intermediate position, with bulk and prominence graduated to their intrinsic value, may derive, as to placing, much advantage from their companion arguments. Not infrequently an argument that does no more than open a probability for another to utilize, or add a coloring to its predecessor, may by its juxtaposition both receive and lend, till each has the strength of two. This fact dictates that a minor consideration should ally itself with pleas of more importance, so as to gain the advantage of fellowship and position.

Order of Refutation. The order that refutation should occupy in debate depends on the strength of the position refuted, and on the prominence it already has in the mind of the public addressed. When the opposed idea holds full possession of the field, the first business must be to dislodge it; there is no room for a new argument until the old view is cleared away. On the other hand, when the refuted position is insignificant, the order of refutation may recognize its insignificance; the refutation may come in incidentally as a corollary of the argument most potent to overthrow the

error.

All this is merely one aspect of the wisdom that is needed in refutation, manifest in the estimate placed upon the opponent's strength. In strength also, as well as in position, the refutation should be wisely adapted to the exact significance of the opposed argument, neither belittling nor exaggerating it. It is manifestly unwise to underrate the opponent's position; the refutation must be stronger if it is to act as a real refutation. On the other hand, it is manifestly unwise to spend superfluous energy in refuting a weak position; the very exertion put forth advertises it for strong. To put forth just the power requisite to dispossess the hearer of an erroneous view is the work of nice calculation and tact.

NOTE. In Webster's speech on "The Constitution not a Compact between Sovereign States,” already quoted from to illustrate negative argument, the first half is devoted to an elaborate refutation of the widely prevalent Nullification doctrine. In Burke's Bristol Speech, where the refutation is merely an incidental answer to objections, it comes in as a supplementary part added in the interests of completeness.

II. ORATORY.

From debate, that comparatively simple body of arguments wherein ordering, tone, and style are determined by the subject-matter, we pass now to a far more complex kind of discourse, wherein not the subject-matter alone but the person apprehending it, not the brain alone but the emotions and the whole man, have their proportioned share in the appeal. In oratory, on account of the issues involved, we may fitly conceive all the elements of discourse raised, as it were, to a higher power, suffused with the glow of immediate personal interest, and vitalized from the inner world of motive. Thus we have reached the summit and crown of the rhetorical art, the utterance wherein style and invention, wherein subject, author, and audience, all come to typical relation and expression.

I.

The Essence of Oratory. Every hearer for whom oratory is designed has a vague ideal of what it should be; and if what he hears turns out to be merely a thing in oratory's clothing, a lecture, an essay read aloud, or a severely reasoned speech, he is aware that something is wrong, though he cannot define it; the spoken delivery has not made it oratory. It is important, then, to inquire what are the distinguishing qualities, the attributes essential to oratory.

By oratory we mean public discourse of the argumentative type, in which truth of personal import and issue is presented and enforced.

Let us analyze this definition.

1. The truth with which oratory deals is of personal import; that is, it so touches the hearer's life-interests that his active impulses may be enlisted in it; and it is of personal issue; that is, it has a trend of imperative, it contemplates more or less nearly an outcome in will and conduct. In its sphere, therefore, is comprised all the truth by which men live and devise action; the truth underlying conduct, character, faith, enterprise, righteousness.

NOTE. A reasoner who is endeavoring to demonstrate that the planet Mars is inhabited is indeed handling an intricate argumentative problem; he is seeking to find a truth, or at least a balance of probability; but if he solves the problem ever so clearly the answer cannot in the smallest degree appeal to the hearer's will. An interesting thing it is to know, but there is no point that can be a claim on him to do. On the other hand, when Demosthenes ceases presenting to his audience a truth which is also an appeal, and has given it the requisite power of diction and delivery, his hearers cry, "Up! let us march against Philip!" The truth has taken possession of their will, and wrought its purpose in an impulse to action. And such an impulse, more or less immediate, is what vitalizes the truth presented in oratory.

2. The literary type to which oratory predominantly belongs is the argumentative; but the imperative cast of its theme causes the argumentation to assume a modified, more impassioned character, which we term persuasion; instead of moving in the formal lines of logical reasoning it may on occasion have the tone and order of emotion and appeal. All this, however, far from impairing its argumentative force, rather gives it greater elevation and freedom.

NOTE. The other literary types also, as will be specified later, are freely drawn upon for the purposes of oratory; each giving its distinctive power where it will best aid.

3. The diction of oratory, like that of debate, is spoken diction, with its fulness and freedom1; but as it is addressed

1 See Spoken Diction, pp. 118-126, above.

not merely to the brain but to the emotions, and through these to the will, its general tone is more impassioned and fervid. By this is not meant that oratorical diction must assume these strenuous qualities, for it may be as plain and familiar as conversation; but also it rises freely with its theme, and answers to the glow of emotion or sublimity or imagination that enters into it. The ideal of oratorical effect, is called elo

style, in its general compass and

quence..

Working Essentials of Eloquence. No definition of eloquence is needed here, nor directions for acquiring it. It is not something to be inculcated; one might as well be commanded to write poetry. Nor is it to be acquired by working directly for it; one can by effort become declamatory and turgid, not truly eloquent. For eloquence subsists as well with the homely as with the sublime; and into it enter not words alone but the character of the orator, his skill over subject and audience, his response to the occasion, things too elusive to bind into rules.1

many

1 Daniel Webster's famous description of eloquence, description and example in one, may here stand in lieu of definition: "When public bodies are to be addressed on momentous occasions, when great interests are at stake, and strong passions excited, nothing is valuable in speech farther than as it is connected with high intellectual and moral endowments. Clearness, force, and earnestness are the qualities which produce conviction. True eloquence, indeed, does not consist in speech. It cannot be brought from far. Labor and learning may toil for it, but they will toil in vain. Words and phrases may be marshalled in every way, but they cannot compass it. It must exist in the man, in the subject, and in the occasion. Affected passion, intense expression, the pomp of declamation, all may aspire to it; they cannot reach it. It comes, if it come at all, like the outbreaking of a fountain from the earth, or the bursting forth of volcanic fires, with spontaneous, original, native force. The graces taught in the schools, the costly ornaments and studied contrivances of speech, shock and disgust men, when their own lives, and the fate of their wives, their children, and their country, hang on the decision of the hour. Then words have lost their power, rhetoric is vain, and all elaborate oratory contemptible. Even genius itself then feels rebuked and subdued, as in the presence of higher qualities. Then patriotism is eloquent; then self-devotion is eloquent. The clear conception, outrunning the deductions of logic, the high purpose, the firm resolve, the dauntless spirit, speaking on the tongue, beaming from the eye, informing every feature, and urging the whole man onward, right onward to his object,—this, this is eloquence; or rather,

On account of prevalent misconceptions, however, we may here make a few discriminations, principally by way of saying what eloquence is not.

1. Eloquence is not grandiloquence; not synonymous with ambitious or pretentious style. It is simply wise to respond to occasion. When the occasion itself is eloquent, then its best expression may be silence; and it knows when plainness and even bareness of statement works with the occasion to have power on men.

2. Eloquence does, however, exclude considerations that are subtle and far-fetched, hair-splitting discriminations of thought, fine-spun threads of reasoning, ultra-literary phrase and imagery; because these are ill-adapted to spoken discourse, and dissipate earnestness in subtlety of thought.

3. Eloquence, dealing with common men, moves among the interests and motives that are common to all. Its realm of truth is common sense, we may almost say commonplace; its close touch with life, however, clothes common ideas with newness of interest.

4. When on occasion eloquence rises into splendor of style, rhythm, imagery, as it has full liberty to do, still its basis of structure and phrase remains as plain as ever. Its great efforts are not complexity but largeness, and greater for being more simple and close to common men.1

II.

The Basis of Relation with the Audience. -The orator's relation with his audience is best conceived as an alliance, wherein, although the audience yield to his views and arguments, they yield because they are glad to yield, and see it

it is something greater and higher than all eloquence, it is action, noble, sublime, godlike action."-WEBSTER, Oration on Adams and Jefferson, Webster's Great Speeches, p. 167.

1 For approach of impassioned prose to poetry, see above, pp. 166–168.