every precept, which ever could be useful in the exercise of oratory, remains useful in its utmost extent here. The eloquence of the divine and of the magistrate partakes of them all; and occasionally requires the arguments, appropriated to each of them separately. ditional principles, which we shall consider at the proper time. I shall now conclude with reminding you, that in this lecture you have the outline of all, that the whole course will comprize. under the successive articles of invention, disposition, elocution, memory, and pronunciation, whatever I have to say upon the science of rhetoric will be included; and that the primary division of oratory, drawn from the different ultimate purposes of the speaker, is into discourses demonstrative, deliberative, judicial, and religious. It has also suggested some ad That LECTURE VIII. STATE OF THE CONTROVERSY. IN my last lecture I informed you, that the whole science of rhetoric was divided into five constituent parts; invention, disposition, elocution, memory, and pronunciation or action. All which terms I endeavoured to explain in such a manner, that your ideas of their import might be clear and precise. Proceeding then to the consideration of the facilities, which it is the object of the science to to furnish the orator's invention, I indicated the three great classes, into which all oratorical performances were divided by the ancient rhetoricians, and by them denominated the demonstrative, the deliberative, and the judicial. It will now be proper to say something more, with a view to ex hibit the reasons for this division. In undertaking to reduce the most important principles of eloquence to a system of rules, it was obvious that there were certain points, the observance of which applied equally to every occasion, upon which a man should speak in public; and certain others, which could operate only when the object of the speaker was directed to some specific purpose. The scenes, upon which orators were accustomed to exercise their talents, were different. In the popular assemblies, general or particular, the subjects discussed were concerning laws to be enacted, taxes to be levied, distributions of the public force and revenue to be made, accounts to be settled, and all other things of a similar nature. Deliberation upon something to be done was the common character of all such meetings; and the whole drift of the orator in such debates must be to persuade his hearers, that the measure in question is useful, or the contrary. Before the public tribunals, where the litigation of conflicting rights was conducted, the question must necessarily concern some action past; and the common standard, to which the orator must exert himself to bring the cause, which he supported, was justice. But orations, written before-hand, for delivery on some public solemnity, whether in honor of individuals, of communities, or of events, neither having nor intended to have any direct bearing upon the will of other men; neither destined to influence deliberation of the future, nor decision upon the past; the luxury, not the necessity of social intercourse; the pride, pomp, and circumstance, not the broils and battle of oratorical warfare: these, from their showy character, were called demonstrative discourses; and honor was the subject of their story. It will be obvious to you that, in regard to the character of the composition, arrangement, and delivery, there must be a great difference in the style and manner, suited to these several theatres of eloquence. That the same mode of proceeding, which would be proper for an anniversary oration, would be ridiculous upon an argument at the bar; and that neither would befit a debate upon the passage of a law in the legislature. There are some of you, who, in the course of a very few years, may be called to exhibit your talents on each of these different stages; and you will then be fully sensible of the advantage there is in forming, during the process of early education, a distinct idea of the style of eloquence, adapted to each. A legislature then deliberates whether a law shall be past; a court of justice decides whether a wrong, public or private, has been committed; and a holiday audience is delighted or wearied, instructed or disgusted. I shall in future treat of the arguments, peculiarly proper for each of these occasions, separately; but I am first to notice essential particulars, belonging to them all. The first and most important of these is what the ancient rhetoricians term the state of the controversy. The passages in the treatises of Cicero and Quinctilian, relating to this subject, are some of the most tedious and unprofitable parts of their works, because they have continual reference to the institutions and forms of proceeding, prevalent in their times; which were very different from those, to which we are accustomed. Some of the translators, and even some editors of Quinctilian, with a freedom highly to be censured, have struck out almost the whole of his chapter on this article. Yet a full and clear understanding of it, properly applied to the usages and manners of our own times, is one of the most important points in the whole science. The state of a controversy, or, as it is oftentimes denominated, the state of the cause, and yet |