All contemptuous, spiteful, haughty, calumniating expressions must be
avoided and not so much as even insinuated to the defamation of any
particular person or rank, much less against those to whom an affront
would alienate the minds of the judges. To be so imprudent as to attack
judges themselves, not openly, but in any indirect manner, would be most
unwise.
The advocate for the other side may likewise furnish sufficient matter
for an exordium. Sometimes honorable mention may be made of him, as when
we pretend to be in dread of his interest and eloquence in order to make
them suspected by the judges, and sometimes by casting odium on him,
altho this must be done very seldom. I rather think, from the authority
of the best authors, that whatever affects the orator, affects also the
cause he patronizes, as it is natural for a judge to give more credit to
those whom he more willingly hears.
We shall procure the favor of the judge not so much by praising him,
which ought to be done with moderation, and is common to both sides, but
rather by making his praise fitting, and connecting it with the interest
of our cause. Thus, in speaking for a person of consequence, we may lay
some stress on the judge's own dignity; for one of mean condition, on
his justice; for the unhappy, on his mercy; for the injured, on his
severity.