contrast with it. The introduction by anecdote belongs to this class. The Grady Speech (p. 242) illustrates well both of these varieties of beginning.

Whatever the subject matter chosen for the introduction it must, in order to suit the modern taste, bear close relevance to the theme of the discourse. The irrelevant introduction advocated by some, practised by many, may be attractive in itself, but it arouses expectations that are destined not to be fulfilled, and its final effect, when it is recalled by a hearer, is to diminish the total influence of the speech. Nowhere is there greater danger, than in the introduction, of violating unity of tone. If the introduction is keyed at too high an elevation of thought or feeling or is too finely finished, the speaker may later find himself unable to maintain the level on which he started and the decline to a lower level is sure to be disappointing. Speakers of experience are usually wary of this danger and prefer to begin on a level from which it will not be difficult to rise as the essential parts of the discourse are taken up. The summit of an inclined plane is not a good point of departure in any discourse. Among the best exemplars of moderation and restraint in introducing a discourse, was Wendell Phillips, a fact the more striking since moderation and restraint were characteristic only of his manner, and not at all of his thinking. Those who listened to him for the first time, aware of his great fame, might experience some disappointment of their high expectations for a little while after he had begun to speak; it was all so unassuming, quite on the conversational level; but the temporary disappointment served only to put them in readiness to rise with the speaker to the higher levels of his discourse as he reached these. On the other hand, the splendid introductions

of Webster must have put many of his first hearers in fear that no man, however great, could begin on so high a plane and maintain himself there for long.

The usual advice to the inexperienced is to prepare the introduction after the body of the discourse has been written. The advice is sound if understood as a warning against a pretentious, a trite, or a far-fetched introduction, or against one that for any reason is out of tune with the prevailing note of the discourse. The further advice that if an appropriate introduction has not suggested itself by the time the body of the discourse is completed, all attempt at introduction should be given up, is also sound. Earlier writers on oratory provided for this very contingency by naming one of their varieties of introduction "the abrupt beginning." To this advice may be added the reminder, contained in a word of Walter Bagehot's, that excepting in times of great excitement an audience begins to listen in a decidedly "factish" frame of mind. At the outset it prefers the particular rather than the general, facts rather than principles, the specific instance rather than the universal truth, the intellectual rather than the emotional.

2. The Discussion. The main body of an address includes one or more of the following elements: (1) a division or partition of the subject, (2) definition, (3) narration, description, or exposition, (4) proofs and refutation. The order in which these things appear in an address is determined by the nature of the address. One or more of them may in many cases be omitted altogether. Attention to the first will always be necessary.

(1) The division or partition of the material is not often formally announced in the finished address, as was once the custom. When it is so announced it is usually

accounted a part of the introduction. Yet it is with the organization of the body of the discourse that the partition is concerned; and, in any event, there must be in the preparation of a discussion a division or partition of the material with a view to orderly presentation. Waiving the question whether the partition is at the end of the introduction or at the beginning of the discussion, we may say that the best division is the simplest and most natural, with each part distinct from the others, yet with all the parts standing in intelligible relationship to one another and to the main idea. In spoken more than in written discourse, the plan must be perfectly clear, because the hearer has no time to think back over the speech in order to consider relationships of ideas. He is occupied with the passing word. One test of a speech is the possibility of reproducing its plan in an obviously consecutive outline. In a speech that is mainly argumentative like Hamilton's (p. 44) such an outline will reveal a debatable proposition followed by arguments supporting it, each in its logical place, and each, when necessary, supported by subordinate arguments. In an address of the expository class, like Webster's on The Bunker Hill Monument (p. 87) there is no debatable proposition; there is only a broad general subject certain aspects of which the speaker chooses to explain; there is perhaps only an occasion, requiring a voice to express its dominant mood. The plan of such a discourse will show the chief ideas in their relationship; but will fail to reproduce what is most characteristic and valuable in the speech, the element of personality, the emotional uplift. It is likely, therefore, to be much less satisfactory as a graphic representation of the speech, than the brief of an argumentative address. A study of the following

outline of Webster's speech and the brief of Hamilton's argument, in connection with the addresses themselves, will illustrate all of these points.

OUTLINE OF THE BUNKER HILL MONUMENT ADDRESS.

INTRODUCTION.

1. Impressiveness of the occasion (p. 87, 11. 1-8).

2. Patriotic memories and hopes peculiar to Americans inspired (p. 87, 1. 9-p. 89, 1. 17).

I. By the significance to them of the date and place

(p. 87, 1. 9-p. 88, 1. 7).

II. By the significance to them of the discovery of
America (p. 88, 11. 8-23).

III. By the significance to them of colonial history (p.
88, 1. 24-p. 89, 1. 8).

IV. By the significance to them of the Revolution (p. 89, 11. 9-17).

DISCUSSION.

A. Purposes of the Society in providing for the Monument (p. 89, 1. 18-p. 90, 1. 2).

I. Not that a monument is necessary, but to show our appreciation of the deeds of our ancestors, to keep alive similar sentiments and to foster a regard for the principles of the Revolution (p. 90, 11. 3-26).

II. Not to cherish hostility or the military spirit, but to express our sense of the benefits which

have come through the events commemorated (p. 90, 1. 27—p. 91, 1. 29).

B. Mighty events in America and Europe since the Revolu

tion (p. 91, 1. 30-p. 93, l. 18).

C. Apostrophe to the survivors of the Revolution (p. 93, 1. 19-p. 94, 1. 20).

D. Tribute to the patriotic dead (p. 94, 1. 21—p. 95, l. 1), especially to Warren (p. 95, 1. 2—p. 95, 1. 19).

E. Address to the living survivors (p. 95, 1. 20—p. 96, 1. 23). F. The unity of spirit in the Colonies and the effect of the Battle of Bunker Hill, especially upon La Fayette (p. 96, 1. 24-p. 100, 1. 25).

G. Eulogy on La Fayette (p. 100, 1. 26—p. 102, 1. 7). H. Improvement in the world since the Battle of Bunker Hill, especially in politics and government (p. 102, 1. 8). 1. Diffusion of knowledge and community of ideas; with results (p. 102, 1. 23—p. 103, 1. 33).

II. Difference between the Revolution in America and the French Revolution (p. 124, 1. 28).

III.

a.

America was accustomed to representative government (p. 105, 11. 4-30).

b. Europe was a stranger to the popular principle (p. 105, 1. 31-p. 106, 1. 4).

c. Europe has, however, gained by the change (p. 106, 11. 4-21).

(1) Everywhere there is a desire for

popular government (p. 106, 11.

22-32).

The influence of world opinion upon arbitrary governments (p. 106, 1. 33-p. 107, 1. 19). The case of Greece (p. 107, 1. 20—p. 108, 1. 33).

IV. The rise of independent states in South America (p. 108, 1. 34-p. 110, 1. 6).

I. The influence of the example of America (p. 110, 1. 7). I. It proves that free government may be safe and just (p. 110, 11. 13-19).

II. If we fail, free government will perish from the earth (p. 110, 1. 20-p. 111, 1. 2).

III. Free government may be as permanent as any other (p. 111, 11. 3-13).

CONCLUSION.

The duty of America is to preserve what the fathers won and to increase the spirit of union.