Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

triflers those who give time to the observation of Nature they actually scorn those who show any active interest in these marvels. We repeat, then, that not science, but the neglect of science, is irreligious. Devotion to science is a tacit worship-a tacit recognition of worth in the things studied; and by implication in their Cause. It is not a mere lip-homage, but a homage expressed in actions—not a mere professed respect, but a respect proved by the sacrifice of time, thought, and labor.

Nor is it thus only that true science is essentially religious. It is religious, too, inasmuch as it generates a profound respect for, and an implicit faith in, those uniform laws which underlie all things. By accumulated experiences the man of science acquires a thorough belief in the unchanging relations of phenomena — in the invariable connection of cause and consequence-in the necessity of good or evil results. Instead of the rewards and punishments of traditional belief, which men vaguely hope they may gain, or escape, spite of their disobedience; he finds that there are rewards and punishments in the ordained constitution of things, and that the evil results of disobedience are inevitable. He sees that the laws to which we must submit are not only inexorable but beneficent. He sees that in virtue of these laws, the process of things is ever toward a greater perfection and a higher happiness. Hence he is led constantly to insist on these laws, and is indignant when men disregard them. And thus does he, by asserting the eternal principles of things and the necessity of conforming to them, prove himself intrinsically religious.

To all which, add the further religious aspect of science, that it alone can give us true conceptions of ourselves and our relation to the mysteries of existence. At the same time that it shows us all which can be known, it shows us the limits beyond which we can know nothing. Not by dogmatic assertion does it teach the impossibility of comprehending the ultimate cause of things; but it leads us clearly to recognize this impossibility by bringing us in every direction to boundaries we cannot cross. It realizes to us in a way which nothing else can, the littleness of human intelligence in the face of that which transcends human intelligence. While towards the traditions and authorities of men its attitude may be proud, before the impenetrable veil which hides

the Absolute its attitude is humble a true pride and a true humility. Only the sincere man of science (and by this title we do not mean the mere calculator of distances, or analyzer of compounds, or labeller of species; but him who through lower truths seeks higher, and eventually the highest) — only the genuine man of science, we say, can truly know how utterly beyond, not only human knowledge, but human conception, is the Universal Power of which Nature, and Life, and Thought are manifestations.

[blocks in formation]

On the Unveiling of a Monument to General Grant.

Dedication of the Public Library.

President's Inaugural Address.

Speech in Response to the Toast, "Our Guest."

"The Prize-winners."

"Once Upon a Time."
"Our Future."

While Exposition, Argumentation, and Persuasion are clearly distinct, it is just as impossible to keep them always separate as it is to keep Narration and Description separate. All three are often employed in the same discourse and there is no reason why they should

not be. Still for convenience we may wish to distinguish the discourse as belonging to one class or the other, and then we shall have to be guided by what seems to be its principal object, whether it is intended to inform, to correct, or to arouse, whether it aims to explain a fact, to prove a statement, or to influence an action. We have seen that an argument may be most effective sometimes if made up almost wholly of exposition. In like manner the ends of persuasion may often be effected by simple exposition or argument, or by a combination of the two. The citation from Herbert Spencer in the last exercise contained scarcely a directly persuasive word and yet it was offered as an example of persuasive discourse because its object so manifestly is to move people to lay more stress on scientific studies in ordinary education.

The precise method adopted in any case will depend on many considerations, on the general character of the persons appealed to, on their present attitude and feeling, on the kind of action desired, whether calm or violent, immediate or remote, etc. Thus far we have treated of persuasive discourse that is written and intended to be read. In such the calmer expository and argumentative methods are very appropriate. When we come, as we now do, to the more ordinary form under which this style of discourse is found, declamation, oratory, these methods will naturally fall into the background in order to give more prominence to direct address and stirring appeals.

It has been said that oratory is on the decline, that we have no more Ciceros, Pitts, Burkes, Websters, Beechers. Perhaps this is true in a certain degree. It

may well be that the extension of printing, making it possible to appeal at once to a vast audience in nearly every part of the world, has dwarfed the importance of oratory. Why should people crowd the galleries of our congressional halls when they can read the speeches over their coffee the next morning? Or why should a speaker address a hundred people here and another hundred there, when he can with so little trouble put his speech in print and address thousands?

But of course the peculiar charm and value of oratory are not dead. People will still be made to listen who could never be made to read, and people hearing will be aroused who reading would sit unmoved. And men speaking will still find their tongues tipped with a fire which would never irradiate the point of their pens.

Nor is the need for oratory past. A felicitous response to a toast will give a life, a character, and a unity to a dinner-party that nothing else can give. In no more fitting way than by a fervent speech can we dedicate buildings and consecrate enterprises. Inaugural addresses, baccalaureate addresses, Labor-day speeches, memorial sermons, Fourth of July orations, all of these occasional forms of oratory we still demand, to say nothing of the forms regularly practiced in politics, the law, the ministry, etc. It will be noticed that into some of these forms the element of persuasion scarcely enters at all, but since they come under the general head of oratory it seems best to include them here.

The following plain but graceful speech was delivered at a public dinner in Philadelphia in 1846 by the Hon. Samuel Breck, who presided. The address is compli

mentary to Daniel Webster, in whose honor the dinner

was given:

GENTLEMEN: I rise to propose a toast, expressive of the great esteem and honor in which we hold the illustrious guest whom we are assembled to welcome. It is cause for felicitation to have this opportunity to receive him, and to meet him at our festive board.

In Philadelphia we have long been accustomed to follow him, with earnest attention, in his high vocations in the legislative hall and in the Cabinet; and have always seen him there exercising his great talents for the true interests of our wide-spread Republic. And we, in common with the American people, have felt the influence of his wisdom and patriotism. In seasons of danger, he has been to us a living comforter; and more than once has restored this nation to serenity, security, and prosperity.

In a career of more than thirty years of political agitation, he, with courageous constancy, unwavering integrity, and eminent ability, has carried out, as far as his agency could prevail, the true principles of the American system of government.

For his numerous public services we owe him much, and we open our grateful hearts to him in thanks; we say to him, with feelings of profound respect and warm affection, that we are rejoiced at his presence here, amid his Philadelphia friends — his faithful Philadelphia friends and admirers.

Thirteen years later, and seven years after the death of Daniel Webster, the seventy-seventh anniversary of the great statesman's birthday was commemorated by a banquet at which the orator, Rufus Choate, made an address. The opening words of that address were as follow:

I would not have it supposed for a moment that I design to make any eulogy, or any speech, concerning the great man whose birthday we have met to observe. I hasten to assure you that I shall attempt to do no such thing. There is no longer need of it, or fitness for it, for any purpose. Times have been when such a thing might have been done with propriety. While he was yet

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »