The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1875-07-19

jects which have been treated thousands
I've should rather say millions-oi
times, by men Of much greater power
than themselves. Every conceivable re-
Election bearing upon the topic has been
expressed over and over again, in every
possible variety of form, by the greatest
and the weakest men who have occupied
the pulpit in all ages. What is to be
hoped under such circumstances Why
should we be absurd enough to expect
anything remarkable or original from
thousands of young men, who have &C
eumulated scraps enough of secondhand
thought to satisfy their examiners, and
who are Immediately ordered to get into
the pulpit and enlighten the world by the
practice Of one Of the most difficult of
artse In English public life, the power
of making q good speech is the greatest
recommendation to power, and is valued,
as some people say. at q preposterous
rate. And yet. though every member of
Parliament has the strongest possible
motives for attaining excellence, and has
to speak upon subjects which awake the
liveliest interest, there are probably not
half q dozen men in the House
Of Commons who can really pro-
duce an oratorical effect. Why should
we suppose that q power so sparsely
distributed should be found in o greater
number of average young men. speaking,
net because they have something to say.
but because they are forced 20 say some
thing! So long as our system is what it
is, we must be utterly unreasonable not
to be amply content if, out of a hundred
sermons, there is one that is passably
good. Of the ninety.nAe others, it
should be quite as much as we can fairly
expect if they areas they generally are
thoroughly in~offensive.
The facts, indeed, are too obvious to be
overlooked. How is an improvement to
&c obtained! Various suggestions are reg
ularly put forward on these occasions. One
is that young men should be trained to
speak; another, that they should be en-
couraged to preach the m of other
people; and a third, that preaching should
not be exacted from all the clergy. We
cannot discuss fully proposals which
would involve very serious changes III the
ecclesiastical organization of the country;
but there are two or three considerations
which require to be often put forward,
because they are so often overlooked.
The theory, for example. that the clergy
ought to be trained to speak may be q
good one in its way, but it is palpsbly and
ludicrously insufficient. The first
condition Of good oratory is
that the orator should have
something to say. No mount of train.
ing in the proper manner of speaking can
remedy the defect of utter emptiness Of
mind. To train q man to make utter in
sipidity of thought interesting in express
sion is q hopeless task. The theory that
this part of the art can be taught is like
the theory that sufficient training would
enable the cart-horse to win the. Derby.
Where the original force is wanting, no
amount Of training and pruning away of
faults can give posi;ive excellence. You
can teach a man to open his mouth and
keep his lungs full, but if the only result
is the clearer utterance of nonentities,
the labor will produce little result.
Something perhaps might be done to-
wards the eradication OF certain awkward
tricks Of demeanor; but it is hopeless to
suppose that any quantity Of polish be-
slowed upon a common pebble will make
it into a diamond, or that you can drill
the ordinary young Englishman into ora
torical excellence. With infinite pains
you can teach some lads not to make
gross false quantities; but no labor WILL
teach one in a hundred t.. write passable
Latin verse. The task of making orators
is still more difficult, and, indeed, but for
| the regular recurrence of the advice to
attempt it in letters to the newspapers,
we should have thought that the plan
would have been universally abandoned.
1t is at first sight q more promising
plan to propose that preachers should
openly make use of other mems writing.
Addison suggested this device in the case
Of Sir Roger de Coverly's chaplain . cen.
fury and q half ago, and it has been tried
often enough. Mr.. Bellew, We are told,
who Was . good reader, though not a
first-rate thinker, used to charm his con-
gregations with sermons from South and
Jeremy Taylor. But the plan will not
bear investigation. The art Of good
reading, in the first place is not much
less difficult than the art Of good speak.
Il IuHs tgOt HULL AVES OApAOsC VI UCluS
taught. Few men are born with the
dramatic instinct any more than with the
rhetorical; and without some share Of
that instinct, reading always wants
the viyacity of the utterance of ones own
thoughts. "a poor thing. but mine
own" is > sufficient defense Of many in
ferior sermons. The real difficulty, how
ever. is with the congregation II q man
conceals the practice, he is acting dis
honorably; it he openly avows it, he, will
find that his congregation will infallibly
begin TO yawn. Perhaps they may be
wrong, but that is not the question. The
fact j., we believe, ~undeniable. and might
be established by the experience Of many
who have tried the plan. Nor is it 80
unreasonable as appears at first sight.
The pleasure Of hearing good oratory de-
ponds upon the sense Of being brought in
t. personal cor tact with the orator. 1t
is the electric fash Of sympathy which
makes listening to living speech so incom-
parabIy more effective than reading. The
L L--l tt--- ~4~4an --I.-