In this way an indirect reply is given to the objection, always present in the minds of a timid jury, that the acquittal of Peltier might lead to war.

$ 541. DEFENCE TURNED INTO ATTACK.

A more energetic and effective kind is that in which defence is turned into attack.

The greatest example of this is found in the oration of Demosthenes on the Crown. Here the speaker, who is set upon his own defence, conducts it in a manner that has never been surpassed; but the vindication of his own life and policy is inseparably connected with accusations against his adversary. The same arguments which show the one to be a patriot prove the other to be a traitor. Demosthenes clears himself of charges only to fix them with more damning effect upon Æschines, whom he denounces as the guilty cause of all the calamities of Athens.

The active genius of Fox rendered him impatient of a defensive attitude, and in those speeches where this is forced upon him he is perpetually rushing forth against the enemy, and becoming the assailant in turn. In the defence of his East India following attack upon the com

Bill he exemplifies this by the pany and his own assailants:

"I am at a loss to reconcile the conduct of men who approve that resumption of violated trust [the deposition of King James II.] which rescued and re-established our unparalleled and admirable constitution, with a thousand valuable improvements and advantages, at the Revolution, and who at this moment rise up the champions of the East India Company's charter, although the incapacity and incompetence of that company to a due and adequate discharge of the trust deposited in them by that charter are themes of ridicule and contempt to all the world; and although, in consequence of their mismanagement, connivance, and imbecility, combined with the wickedness of their servants, the very name of an Englishman is detested, even to a proverb, throughout all Asia, and the national character is become degraded and dishonored."

While defending himself in his speech on the Westminster Scrutiny, he makes an attack in the following manner :

"A noble lord [Lord Mulgrave], in his zeal to exculpate the high-bailiff, charges me with having intimidated him, and charges it upon the evidence of Mr. Grojan. . . . Grojan tells you that he believes these threats sometimes induced the high-bailiff to make decisions in my favor contrary to his

judgment. Yet this is the man whose firmness and intrepidity the noble lord commends so much, and whom the government of this country is straining every nerve to bear harmless through this unprecedented business. An officer, whose deputy, as a palliation of greater guilt, defends by saying that he committed a palpable breach of duty, and only because he is threatened with legal punishment if he acts against law."

§ 542. THE TESTIMONY OF AN ADVERSARY TURNED AGAINST

HIMSELF.

Nothing is more effective than the employment of the testimony of an adversary against himself. This also was largely resorted to by Fox, and always urged with force and success. In his speech on the Russian Armament there is the following passage:

"I hold it to be now acknowledged that it was not the public opinion, but that of the minority of this House, which compelled the ministers to relinquish their ill-advised projects; for a right honorable gentleman who spoke last night confessed the truth in his own frank way. 'We certainly,' said he, 'do not know that the opinion of the public was against us; we only know that a great party in this country was against us, and therefore we apprehended that, though one campaign might have been got through at the beginning of the next session, they would have interrupted us in procuring the supplies.' I believe I quote the right honorable gentleman correctly. And here, sir, let me pause and thank him for the praise which he gives the gentlemen on this side of the House-let me indulge the satisfaction of reflecting that, though we have not the emoluments of office nor the patronage of power, yet we are not excluded from great influence on the measures of government. We take pride to ourselves at this moment that

we are not sitting on a committee of supply, voting enormous fleets and armies to carry into execution this calamitous measure. To us he honestly declares this credit to be due; and this country will no doubt feel the gratitude they owe us for having saved them from the miseries of war."

Dundas having admitted that the ministry desisted from the Russian war through the dread of the opposition, Fox at once uses this admission against the ministry, and converts it into an acknowledgment that the opposition had saved the country from war.

The following passage from the same speech affords an additional illustration:

"He acknowledges another fact, that we are not what another honorable gentleman chose to represent us-a faction that indiscriminately approves of everything, right or wrong. This is clearly manifest from his own admission, for, giving up where he found we condemned, he must have begun in the idea that we should approve."

CHAPTER VIII.

DISPLAY OF FEELING IN ORATORY.

§ 543. DISPLAY OF FEELING.

8. THE exhibition of feeling on the part of the orator is of immense assistance towards commending his arguments and swaying his audience. Passion is stronger than fluency, earnestness is better than rhetoric; and when the hearers believe that the speaker is moved, they share his feelings by a natural sympathy. As the subject of the literature of the emotions has been more fully considered elsewhere, it will only be necessary to notice in this place some of the more striking displays of feeling which may be classed among the tactics of oratory.

544. SUDDEN OUTBURST OF FEELING.

One of the highest displays of emotion is seen in what may be called a sudden outburst of feeling; the most famous of which is to be found in the speech of Demosthenes on the Crown. The following is the criticism of Longinus on this passage:

"Demosthenes is producing proofs of his upright behavior as a public servant. Now what was the most natural method of doing this? 'You were not in the wrong, Athenians, when you bravely risked your lives in fighting for the liberty and safety of Greece; and of this you have domestic examples. For neither were they in the wrong who fought at Marathon, who fought at Salamis, who fought at Platæa.' But when filled, as it were, with sudden inspiration of the Deity, and like one possessed he thunders out that oath-by the champions of Greece: 'You were not in the wrong, no, you could not be; I swear by those that risked their lives for their country on the field of Marathon'-he seems by this one figure of swearing to have enrolled their ancestors among the gods, while suggesting to them that they ought to swear by those who fell so gloriously as by so many gods; to have inspired his judges with the exalted sentiments of those devoted patriots; to have changed, what was naturally a proof, into an appeal transcendently sublime and affecting, aided by the powerful evidence of oaths of a novel and most sublime character; and at the same time to have instilled a balm

into their minds which heals every painful reflection and assuages the smart of misfortune; so that, inspirited by his encomiums, they begin to think with no less pride of the engagement with Philip than of the trophies earned at Marathon and Salamis."

Such outbursts of feeling are not infrequent in the speeches of Erskine. Thus, while speaking in behalf of Lord George Gordon, he seems in one place to lose all self-control, and exclaims :

"I say, by God! that man is a ruffian who shall after this presume to build upon such honest, artless conduct as an evidence of guilt."

Again, in the same orator's speech in behalf of Hardy, full of impatience at the nature of the evidence brought against his client, he says:

"The unfortunate man whose innocence I am defending is arraigned before you of high-treason upon evidence not only wholly repugnant to this particular statute, but such as never yet was heard of in England upon any capital trial, . . . which has filled my mind with unremitting distress and agitation, and which, from its discordant, unconnected nature, has suffered me to reap no advantage from the indulgence which I began by thanking you for; but which, on the contrary, has almost set my brain on fire with the vain endeavor of collecting my thoughts upon a subject never designed for any rational course of thinking."

In both of these examples we see how the orator strives by means of passionate affirmation to give additional force to his arguments. In the first instance he contends that the demeanor of the prisoner is no proof of his guilt; in the second, that the evidence brought against his client is unfair. To each of these he gives the greatest possible emphasis by the vehemence of his declarations.

Another example occurs in the same speech:

"The question must return at last to what you, and you only, can resolve. Is he guilty of that base and detestable intention to destroy the king?... If you can say this upon the evidence, it is your duty to say so, and you may with a tranquil conscience return to your families; though by your judgment the unhappy object of it must no more return to his. Alas! gentlemen, what do I say! He has no family to return to. The affectionate partner of his life has already fallen a victim to the surprise and horror which attends the scene now transacting. But let that melancholy reflection pass."

Here the display of feeling consists of a sudden outburst of

Y

sympathy for the accused, accompanied by a brief statement of his most piteous condition.

$545. EXTRAVAGANCE OF EXPRESSION.

Extravagance of expression is freely indulged in by orators when under the influence of strong emotion, and the statement which in ordinary composition would seem exaggerated, and therefore absurd, becomes most effective as a sign of the passion of the speaker. Thus Sir James Mackintosh, in behalf of Peltier, says of the French government:

"They are banded together by the despair of forgiveness, by the unanimous detestation of mankind."

This language goes beyond the actual truth, yet is not stronger than is warranted by the feeling of the speaker.

§ 546. CONTROL OF EMOTION.

However strong the passion of the orator may be, it should always be under control, so that after any outburst he may return to his argument, and make even his passion conduce to its enforcement. Lord Brougham, in his admirable Inaugural Discourse, praises the manly severity of Greek oratory, and especially the self-control which never allowed the speaker to go too far, but even after the boldest outbursts of feeling drew him back to his subject.

A good example may be found in Erskine's speech on Stockdale. He is alluding to the trial of Warren Hastings:

"Shall it be endured that a subject of this country may be impeached for the transactions of twenty years; that the accusation shall spread as wide as the region of letters; that the accused shall stand day after day and year after year as a spectacle before the public, which shall be kept in a state of perpetual inflammation against him; that he shall not, without the severest penalties, be permitted to submit anything to the judgment of mankind in his defence? If this be the law (which it is for you to decide), such a man has no trial. That great hall built by our fathers for English justice is no longer a court but an altar, and an Englishman, instead of being judged in it by God and his country, is a victim and a sacrifice."

After this he at once returns to severe argument with the words:

"You will carefully remember that I am not presuming to question the right or the duty of the Commons of England to impeach," etc.