LESSON TALKS
These lesson talks will be of value to students only after they have
diligently studied the contents of this book, particularly the first,
second, and sixth chapters, which treat of the means of speech
construction and the forms of delivery. It is absolutely necessary
that students should have a thorough understanding of inflection,
emphasis, apposition, opposition, and the series, in order that they
may understand and appreciate the work of this chapter. These talks
are intended to exemplify the application of the rules laid down in
this book for the guidance of those who seek proficiency in the art
of public speaking, but they will help little unless the student has
prepared himself to receive them by thoroughly mastering the
technique of the art as expounded in the different chapters.
It will be well for the student to mark the speeches given in this
chapter according to the instructions given in the lesson talks, as
then he will have an object lesson before him that will enable him
more readily to grasp the written instructions regarding the series,
emphasis, and inflection.
_Cuba Must Be Free._ On March 24, 1898, Senator John M. Thurston of
Nebraska delivered a speech "On the Affairs of Cuba," from which this
extract is taken. While it is but a portion of a speech, being the
peroration only, still it is a complete speech in itself, as it
conforms to all the requirements of speech construction. Its opening,
or statement, consists of the laying down of the facts upon which the
argument is to be based, these facts being the legal rights of
individuals and states as opposed to the moral rights. The statement
ends with the second paragraph. The body, or argument, closes with
the fifth paragraph and consists in showing that nations, like
individuals, should be governed by high moral motives and not shrink
from obligations because they have the legal right to do so; and that
in the performance of these obligations force is the only means that
can bring about the desired end. The balance of the speech forms the
conclusion, and it consists of a summing up of the great events of
the world's history wherein progress was made in man's struggle for
liberty only by the exercise of force.
The opening sentence states the claims of those who oppose
intervention in behalf of Cuba by the United States, and sets forth
their claims. This forms the base of Senator Thurston's argument. The
second sentence is a qualified acknowledgment of the legal right of
the United States to refrain from interfering. In other words, he
frankly confesses that there is no legal power that can compel the
United States to interfere between Spain and her colony, but clearly
shows that he intends to uphold the moral right of that country to
intervene, the construction of this sentence, "It may be the naked
legal right of the United States to stand thus idly by," plainly
denoting the senator's opinion.
The second paragraph is devoted to illustrating the legal rights of
the individual; the third paragraph, the effects that would flow from
an exercise of those rights; the fourth paragraph, an application of
the principle to nations that has previously been applied to
individuals, and an explanation as to the senator's conception of the
religious doctrine as taught by Christ; the fifth paragraph states
the meaning of intervention, force, and war, defines the force that
should be used, and makes two strong assertions in the form of
indirect questions; the sixth paragraph is devoted to the production
of cumulative evidence as to the efficacy of force, and a stirring
appeal that this force be exercised. The quotation from "The Battle
Hymn of the Republic" is used to emphasize this last point; the
seventh paragraph states the position that the senator takes on the
question.
"Cuba" and "United States" are contrasted, consequently both require
emphasis as well as different inflections, and as the former is
affirmative it should be given the falling inflection, and the
latter, because it is negative, should be given the rising
inflection. The balance of the sentence consists of a concluding
series that is out of the ordinary for the reason that the last
member of the series forms a series by itself, and it is therefore
termed a series within a series. The last sentence of the opening
paragraph requires the falling inflection because it is an
affirmative statement.
The opening sentence of the second paragraph requires the falling
inflection because it is a positive statement. The word "legal"
should be emphasized for the reason that it qualifies the word
"right," and by means of emphasis placed on the word "legal" a
contrast is immediately suggested with the "moral" right. In the next
sentence the word "my" is the important word because it qualifies the
word "dog," and as it states that "it is not my dog," the word "my"
should be given the rising inflection to show its negative quality.
If the emphasis and inflection should be placed on the word "dog," it
would then be indicated that the "dog" is not mine but the cat or the
horse is. Care must be exercised to place properly both the
inflection and the emphasis in order that a correct interpretation
may be given. "Mine," in the next sentence, should be given the
rising inflection for the same reason that governs the inflection on
the word "dog," the meaning being that it may be the policeman's duty
to interfere but it is not the speaker's. The word "my," in the next
phrase, requires the rising inflection for the same reason, the
occurrence taking place on premises but not on "my" premises. The
conclusion of the paragraph should be given the falling inflection
because it is assertive.
"But if I do" is conditional and therefore requires the rising
inflection; "I am a coward and a cur" being the concluding clause to
the conditional, and being positive, it should have the falling
inflection; "live" is contrasted with "die," and "God knows" is
parenthetical. "Dog," "woman," and "force" all require the rising
inflection because they are negatived, the statement being that "I
cannot protect the dog," "I cannot save the woman," "without [not
employing] force." The reverse of the form used in the speech, the
positive, would be: I can protect the dog, I can save the woman, by
exercising force.
"We cannot intervene and save Cuba without the exercise of force"
requires the rising inflection because it is a negative statement,
"and force means war; war means blood" requires the falling
inflection because they are positive. The next sentence requires a
like inflection for a like reason. "Liberty" and "humanity" are
negatived, and therefore should be giving the rising inflection. The
next sentence is a negative one, and all its members require the
rising inflection. The sentence that follows is positive, and
requires the falling inflection. The phrase "I believe in the
doctrine of peace," is also positive, but as it is qualified by "men
must have liberty before there can come abiding peace," it requires
the rising inflection, the qualifying phrase taking the falling
inflection because it is assertive.
The three short opening sentences of the fifth paragraph require the
falling inflection because they are positive. "God's" requires
emphasis for the reason that it qualifies "force." The two questions
that follow, being indirect questions, should be given falling
inflections.
The sixth paragraph represents a masterly arrangement of concluding
series. The first series enumerates three great charters: Magna
Carta, the Declaration of Independence, and the Emancipation
Proclamation; the second, three instances where the people struggled
against oppression: the storming of the Bastille, the battle of
Bunker Hill, and the suffering of the American army at Valley Forge;
the third, three battles of the war between the states; the fourth,
three Federal generals; the fifth, the results that followed the
Civil War. All these are concluding series; therefore, in each
series, the first member should be given the falling inflection, the
second member the rising inflection, and the third member the falling
inflection. If these directions are not clear, review the section on
series, in the second chapter. The two sentences that follow the
series are positive and require falling inflections. In the first
sentence the word "again" requires emphasis because it is important,
while in the second, "once more" should be given emphasis for the
same reason.
In the quotation, "you" and "me" are contrasted, and there is a
double contrast between "He" and "us," "holy" and "free." "God," in
the last line of the quotation, requires emphasis because of its
importance.
In the last paragraph there is a double opposition between "others,"
each time the word is used, and "me," "hesitate," "procrastinate" and
"negotiation" with "act now," while "which means delay" is
parenthetical. The speech ends with a concluding series.
[Transcriber's Note: The sixth paragraph of the following
oration includes a term that many find offensive.]
CUBA MUST BE FREE[1]
JOHN M. THURSTON
Mr. President, there are those who say that the affairs of
Cuba are not the affairs of the United States, who insist
that we can stand idly by and see that island devastated
and depopulated, its business interests destroyed, its
commercial intercourse with us cut off, its people starved,
degraded, and enslaved. It may be the naked legal right of
the United States to stand thus idly by.
I have the legal right to pass along the street and see a
helpless dog stamped into the earth under the heels of a
ruffian. I can pass by and say that is not my dog. I can
sit in my comfortable parlor with my loved ones gathered
about me, and through my plate glass window see a fiend
outraging a helpless woman nearby, and I can legally say
this is no affair of mine--it is not happening on my
premises; and I can turn away and take my little ones in my
arms, and, with the memory of their sainted mother in my
heart, look up to the motto on the wall and read, "God
bless our home."
But if I do, I am a coward and a cur unfit to live, and,
God knows, unfit to die. And yet I cannot protect the dog
nor save the woman without the exercise of force.
We cannot intervene and save Cuba without the exercise of
force, and force means war; war means blood. The lowly
Nazarene on the shores of Galilee preached the divine
doctrine of love, "Peace on earth, good will toward men."
Not peace on earth at the expense of liberty and humanity.
Not good will toward men who despoil, enslave, degrade, and
starve to death their fellow men. I believe in the doctrine
of Christ. I believe in the doctrine of peace; but, Mr.
President, men must have liberty before there can come
abiding peace.
Intervention means force. Force means war. War means blood.
But it will be God's force. When has a battle for humanity
and liberty ever been won except by force? What barricade
of wrong, injustice, and oppression has ever been carried
except by force?
Force compelled the signature of unwilling royalty to the
great Magna Carta; force put life into the Declaration of
Independence and made effective the Emancipation
Proclamation; force beat with naked hands upon the iron
gateway of the Bastille and made reprisal in one awful hour
for centuries of kingly crime; force waved the flag of
revolution over Bunker Hill and marked the snows of Valley
Forge with blood-stained feet; force held the broken line
at Shiloh, climbed the flame-swept hill at Chattanooga, and
stormed the clouds on Lookout Heights; force marched with
Sherman to the sea, rode with Sheridan in the valley of the
Shenandoah, and gave Grant victory at Appomattox; force
saved the Union, kept the stars in the flag, made "niggers"
men. The time for God's force has come again. Let the
impassioned lips of American patriots once more take up the
song:
In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born
across the sea,
With a glory in His bosom that transfigured
you and me;
As He died to make men holy, let us die to
make men free,
For God is marching on.
Others may hesitate, others may procrastinate, others may
plead for further diplomatic negotiation, which means
delay, but for me, I am ready to act now, and for my action
I am ready to answer to my conscience, my country, and my
God.
_Evidence and Precedents in Law._ Here is an example of argumentative
oratory, an extract from a speech by Thomas Erskine, that will repay
careful consideration.
The opening statement, "Before you can adjudge a fact, you must
believe it," is positive, and demands the falling inflection; "not
suspect it, or imagine it, or fancy it" are all negatived and require
the rising inflection; "but believe it" is positive and must be given
the falling inflection, and the balance of the sentence is negative
and requires the rising inflection throughout. The question that
follows is an indirect one and should be given the falling
inflection. "Neither more nor less" are negatived and therefore both
"more" and "less" require the rising inflection; "justice" should be
given the falling inflection because it completes a positive
statement; the balance of the sentence should receive the same
inflection for the same reason. "As they are settled by law, and
adopted in its general administration" is parenthetical; the main
idea, "the rules of evidence are not to be overruled or tampered
with" is negative, consequently the negatived words "overruled" and
"tampered" should receive the rising inflection. The passage that
follows, ending with the word "life," is a concluding series of four
members, and all members except the next to the last, "in the truth
of history," receive the falling inflection, the exception requiring
the rising inflection; "and whoever ventures rashly to depart from
them" is, in its spirit, conditional, and for that reason should be
given the rising inflection; the balance is assertive and requires
the falling inflection; a contrast should be shown between "God" and
"man."
Let the student work out the balance of the speech.
EVIDENCE AND PRECEDENTS IN LAW
THOMAS ERSKINE
Before you can adjudge a fact, you must believe it--not
suspect it, or imagine it, or fancy it, but believe it--and
it is impossible to impress the human mind with such a
reasonable and certain belief, as is necessary to be
impressed, before a Christian man can adjudge his neighbor
to the smallest penalty, much less to the pains of death,
without having such evidence as a reasonable mind will
accept of as the infallible test of truth. And what is that
evidence? Neither more nor less than that which the
Constitution has established in the courts for the general
administration of justice; namely, that the evidence
convince the jury, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the
criminal intention, constituting the crime, existed in the
mind of the man upon trial, and was the mainspring of his
conduct. The rules of evidence, as they are settled by law,
and adopted in its general administration, are not to be
overruled or tampered with. They are found in the charities
of religion--in the philosophy of nature--in the truth of
history--and in the experience of common life; and whoever
ventures rashly to depart from them, let him remember that
it will be meted to him in the same measure, and that both
God and man will judge him according.
These are arguments addressed to your reasons and your
consciences; not to be shaken in upright minds by any
precedent--for no precedents can sanctify injustice; if
they could, every human right would long ago have been
extinct upon the earth. If the state trials in bad times
are to be searched for precedents, what murders may you not
commit--what law of humanity may you not trample upon--what
rule of justice may you not violate--and what maxim of wise
policy may you not abrogate and confound? If precedents in
bad times are to be implicitly followed, why should we have
heard any evidence at all? You might have convicted without
any evidence; for many have been so convicted--and, in this
manner, murdered--even by acts of Parliament. If precedents
in bad times are to be followed, why should the Lords and
Commons have investigated these charges, and the Crown have
put them into this course of judicial trial? since, without
such a trial, and even after an acquittal upon me, they
might have attained all the prisoners by act of Parliament:
they did so in the case of Lord Strafford.
There are precedents, therefore, for all such things, but
such precedents as could not for a moment survive the times
of madness and distraction which gave them birth: but
which, as soon as the spurs of the occasion were blunted,
were repealed and execrated even by Parliaments which
(little as I may think of the present) ought not be
compared with it--Parliaments sitting in the darkness of
former times--in the night of freedom--before the
principles of government were developed, and before the
constitution became fixed. The last of these precedents,
and all the proceedings upon it, were ordered to be taken
off the file and burnt, so the intent that the same might
no longer be visible to after ages; an order dictated, no
doubt, by a pious tenderness for national honor, and meant
as a charitable covering for the crimes of our fathers. But
it was a sin against posterity--it was a treason against
society; for, instead of commanding them to be burnt, they
should rather have directed them to be blazoned in large
characters upon the walls of our Courts of Justice, that,
like the characters deciphered by the prophet of God to the
Eastern tyrant, they might enlarge and blacken in your
sights, to terrify you from acts of injustice.
_The Permanency of Empire._ This extract opens with an earnest appeal
which requires the falling inflection. The question that follows it
is a direct one, consequently all its members require the rising
inflection. From the exclamation "Alas" to the end of the sentence,
all is positive, therefore the falling inflection should be used
throughout. The next question is an indirect one and requires the
falling inflection. "So thought the countries of Demosthenes and the
Spartan" is a positive thought and should be given the falling
inflection. Then comes a triple opposition, "Leonidas" being
contrasted with "Athens," "trampled" with "insulted," and "slave"
with "Ottoman." The three words qualifying "Ottoman" constitute a
commencing series, and for this reason "servile" and "mindless"
should be given the falling inflection, and "enervate" the rising.
The next sentence is a positive one and the falling inflection should
be given the word "footsteps," which closes it; "from the palace to
the tomb" and "with their ruins" are both parenthetical, and there is
a contrast between "palace" and "tomb." The phrase ending with "as if
they had never been" is conditional and requires the rising
inflection; the balance of the sentence contains a parenthetical
clause, "rude and neglected in the barren ocean," and a double
contrast, the last of the four members of which is a concluding
series, the contrasts being "then" with "now," "speck" with the
concluding series "the ubiquity of their commerce, the glory of their
arms, the fame of their philosophy, the eloquence of their Senate and
the inspiration of their bards." There is a double opposition between
"England" and "America," and "Athens is" with "Athens was";
"contemplating the past," "proud and potent as she appears," "then,"
and "one day" are parenthetical; the conclusion of the extract
consists of a parenthesis, "for its time," and a double contrast,
"Europe" being contrasted with "that mighty continent" (America), and
"shall have mouldered, and the night of barbarism obscured its very
ruins" with "emerge from the horizon to rule sovereign of the
ascendant."
THE PERMANENCY OF EMPIRE
WENDELL PHILLIPS
I appeal to history! Tell me, thou reverend chronicler of
the grave, can all the wealth of a universal commerce, can
all the achievements of successful heroisms, or all the
establishments of this world's wisdom, secure to empire the
permanency of its possessions? Alas! Troy thought so once;
yet the land of Priam lives only in song! Thebes thought so
once; yet her hundred gates have crumbled, and her very
tombs are but as the dust they were vainly intended to
commemorate. So thought Palmyra--where is she? So thought
the countries of Demosthenes and the Spartan; yet Leonidas
is trampled by the timid slave, and Athens insulted by the
servile, mindless, and enervate Ottoman. In his hurried
march, Time has but looked at their imagined immortality,
and all its vanities, from the palace to the tomb, have,
with their ruins, erased the very impression of his
footsteps. The days of their glory are as if they had never
been; and the island that was then a speck, rude and
neglected in the barren ocean, now rivals the ubiquity of
their commerce, the glory of their arms, the fame of their
philosophy, the eloquence of their Senate, and the
inspiration of their bards. Who shall say, then,
contemplating the past, that England, proud and potent as
she appears, may not, one day, be what Athens is, and the
young America yet soar to be what Athens was! Who shall say
that, when the European column shall have mouldered, and
the night of barbarism obscured its very ruins, that mighty
continent may not emerge from the horizon to rule, for its
time, sovereign of the ascendant!
_Judicial Injustices._ The next extract, from a powerful speech
delivered by Senator Charles Sumner in September, 1854, is an
excellent example of cumulative oratory. He asserts that he has no
superstitious reverence for judicial proceedings, and then states his
reasons, which he piles one upon another until the sum reaches such
proportions as to utterly disarm any successful opposition to his
statement, or even an attempt at opposition. This form of delivery is
wonderfully effective, just as the opinion of a counselor-at-law
would be when re-enforced by numerous decisions of the highest courts
in the land. Only two means of attacking this style of oratory remain
to the opposition, one being to impeach the authorities, the other to
attack the application of them. Both these modes, however, are
exceedingly dangerous to the objector when his opponent is a keen
lawyer, an able speaker, and a learned man, such as was Charles
Sumner.
The word "judges" takes the rising inflection because of the
incompleteness of the thought, "in much respect" being necessary to
complete the sense, and this takes the falling inflection because of
the completeness, and the intervening thought "and especially the
Supreme Court of the Country" must be given parenthetically on
account of its being an interjected remark; the words "judicial
proceedings" take the falling inflection because they finish a
positive thought, and "superstitious reverence" the rising, as the
Senator means to express this thought negatively, as he does not
possess any superstitious reverence for judicial proceedings.
"Judges" and "men" are in apposition and for that reason take the
same inflection, and as the statement is positive, the falling
inflection must be used. The "worst crimes" and "sanction" require
emphasis because they are important, and the sentence takes the
falling inflection because it is positive. "Martyrs" and "patriots"
require the rising inflection because they depend on "summons them to
judgment" to complete the sense, and "crying from the ground" must be
given parenthetically for the reason that it is interjected.
"Judicial tribunal" being the thing arraigned, requires emphasis
whenever used in the speech. "Socrates" requires emphasis, and
"hemlock" takes the falling inflection on account of the completion
of the thought, "Saviour" is emphatic, and "Jerusalem" and "cross"
take the falling inflection on account of completion of thought. The
next line commences a concluding series which continues to the end of
the paragraph. "Against the testimony and entreaties of her father,"
"in the name of the Old Religion," "amidst the shrieks and agonies of
its victims," "in solemn denial of the great truth he had disclosed,"
are all interjected remarks and therefore must be rendered
parenthetically. All these parenthetical thoughts are complete in
themselves, and consequently require the falling inflection. "Not" is
emphatic, and the falling inflection is given "sun" because it
expresses a contradiction.
The first phrase of the next paragraph requires the falling
inflection, and the words "hesitate" and "unpitying," being
negatived, require the rising. The close of the paragraph requires
the falling inflection.
The next paragraph is a concluding series. "Surrounded by all the
forms of law," "after deliberate argument," "in defiance of justice
and humanity," "with Jeffreys on the bench," are all interjected
remarks, complete in themselves, and require the falling inflection
and parenthetical expression to each. "Queen" and "Sir Thomas More"
require opposite inflections for the reason they are used to mark two
distinct points in the despotic career of Henry the Eighth, just as
one would say "from the first to the last," "Latimer, Ridley, and
John Rogers" constitute a concluding series. "Justice" and "humanity"
in the parenthetical clause are contrasted, and consequently given
the opposite inflections, and "even" and "innocent women" require
emphasis on account of their importance.
The last paragraph is a concluding series, "surrounded by all the
forms of law" is an interjected complete thought, and therefore must
be expressed parenthetically and given the falling inflection, and
"our," in both instances when used in this paragraph, requires
emphasis and the falling inflection; while "unutterable" should take
the rising inflection on account of its negative quality; the voice
falling in conclusion on "Fugitive Slave Bill," because the final
thought is a positive one.
JUDICIAL INJUSTICES
CHARLES SUMNER
I hold judges, and especially the Supreme Court of the
country, in much respect, but I am too familiar with the
history of judicial proceedings to regard them with any
superstitious reverence. Judges are but men, and in all
ages have shown a full share of human frailty. Alas! alas!
the worst crimes of history have been perpetrated under
their sanction. The blood of martyrs and of patriots,
crying from the ground, summons them to judgment.
It was a judicial tribunal which condemned Socrates to
drink the fatal hemlock, and which pushed the Saviour
barefoot over the pavements of Jerusalem, bending beneath
his cross. It was a judicial tribunal which, against the
testimony and entreaties of her father, surrendered the
fair Virginia as a slave; which arrested the teachings of
the great Apostle to the Gentiles and sent him in bonds
from Judea to Rome; which, in the name of the Old Religion,
adjudged the Saints and Fathers of the Christian Church to
death in all its most dreadful forms; and which afterwards,
in the name of the New Religion, enforced the tortures of
the Inquisition, amidst the shrieks and agonies of its
victims, while it compelled Galileo to declare, in solemn
denial of the great truth he had disclosed, that the earth
did not move round the sun.
It was a judicial tribunal which in France during the long
reign of her monarchs lent itself to be the instrument of
every tyranny, as during the brief Reign of Terror it did
not hesitate to stand forth the unpitying accessory of the
unpitying guillotine.
It was a judicial tribunal in England, surrounded by all
the forms of law, which sanctioned every despotic caprice
of Henry the Eighth, from the unjust divorce of his queen
to the beheading of Sir Thomas More; which lighted the
fires of persecution that glowed at Oxford and Smithfield
over the cinders of Latimer, Ridley, and John Rogers;
which, after deliberate argument, upheld the fatal tyranny
of Ship-Money, against the patriot resistance of Hampden;
which, in defiance of justice and humanity, sent Sidney and
Russell to the block; which persistently enforced the laws
of Conformity that our Puritan Fathers persistently refused
to obey; and which afterwards, with Jeffreys on the bench,
crimsoned the page of English history with massacre and
murder--even with the blood of innocent women.
Ay, Sir, and it was a judicial tribunal, in our country,
surrounded by all the forms of law, which hung the witches
at Salem; which affirmed the constitutionality of the
Stamp-Act which it admonished "jurors and the people" to
obey; and which now in our day, lent its sanction to the
unutterable atrocity of the Fugitive Slave Bill.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] This extract is from a speech delivered in the
United States Senate, March 21, 1898.
AFTERWORD
We have now reached the end of our journey; but before parting, let
us discuss generally the course over which we have traveled in order
that some necessary incidents that may not have impressed themselves
strongly on our memories may be reënforced, lest they otherwise be
lost.
The public speaker should leave nothing to chance. It is customary to
speak of the spontaneous bursting forth of eloquence, but eloquence
is not spontaneous--it is the culmination of stored-up knowledge
which has reached the point when it is fully matured and ready to
use, and its apparent bursting forth is nothing but the arrival of
the opportunity for its making its presence known. It is the coming
together of the fully prepared man and the occasion that produces the
orator. It is an axiom that nothing comes of nothing, and unless the
would-be orator is willing to give his best in the way of fitting
himself by study, labor, reflection, and industry, in their highest
and broadest sense, to be a medium through which eloquence may be
conveyed, he will look in vain for its appearance--the seed must be
planted before the fruit can be gathered.
In the first place, the vocal mechanism must be thoroughly trained to
stand the strain that is to be placed upon it, and to execute
properly the manifold duties it will be called upon to perform. This
necessitates careful and systematic practice in breathing, voice
production, tone coloring, inflection, emphasis, and the many other
sections of the vocal work which, when combined, comprise the vehicle
which is to convey the thought.
In the second place, the mind must be fed and cultivated so as to
enable it to produce thought. It must be strengthened by exercise,
fed by reading of good matter, and made active by use. Time must be
devoted to meditation, to thinking over the expressions of the ideas
of the master minds that have gone before--weighing, refuting, and
combining them, as well as receiving them and being influenced
thereby--and to keeping the light of our own mind burning by thinking
matters out in our own way and giving our thoughts the impress of our
individuality. Only by these means can we hope to be at the same time
wise and original. Originality that is foolish is worse than useless,
and wisdom that is borrowed shines only with a reflected light; but
that which is both original and wise will live through many ages and
act as a beacon to light others to the attainment of originality and
wisdom.
In the third place, an effective delivery is absolutely essential.
There can no more be such a thing as an orator without a delivery
than there can be a newspaper without paper or some other substance
on which to print the news. A publisher might as well print a
newspaper and then indifferently circulate it as for a man to fill
his mind with great thoughts and ineffectively deliver them. Delivery
is the soul of oratory; without it, there can be nothing but the form
of speech; with it, there is the spirit that gives life to the words.
The matter is the product, the delivery is the mode of conveyance;
and each is necessary to the other if either is to be of value to the
speaker.
The only really effective form of delivery is the extempore; and,
after once it has been acquired, it is the easiest of the many forms.
In the opinion of the author, matter that is written out and then
read, or matter that is written out, memorized, and then spoken, is
in neither case a speech. Speaking is conveying thought by word of
mouth, and not by word of pen. The matter that is to form the speech
should be diligently gathered, fully digested, and carefully
arranged, but the words that are to clothe the thought should be
spontaneous. Unless the words are willing servants, well trained,
springing instantly to the performance of their duty, coming, not
through a conscious effort to recall what has been memorized, but in
response to the sub-conscious action of the mind, the words will fail
to possess that mentality that alone can give them the expression
that is really their soul. Only when the mind is released from all
care concerning words can it be placed adequately upon the thought,
and only by fully placing it upon the thought can the mentality enter
the voice, thereby making the words convey by tone and general
expression what they really stand for, and carry to the mind of the
listener the thought which is in the mind of the speaker. In this
manner is a connection brought about between listener and speaker,
and by these means is generated that force which is commonly called
magnetism but which is, in reality, the active mind of the speaker
getting into communication with the mind of the listener through the
mediumship of the vitalized spoken word. The language is but the wire
which carries the message, or the atmosphere on which the message is
sent; the thought is the electricity which produces the message. The
language is material, the mentality is spiritual; the one being the
body of expression, the other being the soul.
Finally, why are there so few orators in the world today? Merely
because there are so few persons who are willing to spend the time
and employ the labor necessary to acquire the qualifications for the
making of orators. No great achievement in any walk of life is
accomplished without labor, no movement in behalf of man has ever
progressed without labor, and nothing is worth having unless it is
secured by labor. Run your eye over the pages of history and try to
find instances where chance has knocked with its golden wand on the
door of man's existence; and for every one so found, at least a dozen
will be discovered where man has cut through the rock of difficulties
with the iron tools of industry and forged those tools in the fires
of determination. Not all men who achieved greatness were born poor
in this world's goods. Many of them, men like Marcus Aurelius,
Washington, Lafayette, and Roosevelt, won renown in spite of their
wealth; while, on the other hand, men like Moses, Franklin, and
Lincoln gained their great eminence in the face of poverty. It
matters not whether man be rich or whether man be poor, so far as his
success in living a useful life is concerned, but it does signify
much whether he is an idler or a laborer. Make yourself worthy of
success, and success--in its true and only valuable sense--will be
yours. Remember, that labor--proud, independent labor--is noble, and
that it leads, not only to the making of orators, but to the
formation of characters--the building of souls.
A SYSTEMATIZED STUDY
OF
"HOW TO MASTER THE SPOKEN WORD"
_A Guide to Teachers and Students_
Students are advised to read the work as a book, commencing with the
first page and continuing straight on to the end. They should skip
nothing, not even the long speeches, as they are introduced for
specific purposes; but they should also guard against tarrying on the
way to study and particular passages that may strike their fancy.
They are advised to first read the book carefully in order that they
may the better understand its scope and purpose, and gain some idea
regarding the general plan that underlies its construction.
It will be noted that the first chapter does not contain instructions
as to how the student of oratory is to breathe, or how he is to use
the many other functions of body, voice, and mind that are necessary
to the correct production of the spoken word; but it shows how famous
speakers produced their effects, and it reveals to the student the
means he must adopt if he is to produce like results, leaving to
later chapters the task of revealing how the means are to be applied.
This manner of arranging the matter was adapted in order to insure
the student's interest being aroused in the subject at the start,
thereby preventing an extinguishing of his enthusiasm by initiating
him into the dry mysteries of the technical parts of speech before he
had gained a fair idea regarding the means to employ in qualifying
himself to become a public speaker. When, however, it is intended to
use the work as a textbook, it should not be studied as it is read,
but the lesson should be taken up in a natural sequence, beginning
with breath and continuing through to the production of the finished
speech or oration. Here is given an outline of study, or syllabus,
showing the order in which the different subjects treated in the book
can be taken up to best advantage.
SYLLABUS
LESSON I
Breath 120-126, 133-135
LESSON II
Voice 126-133, 135-138
LESSON III
Inflection 27-37
LESSON IV
Emphasis 37-46
LESSON V
Combined Use of Emphasis and Inflection, and
Parenthesis and Pause 46-54
LESSON VI
Series and Modulation 54-63
LESSON VII
Paraphrasing 103-119
LESSON VIII
Composition 84-102
LESSON IX
Construction 61-83
LESSON X
The Making of Oratory 1-25
LESSON XI
Delivery 145-157
LESSON XII
Memory 138-145
LESSON XIII
Lesson Talks 389-406
LESSON XIV
Grecian Orators 158-256
LESSON XV
Latin Orators 257-297
LESSON XVI
Modern Orators 298-388
LIST OF ORATIONS
Against Crowning Demosthenes _Aeschines_
Against Eratosthenes _Lysias_
Against the Tory Government _William E. Gladstone_
At His Brother's Grave _Robert G. Ingersoll_
Cuba Must Be Free _John M. Thurston_
Digging for the Thought _John Ruskin_
Education _Horace Mann_
Encomium on Evagoras _Isocrates_
Eulogy of General Grant _Dean Farrar_
Eulogy of President Garfield _James G. Blaine_
Eulogy of Webster _Rufus Choate_
Evidence and Precedents in Law _Thomas Erskine_
Historical Reading _Arthur James Balfour_
Inaugural Address _Theodore Roosevelt_
In Favor of the Peloponnesian War _Pericles_
Judicial Injustices _Charles Sumner_
Liberty or Death _Patrick Henry_
Menexenus and Others Against Dicaeogenes and
Leochares _Isaeus_
On Leaving Springfield _Abraham Lincoln_
On the Foote Resolution _Robert Young Hayne_
On the Murder of Lovejoy _Wendell Phillips_
On Resigning from the Senate _Robert Toombs_
On the Murder of Herodes _Antiphon_
On the Punishment of the Catiline
Conspirators _Cato the Younger_
On the Treatment of the Catiline
Conspirators _Caesar_
On Withdrawing from the Union _Jefferson Davis_
Oration Against Leocrates _Lycurgus_
Oration on the Crown _Demosthenes_
Our Country _Edwin G. Lawrence_
Peace Between Labor and Capital _John Haynes Holmes_
Robert Burns _George William Curtis_
Speech Against Athenogenes _Hyperides_
Speech in Support of the Oppian Law _Cato the Censor_
Speech on the Mysteries _Andocides_
Speech to His Troops _Catiline_
Speech to the Conspirators _Catiline_
Sumner and the South _L. Q. C. Lamar_
The Birth of an Orator _John Haynes Holmes_
The Blind Preacher _William Wirt_
"The Cross of Gold" Speech _William J. Bryan_
The First Olynthiac _Demosthenes_
The First Oration Against Veres _Cicero_
The "House Divided Against Itself" Speech _Abraham Lincoln_
The Perfect Orator _Richard B. Sheridan_
The Permanency of Empire _Wendell Phillips_
"The Seventh of March" Speech _Daniel Webster_
The Strength of the American Government _John Bright_
Transcriber's Notes.
- The break between pages 1 and 2 is in the word "employs":
em|ploys. In this and all other cases, the whole word was
moved to the earlier page.
- The break between pages 11 and 12 is in the word "contrary":
con|trary.
- On page 24, set the citation of a legal matter, _People vs.
Durant,_ in Italic.
- On page 33, two single line examples were set in body text.
The Transcriber has made them block quotes to match the other
examples on that page.
- On page 36, change "dryest" to "driest."
- The break between pages 51 and 52 is in the word "language":
lan|guage.
- On page 55, the Transcriber capitalized the word
"Christianity" in a Daniel Webster quotation. The word was
capitalized correctly in the same text that is part of a
longer quotation on page 61.
- On page 58, the original text has a sentence that ends as
follows: ". . . we must, in order to retain the concluding
series, give 'ask' the rising inflection, 'knock' the
falling, 'seek' the falling, 'find' the rising, 'knock' the
falling, and 'opened' the falling." The Transcriber corrected
the first "knock" to "given" because the text under
discussion is "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye
shall find; knock, and the door shall be opened unto you."
- On page 59, change "huzza" to "huzzah."
- The break between pages 69 and 70 is in the word "attachment":
attach|ment.
- On page 75, change "deprived of his honor" to "honour"
to correspond with "favour" in the same paragraph.
- The break between pages 78 and 79 is in the word "besieged":
be|sieged.
- The break between pages 103 and 104 is in the word
"considered": con|sidered.
- On page 108, change "Wittenagemote" to "Witenagemot."
- On page 114, change "huzzas" to "huzzahs."
- The break between pages 115 and 116 is in the word
"temporary": tem|porary.
- The break between pages 124 and 125 is in the word
"following": fol|lowing.
- On page 127, change "Immediately voice is produced . . ."
to "Immediately as voice is produced . . . ."
- The break between pages 130 and 131 is in the word
"magnificent": mag|nificent.
- The break between pages 148 and 149 is in the word
"audiences": audi|ences.
- The break between pages 151 and 152 is in the word
"carefully": care|fully.
- On page 164, change the question mark after "I am sadly
deficient" to a period.
- On page 165, change "indicated me for homicide" to
"indicted."
- On page 193, change the question mark after "witness of
his crimes" to a period.
- On page 204, the word "betrothals" was misspelled
"bethrothals" in the sentence "Thus the law makes just
betrothals valid, and unjust ones it declares invalid."
- The break between pages 211 and 212 is in the word
"Menexenus": Menexe|nus.
- The break between pages 214 and 215 is in the word
"Leochares": Leo|chares.
- The break between pages 220 and 221 is in the word
"dishonor": dis|honor.
- The break between pages 223 and 224 is in the word
"hallowed": hal|lowed.
- On page 237, change "Midias' anger" to "Meidias' anger."
- The break between pages 241 and 242 is in the word
"descendants": descend|ants.
- The break between pages 247 and 248 is in the word
"overbearing": over|bearing.
- On page 260, change "tribunitian" to "tribunician."
- On page 265, change "Uticeusis" to "Uticensis."
- In the oration of Cato the Younger, the term "Conscript
Fathers" referring to the members of the Roman Senate,
is not capitalized in the original on pages 265 or 266.
These have been made consistent with the initial-capped
references on page 269 and following.
- On page 268, change "hesitate how to act" to "hesitate
now to act."
- On page 269, change "Cathegus" to "Cethegus."
- The break between pages 273 and 274 is in the word
"putting": put|ting.
- On page 274, in the Caesar oration, this sentence appears
in the original: "But in a large state there arise may men
of various dispositions." The word "may" has been corrected
to "many."
- The break between pages 274 and 275 is in the word
"borrowed": bor|rowed.
- The break between pages 281 and 282 is in the word
"manner": man|ner.
- On page 285, change "proquestor" to "proquaestor."
- On page 292, change "edileship" to "aedileship."
- On page 302, change the word "equalled" to "equaled."
- On page 310, set "On the Clay Compromise" in title case small
caps rather than lower case small caps.
- The break between pages 312 and 313 is in the word
"perfectly": per|fectly.
- On page 314, change "McDowel" to "McDowell" and change the
question mark after "remarks to the press" to a period.
- The break between pages 323 and 324 is in the unit
"slave-trade": slave-|trade.
- On page 325, the period at the end of the final sentence
of Lincoln's "House Divided" speech was missing from the
original.
- The break between pages 330 and 331 is in the word
"principles": prin|ciples.
- The break between pages 335 and 336 is in the word
"Colonies": Col|onies.
- The break between pages 338 and 339 is in the word
"Constitution": Con|stitution.
- The break between pages 341 and 342 is in the word
"confederates": con|federates.
- The break between pages 345 and 346 is in the word
"courageously": coura|geously.
- On page 346, change "memories indulged of the past or the
dead" to "memories indulged of the past or of the dead"
(_insert second "of"_).
- On page 355, the original text of the Robert Burns eulogy
uses the word "woos," spelled "wooes," and "rhythmic,"
spelled "rythmic." The Transcriber modernized the spelling
of both words.
- The break between pages 360 and 361 is in the word
"unreplying": unre|plying.
- On page 367, change "crystalize" to "crystallize."
- On page 381, there is a printing defect in the copy of the
original available to the Transcriber. One sentence reads:
"All his internal powers are at wo__; all his external,
testify their energies." The Transcriber has inferred that
the incomplete word is "work." Confirmation from another
copy of the original would be most appreciated.
- On page 387, a reference to the Decalogue, referring to
The Ten Commandments of the Bible, was not capitalized
in the original. The Transcriber capitalized it.
- The break between pages 391 and 392 is in the word
"opening": open|ing.
- On page 392, in the "opening sentence" paragraph, second
sentence, insert double quotes around first instance of
the word "right."
- The break between pages 392 and 393 is in the word
"positive": posi|tive.
- On page 394, change "Magna Charta" to "Magna Carta."
- On page 395, insert a warning of a sensitive word in the
sixth paragraph of the subsequent oration.
- The break between pages 395 and 396 is in the word
"President": Presi|dent.
- On page 396, change "Magna Charta" to "Magna Carta" and
"Bastile" to "Bastille."
- The break between pages 404 and 405 is in the word
"instances": in|stances.
- In the index, on page 415, change "Dacaeogenes" to
"Dicaeogenes."
- In the index, on page 416, change "Roberts Burns" to
"Robert Burns."