to conquer, on whofe arms reafon hath conferred folidity and weight, and paffion such a sharpness as enables them, in defiance of every obftruction, to open a fpeedy paffage to the heart?

IT is not, however, every kind of pathos, which will give the orator fo great an afcendency over the minds of his hearers. All paffions are not alike capable of producing this effect. Some are naturally inert and torpid, they deject the mind, and indifpose it for enterprise. Of this kind are forrow, fear, fhame, humility. Others, on the contrary, elevate the foul, and ftimulate to action. Such are hope, patriotism, ambition, emulation, anger. These, with the greateft facility, are made to concur in direction with arguments exciting to refolution and activity; and are, confequently, the fitteft for producing, what, for want of a better term in our language, I fhall henceforth denominate the vehement. There is, befides, an intermediate kind of paffions, which do not fo congenially and directly either reftrain us from acting, or incite us to act; but, by the art of the fpeaker, can, in an oblique manner, be made conducive to either. Such are joy, love, efteem, compaffion. Never

D 2

Nevertheless, all these kinds may find a place in fuafory difcourfes, or fuch as are intended to operate on the will. The first is propereft for diffuading; the second, as hath been already hinted, for perfuading; the third is equally accommodated to both.

GUIDED by the above reflections, we may eafily trace that connexion in the various forms of eloquence, which was remarked, on diftinguishing them by their feveral objects. The imagination is charmed by a finished picture, wherein even drapery and ornament are not neglected; for here the end is pleasure. Would we penetrate farther, and agitate the foul, we muft exhibit only some vivid ftrokes, fome expreffive features, not decorated as for fhow (all oftentation being both defpicable and hurtful here), but fuch as appear the natural expofition of thofe bright and deep impreffions, made by the fubject upon the speaker's mind; for here the end is not pleasure, but emotion. Would we not only touch the heart, but win it entirely to co-operate with our views, thofe affecting lineaments must be fo interwoven with our argument, as that, from the paffion excited, our reafoning may derive importance, and

fo be fitted for commanding attention; and, by the juftnefs of the reasoning, the paffion may be more deeply rooted and enforced; and that thus, both may be made to confpire in effectuating that perfuafion which is the end propofed. For here, if I may adopt the fchoolmen's language, we do not argue to gain barely the affent of the understanding, but, which is infinitely more important, the confent of the will*.

To prevent mistakes, it will not be befide my purpose further to remark, that feveral of the terms above explained, are fometimes ufed by rhetoricians and critics in a much larger and more vague fignification, than has been given them here. Sublimity and vehemence, in particular, are often confounded, the latter being confidered as a fpecies of the former. In this manner has this fubject been treated by that great mafter Longinus, whofe acceptation of the term fublime is extremely indefinite, importing an eminent degree of almost any excellence

* This fubordination is beautifully and concifely expreffed by Herfan in Rollin, "Je conclus que la veritable eloquence eft celle qui perfuade; qu'elle ne perfuade ordinairement qu'on touchant; qu'elle ne touche que par des chofes et par des idées palpables."

of fpeech, of whatever kind.

Doubtless, if

things themselves be understood, it does not feem material what names are affigned them. Yet it is both more accurate, and proves no inconfiderable aid to the right understanding of things, to difcriminate by different figns fuch as are truly different. And that the two qualities above mentioned are of this number is undeniable, fince we can produce paffages full of vehemence, wherein no image is prefented, which, with any propriety, can be termed great or fublime. In matters of criticifm, as in the abstract For an inftance of this, let that of Cicero against Antony fuffice. "Tu iftis faucibus, iftis lateribus, ifta gladia"toria totius corporis firmitate, tantum vini in Hippiæ nup"tiis exhauferas, ut tibi neceffe effet in populi Romani con"fpectu vomere poftridie. Orem non modo vifu fœdam, "fed etiam auditu! Si hoc tibi inter cœnam, in tuis im"manibus illis poculis accidiffet, quis non turpe duceret ? In catu vero populi Romani, negotium publicum gerens, magifter equitum, cui ructare turpe effet, is vomens, fruftis "efculentis vinum redolentibus, gremium fuum et totum "tribunal implevit." Here the vivacity of the address, in turning from the audience to the perfon declaimed against, the energy of the expreffions, the repetition, exclamation, interrogation, and climax of aggravating circumftances, accumulated with rapidity upon one another, difplay in the ftrongest light, the turpitude of the action, and thus at once convince the judgment, and fire the indignation. It is therefore justly styled vehement. But what is the image it prefents? The reverse in every respect of the fublime; what, inttead of gazing on with admiration, we should avert our

eyes

1

abstract sciences, it is of the utmost confequence to ascertain, with precifion, the meanings of words, and, as nearly as the genius of the language in which one writes will permit, to make them correfpond to the boundaries affigned by Nature to the things fignified. That the lofty and the vehement, though ftill distinguishable, are fometimes combined, and act with united force, is not to be denied. It is then only that the orator can be faid to fight with weapons, which are at once fharp, maffive, and refulgent, which, like Heaven's artillery, dazzle while they ftrike, which overpower the fight and the heart in the fame inftant. How admirably do the two forenamed qualities, when happily blended, correfpond in the rational to the thunder and lightning in the natural world, which are not more awfully majestical in found and afpect, than irrefiftible in power ‡.

THUS

eyes from with abhorrence. For, however it might pafs in a Roman fenate, I question whether Ciceronian eloquence itself could excufe the uttering of fuch things in any modern affembly, not to fay a polite one. With vernacular expreffions, answering to thefe, " vomere, ructare, fruftis efculentis vi. "num redolentibus," our more delicate ears would be immoderately fhocked. In a cafe of this kind, the more lively the picture is, fo much the more abominable it is.

A noted paffage in Cicero's oration for Cornelius Balbus, will serve as an example of the union of fublimity with vehemence

D 4