Price, only 10 cents.

Chart of Physiognomy Illustrated.—Designed for Framing, and for Lecturers. By S. R. Wells, Author of New Physiognomy. In map Form. Printed on fine paper. A good thing for learners. Price, 85 cents.

Domestic Life, Thoughts On; Or, Marriage Vindicated and Free Love Exposed. By Nelson Sizer. 12mo, 72 pp. Paper, 25 cents.

This is a work consisting of three valuable lectures, part of an extended course delivered in the city of Washington. The favor with which they were received, and the numerous requests for their publication, resulted in the present work.

Phrenology and the Scriptures.—Showing the Harmony existing between Phrenology and the Bible. By Rev. John Pierpont. Price 25 cents.

“A full explanation of many passages of Scripture.”—New York Mirror.

Phrenological Guide.—Designed for Students of their own Character. Twenty-Fifth Edition. Illustrated. 12mo, 54 pp. Paper, 25 cents.

Phrenological Specimens; For Societies and Private Cabinets. For Lecturers; including Casts of the Heads of most remarkable men of history. See our Descriptive Catalogue. Forty casts, not mailable, $35.

Phrenological Bust.—Showing the latest classification, and exact location of the Organs of the Brain, fully developed, designed for Learners. In this Bust, all the newly-discovered Organs are given. It is divided so as to show each individual Organ on one side; and all the groups—Social, Executive, Intellectual, and moral—property classified, on the other side. It is now extensively used in England, Scotland and Ireland, and on the Continent of Europe, and is almost the only one in use here. There are two sizes—the largest near the size of life—is sold In Box, at $1 75. The smaller, which is not more than six inches high, and may be carried in the pocket, is only 75 cents. Not mailable.

Phrenology at Home.—How can I learn Phrenology? What books are best for me to read? Is it possible to acquire a knowledge of it without a teacher? These are questions put to us daily; and we may say in reply, that we have arranged a series of the best works, with a Bust, showing the exact location of all the Phrenological Organs, with such Illustrations and Definitions as to make the study simple and plain without the aid of a teacher. The cost for this “Student’s Set,” which embraces all that is requisite, is only $10. It may be sent by express, or as freight, safely boxed—not by mail—to any part of the world.

“Mirror of the Mind;” Or, Your Character from your Likeness. For particulars how to have pictures taken, inclose a prepaid envelope, directed to yourself, for answer. Address, Samuel R. Wells, No. 389 Broadway, New York.

New Physiognomy; Or, Signs of Character, as manifested through Temperament and External Forms, and especially in the “Human Face Divine.” With more than One Thousand Illustrations. By S. R. Wells. In three styles of binding. Price, in one 12mo volume, 708 pp., handsomely bound in muslin, $5; in heavy calf, marbled edges, $8; Turkey morocco, full gilt, $10.

This work systematizes and shows the scientific basis on which each claim rests. The “Signs of Character” are minutely elucidated, and so plainly stated as to render them available. The scope of the work is very broad, and the treatment of the subject thorough, and, so far as possible, exhaustive. Among the topics discussed are—“General Principles of Physiognomy;” “the Temperaments;” “General Forms” as Indicative of Character; “Signs of Character in the Features”—the Chin, the Lips, the Nose, the Eyes, the Cheeks, the Ears, the Neck, etc.; “The Hands and Feet;” “Signs of Character in Action,”—the Walk, the Voice, the Laugh, Shaking Hands, the Style of Dress, etc.; “Insanity;” “Idiocy;” “Effects of Climate;” “Ethnology;” “National Types;” “Physiognomy of Classes,” with grouped portraits, including Divines, Orators, Statesmen, Warriors, Artists, Poets, Philosophers, Inventors, Pugilists, Surgeons, Discoverers, Actors, Musicians; “Transmitted Physiognomies;” “Love Signs;” “Grades of Intelligence;” “Comparative Physiognomy;” “Personal Improvement; or, How to be Beautiful;” “Handwriting;” “Studies from Lavater;” “Physiognomy Applied;” “Physiognomical Anecdotes,” etc.

It is an Encyclopædia of biography, acquainting the reader with the career and character, in brief, of many great men and women of the past one thousand years, and of the present—such, for instance, as Aristotle, Julius Cæsar, Shakspeare, Washington, Napoleon, Franklin, Bancroft, Bryant, Longfellow, Barnes, Irving, Rosa Bonheur, Theodosia Burr, Cobden, Bright, Lawrence, Whately, Thackeray, Knox, Richelieu, Dickens, Victoria, Wesley, Carlyle, Motley, Mill, Spencer, Thompson, Alexander, etc.

Phrenological Specimens, for the use of Lecturers, Societies, or for Private Cabinets. Forty Casts, not mailable. May be sent as freight. Price, $35

These specimens were cast from living heads, and from skulls. They afford as excellent contrast, showing the organs of the brain, both large and small. Lecturers may here obtain a collection which affords the necessary means of illustration and comparison. This select cabinet is composed, in part, of the following:

John Quincy Adams, Aaron Barr, George Combe, Elihu Burritt, Col. Thomas H. Benton, Black Hawk, Henry Clay, Rev. Dr. Dodd, Thomas Addis Emmet, Clara Fisher, Dr. Gall, Rev. Sylvester Graham, M. D., Gosse, Gottfried, Harrawaukay, Joseph C. Neal, Napoleon Bonaparte, Sir Walter Scott, Voltaire, Hon. Silas Wright, Water-Brain, Idiot, etc. Masks of Brunell, Benjamin Franklin, Haydn, etc. Casts from the Skulls of King Robert Bruce, Patty Cannon, Carib, Tardy, Diana Waters. A Cast from the Human Brain. A Human Head, divided, showing the naked Brain on one side, and the Skull on the other, and the Phrenological Bust.

The entire list, numbering Forty of our best phrenological specimens, may be packed and sent as freight by railroad, ship, or stage, to any place desired, with perfect safety.

Human Skulls, from $5 to $10, or $15. Articulated, $25 to $80.

Human Skeletons, from $35 to $75. French Manikins, to order.

Sets of Forty India Ink Drawings, of noted Characters, suitable for Lecturers. Price, $30. On Canvass, in sets, $40.

Oil Paintings—Portraits,—can be had to order, from $5 each, upwards.

Anatomical and Physiological Plates Mounted.—Weber’s, 11 in number, $100. Trall’s, 6 in number, $20. Lambert’s, 6 in number, $20. Kellogg’s, from the French of Bourgeoise and Jacobs. Very fine. 20 in number, $50.

For additional information, descriptive Circulars, inclose Stamps, and address S. R. WELLS, 389 Broadway, New York.

Food and Diet, A Treatise.—With observations on the Dietetical Regimen, suited for Disordered States of the Digestive Organs, and an account of the Dietaries of some of the Principal Metropolitan and other Establishments for Paupers, Lunatics, Criminals, Children, the Sick, etc. By Jonathan Pereira, M.D., F. R. S. and L. S. Edited by Charles A. Lee, M. D. Octavo. 318 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

An important physiological work. Considerable pains have been taken in the preparation of tables representing the proportion of some of the chemical elements, and of the alimentary principles contained in different foods. The work is accurate and complete.

Fruits and Farinacea the Proper Food of Man.—Being an attempt to Prove by History, Anatomy, Physiology and Chemistry, that the Original, Natural and Best Diet of Man, is derived from the Vegetable Kingdom. By John Smith. With Notes and Illustrations. By R. T. Trall, M. D. From the Second London Edition. 12mo, 314 pp. Muslin $1 75.

This is a text-book of facts and principles connected with the vegetarian question, and is a very desirable work.

Hereditary Descent: Its Laws and Facts applied to Human Improvement. Physiological. By Mr. Fowler. 12mo, 288 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

Human Voice, The.—Its Right Management in Speaking, Reading and Debating. Including the Principles of True Eloquence, together with the Functions of the Vocal Organs, the Motion of the Letters of the Alphabet, the Cultivation of the Ear, the Disorders of the Vocal and Articulating Organs, Origin and Construction of the English Language, Proper Methods of Delivery, Remedial Effects of Reading and Speaking, etc. By the Rev. W. W. Eazalet, A. M. 12mo, 46 pp. Muslin Flex., 50 cents.

This work contains many suggestions of great value to those who desire to speak and read well. Regarding the right management of the voice as intimately connected with health, as well as one of the noblest and most useful accomplishments; the work should be read by all.

Illustrated Family Gymnasium.—Containing the most improved methods of applying Gymnastic, Calisthenic, Kinesipathic and Vocal Exercises to the Development of the Bodily Organs, the invigoration of their functions, the preservation of Health, and the Cure of Disease and Deformities. With numerous illustrations. By R. T. Trall, M. D. 12mo, 215 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

In this excellent work, the author has aimed to select the very best materials from all accessible sources, and to present a sufficient variety of examples to meet all the demands of human infirmity, so far as exercise is to be regarded as the remedial agency.

Management of Infancy, Physiological and Moral Treatment on the. By Andrew Combe, M. D. With Notes and a Supplementary Chapter. By John Bell, M. D. 12mo, 307 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

This is one of the best treatises on the management of infancy extant. Few others are so well calculated to supply mothers with the kind of information which, in their circumstances, is especially needed.

Philosophy of Sacred History, Considered in Relation to Human Aliment and the Wines of Scripture. By Graham. 12mo, 580 pp. Cloth, $3 50.

A work highly useful, both for study and reference, to an who are interested in the great question of Biblical History in relation to the great moral reforms, which are acknowledged as among the most prominent features of the nineteenth century. It is among the most valuable contributions to Biblical and reformatory literature.

Physiology, Animal and Mental: Applied to the Preservation and Restoration of Health of Body and Power of Mind. Sixth Edition. 12mo, 312 pp. Illustrated. Muslin, $1 50.

The title of this work indicates the character of this admirable physiological work. Its aim is to preserve and restore health of body and power of mind. The motto is, “A sound mind in a sound body.”

Physiology of Digestion.—Considered with relation to the Principles of Dietetics. By Andrew Combe, M. D. Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. Tenth Edition. Illustrated. 18mo, 310 pp. Price, 50 cents.

The object of this work is to lay before the public a plain and intelligent description of the structure and uses of the most important organs of the body, and to show how information of this kind may be usefully applied in practical life.

Practical Family Dentist.—A Popular Treatise on the Teeth. Exhibiting the means necessary and efficient to secure their health and preservation. Also, the various errors and pernicious practices which prevail in relation to Dental Treatment. With a variety of useful Receipts for Remedial Compounds. Designed for Diseases of the Teeth and Gums. By D. C. Werner, M. D. $1 50.

This is a work which should be in the hands of all who wish to keep their teeth in a good and healthy condition. The author treats on the subject in a practical manner.

Principles of Physiology applied to the Preservation of Health and to the Improvement of Physical and Mental Education. By Andrew Combe, M. D., Physician Extraordinary to the Queen of England, and Consulting Physician to the King and Queen of the Belgians. Illustrated with Wood Cuts. To which are added Notes and Observations. By Mr. Fowler. Printed from the Seventh Edinburgh Edition. Enlarged and Improved. Octavo, 320 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

“One of the best practical works on Physiology extant.”

Science of Human Life, Lectures on the.—By Sylvester Graham. With a copious Index and Biographical Sketch of the Author. 12mo, 651 pp. Illustrated. Muslin, $3 50.

We have met with few treatises on the Science of Human Life, especially among those addressed to the general reader, of equal merit with this one. The subject is treated, in all its details, with uncommon ability.... Those lectures will afford the unprofessional reader a fund of curious and useful information in relation to the organization of his frame, the laws by which it is governed, and the several causes which tend to derange the regularity of its functions, which he would find it difficult to obtain from any other source.—Eclectic Journal of Medical Science.

Sober and Temperate Life.—The Discourses and Letters of Louis Cornado, on a Sober and Temperate Life. With a Biography of the Author, who died at 150 years of age. By Piero Maroncelli, and Notes and Appendix by John Burdell. Twenty-Fifth Thousand. 16mo, 228 pp. Paper, 50 cents.

This work is a great favorite with the reading public, as evinced by the number of editions already sold. The sound principles and maxims of temperance of the “old man eloquent,” are, though centuries have elapsed since his decease, still efficient in turning men to a sober and temperate life.

Æsop’s Fables.—The People’s Edition. Beautifully Illustrated, with nearly Sixty Engravings. 1 vol. 12mo. 72 pp. Cloth, gilt, beveled boards, $1.

It is gotten up in sumptuous style, and illustrated with great beauty of design. It will conduce to educate the eye and elevate the taste of the young to the appreciation of the highest and most perfect forms of grace and beauty.—Mount Holly Herald.

Chemistry, and its application to Physiology, Agriculture and Commerce. By Justus Liebig, M. D., F. R. S., Professor of Chemistry. Edited by John Gardner, M. D. Twelfth Thousand. Octavo, 54 pp. Paper, 50 cents.

Essays on Human Rights and their Political Guarantees.—By E. P. Hurlbut, Counselor-at-Law in the City of New York—now Judge. With Notes, by George Combe. Sixth Thousand. 1 vol. 12mo, 249 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

Fruit Culture for the Million.—A Hand-Book. Being a Guide to the Cultivation and Management of Fruit Trees. With Descriptions of the Best Varieties in the United States. Illustrated with Ninety Engravings. With an Appendix containing a variety of useful memoranda on the subject, valuable receipts, etc. By Thomas Gregg. 12mo, 163 pp. Muslin, $1.

Gospel Among the Animals; Or, Christ with the Cattle.—By Rev. Samuel Osgood, D. D. One small 12mo vol., 24 pp. Price, 25 cents.

Home for All; Or, the Gravel Wall. A New, Cheap, and Superior Mode of Building, adapted to Rich and Poor. Showing the Superiority of this Gravel Concrete over Brick, Stone and Frame Houses; Manner of Making and Depositing it. With numerous Illustrations. 1 vol. 12mo, 192 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

“There’s no place like Home.” To cheapen and improve human homes, and especially to bring comfortable dwellings within the reach of the poor classes, is the object of this volume—an object of the highest practical utility to man.

How to Live: Saving and Wasting, or Domestic Economy Illustrated, by the Life of Two Families of Opposite Character, Habits and Practices, in a Pleasant Tale of Real Life, full of Useful Lessons in Housekeeping, and Hints How to Live, How to Have, How to Gain, and How to be Happy; including the Story of “A Dime a Day.” By Solon Robinson. 1 vol. 12mo, 343 pp. $1 50.

Life in the West; or, Stories of the Mississippi Valley. By N. C. Meeker, Agricultural Editor of the New York Tribune and Reporter of Farmers’ Club. 1 large 12mo. vol., on tinted paper, pp. 360, beveled boards. $2.

Movement-Cure.—An Exposition of the Swedish Movement-Cure. Embracing the History and Philosophy of this System of Medical Treatment, with Examples of Single Movements, and Directions for their Use in Various Forms of Chronic Diseases; forming a Complete Manual of Exercises, together with a Summary of the Principles of General Hygiene. By George H. Taylor, A. M., M. D. 1 vol. 12mo, 408 pp. Muslin, $1 75.

Natural Laws of Man.—A Philosophical Catechism. By J. G. Spurzheim, M. D. Sixth Edition. Enlarged and Improved. One small 16mo vol., 171 pp. Muslin, 75 cents.

George Combe, in that great work “The Constitution of Man,” acknowledges that he derived his first ideas of the “Natural Laws,” from Spurzheim.

An Essay on Man.—By Alexander Pope. With Notes by S. R. Wells. Beautifully Illustrated. 1 vol. 12mo, 50 pp. Cloth, gilt, beveled boards, $1.

Three Hours’ School a Day.—A Talk with Parents. By William L. Crandal. Intended to aid in the Emancipation of Children and Youth from School Slavery. 1 vol. 12mo, 264 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

The Christian Household.—Embracing the Christian Home, Husband, Wife, Father, Mother, Child, Brother and Sister. By Rev. G. S. Weaver. 1 vol. 12mo, 160 pp. Muslin, $1.

This little volume is designed as a partial answer to one of the most solicitous wants of Christian families. I have for years seen and sorrowed over the absence of Christ in our households. Among the Christian people of every sect, there is a sad deficiency of Christian principle and practice at home.... Why is it so?—Preface.

Weaver’s Works for the Young.—Comprising “Hopes and Helps for the Young of both Sexes,” “Aims and Aids for Girls and Young Women,” “Ways of Life; Or, the Right Way and the Wrong Way.” By Rev. G. S. Weaver. One large vol. 12mo, 626 pp. Muslin, $3.

The three volumes of which this work is comprised, may also be had in separate form.

Hopes and Helps for the Young of both Sexes.—Relating to the Formation of Character, Choice of Avocation, Health, Amusement, Music, Conversation, Cultivation of Intellect, Moral Sentiment, Social Affection, Courtship and Marriage. Same Author. 1 vol. 12mo, 246 pp. Muslin, $1 60.

Aims and Aids for Girls and Young Women, on the various Duties of Life. Including, Physical, Intellectual and Moral Development, Self-Culture, Improvement, Dress, Beauty, Fashion, Employment, Education, the Home Relations, their Duties to Young Men, Marriage, Womanhood and Happiness. Same Author. 12mo, 224 pp. Muslin, $1 50.

Ways of Life, showing the Right Way and the Wrong Way. Contrasting the High Way and the Low Way; the True Way and the False Way; the Upward Way and the Downward Way; the Way of Honor and the Way of Dishonor. Same Author. 1 vol. 12mo, 157 pp. Muslin, $1.

Notes on Beauty, Vigor and Development; Or, How to Acquire Plumpness of Form, Strength of Life and Beauty of Complexion; with Rules for Diet and Bathing, and a Series of improved Physical Exercises. By William Milo, of London. Illustrated. 12mo, 24 pp. Paper, 12 cents.

Father Matthew, the Temperance Apostle.—His Portrait, Character, and Biography. By S. R. Wells, Editor of the Phrenological Journal. 12c.

Temperance in Congress.—Speeches delivered in the House of Representatives on the occasion of the First Meeting of the Congressional Temperance Society. One small 12mo vol. 25 cents.

A Library for Lecturers, Speakers and Others.—Every Lawyer, Clergyman, Senator, Congressman, Teacher, Debater, Student, etc., who desires to be informed and posted on the Rules and Regulations which govern Public Bodies, as well as those who desire the best books on Oratory, and the Art of Public Speaking, should provide himself with the following small and carefully selected Library:

One copy of each sent by Express, on receipt of $10, or by mail, post-paid, at the prices affixed. Address, Samuel R. Wells, 389 Broadway, New York.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES