The style proper to such eloquence will be precise and lucid, without complication of parts, or embarrassment of the arranged elements. The diction will be choice, forcible, expressive, and distinct. The form into which the sentences will crystallize will be natural, logical, and pertinently knit. The sequence of sentences should be direct and judicious. The paragraphs will cohere by sharp but clearly perceptible joinings, delicately shaded, and yet nicely distinct. A critical speech will generally begin by conciliating attention, and showing grounds for pursuing the inquiry. It will state the grounds of judgment, and apply them to the topic under investigation. It will distinguish statements from opinions, and test each separately. It will then examine the relation or irrelation of the facts to opinions advanced; and conclude with a series of inferences, which may be drawn from the process of thought of which the speech has been the exponent and expression. III. Deliberative.-Deliberation implies a more mature, steady, and painstaking exercise of judiciality than criticism. It aims at reaching a definite conclusion. It also admits of the balance and the inquisition of thought, but it is more earnest to find and take the most suitable conclusion attainable. It is a serious and sedate exercise of political sagacity, logical skill, and inventive resource. On the occurrence of a political question, a problem in national affairs, the practised mind perceives at once a whole tribe of arrangements, plans, contrivances, schemes, laws, institutions, and adaptations by which a solution would become possible; but the statesman, at the same time, finds himself enmeshed in such an entire circle of enactments, laws, forms, opinions, parties, interests, activities, usages, &c., as causes him to halt. "Such precedents are numberless: we draw As high as heaven,—as wide as sea or land." There is a wide choice of available courses, each good, perhaps, considered in itself, but taken in comparison, or in combination, requiring a wise discretion in the selecter. The man of one idea perceives the evil, and its remedy, and sets out for the attainment of his object in a course as straight as the crow flies, seldom taxing his mind regarding the alternative methods of dealing with the subject, or evading it, which suggest themselves to a student of legislation and the practical statesman. The latter inevitably acquires the habit of looking upon most specific solutions of political problems as at best but specious, and he is hence trained to look deliberately at all the questions, and to view each one as only the stand-point from which the reasons for preference may be noted, or the basis of an attack may be found. “All propositions for change of policy, for reforms in the constitution of Parliament, the church, the courts of justice, the army and the navy, the administrative departments, or for amendments of the law, necessarily involve, in the first place, the comparison between the retention of the existing state of things, without alteration, and the proposed remedy; and, secondly, they involve, in general, a comparison of several remedies. The first step is to decide that a change is expedient; the next is to select, out of several alternative remedies, proposed by different persons, that one which is best suited to the circumstances of the case.' "'* 66 There is room, therefore, for a large amount of critical discourse in any display of deliberative eloquence; but the former merely implies examination, while the latter involves adjudication, choice, selection, and preference. Criticism has a less definite aim, and may be exercised on all the alternatives presented to the thoughts upon a subject, an ultimate decision is not demanded of the critic. But in deliberation we expect to find the mind prepared to propose and pursue some open and traversable" path amidst the conflicting alternatives of politics, to point out the immediately right and proper course, and to advise towards a determination. It is not supposed that equilibrium of argumentation can be maintained; but that, in the long run, some reasons may be found which must weigh down the judgment, and so settle the matter. Deliberative oratory requires wide and ready knowledge, a suave and serious style, careful logical division and distinctness, copious illustration, drawn from constitutional practice, precedents, customs, usages, historic example, &c., constant appeal to the maxims of policy prevalent in the assembly where the discussion is carried on, as well as an appropriate use of arguments tending to preserve the continuity of thought upon the topic receiving attention. In this species of oratory there is need, in general, of a brief, expository exordium, showing how the public care is involved in the proper settlement of the subject; a fair statement of the several alternatives least liable to objection; with, occasionally, a criticism of those which appear most plausible; a detail of the compromises or concessions made towards a settlement by the advocates of the several modes of effecting a solution, so stated, as to lead to the mention of the manner of arranging the question at issue proposed by the speaker, and of reconciling the rival interests. This should be followed by a clear and circumstantial representation of the view proposed, and should be closed by a peroration, in which the several grounds for preference of each mode are disposed of, leading to and ending in the conclusion, that the suggestion made, as the result of the speaker's deliberation, is such as is free from the chief objections to which the others are exposed, and would yet procure the greater part of the advantages they aim at gaining. The management of the argument, and the tone of the speech, may both admit of latitude of manner; but the general tenor and main course of such a style of eloquence should be suitable to the breaking down of prejudices, the securing of concessions, the effecting of a conviction that the *Sir G. C. Lewis "On the Methods of Observation and Reasoning in Politics," vol. ii., p. 315. most salutary course has been pointed out, and ought, therefore, to be adopted. IV. Hortative.-Hortative_eloquence, in its highest rhetorical form, rises into harangue. Its aim is to incite, or stimulate, to encourage, and to spur on. It has a due place in the conduct of public business, when the speaker is proposing some new view, and is anxious to impress its importance on his hearers, when argument on the subject has been pretty equally matched, and there is need for bringing the feelings, affections, or passions into activity, and when a defeat has been sustained by the advocates of any measure. It must, of course, be stirring and lively; thought and emotion must work together in it, and the diction must be warm, vivid, and well placed. In the three previous species, rhetoric deployed its forces under the leadership of logic, and only, or at least chiefly subordinated the form of argument to the requirement of the time and circumstance; but now rhetoric takes the command of the passions, and employs logic as its auxiliary. The prompt, emphatic utterance of passion, and the heat and fervour of emotion, invigorate the hosts of the mind, and work them to the limits of their action. Yet, in all hortation, there is required a carefulness to avoid offence, a judiciousness, and a candour which prevents the agitation of the feelings from betrayal, and keeps within the scope of rational thought. In the advocacy of innovation, though glowing and intense, the language is conciliatory, and the utmost suavity of demeanour is maintained, because the production of a state of mind, favourable to the views advanced, is the aim of the speaker. He is hence constrained to cover many of his most eager expressions with a tone of apology, and to utter many of his most keenly cherished wishes with modesty and hesitation, till he observes how the ideas take. When he notices that favour is accorded to them, he may then widen the sweep of his purpose, and give the reins to his enthusiasm; for, by so doing, he will most effectively ignite the passions of an audience, and spread the flame of his own intent. In imparting into a closely-matched debate the eloquence of hortation, care must be taken to begin on the level of the debate, and to impress the House with a thorough confidence in the power of the speaker to discuss the question; to test now and again the temperature of passion in the hearers, and to discover in what form to administer the designed incitement. The topic suggested by the feeling of the audience should be employed earliest, and from these they should be hurried on to the desired consummation, by energy of mind imparting effectiveness to speech. In hortation, after a defeat, greater art is requisite, and the spur must be inserted with vehemence and eagerness at the earliest moment, while the emotions are astir, and the excitement is uncooled. To utter then with vigour the words of hope, confidence, and undismayedness; to express persistency of purpose, along with manly submission; to point out the loopholes through which (if any) advantage had been taken, the strategies employed by oppo nents, and the surprises to which the speaker's party had been exposed; and so, from the height of passion, to calm and subdue the mind into present acquiescence, and yet excite a fixed determination for the future, is a great triumph of oratorical art. It ennobles defeat, and imparts a sense of manly endurance and worth, which prevents despair in one party, and checks overconfidence in the other. The exordium will, in general, give a reason for the excitement felt, and represent the feelings under which the speaker labours. There will then follow a denial of a feeling of personal or party injury, and a statement of the reasons which justify the inacquiescence displayed. The impelling motives for urging on the hearers the hortation employed, and the expression of a determination to be pursued in future, will form the chief grounds of the peroration. The style may be florid and figurative, but it must be intense and eager. The elocution should be rapid and vigorous, and the pauses made should be so timed, as to increase expectancy, and whet the edge of passion. Invective.-Hortation is the language of a friend to friends, which, though it may deal in reproof, proceeds from a sameness of interest, feeling, or conviction. Invective is the language of estrangement and enmity. It is reproachful, harsh, and accusing, always bitter, sometimes censorious, occasionally opprobrious. It, too, may reprove, but not with the design of producing any amendment. It reproves to condemn, and slurs that it may gratify rage. But it ought never to descend to railing, clamour, insolence, or malice. The honour of a name, a position, a party, or a person, may be assailed, and offence may be taken at the form which it assumes, or the matter in which it deals; but to preserve honour by dishonourable means is a paradox to which practical parliamentary life can lend no sanction. In terms however sharp set invective may express itself, it must, if it would effect its purpose, avoid all merely irrelevant matter, and hold tenaciously to the purpose intended, whether that be to avenge a defeat, to embitter rival's success, or to protect the honour of another, or one's self. The vulnerable portion of an argument, a party, or an opponent's public life, must be that fixed on, and the attack should be direct, forthright,-specific in terms, and trenchantly earnest. The diction must be clear and sharp, vigorous and Saxonized; generalities must be avoided, and epigram and pungency may be employed with unrelaxing intensity, yet the style should be plain, pointed, and precise. The parts which such a form of eloquence would naturally colligate and arrange for the attainment of the end in view should be, we think, an introduction calculated, not only to explain the growth of the feeling finding expression in the speech, but also to excite a similar one in the audience. The succeeding part should tend to increase that feeling, and intensify it. The cause of the speech ought to be noted and stated; the effects anticipated ought to be dwelt upon. The castigation may, therefore, be administered either in the form of a narrative of the procedures, exciting the speaker's ire, or justifying it; or in the form of advice regarding acts done, aims held, or professions made, which have not been accordant with right or character, position or person. It may be couched in ironical praise, or may consist in an elaborate comparison of what might be, or ought to have been expected, with what has resulted from the steps taken by the party or persons inveighed against. The peroration should then consist of a collection of such excitements to the passions as shall induce the hearers to coincide with the speaker in his condemnation of the course objected to, and feel the justifiableness of the opposition offered to it. IV. Defensive.-In public life accusations must be borne, opposition must be endured, and misunderstandings must frequently arise. Aggressions must be resisted, policy vindicated, and charges repelled. In no free country can men long retain the management of affairs in their hands without exposing themselves to grumbling misconception, opposition, censure, or active hostility. In this case defensive eloquence finds scope. It is the safeguard of the reputation of a public man. It ought to be terse and ready, and should never be begun "With faltering speech and visage incomposed." The form should become statuesque, and the features receive animation; the words should be select, and the sentences brief and pointed. Every statement in opposition to the character of the person, or the advisability of a measure, ought to be distinctly met with an opposing fact or argument. The fallacy or irrelevancy of each argument should be clearly made out and exposed. Passion should be carefully suppressed, and serene temper, collected utterance, and logical thought should rule the hour. A burst of indignation will occasionally flash from the soul in the ardour of excited thought, and give evidence of the emotion pulsing in the spirit; but it is often unsafe to display any such feeling, it is so natural for men to obey the mandate, "Let the galled jade wince." Defensive speech is much more potent when it seizes the weapon used against the measures or the man, and hurls it back at the opponent. In defensive oratory it is advisable to notice how the matter has assumed the aspect it presents, to explain the turn the affair has taken, to repudiate the accusations made, and the personal or party insinuations expressed, to attack_the_opposition in return, and to submit to the judgment of the House that the explanation offered affords sufficient justification. It may be requisite to demand an apology, but it is seldom that an affair of that sort can be successfully carried so far as to ensure a recantation. The writer has hesitated to include, in the regular and justifiable styles of parliamentary eloquence, a class of speeches which, if he should believe the newspapers, often occupy the time of the Legis |