RUFUS CHOATE: A Discourse Commemorative of Daniel Webster, 1853

2. What is the effect of the questions in the following? Are the sentences varied? If the occasion was momentous, what is the style?

"And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the house? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, Sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our water and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love?"

PATRICK HENRY: Speech in the Virginia Convention, 1775

3. List the concrete details given below. What effect have they? What elements give the idea of the extent of the Colonies' fisheries? Are the sentences long or short? Does their success justify them?

"Look at the manner in which the people of New England have of late carried on the whale fishery. Whilst we follow them among the tumbling mountains of ice, and behold them penetrating into the deepest frozen recess of Hudson's Bay and Davis' Straits, whilst we are looking for them beneath the arctic circle, we hear that they have pierced into the opposite region of polar cold, that they are at the antipodes, and engaged under the frozen Serpent of the South. Falkland Islands, which seemed too remote and romantic an object for the grasp of national ambition, is but a stage and resting-place in the progress of their victorious industry. Nor is the equinoctial heat more discouraging to them than the accumulated winter of both the poles. We know that whilst some of them draw the line and strike the harpoon on the coast of Africa, others run the longitude and pursue their gigantic game along the coast of Brazil. No sea but what is vexed by their fisheries; no climate that is not witness to their toil. Neither the perseverance of Holland, nor the activity of France, nor the dexterous and firm sagacity of English enterprise ever carried this most perilous mode of hardy industry to the extent to which it has been pushed by, this recent people; a people who are still, as it were, but in the gristle, and not yet hardened into the bone of manhood."

EDMUND BURKE: Conciliation with America, 1775

4. Is the following clear? What kind of sentence is it? What minor phrase? Is this phrase important? Why? Why did Lincoln repeat this sentence, practically with no change, twelve times in a single speech?

"The sum of the whole is that of our thirty-nine fathers who framed the original Constitution, twenty-one—a clear majority of the whole—certainly understood that no proper division of local from Federal authority, nor any part of the Constitution, forbade the Federal Government to control slavery in the Federal Territories."

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: Cooper Union Speech, 1860

5. Is the following well phrased? What makes it so? Is any expression too strong? Do you object to any? How many of the words would you be likely not to use?

"It is but too true that there are many whose whole scheme of freedom is made up of pride, perverseness, and insolence. They feel themselves in a state of thraldom; they imagine that their souls are cooped and cabined in, unless they have some man, or some body of men, dependent on their mercy. The desire of having some one below them descends to those who are the very lowest of all; and a Protestant cobbler, debased by his poverty, but exalted by his share of the ruling church, feels a pride in knowing it is by his generosity alone that the peer, whose footman's instep he measures, is able to keep his chaplain from a gaol. This disposition is the true source of the passion which many men, in very humble life, have taken to the American war. Our subjects in America; our colonies; our dependents. This lust of party power is the liberty they hunger and thirst for; and this Siren song of ambition has charmed ears that we would have thought were never organized to that sort of music."

EDMUND BURKE: Speech at Bristol, 1780

6. Describe the effects of the questions in the next. How is sentence variety secured? What effects have the simple, declarative sentences?

"And from what have these consequences sprung? We have been involved in no war. We have been at peace with all the world. We have been visited with no national calamity. Our people have been advancing in general intelligence, and, I will add, as great and alarming as has been the advance of political corruption among the mercenary corps who look to government for support, the morals and virtue of the community at large have been advancing in improvement. What, I again repeat, is the cause?"

JOHN C. CALHOUN: Speech on the Force Bill, 1833

7. What quality predominates in the following? Does it lower the tone of the passage too much? Is the interrogative form of the last sentence better than the declarative? Why? Has the last observation any close connection with the preceding portion? Can it be justified?

"Modesty is a lovely trait, which sets the last seal to a truly great character, as the blush of innocence adds the last charm to youthful beauty. When, on his return from one of his arduous campaigns in the Seven Years' War, the Speaker of the Virginia Assembly, by order of the House, addressed Colonel Washington in acknowledgment of his services, the youthful hero rose to reply; but humility checked his utterance, diffidence sealed his lips. 'Sit down, Colonel Washington,' said the Speaker; 'the House sees that your modesty is equal to your merit, and that exceeds my power of language to describe.' But who ever heard of a modest Alexander or a modest Caesar, or a modest hero or statesman of the present day?—much as some of them would be improved by a measure of that quality."

EDWARD EVERETT: Character of Washington, 1858

8. Look up the meaning of every unfamiliar expression in this extract. Is the quotation at the end in good taste? Give reasons for your answer. For what kinds of audiences would this speech be fitting?

"The remedy for the constant excess of party spirit lies, and lies alone, in the courageous independence of the individual citizen. The only way, for instance, to procure the party nomination of good men, is for every self-respecting voter to refuse to vote for bad men. In the medieval theology the devils feared nothing so much as the drop of holy water and the sign of the cross, by which they were exorcised. The evil spirits of party fear nothing so much as bolting and scratching. In hoc signo vinces. If a farmer would reap a good crop, he scratches the weeds out of his field. If we would have good men upon the ticket, we must scratch bad men off. If the scratching breaks down the party, let it break: for the success of the party, by such means would break down the country. The evil spirits must be taught by means that they can understand. 'Them fellers,' said the captain of a canal-boat of his men, 'Them fellers never think you mean a thing until you kick 'em. They feel that, and understand.'"

GEORGE WILLIAM CURTIS: The Public Duty of Educated Men, 1877

9. Describe the quality of the next extract. What is its style? Are repetitions allowable? What then of variety? Point out contrasts of words and phrases.

"What, then it is said, would you legislate in haste? Would you legislate in times of great excitement concerning matters of such deep concern? Yes, Sir, I would; and if any bad consequences should follow from the haste and excitement, let those be answerable who, when there was no need to haste, when there existed no excitement, refused to listen to any project of reform; nay, made it an argument against reform that the public mind was not excited.... I allow that hasty legislation is an evil. But reformers are compelled to legislate fast, just because bigots will not legislate early. Reformers are compelled to legislate in times of excitement, because bigots will not legislate in times of tranquillity."

THOMAS BABINGTON MACAULAY: On the Reform Bill, 1832

10. Describe the diction of the next extract. Describe the prevailing kind of sentences. Do you approve of these in such an instance? Explain your answer. Does it remind you—in tone—of any other passage already quoted in this book? What is your opinion of the style?

"There has been a change of government. It began two years ago, when the House of Representatives became Democratic by a decisive majority. It has now been completed. The Senate about to assemble will also be Democratic. The offices of President and Vice-President have been put into the hands of Democrats. What does the change mean? That is the question that is uppermost in our minds today. That is the question I am going to try to answer in order, if I may, to interpret the occasion.

"This is not a day of triumph; it is a day of dedication. Here muster, not the forces of party, but the forces of humanity. Men's hearts wait upon us; men's lives hang in the balance; men's hopes call upon us to say what we will do. Who shall live up to the great trust? Who dares fail to try? I summon all honest men, all patriotic, all forward-looking men to my side. God helping me, I will not fail them, if they will but counsel and sustain me."

WOODROW WILSON: Inaugural, 1918

11. Consider sentence length in the following: Which words are significant? How is concreteness secured?

"Ours is a government of liberty by, through, and under the law. No man is above it and no man is below it. The crime of cunning, the crime of greed, the crime of violence, are all equally crimes, and against them all alike the law must set its face. This is not and never shall be a government either of plutocracy or of a mob. It is, it has been, and it will be a government of the people; including alike the people of great wealth, of moderate wealth, the people who employ others, the people who are employed, the wage worker, the lawyer, the mechanic, the banker, the farmer; including them all, protecting each and everyone if he acts decently and squarely, and discriminating against any one of them, no matter from what class he comes, if he does not act squarely and fairly, if he does not obey the law. While all people are foolish if they violate or rail against the law, wicked as well as foolish, but all foolish—yet the most foolish man in this Republic is the man of wealth who complains because the law is administered with impartial justice against or for him. His folly is greater than the folly of any other man who so complains; for he lives and moves and has his being because the law does in fact protect him and his property."

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Spokane, 1903



CHAPTER IV

BEGINNING THE SPEECH

Speech-making a Formal Matter. Every speech is more or less a formal affair. The speaker standing is separated from the other persons present by his prominence. He is removed from them by standing while they sit, by being further away from them than in ordinary conversation. The greater the distance between him and his listeners the more formal the proceeding becomes. When a person speaks "from the floor" as it is called, that is, by simply rising at his seat and speaking, there is a marked difference in the manner of his delivery and also in the effect upon the audience. In many gatherings, speeches and discussions "from the floor" are not allowed at all, in others this practice is the regular method of conducting business. Even in the schoolroom when the student speaks from his place he feels less responsibility than when he stands at the front of the room before his classmates. As all formal exercises have their regular rules of procedure it will be well to list the more usual formulas for beginnings of speeches.

The Salutation. In all cases where speeches are made there is some person who presides. This person may be the Vice-President of the United States presiding over the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, the president of a city board of aldermen, the judge of a court, the president of a corporation, of a lodge, of a church society, of a club, the pastor of a church, the chancellor or provost or dean of a college, the principal of a school, the chairman of a committee, the toastmaster of a banquet, the teacher of a class. The first remark of a speaker must always be the recognition of this presiding officer.

Then there are frequently present other persons who are distinct from the ordinary members of the audience, to whom some courtesy should be shown in this salutation. Their right to recognition depends upon their rank, their importance at the time, some special peculiar reason for separating them from the rest of the audience. The speaker will have to decide for himself in most cases as to how far he will classify his hearers. In some instances there is no difficulty. Debaters must recognize the presiding officer, the judges if they be distinct from the regular audience, the members of the audience itself. Lawyers in court must recognize only the judge and the "gentlemen of the jury." In a debate on the first draft for the League of Nations presided over by the Governor of Massachusetts, Senator Lodge's salutation was "Your Excellency, Ladies and Gentlemen, My Fellow Americans." The last was added unquestionably because patriotic feeling was so strong at the time that reference to our nationality was a decidedly fitting compliment, and also perhaps, because the speaker realized that his audience might be slightly prejudiced against the view he was going to advance in criticizing the League Covenant. At times a formal salutation becomes quite long to include all to whom recognition is due. At a university commencement a speaker might begin: "Mr. Chancellor, Members of the Board of Trustees, Gentlemen of the Faculty, Candidates for Degrees, Ladies and Gentlemen."

Other salutations are Your Honor, Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Madame President, Madame Chairman, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Stevenson, Sir, Mr. Toastmaster, Mr. Moderator, Honorable Judges, Ladies, Gentlemen, Fellow Citizens, Classmates, Fellow Workers, Gentlemen of the Senate, Gentlemen of the Congress, Plenipotentiaries of the German Empire, My Lord Mayor and Citizens of London; Mr. Mayor, Mr. Secretary, Admiral Fletcher and Gentlemen of the Fleet; Mr. Grand Master, Governor McMillan, Mr. Mayor, My Brothers, Men and Women of Tennessee.

The most important thing about the salutation is that it should never be omitted. To begin to speak without having first recognized some presiding officer and the audience stamps one immediately as thoughtless, unpractised, or worse still—discourteous.

Having observed the propriety of the salutation the speaker should make a short pause before he proceeds to the introduction of his speech proper.

Length of the Introduction. There was a time when long elaborate introductions were the rule, and textbooks explained in detail how to develop them. The main assumption seems to have been that the farther away from his topic the speaker began, the longer and more indirect the route by which he approached it, the more sudden and surprising the start with which it was disclosed to the audience, the better the speech. Such views are no longer held. One of the criticisms of the speeches of the English statesman, Burke, is that instead of coming at once to the important matter under consideration—and all his speeches were upon paramount issues—he displayed his rhetorical skill and literary ability before men impatient to finish discussion and provide for action by casting their votes. If a student will read the beginning of Burke's famous Speech on Conciliation he will readily understand the force of this remark, for instead of bringing forward the all-important topic of arranging for colonial adjustment Burke uses hundreds of words upon the "flight of a bill for ever," his own pretended superstitiousness and belief in omens. So strong is the recognition of the opposite practice today that it is at times asserted that speeches should dispense with introductions longer than a single sentence.

Purpose of the Introduction. So far as the material of the speech is concerned the introduction has but one purpose—to bring the topic of the succeeding remarks clearly and arrestingly before the audience. It should be clearly done, so that there shall be no misunderstanding from the beginning. It should be arrestingly done, so that the attention shall be aroused and held from this announcement even until the end. A man should not declare that he is going to explain the manufacture of paper-cutters, and then later proceed to describe the making of those frames into which rolls of wrapping paper are fitted underneath a long cutting blade, because to most people the expression "paper-cutters" means dull-edged, ornamental knives for desks and library tables. His introduction would not be clear. On the other hand if a minister were to state plainly that he was going to speak on the truth that "it is more blessed to give than to receive" his congregation might turn its attention to its own affairs at once because the topic promises no novelty. But if he declares that he is going to make a defense of selfishness he would surely startle his hearers into attention, so that he could go on to describe the personal satisfaction and peace of mind which comes to the doers of good deeds. A speaker could arrest attention by stating that he intended to prove the immorality of the principle that "honesty is the best policy," if he proceeded to plead for that virtue not as a repaying policy but as an innate guiding principle of right, no matter what the consequences. In humorous, half-jesting, ironical material, of course, clearness may be justifiably sacrificed to preserving interest. The introduction may state the exact opposite of the real topic.

When nothing else except the material of the introduction need be considered, it should be short. Even in momentous matters this is true. Notice the brevity of the subjoined introduction of a speech upon a deeply moving subject.

Gentlemen of the Congress:

The Imperial German Government on the 31st day of January announced to this Government and to the Governments of the other neutral nations that on and after the 1st day of February, the present month, it would adopt a policy with regard to the use of submarines against all shipping seeking to pass through certain designated areas of the high seas, to which it is clearly my duty to call your attention.

WOODROW WILSON, 1917

The following, though much longer, aims to do the same thing—to announce the topic of the speech clearly. Notice that in order to emphasize this endeavor to secure clearness the speaker declares that he has repeatedly tried to state his position in plain English. He then makes clear that he is not opposed to a League of Nations; he is merely opposed to the terms already submitted for the one about to be formed. This position he makes quite clear in the last sentence here quoted.

Your Excellency, Ladies and Gentlemen, My Fellow Americans:

I am largely indebted to President Lowell for this opportunity to address this great audience. He and I are friends of many years, both Republicans. He is the president of our great university, one of the most important and influential places in the United States. He is also an eminent student and historian of politics and government. He and I may differ as to methods in this great question now before the people, but I am sure that in regard to the security of the peace of the world and the welfare of the United States we do not differ in purposes.

I am going to say a single word, if you will permit me, as to my own position. I have tried to state it over and over again. I thought I had stated it in plain English. But there are those who find in misrepresentation a convenient weapon for controversy, and there are others, most excellent people, who perhaps have not seen what I have said and who possibly have misunderstood me. It has been said that I am against any League of Nations. I am not; far from it. I am anxious to have the nations, the free nations of the world, united in a league, as we call it, a society, as the French call it, but united, to do all that can be done to secure the future peace of the world and to bring about a general disarmament.

SENATOR HENRY CABOT LODGE in a debate in Boston, 1919

The Introduction and the Audience. When we turn from the material of the introduction or the speech we naturally consider the audience. Just as the salutations already listed in this chapter indicate how careful speakers are in adapting their very first words to the special demands of recognition for a single audience, so a study of introductions to speeches which have been delivered will support the same principle. A speech is made to affect a single audience, therefore it must be fitted as closely as possible to that audience in order to be effective. A city official invited to a neighborhood gathering to instruct citizens in the method of securing a children's playground in that district is not only wasting time but insulting the brains and dispositions of his listeners if he drawls off a long introduction showing the value of public playgrounds in a crowded city. His presence before that group of people proves that they accept all he can tell them on that topic. He is guilty of making a bad introduction which seriously impairs the value of anything he may say later concerning how this part of the city can induce the municipal government to set aside enough money to provide the open space and the apparatus. Yet this speech was made in a large American city by an expert on playgrounds.

People remembered more vividly his wrong kind of opening remarks than they did his advice concerning a method of procedure.

Effect of the Introduction upon the Audience. Many centuries ago a famous and successful Roman orator stipulated the purpose of an introduction with respect to the audience. Cicero stated that an introduction should render its hearers "benevolos, attentos, dociles"; that is, kindly disposed towards the speaker himself, attentive to his remarks, and willing to be instructed by his explanations or arguments. Not everyone has a pleasing personality but he can strive to acquire one. He can, perhaps, not add many attributes to offset those nature has given him, but he can always reduce, eradicate, or change those which interfere with his reception by others. Education and training will work wonders for people who are not blessed with that elusive quality, charm, or that winner of consideration, impressiveness. Self-examination, self-restraint, self-development, are prime elements in such a process. Great men have not been beyond criticism for such qualities. Great men have recognized their value and striven to rid themselves of hindrances and replace them by helps.

Every reader is familiar with Benjamin Franklin's account of his own method as related in his Autobiography, yet it will bear quotation here to illustrate this point:

While I was intent on improving my language, I met with an English Grammar (I think it was Greenwood's), at the end of which there were two little sketches of the arts of rhetoric and logic, the latter "finishing with a specimen of a dispute in the Socratic method; and soon after I procured Xenophon's Memorable Things of Socrates, wherein there are many instances of the same method. I was charmed with it, adopted it, dropt my abrupt contradiction and positive argumentation, and put on the humble inquirer and doubter.... I found this method safest for myself and very embarrassing to those against whom I used it; therefore I took a delight in it, practised it continually, and grew very artful and expert in drawing people, even of superior knowledge, into concessions, the consequences of which they did not foresee, entangling them in difficulties out of which they could not extricate themselves, and so obtaining victories that neither myself nor my cause always deserved. I continued this method some few years, but gradually left it, retaining only the habit of expressing myself in terms of modest diffidence; never using, when I advanced anything that may possibly be disputed, the words Certainly, Undoubtedly, or any others that give the air of positiveness to an opinion; but rather say, I conceive or apprehend a thing to be so and so; it appears to me, or I should think it so or so, for such and such reasons; or I imagine it to be so; or it is so if I am not mistaken. This habit, I believe, has been of great advantage to me when I have had occasion to inculcate my opinions, and persuade men into measures that I have been from time to time engaged in promoting; and as the chief ends of conversation are to inform or to be informed, to please or to persuade, I wish well-meaning, sensible men would not lessen their power of doing good by a positive, assuming manner, that seldom fails to disgust, tends to create opposition, and to defeat everyone of those purposes for which speech was given to us, to wit, giving or receiving information or pleasure. For if you would inform, a positive and dogmatical manner in advancing your sentiments may provoke contradiction and prevent a candid attention. If you wish information and improvement from the knowledge of others, and yet at the same time express yourself as firmly fixed in your present opinions, modest, sensible men who do not love disputation will probably leave you undisturbed in the possession of your error. And by such a manner you can seldom hope to recommend yourself in pleasing your hearers, or to persuade those whose concurrence you desire. Pope says, judiciously:

"Men should be taught as if you taught them not, And things unknown propos'd as things forgot;"

farther recommending to us

"To speak, tho' sure, with seeming diffidence."

Of course an audience must be induced to listen. The obligation is always with the speaker. He is appealing for consideration, he wants to affect the hearers, therefore he must have at his command all the resources of securing their respectful attention. He must be able to employ all the legitimate means of winning their attention. A good speaker will not stoop to use any tricks or devices that are not legitimate. A trick, even when it is successful, is still nothing but a trick, and though it secure the temporary attention of the lower orders of intellect it can never hold the better minds of an audience. Surprises, false alarms, spectacular appeals, may find their defenders. One widely reputed United States lawyer in speaking before audiences of young people used to advance theatrically to the edge of the stage, and, then, pointing an accusing finger at one part of the audience, declare in loud ringing tones, "You're a sneak!" It is questionable whether any attempt at arousing interest could justify such a brusque approach. Only in broadly comic or genuinely humorous addresses can it be said that the end justifies the means.

When the audience has been induced to listen, the rest should be easy for the good speaker. Then comes into action his skill at explanation, his ability to reason and convince, to persuade and sway, which is the speaker's peculiar art. If they will listen to him, he should be able to instruct them. The introduction must, so far as this last is concerned, clear the way for the remainder of the speech. The methods by which such instruction, reasoning, and persuasion are effected best will be treated later in this book.

Having covered the preceding explanation of the aims and forms of introductions, let us look at a few which have been delivered by regularly practising speech-makers before groups of men whose interest, concern, and business it was to listen. All men who speak frequently are extremely uneven in their quality and just as irregular in their success. One of the best instances of this unevenness and irregularity was Edmund Burke, whose career and practice are bound to afford food for thought and discussion to every student of the power and value of the spoken word. Some of Burke's speeches are models for imitation and study, others are warnings for avoidance. At one time when he felt personally disturbed by the actions of the House of Commons, because he as a member of the minority could not affect the voting, he began a speech exactly as no man should under any circumstances. No man in a deliberative assembly can be excused for losing control of himself. Yet Burke opened his remarks with these plain words.

"Mr. Speaker! I rise under some embarrassment occasioned by a feeling of delicacy toward one-half of the House, and of sovereign contempt for the other half."

This is childish, of course. A man may not infrequently be forced by circumstances to speak before an audience whose sentiments, opinions, prejudices, all place them in a position antagonistic to his own. How shall he make them well-disposed, attentive, willing to be instructed? The situation is not likely to surround a beginning speaker, but men in affairs, in business, in courts, must be prepared for such circumstances. One of the most striking instances of a man who attempted to speak before an antagonistic group and yet by sheer power of his art and language ended by winning them to his own party is in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar when Mark Antony speaks over his dead friend's body. Brutus allows it, but insists on speaking to the people first that he may explain why he and his fellow conspirators assassinated the great leader. It was a mistake to allow a person from the opposite party to have the last word before the populace, but that is not the point just here. Brutus is able to explain why a group of noble Romans felt that for the safety of the state and its inhabitants, they had to kill the rising favorite who would soon as King rule them all. When he ceases speaking, the citizens approve the killing. Mark Antony perceives that, so at the beginning of his speech he seems to agree with the people. Caesar was his friend, yet Brutus says he was ambitious, and Brutus is an honorable man. Thus the skilful orator makes the populace well-disposed towards him, then attentive.

Having secured those things he proceeds slowly and unobtrusively to instruct them. It takes only a few lines until he has made them believe all he wants them to; before the end of his oration he has them crying out upon the murderers of their beloved Caesar, for whose lives they now thirst. Yet only ten minutes earlier they were loudly acclaiming them as deliverers of their country. The entire scene should be analyzed carefully by the student. It is the second scene of the third act of the play.

In actual life a man would hardly have to go so far as seemingly to agree with such opposite sentiments as expressed in this situation from a stage tragedy. It is general knowledge that during the early years of the American Civil War England sympathized with the southern states, mainly because the effective blockade maintained by the North prevented raw cotton from reaching the British mills. Henry Ward Beecher attempted to present the union cause to the English in a series of addresses throughout the country. When he appeared upon the platform in Liverpool the audience broke out into a riot of noise which effectively drowned all his words for minutes. The speaker waited until he could get in a phrase. Finally he was allowed to deliver a few sentences. By his patience, his appeal to their English sense of fair play, and to a large degree by his tolerant sense of humor, he won their attention. His material, his power as a speaker did all the rest.

It is a matter of very little consequence to me, personally, whether I speak here tonight or not. [Laughter and cheers.] But one thing is very certain, if you do permit me to speak here tonight, you will hear very plain talking. [Applause and hisses.] You will not find me to be a man that dared to speak about Great Britain three thousand miles off, and then is afraid to speak to Great Britain when he stands on her shores. [Immense applause and hisses.] And if I do not mistake the tone and temper of Englishmen they had rather have a man who opposes them in a manly way [applause from all parts of the hall] than a sneak that agrees with them in an unmanly way. [Applause and "Bravo!"] Now, if I can carry you with me by sound convictions, I shall be immensely glad [applause]; but if I cannot carry you with me by facts and sound arguments, I do not wish you to go with me at all; and all that I ask is simply fair play. [Applause, and a voice: "You shall have it too.".]

Those of you who are kind enough to wish to favor my speaking—and you will observe that my voice is slightly husky, from having spoken almost every night in succession for some time past—those who wish to hear me will do me the kindness simply to sit still and to keep still; and I and my friends the Secessionists will make the noise. [Laughter.]

HENRY WARD BEECHER, in speech at Liverpool, 1863

The beginning of one of Daniel Webster's famous speeches was a triumph of the deliverer's recognition of the mood of an audience. In the Senate in 1830 feeling had been running high over a resolution concerning public lands. Innocent enough in its appearance, this resolution really covered an attempt at the extension of the slavery territory. Both North and South watched the progress of the debate upon this topic with almost held breath. Hayne of South Carolina had spoken upon it during two days when Webster rose to reply to him. The Senate galleries were packed, the members themselves were stirred up to the highest pitch of keen intensity. Nearly the entire effect of Webster's statement and argument for the North depended upon the effect he could make upon the Senators at the very opening of his speech.

Webster began in a low voice, with a calm manner, to speak very slowly. In a second he had soothed the emotional tension, set all the hearers quite at ease, and by the time the Secretary had read the resolution asked by Webster, he had them in complete control. His task was to make them attentive, but more especially, ready to be instructed.

Mr. President: When the mariner has been tossed for many days in thick weather and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his latitude and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imitate this prudence; and, before we float farther on the waves of this debate, refer to the point from which we departed, that we may, at least, be able to conjecture where we now are. I ask for the reading of the resolution before the Senate.

DANIEL WEBSTER: Reply to Hayne, 1830

Linking the Introduction to Preceding Speeches. So many speeches are replies to preceding addresses that many introductions adapt themselves to their audiences by touching upon such utterances. In debates, in pleas in court, in deliberative assemblies, this is more usually the circumstance than not. The following illustrates how courteously this may be done, even when it serves merely to make all the clearer the present speaker's position. In moments of tensest feeling great speakers skilfully move from any one position or attitude to another as Patrick Henry did. While you are regarding these paragraphs as an example of introduction do not overlook their vocabulary and sentences.

Mr. President: No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the house. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the house is one of awful moment to the country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery. And in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly things.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that Siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who having eyes see not, and having ears hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and to provide for it.

PATRICK HENRY in the Virginia Convention, 1775

Difficulties of Introductions. People who are scheduled to make speeches are heard to declare that they know exactly what they want to say but they do not know how to begin. Another way they have of expressing this is that they do not know how to bring their material before their hearers. Undoubtedly the most difficult parts of speeches are the beginnings and conclusions. In Chapter II one of the methods of preparing for delivery recognized this difference by recording that one way is to memorize the beginning and ending, the opening and closing sentences. Practised speakers are more likely not to fix too rigidly in their minds any set way for starting to speak. They realize that a too carefully prepared opening will smack of the study. The conditions under which the speech is actually delivered may differ so widely from the anticipated surroundings that a speaker should be able to readjust his ideas instantly, seize upon any detail of feeling, remark, action, which will help him into closer communication with his audience. Many practised speakers, therefore, have at their wits' ends a dozen different manners, so that their appearance may fit in best with the circumstances, and their remarks have that air of easy spontaneity which the best speaking should have. Thus, sometimes, the exactly opposite advice of the method described above and in Chapter II is given. A speaker will prepare carefully his speech proper, but leave to circumstances the suggestion of the beginning he will use. This does not mean that he will not be prepared—it means that he will be all the more richly furnished with expedients. A speaker should carefully think over all the possibilities under which his speech will be brought forward, then prepare the best introduction to suit each set.

Spirit of the Introduction. The combination of circumstances and material will determine what we shall call the spirit of the introduction. In what spirit is the introduction treated? There are as many different treatments as there are human feelings and sentiments. The spirit may be serious, informative, dignified, scoffing, argumentative, conversational, startling, humorous, ironic. The student should lengthen this list by adding as many other adjectives as he can.

The serious treatment is always effective when it is suitable. There is a conviction of earnestness and sincerity about the speech of a man who takes his subject seriously. Without arousing opposition by too great a claim of importance for his topic he does impress its significance upon listeners. This seriousness must be justified by the occasion. It must not be an attempt to bolster up weakness of ideas or commonplaceness of expression. It must be straightforward, manly, womanly. Notice the excellent effect of the following which illustrates this kind of treatment.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOR: I was desired by one of the court to look into the books, and consider the question now before them concerning Writs of Assistance. I have accordingly considered it, and appear not only in obedience to your order, but likewise in behalf of the inhabitants of this town, who have presented another petition, and out of regard to the liberties of the subject. And I take this opportunity to declare, that whether under a fee or not (for in such a cause as this I despise a fee) I will to my dying day oppose with all the powers and faculties God has given me, all such instruments of slavery on the one hand and villainy on the other, as this Writ of Assistance is.

It appears to me the worst instrument of arbitrary power, the most destructive of English liberty and the fundamental principles of law, that ever was found in an English law-book.

JAMES OTIs: On Writs of Assistance, 1761

Informative and argumentative introductions are quite usual. They abound in legislative bodies, business organizations, and courts of law. Having definite purposes to attain they move forward as directly and clearly as they can. In such appearances a speaker should know how to lead to his topic quickly, clearly, convincingly. Introductions should be reduced to a minimum because time is valuable. Ideas count; mere talk is worthless.

Attempts at humorous speeches are only too often the saddest exhibitions of life. The mere recital of "funny stories" in succession is in no sense speech-making, although hundreds of misguided individuals act as though they think so. Nor is a good introduction the one that begins with a comic incident supposedly with a point pat to the occasion or topic, yet so often miles wide of both. The funny story which misses its mark is a boomerang. Even the apparently "sure-fire" one may deliver a disturbing kick to its perpetrator. The grave danger is the "o'er done or come tardy off" of Hamlet's advice to the players. Humor must be distinctly marked off from the merely comic or witty, and clearly recognized as a wonderful gift bestowed on not too many mortals in this world. The scoffing, ironic introduction may depend upon wit and cleverness born in the head; the humorous introduction depends upon a sympathetic instinct treasured in the heart. Look back at the remarks made by Beecher to his turbulent disturbers in Liverpool. Did he help his cause by his genial appreciation of their sentiments?

The student should study several introductions to speeches in the light of all the preceding discussions so that he may be able to prepare his own and judge them intelligently. Printed speeches will provide material for study, but better still are delivered remarks. If the student can hear the speech, then see it in print, so much the better, for he can then recall the effect in sound of the phrases.

Preparing and Delivering Introductions. Actual practice in preparation and delivery of introductions should follow. These should be delivered before the class and should proceed no farther than the adequate introduction to the hearers of the topic of the speech. They need not be so fragmentary as to occupy only three seconds. By supposing them to be beginnings of speeches from six to fifteen minutes long these remarks may easily last from one to two minutes.

Aside from the method of its delivery—pose, voice, speed, vocabulary, sentences—each introduction should be judged as an actual introduction to a real speech. Each speaker should keep in mind these questions to apply during his preparation. Each listener should apply them as he hears the introduction delivered.

Is the topic introduced gracefully? Is it introduced clearly? Is the introduction too long? Does it begin too far away from the topic? Is it interesting? Has it any defects of material? Has it any faults of manner? Can any of it be omitted? Do you want to hear the entire speech? Can you anticipate the material? Is it adapted to its audience? Is it above their heads? Is it beneath their intelligences?

Topics for these exercises in delivering introductions should be furnished by the interests, opinions, ideas, experiences, ambitions of the students themselves. Too many beginning speakers cause endless worry for themselves, lower the quality of their speeches, bore their listeners, by "hunting" for things to talk about, when near at hand in themselves and their activities lie the very best things to discuss. The over-modest feeling some people have that they know nothing to talk about is usually a false impression. In Elizabethan England a young poet, Sir Phillip Sidney, decided to try to tell his sweetheart how much he loved her. So he "sought fit words, studying inventions fine, turning others' leaves, to see if thence would flow, some fresh and fruitful showers upon my sunburnt brain." But "words came halting forth" until he bit his truant pen and almost beat himself for spite. Then said the Muse to him, "Fool, look in thy heart and write." And without that first word, this is the advice that should be given to all speakers. "Look in your heart, mind, life, experiences, ideas, ideals, interests, enthusiasms, and from them draw the material of your speeches—yours because no one else could make that speech, so essentially and peculiarly is it your own."

The following may serve as suggestions of the kind of topic to choose and the various methods of approaching it. They are merely hints, for each student must adapt his own method and material.

EXERCISES

1. By a rapid historical survey introduce the discussion that women will be allowed to vote in the United States.

2. By a historical survey introduce the topic that war will cease upon the earth.

3. Using the same method introduce the opposite.

4. Using some history introduce the topic that equality for all men is approaching.

5. Using the same method introduce the opposite.

6. Starting with the amount used introduce an explanation of the manufacture of cotton goods. Any other manufactured article may be used.

7. Starting with an incident to illustrate its novelty, or speed, or convenience, or unusualness, lead up to the description or explanation of some mechanical contrivance.

Dictaphone Adding machine Comptometer Wireless telegraph Knitting machine Moving picture camera Moving picture machine Self-starter Egg boiler Newspaper printing press Power churn Bottle-making machine Voting machine Storm in a play Pneumatic tube Periscope, etc.

8. Describe some finished product (as a cup of tea, a copper cent) as introduction to an explanation of its various processes of development.

9. Start with the opinion that reading should produce pleasure to introduce a recommendation of a book.

10. Start with the opinion that reading should impart information to introduce a recommendation of a book.

11. Start with the money return a business or profession offers to introduce a discussion advising a person to follow it or not.

12. Beginning with the recent war lead up to the topic that military training should be a part of all regular education.

13. Beginning from the same point introduce the opposite.

14. Beginning with an item—or a fictitious item—from a newspaper recounting an accident lead up to workmen's compensation laws, or preventive protective measures in factories, or some similar topic.

15. Using a personal or known experience introduce some topic dealing with the survival of superstitions.

16. Choosing your own material and treatment introduce some theme related to the government, or betterment of your community.

17. Introduce a topic dealing with the future policy of your city, county, state, or nation.

18. Lead up to the statement of a change you would like to recommend strongly for your school.

19. In as interesting a manner as possible lead up to a statement of the business or profession you would like to follow.

20. Introduce a speech in which you intend to condemn something, by dealing with your introductory material ironically.

21. Imagine that you are presiding at a meeting of some club, society, or organization which has been called to discuss a definite topic. Choose the topic for discussion and deliver the speech bringing it before the session.

22. You have received a letter from a member of some organization who suggests that a society to which you belong join with it in some kind of contest or undertaking. Present the suggestion to your society.

23. You believe that soma memorial to the memory of some person should be established in your school, lodge, church, club. Introduce the subject to a group of members so that they may discuss it intelligently.

24. Introduce some topic to the class, but so phrase your material that the announcement of the topic will be a complete surprise to the members. Try to lead them away from the topic, yet so word your remarks that later they will realize that everything you said applies exactly to the topic you introduce.

25. Lead up to the recital of some mystery, or ghostly adventure.

26. Lead up to these facts. "For each 10,000 American-born workmen in a steel plant in eight years, 21 were killed; and for each non-English speaking foreign born, 26 were killed. Non-English speaking show 65 permanently disabled as compared with 28 who spoke English. Of temporarily disabled only 856 spoke English as compared with 2035 who did not."

27. Introduce the topic: Training in public speaking is valuable for all men and women.

28. In a genial manner suitable to the season's feelings introduce some statement concerning New Year's resolutions.

29. Frame some statement concerning aviation. Introduce it.

30. Introduce topics or statements related to the following:

The eight-hour day. The principles of Socialism. Legitimate methods of conducting strikes. Extending the Monroe Doctrine. Studying the classics, or modern languages. Private fortunes. College education for girls. Direct presidential vote. A good magazine. Some great woman. Sensible amusements. Fashions. Agriculture. Business practice. Minimum wages. Equal pay for men and women.



CHAPTER V

CONCLUDING THE SPEECH

Preparing the Conclusion. No architect would attempt to plan a building unless he knew the purpose for which it was to be used. No writer of a story would start to put down words until he knew exactly how his story was to end. He must plan to bring about a certain conclusion. The hero and heroine must be united in marriage. The scheming villain must be brought to justice. Or if he scorn the usual ending of the "lived happily ever after" kind of fiction, he can plan to kill his hero and heroine, or both; or he can decide for once that his story shall be more like real life than is usually the case, and have wickedness triumph over virtue. Whatever he elects to do at the conclusion of his story, whether it be long or short, the principle of his planning is the same—he must know what he is going to do and adequately prepare for it during the course of, previous events.

One other thing every writer must secure. The ending of a book must be the most interesting part of it. It must rise highest in interest. It must be surest of appeal. Otherwise the author runs the risk of not having people read his book through to its conclusion, and as every book is written in the hope and expectation that it will be read through, a book which fails to hold the attention of its readers defeats its own purpose.

The foregoing statements are self-evident but they are set down because their underlying principles can be transferred to a consideration of the preparation of conclusions for speeches.

Is a Conclusion Necessary? But before we use them let us ask whether all speeches require conclusions.

There are some people—thoughtless, if nothing worse—who habitually end letters by adding some such expression as "Having nothing more to say, I shall now close." Is there any sense in writing such a sentence? If the letter comes only so far and the signature follows, do not those items indicate that the writer has nothing more to say and is actually closing? Why then, when a speaker has said all he has to say, should he not simply stop and sit down? Will that not indicate quite clearly that he has finished his speech? What effect would such an ending have?

In the first place the speaker runs the risk of appearing at least discourteous, if not actually rude, to his audience. To fling his material at them, then to leave it so, would impress men and women much as the brusque exit from a group of people in a room would or the slamming of a door of an office.

In the second place the speaker runs the graver risk of not making clear and emphatic the purpose of his speech. He may have been quite plain and effective during the course of his explanation or argument but an audience hears a speech only once. Can he trust to their recollection of what he has tried to impress upon them? Will they carry away exactly what he wants them to retain? Has he made the main topics, the chief aim, stand out prominently enough? Can he merely stop speaking? These are quite important aspects of a grave responsibility.

In the third place—though this may be considered less important than the preceding—the speaker gives the impression that he has not actually "finished" his speech. No one cares for unfinished articles, whether they be dishes of food, pieces of furniture, poems, or speeches. Without unduly stressing the fact that a speech is a carefully organized and constructed product, it may be stated that it is always a profitable effort to try to round off your remarks. A good conclusion gives an impression of completeness, of an effective product. Audiences are delicately susceptible to these impressions.

Twenty-two centuries ago Aristotle, in criticizing Greek oratory, declared that the first purpose of the conclusion was to conciliate the audience in favor of the speaker. As human nature has not changed much in the ages since, the statement still holds true.

Speakers, then, should provide conclusions for all their speeches.

Although the entire matter of planning the speech belongs to a later chapter some facts concerning it as they relate to the conclusion must be set down here.

Relation of the Conclusion to the Speech. The conclusion should reflect the purpose of the speech. It should enforce the reason for the delivery of the speech. As it emphasizes the purpose of the speech it should be in the speaker's mind before he begins to plan the development of his remarks. It should be kept constantly in his mind as he delivers his material. A train from Chicago bound for New York is not allowed to turn off on all the switches it meets in its journey. A speaker who wants to secure from a jury a verdict for damages from a traction company does not discuss presidential candidates. He works towards his conclusion. A legislator who wants votes to pass a bill makes his conclusion and his speech conform to that purpose. In all likelihood, his conclusion plainly asks for the votes he has been proving that his fellow legislators should cast. A school principal pleading with boys to stop gambling knows that his conclusion is going to be a call for a showing of hands to pledge support of his recommendations. A labor agitator knows that his conclusion is going to be an appeal to a sense of class prejudice, so he speaks with that continually in mind. An efficiency expert in shop management knows that his conclusion is going to enforce the saving in damages for injury by accident if a scheme of safety devices be installed, so he speaks with that conclusion constantly in his mind. In court the prosecuting attorney tells in his introduction exactly what he intends to prove. His conclusion shows that he has proved what he announced.

One is tempted to say that the test of a good speech, a well-prepared speech, is its conclusion. How many times one hears a speaker floundering along trying to do something, rambling about, making no impression, not advancing a pace, and then later receives from the unfortunate the confession, "I wanted to stop but I didn't know how to do it." No conclusion had been prepared beforehand. It is quite as disturbing to hear a speaker pass beyond the place where he could have made a good conclusion. If he realizes this he slips into the state of the first speaker described in this paragraph. If he does not realize when he reaches a good conclusion he talks too long and weakens the effect by stopping on a lower plane than he has already reached. This fault corresponds to the story teller whose book drops in interest at the end. The son of a minister was asked whether his father's sermon the previous Sunday had-not had some good points in it. The boy replied, "Yes, three good points where he should have stopped."

Length of the Conclusion. It must not be inferred from anything here stated concerning the importance of the conclusion that it need be long. A good rule for the length of the conclusion is the same rule that applies to the length of the introduction. It should be just long enough to do best what it is intended to do. As in the case of the introduction, so for the conclusion, the shorter the better, if consistent with clearness and effect. If either introduction or conclusion must deliberately be reduced the conclusion will stand the most compression. A conclusion will frequently fail of its effect if it is so long that the audience anticipates its main points. It fails if it is so long that it adds nothing of clearness or emphasis to the speech itself. It will end by boring if it is too long for the importance of its material. It will often produce a deeper, more lasting impression by its very conciseness. Brevity is the soul of more than mere humor. A brief remark will cut deeper than a long involved sentence. The speaker who had shown that the recent great war fails unless the reconstruction to be accomplished is worthy needed no more involved conclusion than the statement, "It is what we do tomorrow that will justify what we did yesterday."

Coupled with this matter of effect is the length of the speech itself. Short speeches are likely to require only short conclusions. Long speeches more naturally require longer conclusions.

Consider the following conclusions. Comment upon them. It would be interesting to try to decide the length of the speeches from which they are taken, then look at the originals, all of which are easily procurable at libraries.

That is in substance my theory of what our foreign policy should be. Let us not boast, not insult any one, but make up our minds coolly what it is necesary to say, say it, and then stand to it, whatever the consequences may be.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Waukesha, 1903

The foregoing is quite matter-of-fact. It contains no emotional appeal at all. Yet even a strong emotional feeling can be put into a short conclusion. From the date and the circumstances surrounding the next the reader can easily picture for himself the intense emotion of the audience which listened to these words from the leader of the free states against the South.

Neither let us be slandered from our duty by false accusations against us, nor frightened from it by menaces of destruction to the government, nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith let us to the end dare to do our duty as we understand it.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: Cooper Union Speech, 1860

While the student planning his own speech must determine exactly what he shall put into his conclusion—depending always upon his material and his purpose—there are a few general hints which will help him.

The Retrospective Conclusion. A conclusion may be entirely retrospective. This means merely that it may refer back to the remarks which have been delivered in the body of the speech. A speaker does this to emphasize something he has already discussed by pointing out to his audience that he wants them to remember that from what he has said. Conclusions of this kind usually have no emotional appeal. They are likely to be found in explanatory addresses, where the clearness of the exposition should make hearers accept it as true. If a man has proven a fact—as in a law court—he does not have to make an appeal to feeling to secure a verdict. Juries are supposed to decide on the facts alone. This kind of conclusion emphasizes, repeats, clarifies, enforces. The first of the following is a good illustration of one kind of conclusion which refers to the remarks made in the speech proper. Notice that it enforces the speaker's opinions by a calm explanation of his sincerity.

I want you to think of what I have said, because it represents all of the sincerity and earnestness that I have, and I say to you here, from this platform, nothing that I have not already stated in effect, and nothing I would not say at a private table with any of the biggest corporation managers in the land.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Fitchburg, 1902

The next, while it is exactly the same kind in material, adds some elements of stronger feeling. Yet in the main it also enforces the speaker's opinion by a clear explanation of his action. From this conclusion alone we know exactly the material and purpose of the entire speech.

Sir, I will detain you no longer. There are some parts of this bill which I highly approve; there are others in which I should acquiesce; but those to which I have now stated my objections appear to me so destitute of all justice, so burdensome and so dangerous to that interest which has steadily enriched, gallantly defended, and proudly distinguished us, that nothing can prevail upon me to give it my support.

DANIEL WEBSTER: The Tariff, 1824

The Anticipatory Conclusion. Just as a conclusion may be retrospective, so it may be anticipatory. It may start from the position defined or explained or reached by the speech and look forward to what may happen, what must be done, what should be instituted, what should be changed, what votes should be cast, what punishment should be inflicted, what pardons granted. The student should make a list of all possible things in the future which could be anticipated in the conclusions of various speeches. If one will think of the purposes of most delivered speeches he will realize that this kind of conclusion is much more frequent than the previous kind as so many speeches anticipate future action or events. Dealing with entirely different topics the three following extracts illustrate this kind of conclusion. Washington was arguing against the formation of parties in the new nation, trying to avert the inevitable.

There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government, and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence if not with favor upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.

GEORGE WASHINGTON: Farewell Address, 1796

With the dignity and the calmness of the preceding, contrast the Biblical fervor of the next—the magnanimous program of the reuniter of a divided people.

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow and his orphan—to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN: Second Inaugural, 1865

In totally different circumstances the next conclusion was delivered, yet it bears the same aspect of anticipation. There is not a single hint in it of the material of the speech which preceded it, it takes no glance backward, it looks forward only. Its effectiveness comes from the element of leadership, that gesture of pointing the way for loyal Americans to follow.

No nation as great as ours can expect to escape the penalty of greatness, for greatness does not come without trouble and labor. There are problems ahead of us at home and problems abroad, because such problems are incident to the working out of a great national career. We do not shrink from them. Scant is our patience with those who preach the gospel of craven weakness. No nation under the sun ever yet played a part worth playing if it feared its fate overmuch—if it did not have the courage to be great. We of America, we, the sons of a nation yet in the pride of its lusty youth, spurn the teachings of distrust, spurn the creed of failure and despair. We know that the future is ours if we have in us the manhood to grasp it, and we enter the new century girding our loins for the contest before us, rejoicing in the struggle, and resolute so to bear ourselves that the nation's future shall even surpass her glorious past.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Philadelphia, 1902

Grave times always make men look into the future. All acts are judged and justified after they are performed. All progress depends upon this straining the vision into the darkness of the yet-to-be. Upon the eve of great struggles anticipation is always uppermost in men's minds. In the midst of the strife it is man's hope. In the next extract, only one sentence glances backward.

For us there is but one choice. We have made it. Woe be to the man or group of men that seeks to stand in our way in this day of high resolution when every principle we hold dearest is to be vindicated and made secure for the salvation of the nations. We are ready to plead at the bar of history, and our flag shall wear a new luster. Once more we shall make good with our lives and fortunes the great faith to which we were born, and a new glory shall shine in the face of our people.

WOODROW WILSON: Flag Day Address, 1917

Retrospective and Anticipatory Conclusion. While it does not occur so frequently as the two kinds just illustrated it is possible for a conclusion to be both retrospective and anticipatory—to look both backward and forward. The conclusion may enforce what the speech has declared or proved, then using this position as a safe starting point for a new departure, look forward and indicate what may follow or what should be done. The only danger in such an attempt is that the dual aspect may be difficult to make effective. Either one may neutralize the other. Still, a careful thinker and master of clear language may be able to carry an audience with him in such a treatment. The division in the conclusion between the backward glance and the forward vision need not be equal. Here again the effect to be made upon the audience, the purpose of the speech, must be the determining factor. Notice how the two are blended in the following conclusion from a much read commemorative oration.

And now, friends and fellow-citizens, it is time to bring this discourse to a close.

We have indulged in gratifying recollections of the past, in the prosperity and pleasures of the present, and in high hopes for the future. But let us remember that we have duties and obligations to perform, corresponding to the blessings which we enjoy. Let us remember the trust, the sacred trust, attaching to the rich inheritance which we have received from our fathers. Let us feel our personal responsibility, to the full extent of our power and influence, for the preservation of the principles of civil and religious liberty. And let us remember that it is only religion, and morals, and knowledge, that can make men respectable, under any form of government....

DANIEL WEBSTER: Completion of Bunker Hill Monument, 1843

Conclusions are classified in general under three headings: 1. Recapitulation; 2. Summary; 3. Peroration.

The Recapitulation. The first of these—recapitulation—is exactly defined by the etymology of the word itself. Its root is Latin caput, head. So recapitulation means the repetition of the heads or main topics of a preceding discussion. Coming at the end of an important speech of some length, such a conclusion is invaluable. If the speaker has explained clearly or reasoned convincingly his audience will have been enlightened or convinced. Then at the end, to assure them they are justified in their knowledge or conviction, he repeats in easily remembered sequence the heads which he has treated in his extended remarks. It is as though he chose from his large assortment a small package which he does up neatly for his audience to carry away with them. Frequently, too, the recapitulation corresponds exactly to the plan as announced in the introduction and followed throughout the speech. This firmly impresses the main points upon the brains of the hearers.

A lawyer in court starts by announcing that he will prove a certain number of facts. After his plea is finished, in the conclusion of his speech, he recapitulates, showing that he has proved these things. A minister, a political candidate, a business man, a social worker—in fact, every speaker will find such a clear-cut listing an informative, convincing manner of constructing a conclusion. This extract shows a clear, direct, simple recapitulation.

To recapitulate what has been said, we maintain, first, that the Constitution, by its grants to Congress and its prohibitions on the states, has sought to establish one uniform standard of value, or medium of payment. Second, that, by like means, it has endeavored to provide for one uniform mode of discharging debts, when they are to be discharged without payment. Third, that these objects are connected, and that the first loses much of its importance, if the last, also, be not accomplished. Fourth, that, reading the grant to Congress and the prohibition on the States together, the inference is strong that the Constitution intended to confer an exclusive power to pass bankrupt laws on Congress. Fifth, that the prohibition in the tenth section reaches to all contracts, existing or future, in the same way that the other prohibition, in the same section, extends to all debts, existing or future. Sixth, that, upon any other construction, one great political object of the Constitution will fail of its accomplishment.

DANIEL WEBSTER: Ogden vs. Saunders, 1827

The Summary. The second kind—a summary—does somewhat the same thing that the recapitulation does, but it effects it in a different matter. Note that the recapitulation repeats the main headings of the speech; it usually uses the same or similar phrasing.

The summary does not do this. The summary condenses the entire material of the speech, so that it is presented to the audience in shortened, general statements, sufficient to recall to them what the speaker has already presented, without actually repeating his previous statements. This kind of conclusion is perhaps more usual than the preceding one. It is known by a variety of terms—summing up, resume, epitome, review, precis, condensation.

In the first of the subjoined illustrations notice that the words "possible modes" contain practically all the speech itself. So the four words at the end, "faction, corruption, anarchy, and despotism," hold a great deal of the latter part of the speech. These expressions do not repeat the heads of divisions; they condense long passages. The extract is a summary.

I have thus presented all possible modes in which a government founded upon the will of an absolute majority will be modified; and have demonstrated that, in all its forms, whether in a majority of the people, as in a mere democracy, or in a majority of their representatives, without a constitution, to be interpreted as the will of the majority, the result will be the same: two hostile interests will inevitably be created by the action of the government, to be followed by hostile legislation, and that by faction, corruption, anarchy, and despotism.

JOHN C. CALHOUN: Speech on the Force Bill, 1833

From the following pick out the expressions which summarize long passages of the preceding speech. Amplify them to indicate what they might cover.

I firmly believe in my countrymen, and therefore I believe that the chief thing necessary in order that they shall work together is that they shall know one another—that the Northerner shall know the Southerner, and the man of one occupation know the man of another occupation; the man who works in one walk of life know the man who works in another walk of life, so that we may realize that the things which divide us are superficial, are unimportant, and that we are, and must ever be, knit together into one indissoluble mass by our common American brotherhood.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Chattanooga, 1902

The Peroration. A peroration is a conclusion which—whatever may be its material and treatment—has an appeal to the feelings, to the emotions. It strives to move the audience to act, to arouse them to an expression of their wills, to stir them to deeds. It usually comes at the end of a speech of persuasion. It appeals to sentiments of right, justice, humanity, religion. It seldom merely concludes a speech; it looks forward to some such definite action as casting a vote, joining an organization or movement, contributing money, going out on strike, returning to work, pledging support, signing a petition.

These purposes suggest its material. It is usually a direct appeal, personal and collective, to all the hearers. Intense in feeling, tinged with emotion, it justifies itself by its sincerity and honesty alone. Its apparent success is not the measure of its merit. Too frequently an appeal to low prejudices, class sentiment and prejudice, base motives, mob instincts will carry a group of people in a certain direction with as little sense and reason as a flock of sheep display. Every student can cite a dozen instances of such unwarranted and unworthy responses to skilful perverted perorations. Answering to its emotional tone the style of a peroration is likely to rise above the usual, to become less simple, less direct. In this temptation for the speaker lies a second danger quite as grave as the one just indicated. In an attempt to wax eloquent he is likely to become grandiloquent, bombastic, ridiculous. Many an experienced speaker makes an unworthy exhibition of himself under such circumstances. One specimen of such nonsense will serve as a warning.

When the terms for the use of the Panama Canal were drawn up there arose a discussion as to certain kinds of ships which might pass through the canal free of tolls. A treaty with Great Britain prevented tolls-exemption for privately owned vessels. In a speech in Congress upon this topic one member delivered the following inflated and inconsequential peroration. Can any one with any sanity see any connection of the Revolutionary War, Jefferson, Valley Forge, with a plain understanding of such a business matter as charging tolls for the use of a waterway? To get the full effect of this piece of "stupendous folly"—to quote the speaker's own words—the student should declaim it aloud with as much attempt at oratorical effect as its author expended upon it.

Now, may the God of our fathers, who nerved 3,000,000 backwoods Americans to fling their gage of battle into the face of the mightiest monarch in the world, who guided the hand of Jefferson in writing the charter of liberty, who sustained Washington and his ragged and starving army amid the awful horrors of Valley Forge, and who gave them complete victory on the blood-stained heights of Yorktown, may He lead members to vote so as to prevent this stupendous folly—this unspeakable humiliation of the American republic.

When the circumstances are grave enough to justify impassioned language a good speaker need not fear its effect. If it be suitable, honest, and sincere, a peroration may be as emotional as human feelings dictate. So-called "flowery language" seldom is the medium of deep feeling. The strongest emotions may be expressed in the simplest terms. Notice how, in the three extracts here quoted, the feeling is more intense in each succeeding one. Analyze the style. Consider the words, the phrases, the sentences in length and structure. Explain the close relation of the circumstances and the speaker with the material and the style. What was the purpose of each?

Sir, let it be to the honor of Congress that in these days of political strife and controversy, we have laid aside for once the sin that most easily besets us, and, with unanimity of counsel, and with singleness of heart and of purpose, have accomplished for our country one measure of unquestionable good.

DANIEL WEBSTER: Uniform System of Bankruptcy, 1840

Lord Chatham addressed the House of Lords in protest against the inhumanities of some of the early British efforts to suppress the American Revolution.

I call upon that right reverend bench, those holy ministers of the Gospel, and pious pastors of our Church—I conjure them to join in the holy work, and vindicate the religion of their God. I appeal to the wisdom and law of this learned bench, to defend and support the justice of their country. I call upon the Bishops to interpose the unsullied sanctity of their lawn; upon the learned Judges, to interpose their purity upon the honor of your Lordships, to reverence the dignity of your ancestors and to maintain your own. I call upon the spirit and humanity of my country, to vindicate the national character. I invoke the genius of the Constitution. From the tapestry that adorns these walls the immortal ancestor of this noble Lord frowns with indignation at the disgrace of his country....

I again call upon your Lordships, and the united powers of the state, to examine it thoroughly and decisively, and to stamp upon it an indelible stigma of the public abhorrence. And I again implore those holy prelates of our religion to do away with these iniquities from among us! Let them perform a lustration; let them purify this House, and this country, from this sin.

My Lords, I am old and weak, and at present unable to say more; but my feelings and indignation were too strong to have said less. I could not have slept this night in my bed, nor reposed my head on my pillow, without giving vent to my eternal abhorrence of such preposterous and enormous principles.

At about the same time the same circumstances evoked several famous speeches, one of which ended with this well-known peroration.

It is in vain, Sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace—but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the North will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

PATRICK HENRY in the Virginia Convention, 1775

Preparing and Delivering Conclusions. Students cannot very well be asked to prepare and deliver conclusions to speeches which do not yet exist, so there is no way of devising conclusions until later. But students should report upon conclusions to speeches they have recently listened to, and explain to the class their opinions concerning their material, methods, treatment, delivery, effect. The following questions will help in judging and criticizing:

Was the conclusion too long? Was it so short as to seem abrupt? Did it impress the audience? How could it have been improved? Was it recapitulation, summary, peroration? Was it retrospective, anticipatory, or both? What was its relation to the main part of the speech? Did it refer to the entire speech or only a portion? What was its relation to the introduction? Did the speech end where it began? Did it end as it began? Was the conclusion in bad taste? What was its style? What merits had it? What defects? What suggestions could you offer for its improvement? With reference to the earlier parts of the speech, how was it delivered?

The following conclusions should be studied from all the angles suggested in this chapter and previous ones. An air of reality will be secured if they are memorized and spoken before the class.

EXERCISES

1. There are many qualities which we need alike in private citizen and in public man, but three above all—three for the lack of which no brilliancy and no genius can atone—and those three are courage, honesty, and common sense.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT at Antietam, 1903

2. Poor Sprat has perished despite his splendid tomb in the Abbey. Johnson has only a cracked stone and a worn-out inscription (for the Hercules in St. Paul's is unrecognizable) but he dwells where he would wish to dwell—in the loving memory of men.

AUGUSTINE BIRRELL: Transmission of Dr. Johnson's Personality, 1884

3. So, my fellow citizens, the reason I came away from Washington is that I sometimes get lonely down there. There are so many people in Washington who know things that are not so, and there are so few people who know anything about what the people of the United States are thinking about. I have to come away and get reminded of the rest of the country. I have to come away and talk to men who are up against the real thing and say to them, "I am with you if you are with me." And the only test of being with me is not to think about me personally at all, but merely to think of me as the expression for the time being of the power and dignity and hope of the United States.

WOODROW WILSON: Speech to the American Federation of Labor, 1917

4. But if, Sir Henry, in gratitude for this beautiful tribute which I have just paid you, you should feel tempted to reciprocate by taking my horses from my carriage and dragging me in triumph through the streets, I beg that you will restrain yourself for two reasons. The first reason is—I have no horses; the second is—I have no carriage.

SIMEON FORD: Me and Sir Henry (Irving), 1899

5. Literature has its permanent marks. It is a connected growth and its life history is unbroken. Masterpieces have never been produced by men who have had no masters. Reverence for good work is the foundation of literary character. The refusal to praise bad work or to imitate it is an author's professional chastity.

Good work is the most honorable and lasting thing in the world. Four elements enter into good work in literature:—

An original impulse—not necessarily a new idea, but a new sense of the value of an idea.

A first-hand study of the subject and material.

A patient, joyful, unsparing labor for the perfection of form.

A human aim—to cheer, console, purify, or ennoble the life of the people. Without this aim literature has never sent an arrow close to the mark.

It is only by good work that men of letters can justify their right to a place in the world. The father of Thomas Carlyle was a stone-mason, whose walls stood true and needed no rebuilding. Carlyle's prayer was: "Let me write my books as he built his houses."

HENRY VAN DYKE: Books, Literature and the People, 1900

6. All this, I know well enough, will sound wild and chimerical to the profane herd of those vulgar and mechanical politicians who have no place among us—a sort of people who think that nothing exists but what is gross and material; and who, therefore, far from being qualified to be directors of the great movement of empire, are unfit to turn a wheel in the machine. But to men truly initiated and rightly taught, these ruling and master principles, which in the opinion of such men as I have mentioned have no substantial existence, are in truth everything and all in all. Magnanimity in politics is not seldom the truest wisdom: and a great empire and little minds go ill together. If we are conscious of our station, and glow with zeal to fill our places as becomes our situation and ourselves, we ought to auspicate all our public proceedings on America with the old warning of the church, Sursum corda! We ought to elevate our minds to the greatness of that trust to which the order of Providence has called us. By adverting to the dignity of this high calling, our ancestors have turned a savage wilderness into a glorious empire; and have made the most extensive, and the only honorable conquests, not by destroying, but by promoting the wealth, the number, the happiness of the human race. Let us get an American revenue as we have got an American empire. English privileges have made it all that it is; English privileges alone will make it all it can be.

In full confidence of this unalterable truth, I now (quod felix faustumque sit!) lay the first stone of the Temple of Peace; and I move you;—

That the colonies and plantations of Great Britain in North America, consisting of fourteen separate governments, and containing two millions and upwards of free inhabitants, have not had the liberty and privilege of electing and sending any knights and burgesses, or others, to represent them in the high court of Parliament.

EDMUND BURKE: Conciliation with America, 1775

7. Now, Mr. Speaker, having fully answered all the arguments of my opponents, I will retire to the cloak-room for a few moments, to receive the congratulations of admiring mends.

JOHN ALLEN in a speech in Congress

8. Relying then on the patronage of your good will, I advance with obedience to the work, ready to retire from it whenever you become sensible how much better choice it is in your power to make. And may that Infinite Power which rules the destinies of the universe lead our councils to what is best, and give them a favorable issue for your peace and prosperity.

THOMAS JEFFERSON, First Inaugural, 1801

9. My friends, this is wholly an unprepared speech. I did not expect to be called or to say a word when I came here. I supposed I was merely to do something toward raising a flag. I may, therefore, have said something indiscreet. But I have said nothing but what I am willing to live by, and, if it be the pleasure of Almighty God, to die by.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN at Philadelphia, 1861

10. I have spoken plainly because this seems to me the time when it is most necessary to speak plainly, in order that all the world may know that even in the heat and ardor of the struggle and when our whole thought is of carrying the war through to its end we have not forgotten any ideal or principle for which the name of America has been held in honor among the nations and for which it has been our glory to contend in the great generations that went before us. A supreme moment of history has come. The eyes of the people have been opened and they see. The hand of God is laid upon the nations. He will show them favor, I devoutly believe, only if they rise to the clear heights of His own justice and mercy.

WOODROW WILSON in a speech to Congress, 1917

11. This is what I have to say—ponder it; something you will agree with, something you will disagree with; but think about it, if I am wrong, the sooner the wrong is exposed the better for me—this is what I have to say: God is bringing the nations together. We must establish courts of reason for the settlement of controversies between civilized nations. We must maintain a force sufficient to preserve law and order among barbaric nations; and we have small need of an army for any other purpose. We must follow the maintenance of law and the establishment of order and the foundations of civilization with the vitalizing forces that make for civilization. And we must constantly direct our purpose and our policies to the time when the whole world shall have become civilized; when men, families, communities, will yield to reason and to conscience. And then we will draw our sword Excalibur from its sheath and fling it out into the sea, rejoicing that it is gone forever.

LYMAN ABBOTT: International Brotherhood, 1899

12. I give you, gentlemen, in conclusion, this sentiment: "The Little Court-room at Geneva—where our royal mother England, and her proud though untitled daughter, alike bent their heads to the majesty of Law and accepted Justice as a greater and better arbiter than Power."

WILLIAM M. EVARTS: International Arbitration, 1872

13. You recollect the old joke, I think it began with Preston of South Carolina, that Boston exported no articles of native growth but granite and ice. That was true then, but we have improved since, and to these exports we have added roses and cabbages. Mr. President, they are good roses, and good cabbages, and I assure you that the granite is excellent hard granite, and the ice is very cold ice.

EDWARD EVERETT HALE: Boston, 1880

14. Long live the Republic of Washington! Respected by mankind, beloved of all its sons, long may it be the asylum of the poor and oppressed of all lands and religions—long may it be the citadel of that liberty which writes beneath the Eagle's folded wings, "We will sell to no man, we will deny to no man, Right and Justice."

Long live the United States of America! Filled with the free, magnanimous spirit, crowned by the wisdom, blessed by the moderation, hovered over by the guardian angel of Washington's example; may they be ever worthy in all things to be defended by the blood of the brave who know the rights of man and shrink not from their assertion—may they be each a column, and altogether, under the Constitution, a perpetual Temple of Peace, unshadowed by a Caesar's palace, at whose altar may freely commune all who seek the union of Liberty and Brotherhood.

Long live our Country! Oh, long through the undying ages may it stand, far removed in fact as in space from the Old World's feuds and follies, alone in its grandeur and its glory, itself the immortal monument of Him whom Providence commissioned to teach man the power of Truth, and to prove to the nations that their Redeemer liveth.

JOHN W. DANIEL: Washington, 1885

15. When that great and generous soldier, U.S. Grant gave back to Lee, crushed, but ever glorious, the sword he had surrendered at Appomattox, that magnanimous deed said to the people of the South: "You are our brothers." But when the present ruler of our grand republic on awakening to the condition of war that confronted him, with his first commission placed the leader's sword in the hands of those gallant Confederate commanders, Joe Wheeler and Fitzhugh Lee, he wrote between the lines in living letters of everlasting light the words: "There is but one people of this Union, one flag alone for all."

The South, Mr. Toastmaster, will feel that her sons have been well given, that her blood has been well spilled, if that sentiment is to be indeed the true inspiration of our nation's future. God grant it may be as I believe it will.

CLARE HOWELL: Our Reunited Country, 1898

16. Two years ago last autumn, we walked on the sea beach together, and with a strange and prophetic kind of poetry, he likened the scene to his own failing health, the falling leaves, the withered sea-weed, the dying grass upon the shore, and the ebbing tide that was fast receding from us. He told me that he felt prepared to go, for he had forgiven his enemies, and could even rejoice in their happiness. Surely this was a grand condition in which to step from this world across the threshold to the next!

JOSEPH JEFFERSON: In Memory of Edwin Booth, 1893

17. A public spirit so lofty is not confined to other lands. You are conscious of its stirrings in your soul. It calls you to courageous service, and I am here to bid you obey the call. Such patriotism may be yours. Let it be your parting vow that it shall be yours. Bolingbroke described a patriot king in England; I can imagine a patriot president in America. I can see him indeed the choice of a party, and called to administer the government when sectional jealousy is fiercest and party passion most inflamed. I can imagine him seeing clearly what justice and humanity, the national law and the national welfare require him to do, and resolved to do it. I can imagine him patiently enduring not only the mad cry of party hate, the taunt of "recreant" and "traitor," of "renegade" and "coward," but what is harder to bear, the amazement, the doubt, the grief, the denunciation, of those as sincerely devoted as he to the common welfare. I can imagine him pushing firmly on, trusting the heart, the intelligence, the conscience of his countrymen, healing angry wounds, correcting misunderstandings, planting justice on surer foundations, and, whether his party rise or fall, lifting his country heavenward to a more perfect union, prosperity, and peace. This is the spirit of a patriotism that girds the commonwealth with the resistless splendor of the moral law—the invulnerable panoply of states, the celestial secret of a great nation and a happy people.

GEORGE WILLIAM CURTIS: The Public Duty of Educated Men, 1877



CHAPTER VI.

GETTING MATERIAL

The Material of Speeches. So far this book has dealt almost entirely with the manner of speaking. Now it comes to the relatively more important consideration of the material of speech. Necessary as it is that a speaker shall know how to speak, it is much more valuable that he shall know what to speak. We frequently hear it said of a speaker, "It wasn't what he said, it was the way he said it," indicating clearly that the striking aspect of the delivery was his manner; but even when this remark is explained it develops frequently that there was some value in the material, as well as some charm or surprise or novelty in the method of expression. In the last and closest analysis a speech is valuable for what it conveys to its hearers' minds, what it induces them to do, not what temporary effects of charm and entertainment it affords.

Persons of keen minds and cultivated understandings have come away from gatherings addressed by men famous as good speech-makers and confessed to something like the following: "I was held spellbound all the time he was talking, but for the life of me, I can't tell you one thing he said or one idea he impressed upon me." A student should judge speeches he hears with such things in mind, so that he can hold certain ones up as models, and discard others as "horrible examples."

It should be the rule that before a man attempts to speak he should have something to say. This is apparently not always the case. Many a man tries to say something when he simply has nothing at all to say. Recall the description of Gratiano's talk, quoted earlier in this book.

A speaker then must have material. He must get material. The clergyman knows that he must deliver about a hundred sermons a year. The lawyer knows he must go into court on certain days. The lecturer must instruct his various audiences. The business man must address executive boards, committees, conventions, customers. The student must address classes, societies. The beginner in speech training must seize every opportunity to talk. Certainly the natural reserve stock of ideas and illustrations will soon be exhausted, or it will grow so stale that it will be delivered ineffectively, or it will be unsuitable to every occasion. A celebrated Frenchman, called upon unexpectedly to speak, excused himself by declaring, "What is suitable to say I do not know, and what I know is not suitable."

Getting Material. There are three ways of getting material. The first is by observation, the second by interview, the third by reading.

Observation. The value of securing material by observation is apparent at first glance. That which you have experienced you know. That which you have seen with your own eyes you can report correctly. That which has happened to you you can relate with the aspect of absolute truth. That which you have done you can teach others to do. That which has touched you you can explain correctly. That which you know to be the fact is proof against all attack.