ascertained; thirdly, attention to the best way of presenting the matter. The Greek and Latin writers on public speaking devoted a great deal of discussion to the first and second of these points. Later writers have said less about these, devoting their attention almost exclusively to the art of presentation; but always assuming the preeminent importance of knowledge and sincerity.

THE PARTS OF A DISCOURSE.

The usual division of any discourse is into (1) introduction (see pp. 20-23), (2) discussion (pp. 23-34), and (3) conclusion (p. 34). These terms suggest little more than beginning, middle, end. The ancient writers enumerated the following as parts of an address: introduction, the narration or exposition, the proposition, the confirmation, the refutation, the conclusion; and some added the excursus or digression. This minuter division is still useful as indicating certain elements that enter or may enter into the make-up of a speech, certain functions to be performed, or, for good reason, to be consciously left unperformed. In most argumentative discourses, for example, a formal narration or exposition of facts, as a separate part, preliminary to the proposition and the confirmation of proof, is unnecessary: yet the element of narration or exposition will appear at any stage of the discourse as needed. Likewise proof and refutation may or may not constitute the main body of a discourse: in a discourse that is essentially narrative or expository, argument may be absent altogether, while in others there is nothing but argument. The proposition, or, if there be no proposition, the subject, can hardly be considered a part of discourse, yet its enumeration with the parts points clearly to the need

of some unifying element in every discourse; and indeed the excursus, or the digression, an element now almost universally condemned as lacking all excuse for being, was originally offered in answer to the human need of relief from too strict an adherence to the logic of the subject and as an opportunity for the speaker to unburden his mind on any matter that logic would exclude from his discourse. We shall adopt as parts of discourse the introduction, the discussion, and the conclusion; and, in the treatment of each, we shall ask what elements may properly enter into its make-up.

1. The Introduction. The work of the introduction is to provide all that is needed by way of preliminary information and in order to secure a favorable disposition towards the ideas that are to follow in the discussion. Ancient writers, however, restricted the introduction to the work of gaining the active good will of the audience. They assigned to another part of the discourse the work of giving preliminary information. The chief function of the introduction, they thought, is to overcome hostility in the mind of the audience, should hostility exist; to win attention, and to create an interest in the subject, leaving no hearer in a state of indifference. One of the best recommendations of Aristotle may be stated thus: the way to gain good will is to show good will. In general, good will is made apparent in modern speeches, more often in the tone and spirit of the opening than in any direct statement.

A second method of gaining good will is the appeal, direct or indirect, to community of interest, or to class or party spirit. The tacit assumption in this appeal is that because speaker and audience are of the same nationality, church, political party, school, club, social

class, trade, profession, or other occupation, enjoy the same intellectual pursuits, or even the same sports, they will be inclined to agree in all matters. Webster, eulogizing Washington, naturally touches the chord of patriotism; and at the outset of the Monument Address, he voices the common feeling as he conceives it. His second paragraph is devoted exclusively to the patriotic note.

While showing good will, however, while seeking to identify himself with his audience, the speaker must not surrender any of his convictions or any of his selfrespect. As Aristotle long ago pointed out, a speaker commends himself chiefly by his good judgment and reasonableness, by his reliance on his own worth and the worth of his message. But modern taste forbids him to assert his good qualities. A speaker's reasonableness, his worth, his virtue, or strength, declare themselves in his treatment of his theme. The personal introduction in political or other controversy, however, is still common, and, indeed, is unavoidable when the speaker has been made the object of criticism and thus has himself become part of the matter at issue. . It is used with a fine reticence in Washington's Farewell Address and with solemn effectiveness in Lincoln's Independence Hall address. But, excepting instances of obvious necessity, like those just named, the personal introduction will not often suggest itself in these days as an easy or appropriate method of beginning.

Closely related to the personal introduction, and often employed in connection with it, is the introduction based upon the importance of the subject. As a general rule. in modern addresses the importance of the subject is a thing to be assumed rather than directly asserted. The importance of the subject is either self-evident at the outset or is to be made evident by the whole discourse.

It should be recognized by the audiences as a result of the speech, rather than declared by the speaker at the beginning.

Probably the easiest and most economical introductions are those which are based on some pertinent remark that has been made by another. An introduction of this kind seems to continue a discussion already begun in people's minds, and offers a point of departure either in harmony with the quoted sentiment or in contrast with it. The introduction by anecdote belongs to this class.

Whatever the subject matter chosen for the introduction it must, in order to suit the modern taste, bear close relevance to the theme of the discourse. The irrelevant introduction advocated by some, practised by many, may be attractive in itself, but it arouses expectations that are destined not to be fulfilled, and its final effect, when it is recalled by a hearer, is to diminish the total influence of the speech. Nowhere is there greater danger, than in the introduction, of violating unity of tone. If the introduction is keyed at too high an elevation of thought or feeling or is too finely finished, the speaker may later find himself unable to maintain the level on which he started and the decline to a lower level is sure to be disappointing. Speakers of experience are usually wary of this danger and prefer to begin on a level from which it will not be difficult to rise as the essential parts of the discourse are taken up. The summit of an inclined plane is not a good point of departure in any discourse. The splendid introductions of Webster must have put many of his first hearers in fear that no man, however great, could begin on so high a plane and maintain himself there for long. The usual advice to the inexperienced is to prepare

the introduction after the body of the discourse has been written. The advice is sound if understood as a warning against a pretentious, a trite, or a far-fetched introduction, or against one that for any reason is out of tune with the prevailing note of the discourse. The further advice that if an appropriate introduction has not suggested itself by the time the body of the discourse is completed, all attempt at introduction should be given up, is also sound. Earlier writers on oratory provided for this very contingency by naming one of their varieties of introduction "the abrupt beginning." To this advice may be added the reminder, contained in a word of Walter Bagehot's, that excepting in times of great excitement an audience begins to listen in a decidedly "factish" frame of mind. At the outset it prefers the particular rather than the general, facts rather than principles, the specific instance rather than the universal truth, the intellectual rather than the emotional.

2. The Discussion. The main body of an address includes one or more of the following elements: (1) a division or partition of the subject, (2) definition, (3) narration, description, or exposition, (4) proofs and refutation. The order in which these things appear in an address is determined by the nature of the address. One or more of them may in many cases be omitted altogether. Attention to the first will always be necessary.

(1) The division or partition of the material is not often formally announced in the finished address, as was once the custom. When it is so announced it is usually accounted a part of the introduction. Yet it is with the organization of the body of the discourse that the partition is concerned; and, in any event, there must be in the preparation of a discussion a division or par