M'arthur Democrat. (McArthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1853-1865, 1860-03-22
Enrne.tncss in OrnlorY.

EnrnestneSs in OratOry.
When Kossuth was in this country,
people talked Of nothing but his mag.
netism. His oratory certainly was
wonderful, SO wonderful, indeed, that
cold, pasSionateless men shed tears
when he spoke at the Musical Fund
Hall, though the day before the din.
ner, and even the day after it, they
vowed themselves opposed to the in,
toryention which he sought. We
have known nearly similar effects to
be produced oy John Mitchell. But
the only magn etism in either speaker,
is the power of an earnest conviction.
No man ever heard Kossuth speak
without feeling that the soul of the
great Magyar was in all he said: that
he believed in 1t as he believed in his
life, that he wsS ready to co all which
he urged his hearers t0do. An ora.
tor Of this kind always communicates
something Of his own enthusiasm to
the audience. And the want of this
earnostness is the great defect Of
modern eloquence.
This is noticeable both at the bar
and in the pulpit. How often do
what are called elegant speakers lose
their case, when comparatively plain
spoken advocate on the other side wins
it; and this, not because his evidence
is stronger, but because he has sue.
ceeded in convincing the Jury that be
really believes his client in the right!
1t is the fault Of being eloquent "by
rule and line" Of being a rhetorician,
that it gives an air Of artiiicality and
inSincerity to the orator. Everett
could never produce the effects that
Webster or Clay did, simply from this
fact, though both more correct aud
more finished. Not Sunday passes
that critic al observer cannot see how
the influence OF the pulpit is impaired
by the apparent want Of earnestness
in preachers. The use of written
sermons, though to be recommended
on many accounts, has the very seri-
GUS disadvantage, that it is almost i'm.
possible for a speaker to discourse
from the manuscript, and yet retain an
air OF earnestness. The most effec.
tive pulpit orators, in all ages, have
been those who either spoke extempo.
raneodsly, or seemed to do SO, Or when
their sermons were committed to
memory. Much OF the power of the
early Methodists over the audience is
attributable to the earrestness Of their
belief in what they said.
We do not wish to be understood
as recommending extemporaneous Or
atory, in the sense in which that
phrase is generally understood; for
no man, unless he is inspired, can
make good speech, without either
having prepared himself directly for it,
or being so perfectly conversaht with
the sub bject as to be able to discourse
from full mind. Demosthenes al.
ways carefully wrote out his orations,
learned them by heart, and pronoun.
ced them with every aid Of intonatiOn
and gesture. Even Chatham never
rose to speak, except on rare occasions,
until he had turned the subject over
and over again in his mind; and the
exceptions were when lie was reused
by some mighty stake, when he was
thoroughly master of the subject, and
when he was called on to reply in de-
bate, Patrick Henry, indolcnt as he
seemed, as he lounged about or idly
angled, was continually thinking OF
his cases. Perhaps the NEST favOra-
BILE condition for Oratory are when the
speaker rises, with his mind full ofhis
subject, his thoughts clearly arranged,
and few salient and striking passa-
ges determined on, but the general
tone and language left to take color
from the occasion. Such an orator
has always an air of earnestnesS. -
The pulpit, especially, might profit
by cultivating, to a greater degree,
this style of speaking.-PubIic (Pa)
Ledger.