ero's oration against Antony, in which the word laws receives increasing force upon every repetition, which gives it a climax of importance:

And shall we think of ratifying the acts of Cæsar, yet abolish his laws? Those laws which he himself, in our sight, repeated, pronounced, enacted'? Laws which he valued himself upon passing? LAWs in which he thought the system of our government was comprehended'? LAWS which concern our provinces and our trials'? Are we, I say, to repeal such laws, yet ratify his acts'? Yet may we at least complain of those which are only proposed: as to those which we pass', we are deprived even of the liberty to complain.

Crito. Again the principle of suggestion comes in to furnish me with a parallel passage. It is that in which Germanicus, addressing his mutinous soldiers, employs questions to give force and spirit to his reproaches. The repetition of the pronoun you, with the circumflex, forms a climax of great beauty.

What is there in these days that you have not attempted'? What have you not profaned? What name shall I give to this assembly'? Shall I call you soldiers'? You who have besieged with your arms, and surrounded with a trench, the son of your emperor'? Shall I call you citizens'? You who have so shamefully trampled upon the authority of the senate'? YOU who have violated the justice due to enemies', the sanctity of embassy', and the rights of nations'?

Bernardo. As I remarked at the beginning of this conversation, that sometimes a high pitch of voice is required, and sometimes a low one, according to the sentiment, it may be well to notice, in this place, the change of voice with which we should introduce an illustrative simile or comparison in poetry. I think it will be found that at least the beginning of the simile should be read in a lower and more plaintive tone of voice than that part of the passage which precedes it. But let us take an example or two. Suppose we begin with Addison's beautiful description of Marlborough in battle. 'Twas then great Marlb'rough's mighty soul was proved, That in the shock of charging hosts unmoved,

Simile.

Amid confusion, horror, and despair,

Examined all the dreadful scenes of war;

In peaceful thought the field of death survey'd,
To fainting squadrons sent the timely aid;
Inspired repulsed battalions to engage,

And taught the doubtful battle where to rage.
So when an angel, by divine command,
With rising tempests shakes a guilty land,

(Such as of late o'er pale Britannia past),
Calm and serene he drives the furious blast;
And, pleased the Almighty's orders to perform,

Rides on the whirlwind, and directs the storm.-ADDISON.

You perceive how much the reading of this piece is embellished by allowing the voice to drop into a monotone at the commencement of the simile, and then gradually slide out of it, and rise to a higher pitch to avoid too great a sameness.

Crito. And I think that I perceive a peculiar propriety in this mode of introducing a simile in poetry. It must be based upon this principle, that the mind, in forming a simile, is seldom agitated by any strong passion; and as the simile is something that is thrown in to explain or illustrate, that tone of voice which expresses serene, tranquil contemplation, seems to be the tone most suitable to it; and this, if I am not mistaken, will be found to be the plaintive tone, approaching to a monotone. Milton's beautiful description of the sports of the fallen angels affords a good opportunity of exemplifying the rule:

Part curb their fiery steeds, or shun the goal
With rapid wheels, or fronted brigades form,

Simile.

Simile.

As when, to warn proud cities, war appears
Waged in the troubled sky, and armies rush
To battle in the clouds, before each van
Prick forth the aëry knights;-with feats of arms
From either end of heaven the welkin burns.
Others with vast Typhoean rage more fell,
Rend up both rocks and hills, and ride the air
In whirlwind; hell scarce holds the wild uproar.

As when Alcides, from Echalia crown'd

With conquest, felt th' envenom'd robe; and tore,
Through pain, up by the roots Thessalian pines,
And Lichas from the top of Eta threw

Into th' Euboic sea.-MILTON.

Bernardo. Something allied to the principle involved in reading the simile, is that which requires that sublime, grand, and magnificent descriptions in poetry should be read with a similar falling of the voice, and a sameness nearly approaching to monotone. Thus, in the following extract from Pope, a series of grand images, commencing at the fifth line, fills the mind with surprise approaching to astonishment. As this passion has a tendency to fix the body, and deprive it of motion, so it is best expressed, in speaking or reading, by a deep and almost uniform tone of voice,-such inflections as are required being less in degree than in most other cases.

And if each system in gradation roll',
Alike essential to th' amazing whole',
The least confusion but in one', not all
That system only', but the whole must fall'.
Let earth unbalanced from her orbit fly,"
Planets and suns run lawless through the sky';
Let ruling angels from their spheres be hurl'd,
Being on being wreck'd, and world on world',
Heaven's whole foundations to their centre nod,"
And Nature tremble to the throne of God':

All this dread order break'!-for whom? for thee'?
Vile worm'!-oh madness'! pride'! impiety`!—POPE.

But I see our time is already exhausted, and we must defer a farther consideration of the subject until the next evening.

FIFTH EVENING.

General

ANALYSIS. Public speaking; and reading in public the speeches of others. principles that should govern both. How should we read a quoted speech in the speech of another? The speech of Cassius, in which he repeats the supplicating words of Cæsar. The principle that should govern the reading of it. Hotspur's description of a conceited fop. The swain in Gray's Elegy. The "Last words of Marmion." General principles. The reading of dialogue, where the personification is complete. Gray's poem, "The Bard." The personification of Pride, in Pope's Essay on Man.

Bernardo. Well', Crito', what topic or topics have you to suggest for our consideration this evening'?

Crito. I have been thinking upon the subject of public speaking, and also about reading in public the speeches of others.

Bernardo. A very important subject; or, rather, two important subjects, as they are not one and the same thing. Do they suggest any difficulties to you' ?

Crito. I have seen it laid down as a rule that in speaking the speech of another, we should give it all the force and energy that would become the character whose words are assumed. This appears reasonable, because we assume to personate another-to put ourselves in his place. But I would like to know if we ought to read the speech of another just as we should pronounce it from the rostrum. In other words, if we read a speech

merely for the information of our hearers, should we do it oratorically?*

Bernardo. I am pleased with your question, for it shows that you have already discriminated between the character of an orator uttering his own sentiments, and that of one who merely reads from a book. Where the reader merely reads his own speech, he may safely act the orator in his own person; but if he merely assumes the character of a reader of the words of another, he occupies a different position in the view of his hearers, and his manner must be different. Yet I would have you bear in mind that these two kinds of style or manner of reading should differ only in degree of force; the greater degree in the case of the orator, and the lesser in that of the reader: the tones, inflections, and gesticulations should be the same in kind in both.

Crito. I see there is much reason in this rule; for it would be very difficult for one who had assumed the character of a reader to change wholly to that of an orator, without doing violence to the feelings of his hearers. And yet the reader must give tones and inflections of the same kind as the orator used, or he will not faithfully represent him. But still another point has been suggested to me. What if the speaker quotes what another person said: how should we read this speech within a speech'? For example, we will take the speech of Cassius, in which he is describing Cæsar unde the paroxysms of a fever. Cassius says,

He had a fever when he was in Spain,

And, when the fit was on him', I did mark

How he did shake': 'tis' true', this god' did shake,

His coward lips did from their color fly',

And that same eye', whose bend doth awe the world',

Did lose his lustre': I did hear him groan',

Ay, and that tongue of his', that bade the Romans
Mark him', and write his speeches in their books',
Alas! it cried', "Give me some drink`, Titinius',"
As a sick' girl. SHAKSPEARE.

Must these words of Cæsar, "Give me some drink', Titinius', "t be pronounced in exact imitation of the small, feeble voice of a sick person'-just as Cæsar spoke them'?

Bernardo. By no means, because Cassius did not pronounce them so; for, with only a partial imitation of the feeble voice of Cæsar, Cassius united a tone of scorn and contempt, which we should preserve when reading the passage. You must bear in mind that when reading a speech you are to assume the character of the leading speaker throughout, modified only in degree. If Cassius (the leading speaker) had merely mimicked Cæsar, without uniting scorn and contempt with the mimicry, he would have lowered himself to the character of a buffoon, and would thus have made himself appear ridiculous. Much more ridiculous should we appear if, in reading this passage, we should become the mere mimic, and that at third hand too. In Shakspeare's Henry the Fourth, the hero, Hotspur, describes a conceited fop in language indicative of anger and contempt. In reading the speech we must assume the character of Hotspur rather than that of the

* If the reader supposes that Crito designed this as a repeated question, he will give it the falling inflection, in accordance with Note 3, Rule I. Otherwise he will give it the rising inflection. Now who shall decide what Crito's intention was? All those who regard it as a repeated question will evidently read it in one way, and all those who regard it as merely explanatory will read another way. This well illustrates the principle laid down, that different readings of a passage arise from different interpretations of it.

+ Even here the degree of force must be less than when these words are supposed to be poken by Cassius.

fop whom he describes, carrying out the leading passion instead of the secondary. If in reading any piece we so far forget the leading passion as to assume the secondary entirely, we fall into mimicry, and render our expression, however just in other respects, ridiculous. I will read the whole speech of Hotspur, in one part of which, as you will perceive, he assumes to give the language of the fop.

My liege, I did deny no prisoners.
But I remember, when the fight was done,
When I was dry with rage and extreme toil,
Breathless and faint, leaning upon my sword,
Came there a certain lord, neat, trimly dress'd,
Fresh as a bridegroom; and his chin, new reap'd,
Show'd like a stubble-field at harvest-home:
He was perfumed like a milliner;

And 'twixt his finger and his thumb he held
A pouncet-box, which ever and anon

He gave his nose, and took't away again;

Who, therewith angry, when it next came there,
Took it in snuff: and still he smiled and talk'd;
And as the soldiers bore dead bodies by,

He called them untaught knaves, unmannerly,
To bring a slovenly unhandsome corse
Betwixt the wind and his nobility.

With many a holiday and lady terms

He question'd me; among the rest demanded

My prisoners, in your majesty's behalf.

I then, all smarting, with my wounds being cold,

To be so pester'd by a popinjay,

Out of my grief and my impatience,

Answer'd neglectingly, I know not what;

He should, or he should not; for he made me mad`,

To see him shine so brisk, and smell so sweet,

And talk so like a waiting gentlewoman,

Of guns, and drums, and wounds (God save the mark!),

And telling me the sovereign'st thing on earth

Was spermaceti for an inward bruise;

And that it was great pity, so it was,

That villainous saltpetre should be digg'd
Out of the bowels of the harmless earth,

Which many a good tall fellow had destroyed

So cowardly; and, but for these vile guns,

He would himself' have been a soldier'.

This bold unjointed chat of his, my lord',

I answer'd indirectly, as I said;

And I beseech you, let not this report

Come current for an accusation,

Betwixt my love and your high majesty.-SHAKSPEARE.

Crito. I perceive that the rule which you have laid down will also apply to what is supposed to have been said by the hoary-headed swain in Gray's Elegy in a Country Church-yard.

For thee, who, mindful of the unhonor'd dead,
Dost in these lines their artless tale relate,

If chance, by lonely Contemplation led,
Some kindred spirit should inquire thy fate',
Haply some hoary-headed swain may say,

Oft have we seen him, at the peep of dawn,
Brushing with hasty steps the dews away,
To meet the sun upon the upland lawn.
"There, at the foot of yonder nodding beech,

That wreathes its old fantastic roots so high,
His listless length at noontide would he stretch,

And pore upon the brook that babbles by," etc.-GRAY.

Bernardo. You are correct.

It would be very ridiculous, in reading this

passage, to quit the melancholy tone of the narrator, and assume the indifferent and rustic accent of the old swain. What is needed in reading the last seven lines of this extract is to abate the plaintive tone a little, and give it a slight tincture only of the indifference and rusticity of the person introduced. The same principle applies to the "last words of Marmion," in the following extract from Sir Walter Scott:

The war, that for a space did fail,

Now trebly thundering swelled the gale,
And-Stanley! was the cry.

A light on Marmion's visage spread,
And fired his glazing eye.

With dying hand, above his head

He shook the fragment of his blade,

And shouted "Victory!

Charge, Chester, charge! On, Stanley, on!"

Were the last words of Marmion.-SCOTT.

How often have I heard this passage, containing the last words of the dying hero, murdered by the schoolboy in a vain attempt to give it all the force of the living reality. Where the narrator stands out prominently before the mind, and is represented as telling what another person said, it is not in good taste for one who is reading the narration to change to, and fully assume, the character of that other person. He must give the greater prominence throughout to the passion shown by the leading characterthat of the supposed narrator. For example, the reader or speaker should give greater prominence to the passion of Cassius' than to that of sick Casar'; to that of Hotspur' than to that of the fop'; to that of the narrator in the Elegy' than to that of the rustic swain'; and to that of the describer of the battle' than to the character of Marmion'. Much force should, indeed, be given to the repeated words of Marmion, but they must not be screamed out, as Marmion uttered them.

Crito. But what if I am reading a dialogue, or one of Shakspeare's Plays. Do the same principles prevail here', and is the same rule to be observed'?

Bernardo. By no means. The principles of the composition are entirely different. In dialogue, the personification of each character is complete and entire in itself, and wholly independent. Therefore, in dialogue, or in dramatic composition, full force and energy should be given to the passion shown by each character.

Crito. May not, then, the personification be so complete in some other kinds of composition as to require the same degree of force and energy as in dramatic writing'?

Bernardo. Certainly it may be. Thus, at the beginning of Gray's Poem, "The Bard," one of the bards of Wales is represented as meeting King Edward on his march, and addressing him in the following language of -sublime rage, which should be read or spoken with all the vehemence which may be supposed to have characterized the language of the bard himself.