Division? M4\ 2. \ 
 
 4 ks^ 
 
 Section 
 

 Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2019 with funding from 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 
 https://archive.org/details/publicspeakingnaOOkirk 
 
PUBLIC SPEA 
 
 A Natural Method 
 
 BY 
 
 FRANK HOME KIRKPATRICK 
 
 Sometime Professor of Oratory in Hiram College and The 
 University of Wooster, Principal of the Toronto Conserva¬ 
 tory School of Expression; Principal of School of Speech 
 Education of Toronto Association Schools, Special Lecturer 
 in Public Speaking in McMaster University, St. Augustine’s 
 Seminary, and the Extension Department of the University 
 
 ot Toronto 
 
 Author of “Oral Interpretation of Literature 99 
 
 NEW 
 
 YORK 
 
 GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY 
 
COPYRIGHT, I923 
 BY GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING. Ill 
 
 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 
 
PREFACE 
 
 This book is offered in response to a popular demand 
 for a practical, straightforward, and intelligible work on 
 public speaking, devoid of the usual technicalities. 
 
 I do not wish it to be inferred, from the avowed pur¬ 
 pose of the book, that I have intentionally treated the 
 subject superficially. I have based my suggestions upon 
 the same principles as the instruction I offer in my 
 academic teaching. Consequently, those within the walls 
 as well as those without the walls of the colleges and 
 universities, may find the book helpful. 
 
 It is customary to include a number of the great 
 orations in a work on public speaking. However, since 
 the space available would not permit the inclusion of a 
 representative collection of the masterpieces, I inserted 
 only a few necessary excerpts. Then, the large number 
 of comprehensive anthologies of oratory, available to 
 everybody, render it quite unnecessary to devote a large 
 section of a book, such as this, to this end. 
 
 Hitherto, the study, memorization, and delivery of 
 excerpts from the great orations have been stressed in 
 the training for public speaking. This practice is valu¬ 
 able as an exercise in literary interpretation. It does not 
 develop the ability to think and speak one’s own thoughts, 
 on one’s feet, and before an audience. It is to the reali¬ 
 zation of such a conception of training for public speak¬ 
 ing that the instruction in this book is directed. 
 
 v 
 
vi 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 Of course, I do not wish it to be inferred that the study 
 and memorization of the great orations, as a whole or in 
 part, is not desirable. An intimate knowledge of the 
 literature of any subject is necessary to an exponent of 
 that subject. 
 
 The assignments, in connection with each chapter, are 
 types of suitable exercises for the development of the 
 process and relations in public speaking. It will prove 
 no strain upon the originality of the serious student of 
 public speaking to select other themes, with which to 
 apply the treatment prescribed in the assignments. 
 
 I must acknowledge my indebtedness to Lothrop, Lee 
 & Shepard Company for the poem “Hullo,” taken from 
 “Back Country Poems” by Sam Walter Foss; to Mr. S. 
 B. Gundy, Oxford University Press, for an excerpt from 
 Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s eulogy of Queen Victoria; to 
 Charles Scribner’s Sons for poems by Robert Louis 
 Stevenson; to Thomas B. Mosher for “Invictus” by Wil¬ 
 liam Ernest Henley; to the distinguished Canadian poet, 
 Wilson MacDonald, for the use of his poem “A Song to 
 the Valiant” recently published in the London Mercury; 
 and to Robert Frost for the privilege of quoting “Not to 
 Keep,” “one of the most poignant pieces inspired by the 
 War.” 
 
 I wish to express my gratitude to Milton Palmer Lang- 
 staff for assistance in going over the manuscript in prepa¬ 
 ration for the printer; to Margaret M. Kirkpatrick for 
 assistance in proof-reading. 
 
 I would also thank everyone from whom I have derived 
 direct or indirect help in the preparation of this book. 
 
 F. H. K. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 With the vast majority of people, ideas are condemned 
 to life imprisonment, and kept in solitary confinement. 
 Public speaking is one of the keys by means of which the 
 cell doors of repression may be unlocked and ideas set 
 free. 
 
 Recently, an acquaintance, who is an accomplished 
 speaker, related the following significant incident to me: 
 “A short time ago, I enjoyed the hospitality of a friend 
 in the country. We had been intimate since boyhood. 
 We were schoolmates and college chums. Upon gradua¬ 
 tion, I remained in the city and he went back to the farm. 
 He is now a man of substance, as well as of intelligence, 
 mature judgment, and wide information. 
 
 “During my visit, the annual meeting of the electors of 
 the township, in which my friend resides, was held for 
 the purpose of nominating candidates for municipal 
 offices. My host was keenly interested and attended the 
 meeting. On his invitation, I accompanied him. 
 
 “Several problems confronted the municipality. There 
 was much difference of opinion regarding the solution of 
 these problems. The candidates for municipal honors 
 were many and the debate was spirited and general. My 
 friend neither made nor seconded a nomination, nor did 
 he offer a single suggestion. He sat as if glued to his 
 chair. 
 
 “During our return journey, he commented upon the 
 
 • • 
 vn 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 • • • 
 vm 
 
 speeches of the different candidates freely and with dis¬ 
 crimination. He was quick to detect any fallacy. He 
 discussed the problems of the municipality with more than 
 ordinary discernment. I asked him why he had not given 
 his fellow electors at the gathering and the community 
 in general, the advantage of his intimate knowledge of 
 the municipal problems, and of his sound judgment in 
 dealing with them. His answer was, 7 can't make a 
 speech. When I stand on my feet before an audience, my 
 mind becomes a blank.* ” 
 
 How was it that this man who, privately, could discuss 
 questions of public interest with such ease, fluency, and 
 clarity, yet, before an audience, became as one who had 
 lost the power of speech? How is it that everyone can 
 communicate his ideas without self-consciousness in the 
 intimacy of conversation, and that so few can do so before 
 an audience? 
 
 The difficulty arises from a misconception of the nature 
 of public speaking. It is assumed that it is essentially 
 different from conversation or natural speech; that it is 
 a special gift, an unusual form of oral expression. This 
 bewilderment, as to the nature of public speaking, leads 
 to apprehension, self-consciousness, mental confusion, and 
 often speechlessness on the part of those who would, and 
 should, practise it. It has been customary to seek to 
 overcome the difficulty by the superimposition of elocu¬ 
 tionary rules. This has merely aggravated the trouble 
 by introducing the element of the artificial. 
 
 It is obvious, then, that a right point of view must be 
 secured. 
 
 What is the right point of view in regard to public 
 speaking? The writer believes, that it is, in every par¬ 
 ticular, essentially the same as conversation, or more 
 accurately, a “talk,” since a “talk” is the communication 
 of ideas by one person to others, while a conversation 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 ix 
 
 implies the interchange of ideas. True, public speaking 
 is a variant of a “talk,” but it varies from the norm, only, 
 in that each factor of the conversational process is accen¬ 
 tuated. 
 
 Let us compare the factors of an ordinary, intimate 
 talk, with those of public speaking. The purpose of a 
 talk is to convey ideas; so is that of conversation. The 
 means, through which these ideas are expressed in a talk 
 are the voice and body. The means in public speaking 
 are the same, with this modification,—they are used with 
 more accentuation. The environment of a “talk” is made 
 up of one or more listeners; that of a speech, of many. 
 The purpose of a talk is to impress ideas upon the hearers; 
 the same is true of public speaking. It may be urged that 
 the chief aim of public speaking is to convince and per¬ 
 suade. May not this be true of a “talk”? Has not some¬ 
 one in an intimate talk endeavored to convince you about 
 the merits of some proposition, and to persuade you to 
 act upon his suggestion? 
 
 In conversation, or intimate talk, if one has something 
 to say, if one’s ideas are clearly organized, one will talk 
 with purpose, with naturalness, with persuasion, and with¬ 
 out self-consciousness or confusion. If those same factors 
 hold in public speaking—and they do, with extension and 
 accentuation, due to the greater number of hearers—why 
 should the speaker not function just as purposefully, 
 naturally, and persuasively, and without self-conscious¬ 
 ness and confusion? 
 
 The point is, that if a speaker will apply the same pro¬ 
 cesses, conditions, and relations, on his feet, before a 
 number of listeners, that he does in the intimacy of 
 conversation with one or a few, he will speak simply, 
 naturally, and spontaneously. He will not be afflicted 
 with apprehension of failure, mental confusion, stage 
 fright, or speechlessness. 
 

CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 PREFACE . V 
 
 INTRODUCTION.vii 
 
 I CONVERSATIONAL STANDARD . 15 
 
 II PUBLIC SPEAKING A VARIANT OF A TALK 20 
 
 III NATURALNESS AND SIMPLICITY.24 
 
 IV PREPARATION.28 
 
 V CLEARNESS. 34 
 
 VI CONCENTRATION FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING . 38 
 
 VII HOW TO INTEREST AN AUDIENCE .... 42 
 
 VIII HOW TO GAIN AND HOLD ATTENTION . . 47 
 
 IX PAUSING. 51 
 
 X EMPHASIS OF IMPORTANT WORDS .... $6 
 
 XI HOW TO ELIMINATE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS 60 
 XII HOW TO AVOID MONOTONY.63 
 
 XIII CARRYING POWER OF VOICE.69 
 
 XIV NATURALNESS IN GESTURING. 72 
 
 XV DELIBERATION . 77 
 
 XVI TACT .82 
 
 XVII DIGNITY.IOI 
 
 XVIII SPEAKING WITH AUTHORITY. IO4 
 
 XIX DICTION. 107 
 
 XI 
 
Xll 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 XX VIGOROUS EXPRESSION.IIO 
 
 XXI WHEN TO END A SPEECH.113 
 
 XXII HOW TO ATTAIN THE PURPOSE OF A 
 
 SPEECH. Il6 
 
 XXIII VIVIDNESS.119 
 
 XXIV PERSONALITY.123 
 
 XXV THE SPONTANEOUS EXPRESSION OF THE 
 
 FEELING.I30 
 
 xxvi voice education .133 
 
 XXVII PHYSICAL EDUCATION .138 
 
 XXVIII PROBLEMS.I43 
 
 APPENDIX.I49 
 
PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 I 
 
 CONVERSATIONAL STANDARD 
 
 A N accepted standard is necessary in the considera¬ 
 tion of the subject of public speaking. By an 
 accepted standard I do not mean a rigid, unvarying form 
 to which everyone, who essays to speak, must subscribe 
 if he would speak acceptably. When a fixed standard is 
 imposed, individuality is swallowed up in uniformity and 
 artificiality. I do mean a supremely excellent form, vary¬ 
 ing with each individual, but originating in every case 
 from the same principles or basis. Such a standard allows 
 opportunity for the free play of personality. 
 
 Now, what is this very desirable standard for public 
 speaking, which permits infinite variety, and allows oppor¬ 
 tunity for continuous growth in expression? I shall 
 enlist the assistance of my readers in this quest. Shall 
 we base our judgment upon the effectiveness in result of 
 the different styles of delivery? Our choice of standard 
 will, then, resolve itself into a selection of that type of 
 speaking which attains its purpose, or, in other words, is 
 the most effective. 
 
 May I cite a few examples of delivery in public speak¬ 
 ing? Each will vary from the others. These examples 
 will be included, I fancy, in the experience of everyone of 
 my readers. Then, shall we sit in judgment upon them, 
 with the purpose of determining the correct standard? In 
 
 15 
 
16 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 each case, I shall select from my experience an extreme 
 type, and I shall tell you frankly the effect upon myself. 
 
 A few years ago I attended a church service in a large 
 Canadian city, in which I happened to be visiting. The 
 clergyman appeared to be more obsessed with decorous¬ 
 ness than inspired with spirituality. All his postures, 
 gestures, and intonations had been predetermined. Every 
 circumstance of his delivery emphasized the principle of 
 “predestination.” Every detail was fashioned after what 
 he considered good ecclesiastical form. He was conscious 
 of his “solemn, mournful, and slow” walk into the pulpit, 
 of his stilted postures, of his artificial gestures, of his 
 unreal intonations, even of his manner of opening and 
 closing the books and holding his glasses. I do not mean 
 to say that this clergyman is essentially insincere. I know 
 he is not. I do mean to say, however, that his delivery, 
 on this occasion, was insincere, since it was an attempt to 
 create an effect by means of conscious manipulation of the 
 voice and body, rather than an immediate, direct, frank, 
 and true expression of the moral and spiritual appeal of 
 the sermon. 
 
 During one of the Presidential elections, in which the 
 late President McKinley and the Hon. William Jennings 
 Bryan were the candidates, I was living in one of the 
 pivotal states. Sentiment was, apparently, fairly evenly 
 divided, with the result that the state was flooded with 
 spellbinders. I recall one who spoke in the town in which 
 I lived. He was advertised as the “oratorical tornado.” 
 His delivery was certainly “cyclonic.” He began, con¬ 
 tinued, and ended in a fury of sound and gesticulation. 
 Illogical in thought, extravagant in statement, confusing 
 in sound, bewildering in gesture, the speaker at first 
 startled the attention, then grew monotonous, and finally 
 lost the interest of the audience. His delivery was inco¬ 
 herent, distracting, and ineffective. 
 
CONVERSATIONAL STANDARD 
 
 17 
 
 A number of years ago, one of the American churches 
 engaged a celebrated Scotch divine to conduct evangelistic 
 services throughout the United States. He made his 
 headquarters at one of the denomination’s universities 
 with which I was, at that time, associated. The faculty 
 and students enjoyed the rare privilege of hearing him 
 frequently at the Chapel exercises. 
 
 I well remember the first occasion on which he preached 
 after his arrival. His fame, as a pulpit orator, had pre¬ 
 ceded him. A large congregation greeted him. I fancy 
 that the majority of them, like myself, expected to be 
 thrilled by his eloquence. We were thrilled, but not just 
 in the manner we expected. At all times, during the 
 progress of the sermon, his delivery was simple, intimate, 
 intense, conversational. “But,” you will ask, “was it 
 effective?” Extremely so. It was animated and arrest¬ 
 ing, and being so, it attracted and held the attention. I 
 remember very distinctly, that at the conclusion of the 
 sermon I thought, “What a short sermon!” To my sur¬ 
 prise, upon looking at my watch, I found that he had 
 spoken for an hour. As you will, no doubt, assume from 
 what I have written, the address was not monotonous, 
 prosy, or indifferent. We were highly entertained by his 
 spontaneous humor and inimitable wit, were moved by his 
 pathos, and aroused through his righteous indignation. 
 So clearly was the matter of the sermon impressed upon 
 me, that, although it was delivered a number of years ago, 
 I can readily outline it now. The preacher was quite suc¬ 
 cessful in effecting his purpose. The purpose of any 
 sermon is to move to right action. This particular sermon 
 was in the nature of a financial appeal for a worthy 
 object. The congregation had never been known to 
 contribute so generously. 
 
 I feel quite certain, that everyone of my readers will 
 agree with me that, considered from any point of view, 
 
18 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 whether of interest, or charm, or effectiveness, the natural, 
 conversational standard is the ideal which everyone, who 
 would essay to speak in public, should seek to attain. Of 
 course, the ordinary conversational forms that obtain 
 among a few, in the intimate communication of ideas, 
 must be sufficiently modified to adjust them to a large 
 number. This is done by accentuation and extension. 
 The modifications of ordinary conversationalism for this 
 adjustment will be dealt with in succeeding chapters of 
 this book. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 The purpose of public speaking is to impress, convince, per¬ 
 suade. To impress whom? The audience. To convince whom? 
 The audience. To persuade whom? The audience. Therefore, 
 in developing any assignment, an audience is presupposed. “But,” 
 you may interpose, “I cannot always, if at all, have an actual 
 audience to practice upon.” Granted. However, you can readily 
 re-create one in your imagination. Therefore, apply the discus¬ 
 sions required by each assignment, in connection with every 
 chapter to a real or imaginary audience. In each assignment 
 apply the instruction of the chapter with which the assignment 
 is associated, and also that which has been derived from previous 
 chapters. 
 
 If the topic of any assignment be not familiar, substitute 
 another that will be so. 
 
 I. Read a story and tell it in your own words. 
 
 II. Give an account of a personal experience. 
 
 III. Tell a humorous story. 
 
 IV. Discuss familiarly some public question, or the policies of 
 a political party, or the oratorical effectiveness of a certain 
 man. 
 
 V. Ponder well Hamlet’s instruction to the Players: 
 
 “Speak the speech, I pray you, as I pronounced it to you, 
 trippingly on the tongue: but if you mouth it, as many of 
 your plays do, I had as lief the town crier spoke my lines. 
 Nor do not saw the air too much with your hand, thus; 
 but use all gently; for in the very torrent, tempest, and, 
 as I may say, whirlwind of your passion, you must acquire 
 
CONVERSATIONAL STANDARD 
 
 19 
 
 and beget a temperance that may give it smoothness. Oh, 
 it offends me to the soul to hear a robustious periwig-pated 
 fellow tear a passion to tatters, to very rags, to split the 
 ears of the groundlings who, for the most part, are capable 
 of nothing but inexplicable dumb-show and noise: I would 
 have such a fellow whipped for o’erdoing Termagant; it 
 out-herods Herod; pray you, avoid it. 
 
 “Be not too tame, neither, but let your own discretion 
 be your tutor; suit the action to the word, the word to the 
 action; with this special observation, that you o’erstep not 
 the modesty of nature: for anything so overdone is from 
 the purpose of playing, whose end, both at the first and 
 now, was and is, to hold, as t’were, the mirror up to na¬ 
 ture; to show virtue her own feature, scorn her own 
 image, and the very age and body of the time his form 
 and pressure. Now this overdone or come tardy off, though 
 it make the unskilful laugh, cannot but make the judicious 
 grieve; the censure of the which one must in your allow¬ 
 ance o’erweigh a whole theater of others. Oh, there be 
 players that I have seen play, and heard others praise, and 
 that highly, not to speak it profanely, that neither having 
 the accent of Christians nor the gait of Christian, pagan, 
 nor man, have so strutted and bellowed, that I have thought 
 some of nature’s journeymen had made men, and not made 
 them well, they imitated humanity so abominably.” 
 
 Shakespeare . 
 
II 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING A VARIANT OF A TALK 
 
 I N the foregoing chapter I urged that public speaking 
 does not differ essentially from a “talk.” The relation¬ 
 ship of the speaker to the listeners, the process of think¬ 
 ing, and the expressional form manifested through the 
 voice and body are the same in either case. 
 
 But, while inherently the same, public speaking is a 
 modification of a “talk.” The basis of the modification 
 is the difference in the size of the audience. In public 
 speaking the audience is larger than in conversation. As 
 a result the speaker is less familiar, and—if the reader 
 will pardon a redundancy—more formal. He thinks more 
 intensely in order that, through accentuation, his ideas 
 may be more intelligible to individuals at a greater dis¬ 
 tance. His voice is amplified and extended in adjustment 
 to a larger space. The movements of his hands and arms 
 are stretched into gestures, in adaptation to a greater 
 number of hearers, while, at the same time, every phase 
 of physical expression is accentuated. In every case the 
 modification is spontaneous. 
 
 The following quotation, from an article by the writer, 
 is appropriate in this connection. 
 
 “The ways and means adopted by the ‘soap-box orator’ 
 to attract and retain a crowd have always interested me. 
 These open-air audiences do not feel called upon to sub¬ 
 scribe to the rules of behavior that obtain with more 
 formal audiences. As a result, the successful speaker of 
 
 20 
 
 
PUBLIC SPEAKING A VARIANT OF A TALK 21 
 
 this ilk is compelled to depend upon his knowledge of 
 human nature, his ability to illustrate from the experi¬ 
 ences of his hearers, and his sensitiveness to the effect his 
 ideas produce upon them. 
 
 “I recall a very successful speaker of this type. His 
 method of securing and holding an audience is original, 
 sound, and highly effective. He does not, as is customary 
 with so many speakers of this type, ‘yell his head off’ to 
 attract a crowd. He adopts a novel device. He sits on 
 his box and engages in intimate and apparently confi¬ 
 dential conversation with two or three others. This, as 
 he no doubt anticipates, arouses the curiosity of those 
 standing around. They draw near to hear what he is 
 talking about. He includes the newcomers in his con¬ 
 versation. Others arrive. The increase in the number of 
 his hearers makes it necessary for him to talk or converse 
 more loudly, or, in other words, to accentuate his ‘talk.’ 
 
 “When the number of his hearers grows to about 
 thirty he stands up. Why does he do this ? Simply that 
 he may see all his hearers. Now, from the very nature 
 of the circumstances, he talks more loudly, but still talks. 
 
 “When the number in his audience approaches one 
 hundred he mounts his soap-box and talks in a still louder 
 voice, that he may be the better seen and heard. Now he 
 is a public speaker addressing an audience from a plat¬ 
 form. 
 
 “Thus his speaking evolves from a simple, intimate 
 conversation with one or two to a ‘talk’ adjusted to a 
 large number—an audience. And what is the nature of 
 this adjustment? It is this, he stands on his box instead 
 of sitting on it that he may see and be seen; and he talks 
 more loudly that he may be heard. In other words, to 
 adjust his talk to a larger audience, or to make it conform 
 to the new environment or surroundings, he merely accen¬ 
 tuates or emphasizes his conversation. 
 
 “Of course, in this adjustment of a ‘talk’ to a large 
 number, some of the extreme intimacy which charac¬ 
 terizes a conversation with one or two is lost. Audience 
 
22 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 conditions modify the close intimacy of conversation with 
 a few. They need not, and do not in the case cited, 
 eliminate it. As suggested, they merely accentuate it, 
 extend it, modify it.” 
 
 Our soap-box orator’s naturalness in delivery is char¬ 
 acteristic of the most effective public speaking of to-day. 
 Some time ago public speaking was declamatory and 
 grandiloquent. When the orator essayed to “orate” he 
 consciously assumed a posture, tone, rhetoric, and manner 
 that precept and example led him to believe were befitting 
 the occasion. All this is changed. To-day such delivery 
 would cause a smile. Only simple and direct conver- 
 sationalism, in style and language, will arrest and hold 
 the attention of men in this day. 
 
 Public speaking, then, is a variant of a “talk.” This 
 modification takes the form of an accentuated conver¬ 
 sation. The degree of accentuation is determined by the 
 changing environment. The changing environment is the 
 varying size of the audience. 
 
 A well-known instructor in public speaking, who was 
 •one of the first teachers to recognize the desirability of 
 naturalness in delivery, was quite successful in securing 
 it in a novel but legitimate way. He would require the 
 student, who, by the way, had come to the recitation with 
 the matter thoroughly prepared, to sit and deliver the 
 speech conversationally to some real or imaginary person 
 in close proximity. Then he would have the student, still 
 sitting and conversing, repeat the process at increased 
 distances until the space between the speaker and the 
 hearer approximated the distance between the speaker and 
 the hearer in the last seat of an auditorium of ordinary 
 capacity. Then he would have the student stand, and, 
 using the “sit-down” voice, pass through the same proc- 
 
PUBLIC SPEAKING A VARIANT OF A TALK 23 
 
 ess. Thus the instructor substituted conversationalism 
 for declamation in public speaking. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Explain how public speaking may be at once natural and 
 a variant of conversational speech. 
 
 II. Give an account of a game, the advantages of country life, 
 some current event, a recent accomplishment; e.g., the dis¬ 
 covery of the North Pole, to two listeners; to ten listeners; 
 to fifty listeners; to three hundred listeners. Remain seated 
 during the speaking. 
 
 III. Speak upon the same or substituted topics from the same 
 intimate attitude toward the hearers, but from a standing 
 position. 
 
 IV. Speak intimately and personally to audiences of varying 
 sizes, upon the advantages that accrue to the participants 
 in the argumentation and exercises of a debating society. 
 
Ill 
 
 NATURALNESS AND SIMPLICITY 
 
 T HE reader will infer from the preceding chapters, 
 if he is convinced that the conversational standard 
 is the correct standard both in basis and expression, that 
 two of the outstanding characteristics of delivery, so 
 based and so expressed, are naturalness and simplicity. 
 We know that the great orators of the present are free 
 from abstruseness in matter, formality in manner, osten¬ 
 tation in literary style, and affectation in delivery. So, 
 too, were the greatest orators of the past, judging from 
 examples of their oratory, biographies, and other sources. 
 What could be more direct and natural than the greatest 
 oration that we have inherited from the past, “The 
 Oration on the Crown/’ by Demosthenes! Trite oratory 
 is clear, spontaneous, frank, unadorned, and unaffected. 
 In other words, it is simple and natural. 
 
 May I call your attention to the supreme exemplar of 
 simplicity and naturalness among orators ? He was called 
 the Great Teacher. Why should He not be called the 
 Great Orator? He spoke in public and to multitudes, 
 and any of the literary styles He made use of may be 
 employed by the public speaker. You recall the uncon¬ 
 ventional, conversational, sincere, and intelligible quality 
 of His speaking, and the extraordinary effectiveness of 
 His appeal. May I cite an example? 
 
 “The same day went Jesus out of the house and sat by 
 the seaside. And great multitudes were gathered to- 
 
 24 
 
NATURALNESS AND SIMPLICITY 
 
 25 
 
 gether unto Him, so that He went into a ship and sat; 
 and the whole multitude sat on the shore. And He spake 
 many things unto them in parables saying: Behold a 
 sower went forth to sow; and when he sowed some seeds 
 fell by the wayside and the fowls came and devoured 
 them up; some fell upon stony places where they had not 
 much earth, and forthwith they sprung up, because they 
 had no deepness of earth and when the sun was up they 
 were scorched; and because they had no root they withered 
 away. And some fell among thorns, and the thorns 
 sprung up and choked them. But others fell into good 
 ground and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, 
 some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who hath ears to hear, 
 let him hear.” 
 
 Probably I may induce a juster estimate of simplicity 
 and naturalness in delivery by contrasting them with 
 ostentation and artificiality. The reader is aware of the 
 effectiveness of antithesis. An appreciation of the desir¬ 
 able may be stimulated or accentuated by contrasting it 
 with the undesirable. Our estimate of the purity of virtue 
 is enhanced by contrasting it with the sordidness of vice, 
 of the constancy of faith with the suspicions of jealousy, 
 of the pleasures of hope with the miseries of despair. 
 
 Similarly an appreciation of naturalness and simplicity 
 may be aroused or heightened by placing them in contrast 
 with unreality, artificiality, and pretense. I shall endeavor 
 to present this contrast vividly and forcibly by means of 
 illustrations. 
 
 In a certain theological college, in which it is my privi¬ 
 lege to lecture, there is held an annual oratorical contest. 
 The event is looked forward to with great interest. The 
 clergy and many of the laymen of the denomination 
 encourage the students by their attendance. A few years 
 ago the contest was presided over by a dignitary of the 
 particular church that maintains the college referred to. 
 
26 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Notwithstanding his distinction and authority, his supe¬ 
 rior intellectual attainment and high “spiritual endow¬ 
 ment,” he is simplicity itself. Probably I should have 
 said on account of them, since simplicity and true great¬ 
 ness are twin brothers. Someone has written, “The 
 greatest truths are the simplest and so are the greatest 
 men.” 
 
 But to return to my story. This man addressed the 
 students at the banquet that followed the annual contest. 
 He drew generously from the rich store of his experi¬ 
 ence. He gave them much good advice. I particularly 
 remember one statement which I prefer to give in his 
 own words. It was this: “Gentlemen, if in your future 
 ministry, after preaching a sermon, you should think 
 enough about the manner of your delivery to ask anyone 
 —no matter how sincerely—how you did, you will have 
 departed that far from simplicity, naturalness, and sin¬ 
 cerity.” 
 
 If, then, you have a message, if you have something to 
 say, do not be conscious of the manner of your delivery 
 but rather speak with the directness and the simplicity 
 you would use in telling it when conversing with one 
 individual. 
 
 On the other hand, I have in mind a certain professional 
 orator. His purpose is entertainment. His method is, 
 as it were, a box of tricks. He strikes attitudes, and 
 manipulates his voice. His delivery is a combination of 
 affected gestures and unreal intonations. The attention 
 of his hearers is attracted to his manner and not to his 
 message. He is not simple, natural, purposeful, or sin¬ 
 cere. 
 
 Or you may have attended some school function for 
 which some “sweet little miss” had been selected and pre¬ 
 pared to “say a piece.” In all probability this prepara¬ 
 tion was made under the direction or one of the teachers 
 
NATURALNESS AND SIMPLICITY 
 
 27 
 
 who had taken “some lessons in gestures.” You will 
 remember how ridiculously affected the whole perform¬ 
 ance was—or probably you will prefer to forget it. By 
 what right are such artificialities imposed upon the naive 
 and undiscriminating simplicity of children? 
 
 I am sure that anyone who will take the trouble to com¬ 
 pare the latter two types of delivery with that suggested 
 by the clergyman in his address to the theological students, 
 will be impressed with the desirability of naturalness and 
 simplicity in public speaking. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. With simple diction (sedulously avoiding slang and col¬ 
 loquialisms), frank statement, directness in attitude, and 
 
 conversational naturalness in speech, give five-minute talks 
 
 on: 
 
 (a) Simplicity in delivery in Public Speaking. 
 
 (b) The modern feministic movement. 
 
 (c) A contemporaneous statesman; e.g., Lloyd George, 
 Briand, or Woodrow Wilson. 
 
 (d) Ideals. 
 
 (g) A great event in history. 
 
 (h) If I could choose my way. 
 
 (i) A personal experience. 
 
IV 
 
 PREPARATION 
 
 I T is necessary at this stage to stress the fact that the 
 basis of effective public speaking is clear thinking. It 
 must be obvious that clear thinking is conditioned upon 
 the preparation and organization of the matter by the 
 speaker previous to the time for his appearance before an 
 audience. Such preparation is quite as imperative in the 
 case of the serious student of public speaking in his exer¬ 
 cises for practice. Without the mastery and systematic 
 arrangement of his thought, he cannot possibly make 
 definite progress. 
 
 It would be absurd if a hostess, who had invited some 
 friends to dinner, postponed the preparation of the meal 
 until the guests were seated at the table. It is equally 
 absurd to address an audience without thorough prepara¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Preparation, then, is necessary for effective public 
 speaking. We hear much about impromptu speaking. As 
 someone has aptly said, “Impromptu speaking is usually 
 impromptu bosh.” Vagueness spells confusion. Clear¬ 
 ness cannot be derived from obscurity; intelligence from 
 unintelligibility. Before the speaker steps upon a plat¬ 
 form to address an audience his purpose should have been 
 determined, his thoughts clearly defined and arranged in 
 definite relationship to his purpose or conclusion. If his 
 thought is not so methodized his speech represents a dis¬ 
 arranged jumble of ideas, with the result that the speaker’s 
 
 28 
 
PREPARATION 
 
 29 
 
 delivery is unintelligible and the hearer’s listening unin¬ 
 telligent. 
 
 A number of years ago I was a member of a fishing 
 party that set out for a certain lake in the wilds of 
 Northern Ontario, of which we had heard enthusiastic 
 reports. We arrived in due time at the hamlet nearest to 
 our objective. Here we engaged a guide, a very old 
 Indian. Our guide had been over the route we had to 
 travel, many times. He had an unerring sense of direc¬ 
 tion, and a vivid remembrance of the different points, 
 trees, bays, etc., by which he guided himself. He was 
 thoroughly prepared. We reached our destination without 
 loss of time. 
 
 Three years later I joined another party bound for the 
 same fishing ground. We arrived at the same little 
 hamlet, and I sought out the guide of our former expedi¬ 
 tion. To my regret I was informed that he had died 
 some months previously. There were two others who 
 knew the route but they were away with other fishing 
 parties. One young Indian informed us that he had 
 heard the route described so frequently that he felt sure 
 that he could guide us. We accepted his offer and set 
 out. We had not gone very far when it became evident 
 that we had lost our way. We blundered along in a con¬ 
 fused fashion for a short time and then returned. Our 
 youthful guide did not have clear images of the old man’s 
 marks, nor a knowledge of the direction. He had not 
 been over the route before. He was not prepared to lead 
 us. His vagueness ended in confusion. It was an attempt 
 of the blind to lead the blind. 
 
 A public speaker is a mental guide. He leads his audi¬ 
 ence, step by step, through a succession of ideas, to a 
 logical conclusion. If he is not prepared; if each of these 
 steps or ideas is not clearly defined; if his thoughts are 
 but vaguely conceived; if the bearing of the individual 
 
30 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 thoughts upon the conclusion is not clear, confusion fol¬ 
 lows, he loses his way, the purpose of the speech is not 
 achieved and the result is disastrous. 
 
 Assuming that the basis of effective public speaking is 
 clear thinking, I would submit for the consideration of 
 my readers the following elementary method of securing 
 the matter and outlining the argument of a speech. There 
 are three manifest sources from which the public speaker 
 or the student of public speaking may derive material for 
 the treatment of his subject: (1) his own knowledge of 
 the subject, (2) authorities on the subject, (3) general 
 literature on the subject, such as may be found in maga¬ 
 zines, newspapers, etc. Many of the facts he may possess 
 in his own knowledge, or may secure from authorities and 
 general reading, may not be relevant to his purpose in 
 dealing with the subject. How, then, may he sift the 
 relevant from the irrelevant? He should approach the 
 consideration of the facts, statements, opinions, etc., 
 assimilated or derived, with the purpose of the theme 
 stressed in his mind. As a result, what is relevant will 
 cohere about the purpose, as iron filings seek and find the 
 magnet. 
 
 Now that the relevant points are secured, upon what 
 basis Should they be organized, for they are clearly of 
 unequal values? Upon that of saliency and subordina¬ 
 tion, or direct and indirect applicability to the purpose of 
 the speech. The organization of the material of a speech 
 would thus be the systematic arrangement of the matter, 
 according to the main or subsidiary values of the argu¬ 
 ments, facts, judgments, opinions, etc. The main points 
 would bear directly upon the purpose of the discourse. 
 The subsidiary points would apply directly both to the 
 main points, and thus would be indirectly pertinent to the 
 theme. The subsidiary facts, etc., may, in their turn, be 
 qualified or supported, according to the requirements for 
 
PREPARATION 
 
 31 
 
 more exhaustive development of the subject, and more 
 accurate judgment. All this constitutes the outline or 
 brief of a speech. 
 
 The following is an abstract scheme for briefing: 
 
 Statement of subject or theme. 
 
 I. Main heading or argument (related directly to 
 the theme). 
 
 A. Subordinate fact requirements, etc. (re¬ 
 lated directly to I). 
 
 (1) Subsidiary facts, etc. (related 
 directly to A). 
 
 (a) Minor facts, etc. (related 
 directly to 1). 
 
 The matter in connection with each main argument or 
 heading should be similarly outlined. 
 
 The assignments of the synonomous terms “subordi¬ 
 nate,” “subsidiary,” and “minor” are purely arbitrary. 
 
 Of course there is no fixed requirement in the matter 
 of supporting facts, opinions, arguments, etc. The exi¬ 
 gency of convincing the audience must determine this. 
 
 I shall illustrate by briefing an excerpt from a sermon 
 by Robert Hall on the Bible. The excerpts and the brief 
 are as follows:— 
 
 “The Bible is the treasure of the poor, the solace of the 
 sick, and the support of the dying. And while other 
 books may amuse and instruct in a leisure hour, it is the 
 peculiar triumph of that book to create light in the midst 
 of darkness, to alleviate the sorrow which permits of no 
 other alleviation, to direct a beam of hope to the heart 
 which no other topic of consolation can reach. 
 
 “There is something in the spirit and diction of the 
 Bible which is found peculiarly adapted to arrest the at¬ 
 tention of the plainest and most uncultivated minds. The 
 simple structure of its sentences, combined with the lofty 
 
32 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 spirit of poetry—its familiar allusions to the scenes of 
 nature and the transactions of common life—the delight¬ 
 ful intermixture of narration with the doctrinal and per¬ 
 ceptive parts—and the profusion of miraculous facts 
 which convert it into a sort of enchanted ground—its con¬ 
 stant advertence to the Deity, whose perfections it renders 
 almost visible and palpable—unite in bestowing upon it 
 an interest which attaches to no other performance, and 
 which, after assiduous and repeated perusal, invests it 
 with much of the charm of novelty; like the great orb of 
 day, at which we are wont to gaze with unabated astonish¬ 
 ment from infancy to old age. 
 
 “What other book besides the Bible could be heard in 
 public assemblies from year to year, with an attention 
 that never tires, and an interest that never cloys? With 
 few exceptions let a portion of the sacred volume be re¬ 
 cited in a mixed multitude, and though it has been heard 
 a thousand times, a universal stillness ensues, every eye 
 is fixed, and every ear is awake and attentive. Select, if 
 you can, any other composition, and let it be rendered 
 equally familiar to the mind, and see whether it will pro¬ 
 duce this effect.” 
 
 SUBJECT. The Bible. 
 
 I. The infinite helpfulness of the Bible. 
 
 A. The comforter of the afflicted. 
 
 (1) The poor. 
 
 (2) The sick. 
 
 (3) The dying. 
 
 B. Affords relief for spiritual perplexity and dis¬ 
 tress. 
 
 (1) Incomprehensible perplexity and distress. 
 
 (2) Hopeless grief. 
 
 (3) Black despair. 
 
 II. The literature of the Bible arrests attention. 
 
 A. Expression of lofty sentiment in simple form. 
 
 B. Reference to nature and common life. 
 
PREPARATION 
 
 33 
 
 C. Variety of literary styles. 
 
 D. Description of miracles. 
 
 E. Tangibility of the Deity. 
 
 III. Familiarity does not lessen interest. 
 
 A. Bible reading ever commands respect. 
 
 Careful preparation is essential to the intelligible de¬ 
 livery of ideas. The systematization of the thought 
 should be firmly established in the speaker’s mind, so that, 
 when speaking, he can readily proceed from thought to 
 thought through the sequence of ideas. In a speech so 
 prepared the ideas will be stressed, in delivery, according 
 to their value, and thus presented with logical consistency. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Outline a number of speeches. 
 
 II. Prepare a brief for and deliver a five-minute speech upon! 
 “The necessity for preparation in public speaking.” 
 
 III. Make an oral criticism of a speech that you have heard 
 upon the basis of its preparation and clearness. These 
 will be determined by the readiness and definiteness with 
 which the speech can be outlined. 
 
 IV. Outline or brief and deliver a ten-minute talk on: 
 
 (a) The results of high tariff. 
 
 (b) A comparison of the rural conditions of to-day with 
 those of fifteen years ago. 
 
 (c) The necessity of organization among individuals of 
 the same vocation, e.g., the farmers. 
 
 (d) The benefits conferred by scientists. 
 
 (e) Beneficial results of travel. 
 
 (f) Party government. 
 
 (g) Group government. 
 
V 
 
 CLEARNESS 
 
 I N one of his most memorable orations Daniel Webster 
 said, “Clearness, force, and earnestness are the quali¬ 
 ties which produce conviction.'’ Well, clearness is the 
 subject of my story. 
 
 One of the chief ends of preparation for public speak¬ 
 ing is to ensure the ready apprehension of the thought by 
 the listener. Consequently, the subject of this chapter 
 was really anticipated in the previous one. However, if I 
 can succeed in emphasizing the extreme urgency of clear¬ 
 ness in public speaking I am quite willing to plead guilty 
 to the charge of repetition, and accept censure therefor. 
 I shall make, then, what was a by-product in the previous 
 chapter, the chief concern in this, with the hope that by 
 stressing it conspicuously, by presenting it more vividly, 
 I can more completely convince my reader of its necessity. 
 
 A teacher analyzes a problem in Arithmetic. When 
 the solution is arrived at he asks the pupil, “Do you under¬ 
 stand ?” A man approaches you with a business proposi¬ 
 tion. He explains the purpose of the enterprise. Then 
 he asks, “Do you see?” Or someone who speaks still less 
 formally tells you a joke, and then asks, “Do you get 
 me?” 
 
 “Do you understand?” “Do you see?” “Do you get 
 me?” may each be interpreted exactly by, “Is it clear to 
 you?” Is what clear? The solution of the arithmetical 
 problem, the purpose of the business enterprise, the point 
 of the joke. 
 
 34 
 
CLEARNESS 
 
 35 
 
 Before the teacher analyzes the problem, or the business 
 agent outlines his proposition, or the humorous man tells 
 his joke—if each, in his own way, be effective—the 
 answer to the problem, or the purpose of the business 
 enterprise, or the point of the joke must be clear. Each 
 must see the end from the beginning, must have in mind 
 a single aim. In other words, each must, at the outset 
 possess a clear definition of his object. 
 
 Not only must each individual referred to see the end 
 from the beginning, but he must have in mind each step 
 or detail leading from the beginning to the end. The 
 matter of the arithmetical problem, or the business propo¬ 
 sition, or the joke must be arranged in logical sequence, 
 in a clearly defined outline. The result will be clearness. 
 
 All this applies to public speaking. The public speaker 
 must first ask himself, “What do I wish to do?” And 
 then select and arrange his ideas in the light of that pur¬ 
 pose. The definite conception of his object, and the 
 arrangement of his ideas according to that object make 
 for clearness. 
 
 The system of a graded school affords an apt illustra¬ 
 tion of an effective public speech. The principal is the 
 centre of the system. Associated with and subordinate 
 to him are the assistant teachers. Subject to the authority 
 of the assistant teachers, and through them to the author¬ 
 ity of the principal, are the pupils. Thus, through the 
 relationship of the pupils to the assistant teachers, and of 
 all to the principal, such a school represents a well-defined 
 organization. 
 
 The interpretation of this illustration, as it applies to a 
 speech, must be obvious. The principal represents the 
 subject; the assistant teachers, the subordinate and re¬ 
 lated themes; the pupils, the individual ideas connected 
 with the subordinate or minor themes. Thus the relation¬ 
 ship of the separate thoughts to the subordinate themes, 
 
36 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 and of these themes to the main subject represents a 
 systematic, or orderly, or logical, or clear organization of 
 ideas. 
 
 On the other hand, the disorder and tumult, when dis¬ 
 cipline is temporarily suspended in a school, such as I 
 have described—for instance, during an intermission— 
 suggest the lack of clearness in the thought of a speech, 
 that is without purpose or order or system or logical 
 outline. 
 
 Organization of ideas, that is the lucid definition of 
 the object, and the selection and arrangement of ideas 
 according to that object, is as essential to clear and effec¬ 
 tive public speaking, as system is to a successful business, 
 a well-conducted educational institution, or a prosperous 
 agricultural enterprise. 
 
 Clearness in thinking is a most important factor in con¬ 
 vincing delivery, since it is the basis of emphasis. The 
 correct systematization of ideas demands a definite con¬ 
 ception of each idea. The definite conception of each idea 
 is revealed, in expression, by means of the emphatic word, 
 and the relative importance of the idea by the degree of 
 the emphasis. The effect of clearness on delivery is more 
 fully dealt with in the chapter “How to emphasize the 
 important words.” 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Prepare an outline in each of the following subjects as 
 required. Make the outline the basis of your talk or sketch, 
 (a) Description of a battle in the Great War, in which 
 the (Canadian) army was engaged. 
 
 1. Position of Canadians. 
 
 (a) In relation to the Allies. 
 
 (b) Geographical location. 
 
 2. Position of enemy. 
 
 3. Object of the Canadians. 
 
 4. Tactics adopted by Canadians. 
 
 5. Tactics adopted by the enemy. 
 
CLEARNESS 
 
 37 
 
 6. Details of battle. 
 
 7. Result. 
 
 (b) THE IRISH QUESTION. 
 
 1. Early relations of England and Ireland. 
 
 (a) Subjugation by Henry II. 
 
 (b) Events connected with assumption of the title 
 of “King of Ireland” by Henry VIII. 
 
 (c) The so-called “Plantation of Ulster” under 
 James I. 
 
 (d) Struggle between James II and William III 
 and Mary, and results to Ireland. 
 
 (e) Uprising of 1798. 
 
 2. “Final Union” with Great Britain in 1800. 
 
 (a) Revolution of 1848. 
 
 (b) Formation of Fenian Brotherhood. 
 
 3. Formation of Irish Home-rule party in 1873. 
 
 (a) History of various home-rule bills. 
 
 4. Sinn Fein movement. 
 
 (a) Condition in Ireland preceding signing of 
 treaty between Great Britain and Irish Free 
 State. 
 
 (b) Conclusion of treaty. 
 
 5. Attitude of Ulster. 
 
 (a) Terms of treaty. 
 
 II. Treat similarly: 
 
 (a) The granting of franchise and parliamentary 
 rights to women. 
 
 (b) Nationalist agitation in India. 
 
 (c) Good roads. 
 
 (d) Status of Canada in British Empire. 
 
VI 
 
 CONCENTRATION FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 HE basis of effective public speaking is clear think- 
 
 I ing. The process of thinking represents a sys¬ 
 tematic series of concentrations. The fundamental action 
 of the mind, then, in public speaking, or for that matter, 
 in any other form which the oral communication of ideas 
 may take, is concentration and transition. Since this is 
 the case, the student of public speaking cannot avoid the 
 examination of the action of the mind in thinking in 
 order to determine the basis of the art of oratory. 
 
 The action of the mind in thinking resembles the pro¬ 
 pulsion of a locomotive. The latter is driven forward by 
 a series of compressions and expansions of the steam. In 
 the case of the mind, substitute concentration for com¬ 
 pression, and transition for expansion. In the process of 
 thinking, the mind moves forward to the desired con¬ 
 clusion, by centering or focusing or concentrating upon 
 one idea, and then leaping or making a transition to the 
 next. 
 
 Probably the rhythmic action of the mind in thinking 
 is more aptly illustrated in the following quotation from 
 an article I wrote some time ago, on the oral interpreta¬ 
 tion of literature: “One of the essential characteristics of 
 mental activity, and therefore of expression, is movement. 
 It is a rhythmic rather than a monotonously flowing 
 movement. That is, it is from centre to centre. To 
 illustrate, this mental movement does not resemble the 
 continuously regular flowing of the water in a river with 
 
 38 
 
CONCENTRATION FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING 39 
 
 comparatively straight banks, but rather, the movement 
 of the water in a tortuous river. In the latter case, there 
 is a continuous and irregular flowing, centering, and dis¬ 
 solving of the water, as it runs to the succession of 
 centres. It will be observed, that at no time is the water 
 static. So it is in the mental process. The mind, in ex¬ 
 pression, as under all other circumstances of its function¬ 
 ing, is never static. It moves continuously and rhythmic¬ 
 ally from centre to centre. In the interpretation of litera¬ 
 ture, or public speaking, or any other form, which the 
 oral communication of ideas may take, each centre repre¬ 
 sents a concentration upon a thought. This mental activ¬ 
 ity or process, which is the basis of expression, is one of 
 rhythmic movement, of concentration and transition.” 
 
 Suppose one person were to tell another, “J°lm left for 
 New York to-day. He travelled by the Lehigh railroad. 
 While in New York he will transact some business, and 
 will return in a fortnight.” The minds of the speaker 
 and the person spoken to would concentrate upon John’s 
 departure; then, upon the railroad over which he jouney- 
 ed; after that, upon his purpose; and finally, upon the 
 duration of his absence. 
 
 One may have two immediate objects in focusing 
 upon a succession of ideas. There may be the aim of 
 working out the sequence of thoughts, and reaching the 
 conclusion for oneself, as in the case of the student; or, 
 on the other hand, for others, as in the case of the public 
 speaker. At this point, I wish to re-emphasize the fact 
 that the former purpose is necessary to the latter. The 
 one is a preparation for the other. 
 
 The theme of this chapter is concentration for public 
 speaking, that is concentration upon each of a succession 
 of ideas, with the purpose of impressing it upon others. 
 Through his delivery the speaker seeks to fix certain 
 thoughts in the minds of his hearers. His concern is 
 
40 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 to impart effectively to others, not to acquire himself. 
 The latter he has done already in his private study. 
 
 The attitude of the teacher toward his pupils resembles 
 the relationship of the public speaker to his audience. 
 May I use a very elementary example? A teacher wishes 
 to lead some children to understand that 2 + 2 = 4. He 
 may proceed after this fashion: he holds up two sticks, 
 and calls attention to them, repeats the process with two 
 others, then places them all together and focuses the 
 attention upon the result. Thus, at the time of teaching, 
 the teacher concentrates upon his ideas by concentrating 
 the minds of his pupils upon them. 
 
 The concentration of the speaker upon his thought, 
 before an audience, is much the same, in purpose and 
 attitude, as that of the teacher before his pupils. The 
 public speaker should appear before his hearers with well- 
 defined ideas. He should not concentrate upon them for 
 himself, as does the student. This is unnecessary. He 
 has already done it in his preparation. Instead, he should 
 centre or concentrate his hearers’ minds upon each 
 thought; call their attention to, or arrest it, with each 
 idea. His concentration upon his thoughts is now by 
 way of the minds of his hearers. 
 
 Concentration for public speaking, then, differs from 
 or is a variant of concentration for oneself. The public 
 speaker simply places himself in the attitude of calling the 
 attention of his hearers to the succession of ideas, one by 
 one; or of centering their minds upon each before pro¬ 
 ceeding to the next. Thus, he grips the attention of his 
 audience and leads it, step by step, to his conclusion. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 Make a brief of your treatment of each of the following 
 subjects. Then, in the process of the delivery of the ideas 
 organized in the outline, concentrate the minds of your real or 
 
CONCENTRATION FOR PUBLIC SPEAKING 41 
 
 imaginary hearers upon each idea by calling their attention to, 
 or focusing it upon it. 
 
 (a) How to concentrate when speaking. 
 
 (b) Municipal ownership of public utilities. 
 
 (c) Labor unions. 
 
 (d) Consolidated schools in rural communities. 
 
 (e) Advertising. 
 
VII 
 
 HOW TO INTEREST AN AUDIENCE 
 
 T O be effective, a speaker must interest his hearers 
 in the matter of his speech. What are the most 
 efficient means that may be employed to secure the 
 attention of an audience? I shall suggest the answer by 
 illustrations and examples. 
 
 One man tells another about his automobile. We shall 
 assume that the listener has the vaguest knowledge of the 
 parts of a car. The owner discusses them with great 
 fluency. The recipient of all this information is bored. 
 His interest is not aroused. He does not understand the 
 meaning of the terms used. They are outside his ex¬ 
 perience. 
 
 I tell a friend that a mutual acquaintance is afflicted 
 with vertigo. He turns a blank look upon me. He does 
 not understand. True, the novelty of the term may 
 excite his curiosity, but he is not intelligently interested. 
 Why? Because I am unintelligible. The word “vertigo” 
 is unknown to him. 
 
 But, when I tell my friend that a mutual acquaintance 
 is troubled with dizziness, he understands me. He is 
 intelligently interested. Why ? Because I am intelligible. 
 The word “dizziness” is within his experience. It is 
 known to him. 
 
 We counsel children, “All is not gold that glitters.” 
 Our caution makes no impression. It is too abstract. 
 They do not comprehend its import. They are not in¬ 
 terested. 
 
 42 
 
HOW TO INTEREST AN AUDIENCE 
 
 43 
 
 But when we relate to children the story, “King Midas 
 and the Golden Touch,” we refer to concrete ideas within 
 their experience. We have become intelligible. Their 
 interest has been secured. 
 
 The great orator, Edmund Burke, in his famous ora¬ 
 tion at the trial of Warren Hastings, aroused the interest 
 of his hearers by referring to ideas and images within 
 their vivid evperience. He did not refer to the invasion 
 of the Carnatic as a “scene of woe,” and leave it at that. 
 That would have stimulated only a vague interest. In¬ 
 stead he said, “Then ensued a scene of woe, the like of 
 which no eye had seen, no heart conceived, and of which 
 no tongue can adequately tell. A storm of universal fire 
 blasted every field, consumed every house, destroyed 
 every temple. The miserable inhabitants, flying from 
 their flaming villages, in part were slaughtered. Others, 
 without regard to sex, to age, to respect of rank, or 
 sacredness of function—fathers torn from children, 
 husbands from wives, enveloped in a whirlwind of cav¬ 
 alry, and amid the goading spears of drivers and the 
 trampling of pursuing horses—were swept into captivity 
 in an unknown and hostile land.” Thus, Burke, by a 
 vivid appeal to the imagination of his listeners led them 
 to recreate the scenes of desolation and woe out of their 
 experience, and aroused their intense indignation towards 
 Hastings and his policies in India. 
 
 The following extract from an oration delivered by the 
 great Southern orator, Henry W. Grady, must appeal to 
 and arouse the interest of anyone who enjoys the dis¬ 
 tinction of having been reared on a farm: “I went to 
 Washington the other day, and I stood on the Capitol 
 Hill; my heart beat quick as I looked at the towering 
 marble of my country’s Capitol and the mist gathered in 
 my eyes as I thought of its tremendous significance, and 
 the armies and the treasury, and the judges and the 
 
44 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 President, and the Congress and the courts, and all that 
 was gathered there. And I felt that the sun in all its 
 course could not look down on a better sight than that 
 majestic home of a republic that had taught the world 
 its best lesson of liberty. And I felt that if honor and 
 wisdom and justice abided therein, the world would at 
 least owe that great house in which the ark of the cove¬ 
 nant of my country is lodged its final uplifting and regen¬ 
 eration. 
 
 “Two days afterward, I went to visit a friend in the 
 country, a modest man, with a quiet country home. It 
 was just a simple, unpretentious house, set about with 
 big trees, encircled in meadow and field rich with the 
 promise of harvest. The fragrance of the pink and holly¬ 
 hock in the front yard was mingled with the aroma of 
 the orchard and of the gardens, and resonant with the 
 cluck of poultry and the hum of bees. 
 
 “Inside was quiet, cleanliness, thrift, and comfort. 
 There was the old clock that had welcomed, in steady 
 measure, every newcomer to the family, that had ticked 
 the solemn requiem of the dead, and had kept company 
 with the watchers at the bedside. There were the big 
 restful beds, and the old open fireplace, and the old 
 family Bible, thumbed with the fingers of hands long 
 since still, and wet with the tears of eyes long since closed, 
 holding the simple annals of the family and the heart and 
 the conscience of the home. 
 
 “Outside, there stood my friend, the master, a simple, 
 upright man, with no mortgage on his roof, no lien on 
 his growing crops, master of his land, and master of 
 himself. There was his old father, an aged, trembling 
 man, but happy in the heart and home of his son. And 
 as they started to their home, the hands of the old man 
 went down on the young man’s shoulder, laying there the 
 unspeakable blessing of the honored and grateful father 
 
HOW TO INTEREST AN AUDIENCE 
 
 45 
 
 and ennobling it with the knighthood of the fifth com¬ 
 mandment. 
 
 “And as they reached the door the old mother came in 
 with the sunset falling on her face, and lighting up her 
 deep, patient eyes, while her lips, trembling with the rich 
 music of her heart, bade her husband and son welcome to 
 their home. Beyond was the housewife busy with her 
 household cares, clean of heart and conscience, the buckler 
 and helpmeet of her husband. Down the lane came the 
 children, trooping home after the cows, seeking as truant 
 birds do the quiet of their home nest. 
 
 “And I saw the night come down on that house, falling 
 gently as the wings of the unseen dove. And the old 
 man—while a startled bird called from the forest, and 
 the trees were shrill with the crickets cry, and the stars 
 were swarming in the sky—got the family around him, 
 and, taking the old Bible from the table, called them to 
 their knees, the little baby hiding in the folds of its 
 mother’s dress, while he closed the record of that simple 
 day by calling down God’s benediction on that family and 
 on that home. And while I gazed, the vision of that 
 marble Capitol faded. Forgotten were its treasures and 
 its majesty, and I said, ‘Oh, surely in the homes of the 
 people are lodged at last the strength and the responsi¬ 
 bility of this government, the hope and the promise of 
 this republic.’ ” 
 
 The conclusion of the matter is, that the speaker, in 
 order to secure the interest of his listeners, must present 
 ideas adjusted to their experience. What constitutes the 
 experience of an individual? Someone has summed it up 
 well as follows, “All that he retains from what he has 
 seen, heard, read, done, and felt.” 
 
 The public speaker must discriminate in the matter of 
 the experience of a given audience. It would be idle to 
 address a metropolitan city audience in the terms of rural 
 
46 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 experience. It would be equally futile to speak to a rural 
 audience in terms of urban experience. The speaker 
 must seek to bring his ideas and language within the 
 vivid experience of those who constitute his audience, if 
 he would interest them. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Discuss each of the following subjects under three head¬ 
 ings, and support each point by a reference to experience: 
 
 (a) Aerial navigation. 
 
 (b) Corporal punishment for public school children. 
 
 (c) Compulsory military drill in the public schools. 
 
 (d) Fiction reading. 
 
 II. Discuss the tariff with the following audiences, and under 
 
 four headings, and support each point by a reference to 
 
 the experience of the hearers: 
 
 (a) Manufacturers. 
 
 (b) Laborers. 
 
 (c) Farmers. 
 
VIII 
 
 HOW TO GAIN AND HOLD ATTENTION 
 
 C OMPARATIVELY few public speakers succeed in 
 gaining and holding the attention of an audience. 
 If the subject matter of a speech is interesting, the reason 
 for this failure is the inability of the speaker to fit in to 
 public speaking conditions. 
 
 May I make a comparison? In life there are many 
 who do not fit in—who are failures. There is the “shift¬ 
 less romanticist,” who longs for the time “when swords 
 were bright and steeds were prancing”; the pessimist, 
 who “grouches” about the degeneracy of the present, and 
 yearns for “the good old days”; the impractical idealist, 
 who “talks and talks and talks” about some impossible 
 Utopia, instead of “getting busy.” These men are mis¬ 
 fits. They do not fit in, or, in other words, re-act to their 
 environments. 
 
 As in life, so it is in public speaking, which, after all, 
 is a slice of life raised into the high light. He, who 
 would speak effectively in public, must learn to adjust 
 himself to his audience, the public speaker’s environment. 
 If he cannot do this, he does not fit in, he is an oratorical 
 misfit. If he can do it, he will gain and hold the atten¬ 
 tion of his audience. 
 
 There are different types of public speaking misfits or 
 failures. I recall a case in point. A gentleman of wide 
 reputation as a scholar and writer was engaged to give 
 an address, at an important function in a town, in which 
 I lived. A large audience gathered to hear the speaker. 
 
 47 
 
48 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 He responded to a very generous reception, with a cold 
 and perfunctory acknowledgment. He began by dashing 
 cold water, as it were, on our enthusiasm. He proceeded 
 to discuss the subject in a detached way. He isolated 
 himself from his hearers. He was, as one “marooned” 
 on the platform. Undoubtedly, he had something to say, 
 but he did not say it to anybody. There was no reciproc¬ 
 ity between him and his audience. He did not gain and 
 hold attention. He failed. 
 
 Another public speaking misfit is the loud, noisy, de¬ 
 clamatory speaker. He does not relate himself to his 
 audience, but stands isolated in the centre of his own 
 “sound and fury.” He “kicks up” such a cloud of oratori¬ 
 cal “dust,” that he is, as it were, hidden from his listen¬ 
 ers. He harangues at them. He does not talk to them. 
 He never gains, and, consequently, does not hold at¬ 
 tention. 
 
 What, then, is the nature of the attitude of the speaker 
 to his hearers, that enables him to gain and hold their 
 attention? Before I answer this question, I will digress 
 to describe as precisely as I can, the constitution of an 
 audience, and the effect of concentration and transition in 
 thinking, upon the relationship of the speaker to his 
 listeners. 
 
 Very many public speakers regard their hearers as a 
 mass. This is fatal to effectiveness. Such speakers lose 
 touch with the individual members of the audience, and 
 speak to them in the aggregate. As a result, the delivery 
 becomes general, impersonal, and detached, or degenerates 
 into a harangue. 
 
 Properly conceived, an audience is a unity, that is, a 
 number of separate individuals related to a central person. 
 So far as the speaker is concerned, the centre of the 
 audience unity, at any given moment, is that person to 
 whom the speaker is directly appealing, or whose atten- 
 
HOW TO GAIN AND HOLD ATTENTION 49 
 
 tion he is concentrating upon the idea he is endeavoring 
 to convey. With each leap of mind from idea to idea, 
 that has been discussed in the chapter on concentration, 
 the attention of the speaker changes from one individual 
 in the audience to another. Consequently, the audience 
 centre is continually changing. Under these conditions 
 of delivery, the speaker is always intimate, since he ap¬ 
 pears primarily to one person. Notwithstanding that his 
 appeal is primarily to one person, the speaker who has a 
 true realization of correct audience relationship, is aware 
 that he is speaking through the single individual, who 
 may be the centre at a given moment, to every other mem¬ 
 ber of the audience. This realization compels the atten¬ 
 tion of all his hearers. 
 
 Probably, I can suggest more clearly by an illustration 
 my conception of what constitutes the attitude of the 
 speaker to his hearers, that enables him to gain and hold 
 their attention. Not long ago, I listened to a student 
 preacher, who seemed to have solved the problem. No 
 matter where his attention was directed during the de¬ 
 livery of his sermon, and it changed very frequently— 
 with every new idea, in fact—he talked personally and 
 intimately with one individual. At the same time, he 
 appeared to realize that he was talking to every other 
 member of the congregation. He did not single out one 
 person and talk to him to the exclusion of the others. 
 Rather, he spoke through one, to all. While he was 
 intimate, personal, and conversational, his realization that 
 he was speaking to everybody, naturally resulted in the 
 inclusion of all, in his appeal. Thus by directness and 
 inclusiveness, he compelled the attention of everybody. 
 
 The student preacher gained and held attention, as 
 every other speaker must secure and retain it, by relating 
 himself to his hearers, and thus, fitting into the public 
 speaking environment. 
 
50 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 * 
 
 I. Assuming the correct relationship towards the audience, 
 i.e., regarding the audience as an unity, allowing the atten¬ 
 tion to change and re-center with each new idea, and 
 calling the attention of the individual who constitutes the 
 center of the audience, at any given moment, to the idea, 
 and through him the attention of the whole audience, 
 speak upon the following themes: 
 
 (a) The future of Canada. 
 
 (b) The public school curriculum of studies should be so 
 comprehensive, and the right of selection so wide, 
 that the course of study in any school will be based 
 upon the conditions of the community in which the 
 school is situated. 
 
 (c) A thrilling experience. 
 
 (d) Municipal government by commission. 
 
IX 
 
 PAUSING 
 
 O WING to their inability to discriminate, children 
 have much that is absurd and trivial imposed upon 
 them. I recall having been taught reading in the public 
 schools according to these rules; pause while you count 
 one for a comma, two for a semi-colon, three for a colon, 
 and four for a period. In case a pupil neglected to apply 
 any of these rules, he received the number of whacks 
 with a pointer, that corresponded to the number of counts 
 required by the broken rule. Needless to say we were 
 always particularly careful about our periods. Thus, the 
 teacher referred to focused the minds of the children 
 upon these artificial and ridiculous rules for pausing 
 rather than upon the ideas the words conveyed. 
 
 My reader may not have had the rules for pausing im¬ 
 pressed upon him as drastically as I had. Nevertheless, I 
 feel safe in assuming that he was required to guide him¬ 
 self in reading by similar, stupid nonsense. If not, he 
 was fortunate. 
 
 Then, as you may anticipate, I am not going to offer 
 any rules to guide the public speaker in making pauses. 
 An attempt to govern oneself by rules always results in 
 artificiality and self-consciousness. It takes the attention 
 of the speaker from what he is saying and places it upon 
 how he is saying it. The purpose of public speaking is 
 to communicate ideas, not to parade artificial manipula¬ 
 tion of the voice. 
 
 Nevertheless, pausing is of great consequence in public 
 
 51 
 
52 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 speaking. There is a frequently quoted proverb which 
 runs thus, “Speech is silvern, Silence is golden.” In refer¬ 
 ence to this dictum, some one has aptly written, “If in 
 applying this proverb to speechmaking, you will inter¬ 
 pret silence as pausing, then it is certainly golden.” 
 
 Frequently natural pausing is one of the most char¬ 
 acteristic factors of the speech form of conversation. 
 Assuming that the conversational standard is the correct 
 standard, pausing should be, tljen, one of the important 
 distinctions of effective public speaking. And it is. 
 
 Since pausing is natural to speech, it must arise spon¬ 
 taneously from certain processes and conditions. By dis¬ 
 covering and applying these processes and conditions, we 
 can ensure spontaneous pausing, which, as has been in¬ 
 ferred, is inherent to natural speech form. 
 
 If you will listen attentively to anyone in ordinary 
 conversation telling of some experience, you will notice 
 that he utters his words in groups, not in a continuous 
 stream. For instance, in narrating the details of the fol¬ 
 lowing incident, the words group naturally, as I have indi¬ 
 cated : (“On my way downtown to-day) (I saw a collis¬ 
 ion between a street car and an automobile.) (The auto¬ 
 mobile was badly damaged.) (The chauffeur was thrown 
 to the pavement) (and badly injured) (A passing motor¬ 
 ist took him to a hospital) (I see, by this evening’s paper, 
 he was not seriously injured.”) 
 
 Now, how are the words separated and united into 
 groups? By pauses. Where are these pauses located? 
 Before and after each group. What does each group of 
 words convey? An idea. There is a pause, then, before 
 and after the expression of each idea? Yes. 
 
 In conversation, public speaking, or in any other form 
 of the natural, oral communication of ideas, there is a 
 pause before and after the expression of each idea. Now, 
 
PAUSING 
 
 53 
 
 why is this? Well, there is the speaker, and the person 
 spoken to. Time is required to develop an idea. Time is 
 required to grasp an idea. The speaker has to concen¬ 
 trate to get each thought. This requires time—a pause 
 before the utterance of the group of words. He natur¬ 
 ally desires that the hearer shall grasp each idea. This 
 requires time—a pause after the utterance of each group 
 of words. Thus, “the speaker requires time to think of 
 what is to be said, and the audience requires time to think 
 of what has been said.” 
 
 The length of a pause depends upon the length of time 
 required by the speaker to develop an idea, or by the 
 hearer to comprehend it. This leads naturally to the 
 question of the modification of pauses. The speaker can 
 modify his pauses, that is, he can lengthen or shorten 
 them. He can lengthen the pauses before each group of 
 words by concentrating more intensely and sustainedly 
 upon each idea before giving expression to it. He can 
 lengthen the pause after each group of words by concen¬ 
 trating the minds of the hearers more intensely and sus¬ 
 tainedly upon the idea after he has given expression to it. 
 The opposite process would shorten the pauses. 
 
 Although pauses can be modified by lengthening or 
 shortening upon the basis of more accentuated or less 
 accentuated concentration, they cannot be legitimately in¬ 
 creased or decreased in number. 
 
 There are subtle pauses within the groups of words. 
 The most important of these are located before and after 
 the emphatic words. These pauses, also, are made spon¬ 
 taneously in any style of natural speech. 
 
 Should any of my readers fear monotony on account 
 of frequently pausing, let me ask, “Have you ever ex¬ 
 perienced anything so monotonous as an endless ‘ready 
 and steady’ stream of words?” 
 
54 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. They (Rome and Carthage) measure each other from head 
 to foot. | They gather all their forces. | Gradually the war 
 kindles. | The world takes fire. | These colossal powers are 
 locked in deadly strife. | Carthage has crossed the Alps; | 
 Rome, the seas. | The two nations | personified in two 
 men, | Hannibal and Scipio, | close with each other, 
 wrestle, | and grow infuriate. | The duel is desperate. | It 
 is a struggle for life. | Rome wavers. | She utters that cry 
 of anguish, | “Hannibal at the gates!” | But she rallies, | 
 collects all her strength fo** one last, appalling effort, j 
 throws herself upon Carthage, | and sweeps her from the 
 face of the earth .—Victor Hugo. 
 
 In the quotation from Hugo’s “Rome and Carthage,” 
 pause before each thought phrase, which is indicated by 
 a stroke, until the image, or idea, is assimilated. Then, 
 while giving expression to the phrase, relate the minds of 
 the hearers or call their attention to it. Pause slightly 
 after the utterance of each phrase, that the listeners may 
 more fully grasp the thought. 
 
 II. Repeat the process outlined in I, in the following poem: 
 
 They sent him back to her. The letter came 
 Saying . . . and she could have him. And before 
 She could be sure there was no hidden ill 
 Under the formal writing, he was in her sight— 
 
 Living.—They gave him back to her alive— 
 
 How else? They are not known to send the dead— 
 
 And not disfigured visibly. His face? 
 
 His hands? She had to look—to ask 
 “What was it, dear?” And she had given all 
 And still she had all—they had—they the lucky! 
 
 Wasn’t she glad now? Everything seemed won. 
 
 And all the rest for them permissible ease. 
 
 She had to ask, “What was it, dear?” 
 
 “Enough, 
 
 Yet not enough. A bullet through and through 
 High in the breast. Nothing but what good care 
 And medicine and rest—and you a week— 
 
 Can cure me of to go again.” The same 
 Grim giving to do over for them both. 
 
 She dared no more than ask him with her eyes 
 
PAUSING 
 
 55 
 
 How was it with him for a second trial. 
 
 And with his eyes he asked her not to ask; 
 
 They had given him back to her, but not to keep. 
 
 Robert Frost. 
 
 III. Repeat the process outlined in I, in an original speech on: 
 
 (a) Single tax. 
 
 (b) Patriotism. 
 
 (c) Education. 
 
 (d) Profit sharing. 
 
X 
 
 EMPHASIS OF IMPORTANT WORDS 
 
 S OME time ago, at the invitation of a friend, I went 
 to hear an extravagantly advertised “silver-tongued 
 orator.’’ He proved to be a verbose disappointment. We 
 were lost in a wilderness of “words, words, words.” 
 There was nothing by which we could guide durselves to 
 his conclusion. When the lecture was over, we asked 
 each other, in our confusion, “What was it all about?” 
 
 It is essential, that a speaker shall guide his hearers 
 clearly from thought to thought, to his conclusion. How 
 shall he do this? I shall answer the question by a rather 
 obvious and naive symbolism: “A hunter set out for a 
 point on the shore of a certain lake. To reach his desti¬ 
 nation, he had to pass through a piece of virgin forest. 
 There was no path, which he could follow. The way was 
 indicated by blazed trees. Guided by these, he reached 
 his journey’s end.” Let me interpret the symbolism. 
 The “hunter” is the audience; “the point on the shore of 
 a certain lake,” the objective; “the trees of the forest,” 
 the speaker’s words; the “blazed trees” the emphatic words 
 by which the audience is guided, from thought to thought, 
 to the conclusion or object of the speech. 
 
 The reason the “silver-tongued orator,” referred to, 
 left his hearers in mental confusion, was that all his words 
 were uttered with the same, or if you like, without any 
 emphasis. There were no “blazed trees” through his 
 “forest” of words, by which his hearers could guide 
 themselves. 
 
 56 
 
EMPHASIS OF IMPORTANT WORDS 
 
 57 
 
 Have you noticed that, in conversation, one expresses 
 exactly what one wishes to convey? For instance, I may 
 tell a friend, “I am leaving for Boston, (not another 
 place) in the morning, (not some other time) I shall 
 go by boat. (Not by rail) It is likely I shall remain a 
 week, (not a longer or shorter time). Thus, in this 
 talk, by means of the emphatic or thought words—Bos¬ 
 ton, morning, boat, week—I tell my friends exactly what 
 I wish to say, and without having decided beforehand 
 what words I shall emphasize. Natural and exact em¬ 
 phasis of thought words in public speaking demands 
 definite thinking, and simple and direct speaking. When 
 these obtain, the correct word will be emphasized in the 
 expression of each thought, as in conversation. 
 
 In the chapter on the preparation of material, the 
 reader's attention was called to the fact, that, in the 
 development of a subject, thoughts are of unequal value. 
 They vary in importance, according to the degree of their 
 relativity or bearing upon the theme. This inequality, 
 in the value of material was indicated in a form, called 
 a ‘‘brief," in the chapter referred to. The public speaker 
 should have a clear and definite grasp of this arrange¬ 
 ment of his thoughts, before he essays to address an 
 audience. Then, he will focus the attention of his hearers 
 upon definite ideas, and according to the relative values of 
 those ideas. This will result in emphasis, at once exact, 
 and correct in degree. Emphasis, then, is based upon 
 clear thinking, and the application of right audience re¬ 
 lationship. If the public speaker will apply these con¬ 
 ditions, in his speech-making, his emphasis will be exact 
 in word location, and right in degree. 
 
 It is essential that the speaker shall unerringly em¬ 
 phasize the right word. What is the result of incorrect 
 emphasis? Simply this, the audience loses the thread of 
 the speech and confusion results. By a return to correct 
 
58 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 emphasis, the logical sequence of ideas may be again re¬ 
 established, and the conclusion eventually reached, but 
 the effectiveness of the speech as a whole, has been im¬ 
 paired. For example, the hunter referred to earlier in 
 this chapter, might have lost his way temporarily in his 
 journey through the forest, but have found the blazed 
 path again, and reached his destination. But, on account 
 of his temporary confusion, the journey would not have 
 been completed as expeditiously, as it might have been. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Use the sentence, “John walked down College Street to¬ 
 day,” in answer to each of the following questions, empha¬ 
 sizing the word that definitely answers the inquiry: 
 
 (a) Who walked down College Street to-day? 
 
 (b) Did you say that John rode down College Street 
 to-day ? 
 
 (c) Did you say that John walked up College Street 
 to-day ? 
 
 (d) Did you say that John walked down Fifth Avenue 
 to-day ? 
 
 (e) Did you say that John walked down College Street 
 yesterday ? 
 
 II. Repeat the same process with other sentences. 
 
 III. Deliver the sentence. “Though I spoke with the tongues 
 of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become 
 as sounding brass, and a tinkling cymbal,” and definitely 
 call the hearers' attention to each idea, and by so doing 
 emphasize distinctly the thought word in each case. 
 
 IV. In the sentence quoted in III, the thought words are “men,” 
 “angels,” “charity,” “brass,” “cymbal.” Clearly, the most 
 important of these is “charity”; and “men” and “angels” 
 are more important than “brass” and “cymbals.” Upon 
 the basis of this analysis, deliver the sentence calling the 
 attention of the hearers to each idea according to the rela¬ 
 tive value assigned to it in your mind. 
 
 V. Apply the process outlined in IV to the remaining verses 
 in I. Corinthians, XIII Chapter. 
 
 VI. Apply the process outlined in IV to the following para¬ 
 graph : 
 
EMPHASIS OF IMPORTANT WORDS 
 
 59 
 
 If I were to tell you the story of Napoleon, I should 
 take it from the lips of Frenchmen, who find no language 
 rich enough to paint the great captain of the nineteenth 
 century. Were I to tell you the story of Washington, I 
 should take it from your hearts—you who think no marble 
 white enough on which to carve the name of the father 
 of his country. But I am to tell you the story of a negro, 
 Toussaint L’Ouverture, who has left hardly one written 
 line. I am to glean it from the reluctant testimony of his 
 enemies, men who despised him because he was a negro 
 and a slave, and hated him because he had beaten them 
 in battle .—Wendell Phillips. 
 
 VII. Apply the process outlined in IV to an original speech on: 
 
 (a) Co-operation between Capital and Labor. 
 
 (b) Benefits of Life Insurance. 
 
 (c) Gambling. 
 
 (d) Desirability of High Ideals. 
 
XI 
 
 HOW TO ELIMINATE SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS 
 
 W HO has not had an experience like the following? 
 
 You knew you were to be called upon to make a 
 speech. Your heart hammered and thumped. You were 
 almost sick with apprehension. When you arose to speak, 
 your hands and feet seemed to be abnormally obtrusive. 
 You were conscious your movements were ridiculously 
 awkward and constrained. Your sight seemed to be 
 dimmed. The audience was a vague and menacing mass. 
 Your mouth was parched. Your tongue clove to the roof 
 of your mouth. For a moment you could not utter a 
 word. Your mind was a jumble of confusion. Finally, 
 you found your tongue enough to stammer out a few un¬ 
 connected sentences. The sound of your own voice 
 frightened you. Then, you sat down overwhelmed with 
 confusion and humiliation. Ever since, you have wished 
 that the impression made by this painful experience could 
 be blotted from your memory. 
 
 You suffered all this misery at the time of speaking, 
 and have endured a bitter remembrance ever since, be¬ 
 cause you allowed your attention to centre, where it should 
 not have centered, upon yourself. You stood upon the 
 platform “stewing in your own juice,” until, finally, you 
 “boiled away to nothing.” Your attempt ended disas¬ 
 trously, because you were conscious of yourself or self- 
 conscious. 
 
 How can self-consciousness be eliminated? By taking 
 your mind off yourself, through placing it somewhere 
 else. How can this be done ? I shall answer the question 
 with a concrete study. 
 
 60 
 
ELIMINATING SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS 61 
 
 Not long ago, an eminent statesman and orator visited 
 this continent. Those, who were privileged to hear him, 
 were charmed with his geniality, simplicity, and distinc¬ 
 tion. They admired his perfect ease and complete self- 
 possession. Many a one must have thought to himself, 
 “Would I could have such consummate freedom and ‘at- 
 homeness’ before an audience.” 
 
 As one listened to him, one could scarcely conceive, 
 that in the early stages of his public speaking career he 
 suffered all the tortures described in this chapter. Yet it 
 was so. Even now, according to his own confession, he 
 very often suffers from an exaggerated apprehension be¬ 
 fore he arises to speak. He ascribes this to an extreme 
 sensitiveness. However, he has practically overcome this 
 bane of many an orator’s life. The question that inter¬ 
 ests us is, how did he overcome it? 
 
 When he arises to speak, he suggests purposefulness. 
 He conveys the impression that he has something to say, 
 and that he has a thorough grasp of his subject. He 
 rises, as it were, in the atmosphere of his subject. This 
 is a result of a concentration upon his theme, so absorb¬ 
 ing that it shuts out all the distracting influences—includ¬ 
 ing a consciousness of self—that press upon his atten¬ 
 tion, before he arises to address the audience. As he pro¬ 
 ceeds with the development of the question under con¬ 
 sideration, even the winsome personality is forgotten by 
 his hearers, while he rivets their attention upon his train 
 of ideas. He overcomes any apprehension, that may 
 threaten to obsess him before he arises to speak, by center¬ 
 ing his attention exclusively upon his subject. He elimi¬ 
 nates self-consciousness, during the progress of his ad¬ 
 dress, by occupying himself with calling the attention of 
 the audience to, or focusing it upon, his succession of 
 ideas. Thus, he renders it impossible for his attention 
 to centre upon himself. 
 
62 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Then, the miseries of self-consciousness before one 
 arises to speak, may be avoided by concentrating one’s own 
 attention upon the subject; and during the time of speak¬ 
 ing, by concentrating the attention of the audience upon, 
 or calling it to, the ideas. In neither case is the speaker’s 
 attention allowed to centre upon himself. Thus, the cause 
 of self-consciousness is eliminated. 
 
 One of the most common of the causes, that contribute 
 to induce self-consciousness in public speaking, is fear, 
 e.g., fear of forgetting, fear of becoming ridiculous, fear 
 that some members of the audience may possess a supe¬ 
 rior knowledge of the subject, fear from lack of prepara¬ 
 tion. Thorough preparation is the surest way of over¬ 
 coming fear. In public speaking, perfect preparation 
 “casteth out fear.” In this connection, I would strongly 
 urge the student to ponder and apply the counsel offered 
 in the chapters entitled “Preparation” and “Speaking with 
 Authority.” 
 
 It may be a satisfaction to anyone troubled with self- 
 consciousness to know, that at the basis of it are a sen¬ 
 sitiveness and a sensibility, which are characteristic of all 
 orators of distinction. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Remaining seated, and allowing your mind to become 
 absorbed in focusing the attention of your hearers upon 
 or relating it to each image, concept, idea, fact, judgment, 
 or truth, to the exclusion of self. Explain, 
 
 (a) The operation of some machine. 
 
 (b) How to reach a certain place. 
 
 (c) Some work or calling in which you are interested. 
 
 (d) Some current event, e.g., the disarmament conference. 
 
 (e) Parliamentary procedure. 
 
 (f) Necessity for religion. 
 
 Or tell a story, or describe a landscape. 
 
 II. Stand up, apply the processes to the same themes as out¬ 
 lined in I. 
 
XII 
 
 HOW TO AVOID MONOTONY 
 
 I SHALL, in the first place, define the issue for this 
 chapter. A public speaker may be monotonous in his 
 matter, or in his manner, or in both. I shall concern 
 myself, in this chapter, with monotony in delivery only. 
 
 In oral expression, our ideas are revealed through the 
 voice and body. Then, monotony in delivery may mani¬ 
 fest itself in vocalization or in gesture. Monotony or man¬ 
 nerism in gesture will be dealt with in another chapter. 
 Consequently the issue in this chapter is further limited 
 to the treatment of monotony in delivery, as it applies to 
 the voice. 
 
 There will be no reference, at this point, to the train¬ 
 ing of the voice. This important subject will be dealt 
 with later in this book. I will assert, however, at this 
 point, that, in the application of the recommendations 
 submitted for the reader’s consideration in this chapter, 
 the greater the degree of the control and freedom of the 
 voice, or, to put it more technically, the less the interfer¬ 
 ence with the free vibrations of the vocal cords, and the 
 normal amount of resonance space, the greater will be 
 the degree of variety in vocal expression. 
 
 To inquire from my reader, “Have you ever listened 
 to a tiresome speaker?” would be to ask a foolish ques¬ 
 tion. Public speakers who drone along on a sameness of 
 tone; or, whose voices regularly rise and fall with the 
 wearisome recurrence of a certain cadence; or who afflict 
 their audiences with a dull and uniform delivery, are, 
 unfortunately, always with us. 
 
 63 
 
64 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Monotony in delivery is death to all interest. The 
 monotonous public speaker, whose topics are of a general 
 nature, bores his audience, and fails either to gain or to 
 hold attention. The monotonous preacher becomes tedi¬ 
 ous. His hearers are too often lulled to sleep under the 
 soothing sounds of the Gospel. 
 
 The antithesis to monotony is variety. What are the 
 characteristics, that render monotony so undesirable, and 
 variety so desirable in public speaking? Let me answer 
 the question with a series of contrasts! Monotony is 
 dull, variety animated; monotony prosy, variety interest¬ 
 ing; monotony lifeless, variety graphic; monotony stupid, 
 variety keen. 
 
 Monotony is the most distinctive mark of death; vari¬ 
 ety, of life. Henry Ward Beecher said, “Men love 
 variety when they are alive.” Wherever there is variety, 
 there is also vigor and spirit. 
 
 Variety is the characteristic expression of naturalness. 
 It is never associated with artificiality, affectation, or ex¬ 
 aggeration. The normal man approves naturalness. He 
 detests unnaturalness. Audiences are usually made up of 
 normal persons. It follows, that variety in public speak¬ 
 ing will stimulate the members of an audience to life, 
 and secure their alert attention. 
 
 How shall we avoid monotony in public speaking? We 
 are so apt “to go star-gazing and step on a glow worm,” 
 to look for some wonderful remedy, and miss the humble 
 and effective one, close at hand. I shall suggest the 
 answer to the question by asking another. When, in the 
 communication of ideas, are we quite natural? The 
 answer to the latter question is quite obvious. In con¬ 
 versation. Genung writes, “It (conversation) is the 
 crowning excellence of skilled expression.” Now, what 
 are the attributes of conversational speech form, that 
 constitute its variety? If you will listen critically to a 
 
HOW TO AVOID MONOTONY 
 
 65 
 
 conversation, I am sure you will agree with me, that they 
 are pause, emphasis, change of pitch, inflection, and 
 variety in the rate of the utterance of the words. But, 
 you may ask, “How can I secure these in public speak¬ 
 ing, if you will provide me with no rules?” Please, do 
 not worry. Did not the persons, to whom you listened, 
 converse spontaneously? Was not the speech form 
 marked by variety? Were they conscious of the function¬ 
 ing of their voices in the expression of that variety? 
 Then to avoid monotony or to secure variety, the public 
 speaker must adopt the direct and natural, or conversa¬ 
 tional attitude toward his audience. 
 
 Many speakers attempt to secure variety by artificial 
 means, e.g., by “raising the voice to express joy, and by 
 lowering it to express sorrow,” and like absurdities. 
 Avoid these affectations as you would the plague. 
 
 Others, again, seek to relieve monotony by loudness. 
 Shouting merely confuses. It does not possess the basis 
 of real variety. It is purely physical. If physical force 
 is to be used to arouse the attention of an audience, it 
 would be more effective to adopt means similar to those 
 used by a certain spirited divine. It is told of him, that, 
 upon one occasion, when a member of his congregation 
 fell asleep during the delivery of a sermon, he hurled a 
 book at the delinquent, saying, as he did so, that if he 
 would not listen to the Gospel, he would feel it. How¬ 
 ever, I only suggest this means of arousing hearers out 
 of their drowsiness. I do not prescribe it. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Repeat the problems assigned in connection with the chap¬ 
 ter on Emphasis of Important Words. 
 
 II. With definite concentration upon each idea, and under 
 conditions of control and ease, read the following conver¬ 
 sationally and deliberately: 
 
66 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 “The battle of Waterloo—and this gave Bliicher time to 
 come up—could not be commenced before half-past eleven. 
 Why? Because the ground was soft. It was necessary 
 for it to acquire some little firmness so that the artillery 
 could maneuver. 
 
 “Had the ground been dry, and the artillery able to 
 move, the action would have been commenced at six o’clock 
 in the morning. The battle would have been won and 
 finished at two o’clock, three hours before the Prussians 
 turned the scale of fortune. 
 
 “How much fault is there on the part of Napoleon in 
 the loss of this battle ? His plan of battle was, all confess, 
 a masterpiece. To march straight to the center of the 
 allied line, pierce the enemy, cut them in two, push the 
 British half upon Hal and the Prussian half upon Ton- 
 gres, make Wellington and Bliicher two fragments, carry 
 Mont Saint Jean, seize Brussels, throw the Germans 
 into the Rhine, and the Englishman into the sea. All this, 
 for Napoleon, was in this battle. What would follow, 
 anybody can see .”—Victor Hugo. 
 
 III. Read the following, with an intensity of concentration, and 
 a realizing sense of the vividness, deep emotion, and moral 
 elevation: 
 
 “She is now no more—no more? Nay, I boldly say she 
 lives—lives in the hearts of her subjects; lives in the pages 
 of history. And as the ages revolve, as her pure profile 
 stands more marked against the horizon of time, the verdict 
 of posterity will ratify the judgment of those who were 
 her subjects. She ennobled mankind; she exalted royalty; 
 the world is better for her life.” 
 
 Extract from “On the death of Queen Victoria.”— Sir 
 Wilfrid Laurier. 
 
 IV. Read the following, giving clear expression to the antithe¬ 
 ses, and to the vivid images: 
 
 “Here we can not but pause to contemplate two wonder¬ 
 ful men, belonging to the same age and to the same nation: 
 Napoleon and Lafayette. Their names excite no kindred 
 emotions; their fates no kindred sympathies. Napoleon— 
 the child of Destiny—the thunderbolt of war—the victor 
 in a hundred battles—the dispenser of thrones and do¬ 
 mains; he who scaled the Alps and reclined beneath the 
 Pyramids, whose word was fate and whose wish was law. 
 
HOW TO AVOID MONOTONY 
 
 67 
 
 Lafayette—the volunteer of Freedom—the advocate of 
 human rights—the defender of civil liberty—the patriot 
 and the philanthropist—the beloved of the good and the 
 free. Napoleon—the vanquished warrior, ignobly flying 
 from the field of Waterloo, the wild beast, ravaging all 
 Europe in his wrath, hunted down by the banded and 
 affrighted nations and caged far away upon an ocean- 
 girded rock. Lafayette—a watchword by which men excite 
 each other to deeds of worth and noble daring; whose 
 home has become the Mecca of freedom, towards which 
 the pilgrims of Liberty turn their eyes from every quarter 
 of the globe. Napoleon was the red and fiery comet, 
 shooting wildly through the realms of space and scattering 
 pestilence and terror among the nations. Lafayette was 
 the pure and brilliant planet, beneath whose grateful beams 
 the mariner directs his bark and the shepherd tends to 
 his flock. Napoleon died and a few old warriors—the 
 scattered relics of Marengo and of Austerlitz—bewailed 
 their chief. Lafayette is dead and the tears of a civilized 
 world attest how deep is the mourning for his loss. Such 
 is, and always will be, the difference of feeling toward 
 a benefactor and a conqueror of the human race. 
 
 Extract from “Napoleon and Lafayette .”—Sargent S. 
 Prentiss. 
 
 V. Focus the attention of the audience upon each thought in 
 the quoted passage according to the degree of its impor¬ 
 tance. The result in expression will be, that the greater 
 degree of the importance of the idea, the more deliberate 
 will be the utterance of the phrase in which it is couched. 
 
 “Blessed are the poor in spirit; for their’s is the kingdom of 
 heaven. 
 
 JBlessed are they that mourn; for they shall be comforted. 
 Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth. 
 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after right¬ 
 eousness; for they shall be filled. 
 
 Blessed are the merciful; for they shall obtain mercy. 
 Blessed are the pure in heart; for they shall see God. 
 Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall be called the 
 children of God. 
 
 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness 
 sake; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 
 
 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you and persecute 
 
68 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, 
 for my sake. 
 
 Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad: for great is your reward 
 in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were 
 before you.” 
 
 Matthew: V Chapter, Verses 3-12. 
 
 VI. Treat each of the following themes antithetically and em¬ 
 phasize the contrasts in the delivery. 
 
 (a) Restrictive liquor legislation vs. Prohibition. 
 
 (b) Liberalism and Radicalism. 
 
 (c) Von Tirpitz and Edison. 
 
 (d) History and Fiction. 
 
 (e) Gladstone and Disraeli. 
 
 (f) Rural and Urban life. 
 
 (g) The Self-Educated and the College Educated man. 
 
XIII 
 
 s 
 
 CARRYING POWER OF VOICE 
 
 I SHALL not discuss voice production or vocal tech¬ 
 nique in this chapter. These questions will be dealt 
 with elsewhere in this book. The purpose of this chapter 
 is to consider the effect of the conversational standard 
 for public speaking, which demands the correct relation¬ 
 ship of the speaker to the audience, upon the carrying 
 power of the voice. In other words, it is a treatment of 
 the subject from the psychic standpoint. 
 
 May I interject, at this point, that this chapter is written 
 for those who possess voices of relatively normal condi¬ 
 tions and who may be called upon to speak in reasonably 
 sized halls of comparatively satisfactory acoustic proper¬ 
 ties. Those whose voices will not respond adequately, 
 upon the application of the conditions of carrying power 
 that will be considered, on account of faulty voice produc¬ 
 tion or organic trouble, should consult a specialist in voice 
 training. 
 
 Is it not remarkable that one person will converse with 
 a number of others quite naturally, but when he addresses 
 a gathering, in what is known as a public speech, he will 
 key his voice much higher than its customary pitch, and 
 shout? You may recall how conversationally some min¬ 
 ister made the announcements; and how loud and strident 
 his voice became, as he preached the sermon. Yet, you 
 could hear the announcements distinctly. He would have 
 considered it absurd to convey the facts of the announce- 
 
 69 
 
70 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 merits in loud and strident tones. Why did he not regard 
 it equally absurd to express the ideas of his sermon in 
 this manner? 
 
 There is a prevailing misconception that to be heard 
 in a large space, such as that of an auditorium, the public 
 speaker must raise his voice and bellow. The fact of 
 the matter is, while a volume of harsh sound can be heard, 
 ranting confuses the hearing, shocks the sensibilities of 
 the hearers, and interferes with the distinctness of the 
 utterance of the words. 
 
 Where, under circumstances other than those of public 
 speaking, do we find loudness and stridency? In excite¬ 
 ment, lack of control, and anger. In other words under 
 physical, and a low order of emotional agitation. But 
 public speaking is primarily an appeal to the reason. 
 Therefore, shouting or ranting, which is essentially an 
 expression of emotional and physical excitement, is not 
 the correct means of securing carrying power of voice in 
 oratory. 
 
 A voice that carries well in public speaking, may be 
 described as one that can adapt itself, without tension, to 
 any distance demanded by the ordinary conditions of 
 speech-making; and can convey the thoughts so intel¬ 
 ligibly, and express the words so distinctly, that the 
 hearers can appreciate, and distinguish plainly and with¬ 
 out strain, everything that is said. Such voice produc¬ 
 tion is conditioned upon physical ease, natural pitch of 
 the voice, and intimacy with the audience. When, in 
 talking to others, are we physically at ease? In conver¬ 
 sation. When do we speak upon our natural and cus¬ 
 tomary pitch? In conversation. When do we speak 
 simply, directly, and intimately to others? In conversa¬ 
 tion. 
 
 The conversational standard for public speaking, so 
 frequently urged in this book, is the basis of good carry- 
 
CARRYING POWER OF VOICE 
 
 71 
 
 ing power of voice. If the speaker will talk to his hearers 
 personally and intimately, if he will realize that he is 
 speaking to every member of an audience, after the 
 manner suggested in Chapter VII, his voice will carry 
 to every part of any auditorium in which he may be called 
 upon to speak. 
 
 An excellent exercise for securing conversational 
 naturalness and satisfactory carrying power of voice in 
 public speaking is that outlined in Chapter II, by which 
 the student is required to talk to real or imaginary per¬ 
 sons, at distances, that are gradually increased until they 
 approximate the space of the average auditorium. 
 
 Finally I would urge the necessity of clearness in artic¬ 
 ulation and enunciation for public speaking. We have 
 been afflicted too long with a slothful, indifferent, badly 
 enunciated, and poorly articulated emission of flaccid 
 sounds. Every school teacher should be an expert pho¬ 
 netician. Then, the pupils would have the advantage of 
 a specialist’s instruction and example. I anticipate, that 
 not till then will our public speakers enunciate their words 
 with desirable distinctness. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Speaking on the conversational pitch, and realizing the 
 constitution of an audience and the relationship that should 
 exist between the speaker and his audience, talk intimately 
 to your hearers on the following subjects, at distances 
 varying from close proximity, to the last seat in an 
 auditorium: 
 
 (a) My First Speech. 
 
 (b) Wireless Telegraphy. 
 
 (c) Political Partyism. 
 
 (d) The Old Swimming Hole. 
 
 (e) Environment. 
 
 (f) Women in Politics. 
 
XIV 
 
 NATURALNESS IN GESTURING 
 
 T HE public speaker “appeals to the eye and to the 
 ear of his hearer/’ He appeals to the eye—and 
 this is our concern in this chapter—through the attitude 
 of his body, the movements of his arms, and the expres¬ 
 sion of his face. In fact, these sometimes suggest an 
 emotional experience much more effectively than words 
 can convey it. 
 
 The following incident will serve to emphasize the 
 effectiveness of spontaneous and sincere physical expres¬ 
 sion When the Spanish-American war broke out, the 
 Spanish legation to the United States, left Washington 
 and journeyed to Toronto. The Canadian government, 
 with a proper regard for and a correct appreciation of 
 international proprieties, intimated to the Spanish am¬ 
 bassador and his entourage that it would be advisable 
 for them to withdraw from Canada. The reasons for 
 this hint were obvious. 
 
 Before the Spanish legation left Toronto, an arrange¬ 
 ment was made with Senor Du Bose, the first secretary 
 of the legation, to address a public meeting. The pro¬ 
 ceeds of this meeting were to be divided between the 
 Spanish and American Red Cross societies. 
 
 At the conclusion of a very impressive address, Senor 
 Du Bose drew a picture of the Queen Mother of Spain 
 flinging herself about the throne to protect the child King. 
 As the orator contemplated the scene, conjured up in his 
 imagination, he was overcome. He paused for a few 
 
 72 
 
NATURALNESS IN GESTURING 
 
 73 
 
 moments, unable to speak, and then abruptly left the plat¬ 
 form. His bodily elevation, trembling lip, kindling eye, 
 and impressive gesture were more eloquent than words 
 could possibly have been. 
 
 Many of my readers will recollect Wendell Phillips’ 
 description of O’Connell in action: “Lithe as a boy, at 
 seventy, every gesture a grace, every attitude a picture, 
 he was still all nature,” or Lowell’s reference to Webster: 
 “Drawing himself up to his loftiest proportions, his brow 
 clothed with thunder.” 
 
 It must be apparent, that gestures, and attitudes and 
 movements of the body in public speaking should not be 
 underestimated, since they contribute so materially to 
 the effective delivery of the speaker’s message. A dis¬ 
 tinguished authority on public speaking has recently 
 written: “A simple flash of the eye, a turn of the hand, 
 a forward swing of the body, may say more than all the 
 words in an address.” The stiff, rigid angularity of 
 some speakers, who repress every impulse to gesture, and 
 speak with the expressionless gravity of a “wooden In¬ 
 dian,” is a triumph of dreary monotony. 
 
 On the other hand, bodily expression must not be over¬ 
 estimated. Undue accentuation is very distracting. We 
 have all been, at some time or other, the unwilling, if 
 unresisting victims of those wildly gesticulatory orators, 
 who persist in “pawing the air,” or “talking on all fours.” 
 
 Then, there is the mechanical, artificial, and conscious 
 elocutionary gesturing. A friend of mine, an actor, told 
 me of a personal experience, that makes an appropriate 
 illustration here. He was engaged to play a part by a 
 celebrated manager, Mr. R. At the first rehearsal, my 
 friend was applying some rules in gesture that he had been 
 taught. The absurd manipulation of his arms attracted 
 Mr. R.’s attention. He inquired the purpose of the 
 peculiar demonstration. My friend told him, that he 
 
74 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 was taught to count four under the circumstances that 
 demanded, as he was led to believe, this particular gesture, 
 and then make it. Mr. R. was amazed. “Good heavens, 
 man/’ he said brusquely, “if a man called you a scoundrel, 
 would you wait until you counted four, before you 
 knocked him down?” The illustration may be crude, 
 the inference must be clear. 
 
 Gesturing should be natural and spontaneous. Where 
 are these characteristics to be found? In conversation. 
 Did not a Frenchman once say, “Let go my hands; I 
 want to talk.” If a speaker will assume the conversa¬ 
 tional attitude towards his hearers, so frequently urged 
 in this book, the natural movements of the arms will be 
 stretched into gestures, and those of the body accentuated, 
 and adjusted to audience conditions. 
 
 Assuming the proper—that is, the conversational— 
 audience relationship, the adequacy and true expressive¬ 
 ness of gesture depend upon the degree of control, free¬ 
 dom, and spontaneity of the physical agents of expression. 
 These desirable physical conditions can be developed with¬ 
 out violating the natural method of training, by the prac¬ 
 tice of exercises based on nature’s processes. In Chapter 
 XXVI a system of such exercises is prescribed, with 
 explicit instructions for their application. 
 
 The widest connotation of the word “gesture” includes 
 the conditions, and postures or attitudes of the body in 
 delivery, as well as the motions of the head, body, and 
 limbs. Consequently, reference to physical control, free¬ 
 dom, and ease in public speaking is distinctly pertinent. 
 
 I shall reverse the order in the following treatment of 
 this phase of the subject of gesture, and give the first 
 place to ease. By physical ease is not implied a lazy 
 flabbiness or a torpid inertness. What is meant, is a 
 body released but awake, tranquil but ready, reposeful 
 but prepared. 
 
NATURALNESS IN GESTURING 
 
 75 
 
 Of course, physical expression is, apart from certain 
 possible limitations, due to lack of responsiveness, a mani¬ 
 festation of mental processes and conditions. At the 
 same time, there is the reflex of the conditions of the body 
 upon the mental action and state. Browning wrote, “Nor 
 soul helps flesh more than flesh helps soul.” The same 
 might just as appropriately be said of the mind and body. 
 A reposeful, tranquil, alert mind makes for a poised, 
 relaxed, ready body, and vice versa. On the other hand, 
 excessive physical strain induces undue mental tension. 
 An excess of bodily activity causes a mental agitation, 
 and the reverse. 
 
 Then, in public speaking, there is the audience. Do 
 you remember the vast amount of entertainment you 
 used to derive from the mirror, when you were a child? 
 You would smile, and the boy in the glass would smile 
 back at you. You would pull a face, and he would make 
 a face back at you. Then, you would shake your fist at 
 him, and he would shake his fist back at you. Well, audi¬ 
 ences behave like reflections in the mirror. If the speaker 
 is at his ease, his hearers will be at their ease; if he is well- 
 poised, they will be under his control; if he is laboring 
 under tension, they will be strained; if he is excessively 
 active, they will be confused; if he fidgets, they will be 
 nervous and restless; if he is inert and flabby, they will be 
 flaccid. An audience is, then, as I have said a reflection, 
 and returns to the speaker exactly what he gives. 
 
 I have stated that poise, freedom, and ease are mutually 
 dependent. Ease is conditional upon freedom, and free¬ 
 dom upon poise or control. The physical reflection of 
 mental conditions and processes, in this regard, has just 
 been considered. It is quite as important—in fact, it is 
 absolutely indispensable—to freedom and ease in expres¬ 
 sion, that conditions of physical poise shall be established. 
 Assuming a general acceptance of this statement, may I 
 
76 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 pass at once to the suggestion of a simple and practical 
 method of securing physical poise, and thus provide this 
 important factor in the development of ease and freedom? 
 Stand, and relax every muscle of the body. You may 
 ask, “How can I relax ?” I can say only, “Relax,” “Let 
 go.” But, you may say, “This will result in a careless 
 sag, a flabby inertness.” I agree. “Then,” you ask, 
 “what am I to do?” Assert, amid this muscular reaction 
 the “vital centre” of the body, the chest, and the appear¬ 
 ance of slovenliness will be eliminated. The result will be, 
 that through the assertion of a normally developed chest 
 amid muscular relaxation, control and freedom will be 
 established and ease experienced. 
 
 The persistent application of the principles underlying 
 physical control and freedom, by the regular and intel¬ 
 ligent practice of the exercises outlined in Chapter XXVI, 
 and already referred to, will help very materially, in in¬ 
 ducing the desirable conditions and results discussed in 
 this chapter. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. By means of a realization of the purpose and the prac¬ 
 tice of exercises prescribed in the chapter “Physical Edu¬ 
 cation,” seek to establish conditions of bodily control, ease, 
 and responsiveness. 
 
 II. Speaking from conditions of physical ease, and with no con¬ 
 scious attempt either to stimulate or to repress bodily 
 expression, converse intimately with 
 
 (1) One person. 
 
 (2) Five persons. 
 
 (3) Twenty-five persons. 
 
 (4) One hundred persons. 
 
 (5) A large audience. 
 
 The increase in the number of hearers in each successive 
 audience should induce an accentuation and extension of 
 the gesturing. 
 
XV 
 
 DELIBERATION 
 
 M ORE haste, less speed” is a permanent comment 
 on the ineffectiveness of hurry, and the effective¬ 
 ness of deliberation. It applies with equal cogency to 
 public speaking as to any other phase of effort. 
 
 May I endeavour to emphasize the desirability of delib¬ 
 eration by illustrating the futility of hurry. Have you 
 seen someone hurrying along with an armful of parcels; 
 drop one, dive impulsively after it; drop others, plunge 
 spasmodically for them; drop them all, and then scurry 
 around among them, like a pup exploring the “innards” 
 of an oldtime feather bed? 
 
 At intervals, in other days, a new man would invade 
 the business life of my old home town. He would rush 
 about, “churn things up,” and attract a great amount of 
 attention. Of course, many of the residents would say 
 admiringly, “Isn’t he a hustler?” “Isn’t he a live wire?” 
 “He is just the very man this town has needed.” You 
 have seen a light flare up brilliantly and die out. Well, 
 when the “live wire” had scurried about for a short time, 
 he would suddenly depart. I was back there the other 
 day. Nearly all the old business houses are still in exist¬ 
 ence, a monument to system and order, or, if you will, to 
 the futility of hurry. 
 
 No doubt, some of your friends like a few of mine, are 
 always in a hurry. They flutter about in a dizzying 
 fashion. They are always on some mission bent, but 
 accomplish nothing, or very little. 
 
 77 
 
78 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 The hurried public speaker is usually a purveyor of 
 “half-baked” ideas. He does not take time clearly to 
 define and to mature his thoughts. His mind hastily 
 leaps to a new idea, before he has fully expressed the last. 
 More or less mental confusion results. His mind is apt 
 to pick up ideas without strict regard to relevancy, and 
 to run off on tangents. He may return to the main idea, 
 and he may not. He is like the hunter who started out 
 to hunt for a bear; saw a fox, and set out after it; then 
 saw a squirrel, and forgot the fox. He may have re¬ 
 turned to the bear-hunt and he may not. 
 
 Such a speaker’s words come rushing out pell-mell. 
 Each tramples on the heels of its predecessor. Articula¬ 
 tion is slurred, pauses eliminated, and emphases carelessly 
 placed. 
 
 The results of accentuated hurry in speaking are a dis¬ 
 orderly tumult of ideas, and a hurly-burly of words. 
 
 Any public speaker who is afflicted with nervous tiaste, 
 or hurry, should cultivate deliberation. He might, also, 
 with profit, ponder the statement of a distinguished British 
 statesman, who, somewhat sententiously, defended the 
 slowness attributed to the Englishman by saying, “The 
 speed with which you move does not matter so much, 
 providing you are going in the right direction.” 
 
 It is popularly assumed that deliberation in public 
 speaking is equivalent to a monotonous pronunciation 
 of words, one by one, a tiresome, unvaried drawing out 
 of the words. This is not so. True deliberation does 
 not make for tediousness, dulness, and hesitancy; but 
 rather for clearness, vigor, and variety. 
 
 Deliberation in speaking, then, is not secured by merely 
 “slowing up.” This simply induces monotony, and 
 monotony is the death of all interest in a speech. How, 
 then, is it secured? You will recall, that in talking, 
 public speaking, or any other natural communication of 
 
DELIBERATION 
 
 79 
 
 thoughts, the words are uttered in groups; that the words 
 are united and separated into groups by means of pauses; 
 that the pause, before the utterance of each group of 
 words, is the time required by the speaker to concentrate 
 upon and acquire the idea; that the pause, after the 
 utterance of each group of words, is the time spontane¬ 
 ously allowed the hearer for the acquisition of the idea. 
 I think it will be quite obvious, that increased concentra¬ 
 tion upon each idea will result in longer pauses and a 
 more sustained and emphatic utterance of the words. 
 This is deliberation. 
 
 If one possessed an eager temperament, he might urge 
 impatiently, “Why not ignore all these details, and say 
 simply and directly, ‘Think deliberately at the time of 
 speaking, that is with strong and sustained concentration, 
 and you will speak deliberately, that is sustainedly and 
 emphatically.’ ” 
 
 What I am about to write, in conclusion, may have been 
 stated, or suggested, before. If so, it will bear repetition. 
 Deliberation endows delivery with clearness, diversity, 
 and impressiveness; it invests the speaker with control, 
 repose, and a suggestion of reserve; and it enables the 
 hearers to follow the thought intelligently, inspires them 
 with confidence in the speaker, and disposes them to 
 accept his conclusions. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. The length of time that the attention is focused upon an 
 idea in study, conversation, or public speaking is dependent 
 upon its triviality or importance, clearness or vagueness. 
 
 Familiarize yourself with each of the following passages, 
 before attempting to communicate them. Concentrate the 
 attention of your hearers upon each idea, according to the 
 degree of its importance. Allow your hearers sufficient 
 time to group each idea before you pass on to the next. 
 
80 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 (a) “Talent has always something worth hearing, tact is 
 sure of abundance of hearers; talent may obtain a 
 good living, tact will make one; talent gets a good 
 name, tact a great one; talent convinces, tact converts; 
 talent is an honor to a profession, tact gains honor 
 from the profession /’—London Atlas. 
 
 (b) “ Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought 
 forth upon this continent a new nation, conceived in 
 liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men 
 are created equal. Now we are engaged in a great 
 civil w r ar, testing whether that nation, or any nation 
 so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We 
 are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have 
 come to dedicate a portion of that field as a final rest¬ 
 ing place for those who here gave their lives that that 
 nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper 
 that we should do this. But in a larger sense we 
 cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hal¬ 
 low this ground. The brave men, living and dead, 
 who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our 
 power to add or detract. The world will little note, 
 nor long remember, what we say here. It is for us r 
 the living, rather to be dedicated here to the unfin¬ 
 ished work which they who fought here have thus far 
 so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here 
 dedicated to the great task remaining before us, that 
 from these honored dead we take increased devotion 
 to that cause for which they gave the last full measure 
 of devotion, that we here highly resolve that these 
 dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, 
 under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and 
 that government of the people, by the people, and for 
 the people, shall not perish from the earth.” 
 
 Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 (c) “Deep is the solitude of millions, who with hearts 
 welling forth love, have none to love them. Deep is 
 the solitude of those who, fighting with doubts and 
 darkness, have none to counsel them. But deeper than 
 the deepest of these solitudes is that which broods 
 over childhood under the passion of sorrow—bring- 
 
DELIBERATION 
 
 81 
 
 ing before it at intervals, the final solitude which 
 watches for it, and is waiting for it within the gates 
 of death. O mighty and essential solitude, that wast, 
 and art, and art to be, thy kingdom is made perfect 
 in the grave; but even over those that keep watch 
 outside the grave, thou stretchest out a sceptre of 
 fascination /'—De Quincy. 
 
 II. Apply to process prescribed in I and prepare, and de¬ 
 liver the following with increasing degrees of deliberation: 
 
 (a) Describe some trivial incident. 
 
 (b) Explain the parts and the operation of some mechani¬ 
 cal contrivance. 
 
 (c) Discuss some social, national, or religious question or 
 principle concerning which you have profound con¬ 
 victions. 
 
XVI 
 
 TACT 
 
 S OME persons possess the happy faculty of saying or 
 doing the appropriate thing at the right time. Those, 
 who are less fortunate in this regard, envy the mental 
 discernment that enables them to do this. The question 
 is often asked, “What is the source of this quick and 
 intuitive appreciation of what is fit and right ?” 
 
 A tactful person is both imaginative and impression¬ 
 able. He could scarcely be the one without being the 
 other. It follows, naturally, that he can readily enter into 
 the experiences, and see from the points of view of others. 
 The imagination acts spontaneously and immediately. 
 The public speaker, so endowed, is enabled to appreciate 
 the opinions, beliefs, and prejudices of his hearers, and 
 thus, to avoid giving offence, without sacrificing his own 
 position on the question under consideration. 
 
 A tactful speaker is not an oratorical weather-cock. 
 He does not continually change his point of view, and 
 seek to curry favor by adopting the opinion of others. 
 Such a one excites the contempt of his hearers. If the 
 speaker is convinced that his attitude toward the question 
 under consideration is the right one, he must, of course, 
 staunchly adhere to his convictions. At the same time, 
 he should seek to effect the conversion of those of his 
 hearers, who do not agree with him, by adroitly offering 
 convincing reasons in support of that which he advo¬ 
 cates, and by avoiding direct conflict with their conclu¬ 
 sions and convictions. 
 
 82 
 
TACT 
 
 83 
 
 The tactless speaker is unimaginative and self-cen¬ 
 tered. He is biased, unyielding, and impatient of the 
 opinions of others. Thus, he stirs up prejudice, and, on 
 account of his maladroitness, fails to effect his purpose. 
 
 The undiscerning are apt to confuse opportunism with 
 tact. It is true the tactful person may sacrifice principle 
 for expediency. He may apply tactfulness with a sinister 
 purpose. But this is a question of ethics, not of tact. 
 The tactful person adroitly arranges to effect his pur¬ 
 pose but this does not necessarily involve a surrender of 
 principle. 
 
 May I offer a couple of illustrations of the application 
 of tact? 
 
 The classic example of tact in public speaking is Marc 
 Antony’s oration at the funeral of Julius Caesar.* I 
 would advise those, who are interested, to read it again; 
 and to keep the subject of this chapter in mind during 
 the perusal. 
 
 Antony’s purpose, in this oration, was to turn the 
 popular enthusiasm for Brutus, Cassius, and the other 
 conspirators, into popular hatred of them; to convert the 
 populace of Rome from blind partisans of the conspira¬ 
 tors, to passionate and violent enemies. 
 
 Witness the scene: A tumultuous and disorderly 
 rabble fills the forum in Rome. A single man appears 
 and mounts the rostrum. It is Marc Antony, the friend 
 of Julius Caesar. The mob surges clamorously and 
 menacingly about him. He stands firmly and coura¬ 
 geously amid all the hostility. He raises his hand. The 
 tumult ceases. Master of himself, he is master of them. 
 He has their ear. He begins to speak. Any mistakes 
 will be fatal. This is a singularly unreasoning, undis¬ 
 criminating mob. It tore Cinna, the poet, to pieces, for 
 no other reason, than that he bore the same name as 
 Cinna, the conspirator. 
 
84 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Antony does not patronize the populace. He does not 
 fawn upon them, or offer them any extravagant compli¬ 
 ments. He is no wriggler, this Antony. He does not 
 hold his hearers cheaply. He does not hold himself 
 cheaply. With simple dignity, he salutes them, “Friends, 
 Romans, Countrymen.” 
 
 No man knows human nature better than he. He 
 understands the prejudices of these Romans. He does 
 not rail at Brutus and Cassius, their present idols. That 
 would have been fatal to his purpose. He does not sur¬ 
 render to his emotions and talk heedlessly. He carefully 
 selects. “He knows what to say—or better, he knows 
 what not to say.” He arouses no resentment. While 
 asserting his love and firm friendship for Caesar, he ap¬ 
 parently assumes a reasonable attitude towards the 
 assassins. 
 
 He appeals to his hearers’ sense of fairness and justice, 
 in their judgment of Csesar. Qesar was not ambitious. 
 Then he invokes their sympathy, pity, gratitude. He re¬ 
 calls Caesar’s benefactions; his glories, “battles, sieges, 
 fortunes;” his solicitude for their welfare. He quickly 
 senses the moods of his listeners. Always he says the 
 appropriate thing at the proper time. 
 
 Gradually his hearers surrender completely to the spell 
 of his oratory, to the charm of his tact. Then, in an 
 ecstasy of triumph, he hurls them forth to search out the 
 conspirators, “to burn, fire, kill, slay.” 
 
 One of the most striking modern examples of the 
 efficacy of tact in public speaking is the “Liverpool” 
 speech of Henry Ward Beecher.f During the progress 
 of the Civil War in the United States, Beecher went to 
 England to present the cause of the North to the British 
 people. There was considerable antipathy toward the 
 Union cause in Liverpool through the cutting off of raw 
 cotton importations, on account of the war. The feeling 
 
TACT 
 
 85 
 
 was intensified by false reports concerning Mr. Beecher, 
 that had been sedulously circulated. In addition, a gang 
 of hirelings had been organized by Southern sympathiz¬ 
 ers to break up the meeting. 
 
 When Beecher appeared, he was greeted by an audi¬ 
 ence, the majority of whom were determined he would 
 not speak. By taking a firm and manly stand, by relax¬ 
 ing not a jot or tittle from his position, and by appealing 
 to British fair play and admiration of courage and hon¬ 
 esty, he not only overcame all opposition but succeeded in 
 arousing considerable enthusiasm. This was the begin¬ 
 ning of Beecher’s success in influencing British opinion 
 in favor of the Union cause. 
 
 The following quotation from the London Atlas may 
 be appropriate: “Talent is something, but tact is every¬ 
 thing. Talent is serious, sober, grave, and respectable; 
 tact is all that, and more too. It is not a sixth sense, but 
 it is the life of all the five. It is the open eye, the quick 
 ear, the judging taste, the keen smell, and the lively touch; 
 It is the interpreter of all riddles, the surmounter of all 
 difficulties, the remover of all obstacles. It is useful in 
 all places, and at all times; It is useful in solitude, for it 
 shows a man his way into the world; it is useful in society, 
 for it shows a man his way through the world. 
 
 “Talent is power, tact is skill ; talent is weight, tact is 
 momentum; talent knows what to do, tact knows how to 
 do it; talent makes a man respectable, tact will make him 
 respected; talent is wealth, tact is ready money.” 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Prepare speeches advocating the assigned questions. Let 
 the treatment in each case be such that it will not offend 
 the susceptibilities of the suggested hearers nor arouse 
 their antagonism toward the speaker. 
 
 (a) “A limited monarchy, as understood and applied in 
 
36 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Great Britain, is a more truly democratic form of 
 government than a republic,” to an American audience. 
 
 (b) “Labor Unions,” to an audience of employers. 
 
 (c) “War Time Wages,” to an audience of manufac¬ 
 turers. 
 
 (d) “Open Shop,” to au audience of workers. 
 
 (e) “Free Trade,” to an audience of high protectionists. 
 
 (f) “High Tariff,” to an audience of free traders. 
 
 (g) “Private Ownership,” to an audience of those who 
 believe in state control. 
 
 * Antony's speech: 
 
 Ant. Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears: 
 
 I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him. 
 
 The evil that men do lives after them; 
 
 The good is oft interred with their bones: 
 
 So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus 
 Hath told you Caesar was ambitious: 
 
 If it were so, it was a grievous fault; 
 
 And grievously hath Caesar answer’d it. 
 
 Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest,— 
 
 For Brutus is an honorable man; 
 
 So are they all, all honorable men,— 
 
 Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral. 
 
 He was my friend, faithful and just to me: 
 
 But Brutus says he was ambitious; 
 
 And Brutus is an honorable man. 
 
 He hath brought many captives home to Rome, 
 
 Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill: 
 
 Did this in Caesar seem ambitious ? 
 
 When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept: 
 
 Ambition should be made of sterner stuff: 
 
 Yet Brutus says he was ambitious; 
 
 And Brutus is an honorable man. 
 
 You all did see that on the Lupercal 
 I thrice presented him a kingly crown, 
 
 Which he did thrice refuse. Was this ambition? 
 
 Yet Brutus says he was ambitious; 
 
 And, sure, he is an honorable man. 
 
 I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke, 
 
 But here I am, to speak what I do know. 
 
TACT 
 
 87 
 
 You all did love him. once,—not without cause; 
 
 What cause withholds you, then, to mourn for him? 
 
 O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts, 
 
 And men have lost their reason! Bear with me; 
 
 My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar, 
 
 And I must pause till it come back to me. 
 
 1 Cit. Methinks there is much reason in his sayings. 
 
 2 Cit. If thou consider rightly of the matter, 
 
 Caesar has had great wrong. 
 
 3 Cit. Has he not, masters? 
 
 I fear there will a worse come in his place. 
 
 4 Cit. Mark’d ye his words ? He would not take the crown; 
 Therefore ’tis certain he was not ambitious. 
 
 1 Cit. If it be found so, some will dear abide it. 
 
 2 Cit. Poor soul! his eyes are red as fire with weeping. 
 
 3 Cit. There’s not a nobler man in Rome than Antony. 
 
 4 Cit. Now mark him; he begins again to speak. 
 
 Ant. But yesterday the word of Caesar might 
 
 Have stood against the world: now lies he there. 
 
 And none so poor to do him reverence. 
 
 O masters, if I were dispos’d to stir 
 Your hearts and minds to mutiny and rage, 
 
 I should do Brutus wrong, and Cassius wrong, 
 
 Who, you all know, are honorable men. 
 
 I will not do them wrong: I rather choose 
 To wrong the dead, to wrong myself, and you, 
 
 Than I will wrong such honorable men. 
 
 But here’s a parchment with the seal of Caesar,— 
 
 I found it in his closet,—’tis his will: 
 
 Let but the commons hear this testament 
 (Which, pardon me, I do not mean to read), 
 
 And they would go and kiss dead Caesar’s wounds, 
 
 And dip their napkins in his sacred blood; 
 
 Yea, beg a hair of him for memory, 
 
 And, dying, mention it within their wills, 
 
 Bequeathing it as a rich legacy 
 Unto their issue. 
 
 4 Cit. We’ll hear the will; read it, Mark Antony. 
 
 Citizens. The will, the will! We will hear Caesar’s will. 
 Ant. Have patience, gentle friends; I must not read it: 
 
 It is not meet you know how Caesar lov’d you. 
 
88 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 You are not wood, you are not stones, but men; 
 
 And, being men, hearing the will of Caesar, 
 
 It will inflame you, it will make you mad. 
 
 Tis good you know not that you are his heirs; 
 
 For, if you should, O what would come of it! 
 
 4 Cit. Read the will! we’ll hear it, Antony; 
 
 You shall read us the will—Caesar’s will! 
 
 Ant. Will you be patient? will you stay awhile? 
 
 I have o’ershot myself, to tell you of it. 
 
 I fear I wrong the honorable men 
 
 Whose daggers have stabb’d Caesar; I do fear it. 
 
 4 Cit. They were traitors: honorable men ! 
 
 Citizens. The will! the testament! 
 
 2 Cit. They were villains, murderers. The will! read the 
 will! 
 
 Ant. You will compel me, then, to read the will? 
 
 Then make a ring about the corpse of Caesar, 
 
 And let me show you him that made the will. 
 
 Shall I descend? and will you give me leave? 
 
 Citizens. Come down. 
 
 2 Cit. Descend. [He comes down. 
 
 3 Cit. You shall have leave. 
 
 4 Cit. A ring! stand round. 
 
 1 Cit. Stand from the hearse; stand from the body. 
 
 2 Cit. Room for Antony !—most noble Antony! 
 
 Ant. Nay, press not so upon me; stand far off. 
 
 Citizens. Stand back; room ! bear back. 
 
 Ant. If you have tears, prepare to shed them now. 
 
 You all do know this mantle: I remember 
 The first time ever Caesar put it on; 
 
 ’Twas on a summer’s evening, in his tent, 
 
 That day he overcame the Nervil. 
 
 Look, in this place ran Cassius’ dagger through: 
 
 See what a rent the envious Casca made: 
 
 Through this the well-beloved Brutus stabb’d; 
 
 And, as he pluck’d his cursed steel away, 
 
 Mark how the blood of Caesar follow’d it,— 
 
 As rushing out of doors, to be resolv’d 
 If Brutus so unkindly knock’d, or no; 
 
 For Brutus, as you know, was Caesar’s angel: 
 
TACT 
 
 89 
 
 Judge, O you gods, how dearly Caeser lov'd him! 
 
 This was the most unkindest cut of all; 
 
 For, when the noble Caesar saw him stab, 
 
 Ingratitude, more strong than traitors' arms, 
 
 Quite vanquish’d him: then burst his mighty heart; 
 
 And, in his mantle muffling up his face, 
 
 Even at the base of Pompey’s statua, 
 
 Which all the while ran blood, great Caesar fell. 
 
 O, what a fall was there, my countrymen! 
 
 Then I, and you, and all of us fell down, 
 
 Whilst bloody treason flourish’d over us. 
 
 O, now you weep; and, I perceive, you feel 
 The dint of pity: these are gracious drops. 
 
 Kind souls, what, weep you, when you but behold 
 Our Caesar’s vesture wounded? Look you here, 
 
 Here is himself, marr’d, as you see, with traitors. 
 
 1 Cit. O piteous spectacle! 
 
 2 Cit. O noble Caesar! 
 
 3 Cit. O woful day! 
 
 4 Cit. O traitors, villains ! 
 
 1 Cit. O most bloody sight! 
 
 2 Cit. We will be reveng’d. 
 
 Citizens. Revenge,—about,—seek,—burn,—fire,—kill,—slay,— 
 let not a traitor live ! 
 
 Ant. Stay, countrymen. 
 
 1 Cit. Peace there! hear the noble Antony. 
 
 2 Cit. We’ll hear him, we’ll follow him, we’ll die with him. 
 Ant. Good friends, sweet friends, let me not stir you up 
 
 To such a sudden flood of mutiny. 
 
 They that have done this deed are honorable: 
 
 What private griefs they have, alas, I know not, 
 
 That made them do’t; they’re wise and honorable, 
 
 And will, no doubt, with reasons answer you. 
 
 I come not, friends, to steal away your hearts: 
 
 I am no orator, as Brutus is; 
 
 But, as you know me all, a plain blunt man, 
 
 That love my friend; and that they know full well 
 That gave me public leave to speak of him. 
 
 For I have neither wit, nor words, nor worth, 
 
 Action, nor utterance, nor the power of speech, 
 
 To stir men’s blood: I only speak right on; 
 
90 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 I tell you that which you yourselves do know; 
 
 Show you sweet Caesar’s wounds, poor, poor dumb mouths, 
 
 And bid them speak for me: but were I Brutus, 
 
 And Brutus Antony, there were an Antony 
 Would ruffle up your spirits, and put a tongue 
 In every wound of Caesar, that should move 
 The stones of Rome to rise and mutiny. 
 
 Citizens. We’ll mutiny. 
 
 1 Cit. We’ll burn the house of Brutus. 
 
 3 Cit. Away, then! come, seek the conspirators. 
 
 Ant. Yet hear me, countrymen; yet hear me speak. 
 
 Citizens. Peace, ho! hear Antony; most noble Antony. 
 
 Ant. Why, friends, you go to do you know not what. 
 Wherein hath Caeser thus deserv’d your loves? 
 
 Alas, you know not; I must tell you, then: 
 
 You have forgot the will I told you of. 
 
 Citizens. Most true; the will!—let’s stay, and hear the will. 
 Ant. Here is the will, and under Caesar’s seal. 
 
 To every Roman citizen he gives, 
 
 To every several man, seventy-five drachmas. 
 
 2 Cit. Most noble Caesar!—we’ll revenge his death. 
 
 3 Cit. O, royal Caesar ! 
 
 Ant. Hear me with patience. 
 
 Citizens. Peace, ho! 
 
 Ant. Moreover, he hath left you all his walks. 
 
 His private arbors, and new-planted orchards, 
 
 On this side Tiber; he hath left them you, 
 
 And to your heirs for ever; common pleasures. 
 
 To walk abroad, and recreate yourselves. 
 
 Here was a Caeser! when comes such another ? 
 
 1 Cit. Never, never.—Come, away, away! 
 
 We’ll burn his body in the holy place, 
 
 And with the brands fire the traitors’ houses. 
 
 Take up the body. 
 
 2 Cit. Go, fetch fire. 
 
 3 Cit. Pluck down benches. 
 
 4 Cit. Pluck down forms, windows, any thing. 
 
 [Exeunt Citizens with the body 
 Ant. Now let it work:—Mischief, thou art afoot, 
 
 Take thou what course thou wilt! 
 
 Shakespeare. 
 
TACT 
 
 91 
 
 f Henry Ward Beecher’s “Liverpool Speech”: 
 
 For more than twenty-five years I have been made perfectly 
 familiar with popular assemblies in all parts of my country 
 except the extreme south. There has not for the whole of that 
 time been a single day of my life when it would have been safe 
 for me to go south of Mason and Dixon’s line in my own 
 country, and all for one reason: my solemn, earnest, persistent 
 testimony against that which I consider to be the most atrocious 
 thing under the sun—the system of American slavery in a great, 
 free republic. [Cheers.] I have passed through that early 
 period when right of free speech was denied to me. Again and 
 again I have attempted to address audiences that, for no other 
 crime than that of free speech, visited me with all manner of 
 contumelious epithets; and now since I have been in England, 
 although I have met with greater kindness and courtesy on the 
 part of most than I deserved, yet, on the other hand, I perceive 
 that the Southern influence prevails to some extent in England. 
 [Applause and uproar.] It is my old acquaintance; I understand 
 it perfectly—[laughter]—and I have always held it to be an 
 unfailing truth that where a man had a cause that would bear 
 examination he was perfectly willing to have it spoken about. 
 [Applause.] Therefore, when I saw so much nervous appre¬ 
 hension that, if I were permitted to speak—[hisses and ap¬ 
 plause]—when I found they were afraid to have me speak— 
 [hisses, laughter, and “No, no!”]—when I found that they con¬ 
 sidered my speaking damaging to their cause—[applause]—when 
 I found that they appealed from facts and reasonings to mob 
 law—[applause and uproar]—I said: No man need tell me what 
 the heart and secret counsel of these men are. They tremble 
 and are afraid. [Applause, laughter, hisses. “No, no!” and a 
 voice, “New York mob.”] 
 
 Now, personally, it is a matter of very little consequence to me 
 whether I speak here to-night or not. [Laughter and cheers.] 
 But one thing is very certain—if you do permit me to speak 
 here to-night you will hear very plain talking. [Applause and 
 hisses.] You will not find a man,—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 the 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 
 
92 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 with them in an unmanly way. [Applause and “Bravo!”] If 
 I can carry you with me by sound convictions, I shall be im¬ 
 mensely glad; but if I can not 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 suc¬ 
 cession 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 all the noise. [Laughter.] 
 
 There are two dominant races in modern history: the Ger¬ 
 manic and the Romanic races. The Germanic races tend to 
 personal liberty, to a sturdy individualism, to civil and to political 
 liberty. The Romanic race tends to absolutism in government; 
 it is clannish; it loves chieftains; it develops a people that crave 
 strong and showy governments to support and plan for them. 
 The Anglo-Saxon race belongs to the great German family, and 
 is a fair exponent of its peculiarities. The Anglo-Saxon carries 
 self-government and self-development with him wherever he 
 goes. He has popular government and popular industry; for 
 the effects of a generous civil liberty are not seen a whit more 
 plainly in the good order, in the intelligence, and in the virtue 
 of a self-governing people, than in their amazing enterprise and 
 the scope and power of their creative industry. The power to 
 create riches is just as much a part of the Anglo-Saxon virtues 
 as the power to create good order and social safety. The things 
 required for prosperous labor, prosperous manufactures, and 
 prosperous commerce are three: first, liberty; secondly, liberty; 
 thirdly, liberty—but these are not merely the same liberty, as I 
 shall show you. 
 
 First, there must be liberty to follow those laws of business 
 which experience has developed, without imposts or restrictions, 
 or governmental intrusions. Business simply wants to be let 
 alone. [“Hear, hear!”] 
 
 Then, secondly, there must be liberty to distribute and exchange 
 products of industry in any market without burdensome tariffs, 
 without imposts, and without vexatious regulations. There must 
 be these two liberties—liberty to create wealth, as the makers 
 of it think best according to the light and experience which busi¬ 
 ness has given them; and then liberty to distribute what they 
 have created without unnecessary vexatious burdens. The com- 
 
TACT 
 
 93 
 
 prehensive law of the ideal industrial condition of the world is 
 free manufacture and free trade. ["Hear, hear!” A voice, 
 "The Murrill tariff.”] 
 
 I have said there were three elements of liberty. The third is 
 the necessity of an intelligent and free race of customers. There 
 must be freedom among producers; there must be freedom among 
 the distributers; there must be freedom among the customers. 
 It may not have occurred to you that it makes any difference 
 what one’s customers are; but it does, in all regular and pro¬ 
 longed business. The condition of the customer determines how 
 much he will buy, determines of what sort he will buy. Poor 
 and ignorant people buy little and that of the poorest kind. The 
 richest and the intelligent, having the more means to buy, buy 
 the most, and always buy the best. 
 
 Here, then, are the three liberties: liberty of the producer, 
 liberty of the distributer, and liberty of the consumer. The first 
 two need no discussion—they have been long, thoroughly, and 
 brilliantly illustrated by the political economists of Great Britain, 
 and by her eminent statesmen; but it seems to me that enough 
 attention has not been directed to the third, and, with your 
 patience, I will dwell on that for a moment, before proceeding to 
 other topics. 
 
 It is a necessity of every manufacturing and commercial peo¬ 
 ple that their customers should be very wealthy and intelligent. 
 Let us put the subject before you in the familiar light of your 
 own local experience. To whom do the tradesmen of Liverpool 
 sell the most goods at the highest profit? To the ignorant and 
 poor, or to the educated and prosperous? [A voice, "To the 
 Southerner.” Laughter.] The poor man buys simply for his 
 body; he buys food, he buys clothing, he buys fuel, he buys 
 lodging. His rule is to buy the least and the cheapest that he 
 can. He goes to the store as seldom as he can,—he brings 
 away as little as he can—[much laughter]—and he buys for the 
 least he can. Poverty is not a misfortune to the poor only who 
 suffer it, but it is more or less a misfortune to all with whom 
 they deal. 
 
 On the other hand, a man well off—how is it with him? He 
 buys in far greater quantity. He can afford to do it; he has the 
 money to pay for it. He buys in far greater variety, because 
 he seeks to gratify not merely physical wants, but also mental 
 wants. He buys for the satisfaction of sentiment and taste, as 
 well as of sense. He buys silk, wool, flax, cotton; he buys all 
 
94 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 metals—iron, silver, gold, platinum; in short he buys for all 
 necessities and of all substances. But that is not all. He buys 
 a better quality of goods. He buys richer silks, finer cottons, 
 higher grained wools. Now, a rich silk means so much skill and 
 care of somebody’s that has been expended upon it to make it 
 finer and richer; and so of cotton, and so of wool. That is, the 
 price of the finer goods runs back to the very beginning, and 
 remunerates the workman as well as the merchant. Indeed, the 
 whole laboring community is as much interested and profited as 
 the mere merchant, in this buying and selling of the higher 
 grades in the greater varieties and quantities. 
 
 The law of price is the skill; and the amount of skill expended 
 in the work is as much for the market as are the goods. A man 
 comes to the market and says, “I have a pair of hands”; and he 
 obtains the lowest wages. Another man comes and says, “I have 
 something more than a pair of hands—I have truth and fidelity”; 
 he gets a higher price. Another man comes and says, “I have 
 something more; I have hands and strength, and fidelity, and 
 skill.” He gets more than either of the others. The next man 
 comes and says, “I have got hands and strength, and skill, and 
 fidelity; but my hands work more than that. They know how 
 to create things for the fancy, for the affections, for the moral 
 sentiments”; and he gets more than any of the others. The last 
 man comes and says, “I have all these qualities, and have them 
 so highly that it is a peculiar genius”; and genius carries the 
 whole market and gets the highest price. [Loud applause.] So 
 that both the workman and the merchant are profited by having 
 purchasers that demand quality, variety, and quantity. 
 
 Now, if this be so in the town or the city, it can only be so 
 because it is a law. This is the specific development of a general 
 or universal law, and therefore we should expect to find it as true 
 of a nation as of a city like Liverpool. I know it is so, and you 
 know that it is true of all the world; and it is just as important 
 to have customers educated, intelligent, moral, and rich, out of 
 Liverpool as it is in Liverpool. [Applause.] They are able to 
 buy; they want variety, they want the very best; and those are 
 the customers you want. That nation is the best customer that 
 is freest, because freedom works prosperity, industry, and 
 wealth. Great Britain, then, aside from moral considerations, 
 has a direct commercial and pecuniary interest in the liberty, 
 civilization, and wealth of every people and every nation on the 
 globe. [Loud applause.] 
 
TACT 
 
 95 
 
 You have also an interest in this, because you are a moral and 
 a religious people. [“Oh, oh!” Laughter and applause.] You 
 desire it from the highest motives, and godliness is profitable in 
 all things, having the promise of the life that is, as well as of 
 that which is to come; but if there were no hereafter, and if 
 man had no progress in this life, and if there were no question 
 of moral growth at all, it would be worth your while to protect 
 civilization and liberty, merely as a commercial speculation. To 
 evangelize has more than a moral and religious import—it comes 
 back to temporal relations. Wherever a nation that is crushed, 
 cramped, degraded under despotism, is struggling to be free, you, 
 Leeds, Sheffield, Manchester, Paisley, all have an interest that 
 that nation should be free. When depressed and backward 
 people demand that they may have a chance to rise—Hungary, 
 Italy, Poland—it is a duty for humanity’s sake, it is a duty for 
 the highest moral motives, to sympathize with them; but besides 
 all these there is a material and an interested reason why you 
 should sympathize with them. Pounds and pence join with con¬ 
 science and with honor in this design. 
 
 Now, Great Britain’s chief want is—what? They have said 
 that your chief want is cotton. I deny it. Your chief want is 
 consumers. [Applause and hisses.] You have got skill, you have 
 got capital, and you have got machinery enough to manufacture 
 goods for the whole population of the globe. You could turn 
 out fourfold as much as you do, if you only had the market to 
 sell in. It is not therefore so much the want of fabric, though 
 there may be a temporary obstruction of that; but the principal 
 and increasing want—increasing from year to year—is, where 
 shall we find men to buy what we can manufacture so fast? 
 [Interruption over a voice, “The Murril tariff.” Applause.] 
 There is in this a great and sound principle of political 
 
 economy. If the South should be rendered independent- 
 
 Well, you have had your turn; now let me have mine again. 
 [Loud applause and laughter.] It is a little inconvenient to talk 
 against the wind; but, after all, if you will just keep good 
 natured—I am not going to lose my temper; will you watch 
 yours ? Besides all that, it rests me, and gives me a chance, you 
 know, to get my breath. [Applause and hisses.] And I think 
 that the bark of those men is worse than their bite. They do 
 not mean any harm; they do not know any better. [Loud ap¬ 
 plause, hisses and continued uproar.] 
 
 What will be the result if this present struggle shall evenuate 
 
96 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 in the separation of America, and making the South—[loud 
 applause, hooting and cries of “Bravo!”]—a slave territory 
 exclusively—[cries of “No, no!” and laughter]—and the North 
 a free territory; what will be the first result? You will lay the 
 foundation for carrying the slave population clear through to 
 the Pacific Ocean. That is the first step. There is not a man 
 who has been a leader of the South any time within these twenty 
 years, that has not had this for a plan. It was for this that 
 Texas was invaded, first by colonists, next by marauders, until 
 it was wrested from Mexico. It was for this that they engaged 
 in the Mexican War itself, by which the vast territory reaching 
 to the Pacific was added to the Union. Never have they for a 
 moment given up the plan of spreading the American institution, 
 as they call it, straight through toward the West, until the slave 
 who has washed his feet in the Atlantic shall be carried to wash 
 them in the Pacific. [Cries of “Question” and uproar.] There! 
 I have got that statement out, and you can not put it back. 
 [Laughter and applause.] 
 
 Now, let us consider the prospect. If the South became a slave 
 empire, what relation will it have to you as a customer? [A 
 voice, “Or any other man.” Laughter.] It would be an empire 
 of twelve millions of people. Of these, eight millions are white 
 and four millions black. [A voice, “How many have you got?”] 
 Consider that one-third of the whole are the miserably poor, 
 unbuying blacks. You do not manufacture much for them. You 
 have not got machinery coarse enough. [Laughter and “No.”] 
 Your labor is too skilled by far to manufacture bagging and 
 linsey-woolsey. [A Southerner, “We are going to free them 
 every one.”] Then you and I agree exactly. One other third 
 consists of a poor, unskilled, degraded white population; and the 
 remainder one-third, which is a large allowance, we will say, 
 intelligent and rich. Now here are twelve millions of people, 
 and only one-third of them are customers that can afford to buy 
 the kind of goods that you bring to market. [Interruption and 
 uproar.] 
 
 My friends, I saw a man once, who was a little late at a rail¬ 
 way station, chase an express train. He did not catch it. If 
 you are going to stop this meeting, you have got to stop it before 
 I speak; for after I have got the things out, you may chase as 
 long as you please—you will not catch them. But there is luck 
 in leisure; I’m going to take it easy. Two-thirds of the popula¬ 
 tion of the Southern States to-day are non-purchasers of English 
 
TACT 
 
 97 
 
 goods. You must recollect another fact—namely, that this is 
 going on clear through to the Pacific Ocean; and if by sympathy 
 or help you establish a slave empire, you sagacious Britons—if 
 you like it better, then, I will leave the adjective out—are busy in 
 favoring the establishment of an empire from ocean to ocean 
 that should have fewest customers and the largest non-buying 
 population. [“No, no!’’ A voice, “I thought it was a happy 
 people that population parted.”] 
 
 Now, for instance, just look at this—the difference between 
 free labor and slave labor to produce cultivated land. The State 
 of Virginia has 15,000 more square miles of land than the State 
 of New York; but Virginia has only 15,000 square miles im¬ 
 proved, while New York has 20,000 square miles improved. Of 
 unimproved land Virginia has about 23,000 square miles, and 
 New York only about 10,000 square miles. These facts speak 
 volumes as to the capacity of the territory to bear population. 
 The smaller is the quantity of soil uncultivated, the greater is the 
 density of the population; and upon that their value as customers 
 depends. Let us take the States of Maryland and Massachusetts. 
 Maryland has 2,000 more square miles of land than Massachu¬ 
 setts; but Maryland has about 4,000 square miles of land im¬ 
 proved, Massachusetts has 3,200 square miles. Maryland has 
 2,800 unimproved square miles of land, while Massachusetts has 
 but 1,800 square miles unimproved. But these two are little 
 States,—let us take greater States: Pennsylvania and Georgia. 
 The State of Georgia has 12,000 more square miles of land 
 than Pennsylvania. Georgia has only about 9,800 square miles of 
 improved land; Pennsylvania has 13,400 square miles of improved 
 land, or about 2,300,000 acres more than Georgia. Georgia has 
 about 25,600 square miles of unimproved land, and Pennsyl¬ 
 vania has only 10,400 square miles, or about 10,000,000 acres 
 less of imimproved land than Georgia. The one is a slave State 
 and the other is a free State. I do not want you to forget such 
 statistics as those, having once heard them. 
 
 Now, what can England make for the poor white population 
 of such a future empire, and for her slave population? What 
 carpets, what linens, what cottons can you sell to them? What 
 machines, what looking-glasses, what combs, what leather, what 
 books, what pictures, what engravings? [A voice, “We’ll sell 
 them ships.”] You may sell ships to a few, but what ships can 
 you sell to two-thirds of the population of poor whites and 
 blacks ? A little bagging and a little linsey-woolsey, a few whips 
 
98 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 and manacles, are all that you can sell for the slave. [Great 
 applause and uproar.] This very day, in the slave States of 
 America there are eight millions out of twelve millions that are 
 not, and can not be your customers from the very laws of trade. 
 
 Do you sympathize with the minority in Rome or the majority 
 in Italy? [A voice, “With Italy.”] To-day the South is the 
 minority in America, and they are fighting for independence! 
 For what? [Uproar. A voice, “Three cheers for independ¬ 
 ence !” Hisses.] I could wish so much bravery had a better 
 cause, and that so much self-denial had been less deluded; that 
 the poisonous and venomous doctrine of State rights might have 
 been kept aloof; that so many gallant spirits, such as Jackson, 
 might still have lived. [Great applause and loud cheers, again 
 and again renewed.] The force of these facts, historical and 
 incontrovertible, can not be broken, except by diverting attention 
 by an attack upon the North. It is said that the North is fight¬ 
 ing for the Union, and not for emancipation. The North is 
 fighting for the Union, for that ensures emancipation. [Loud 
 cheers, “Oh, oh!” “No, no!” and cheers.] 
 
 A great many men say to ministers of the Gospel: “You pre¬ 
 tend to be preaching and working for the love of the people. 
 Why, you are all the time preaching for the sake of the Church.” 
 What does the minister say? “It is by means of the Church 
 that we help the people,” and when men say that we are fighting 
 for the Union, I, too, say that we are fighting for the Union. 
 [“Hear, hear!” and a voice, “That’s right.”] But the motive 
 determines the value; and why are we fighting for the Union? 
 Because we never shall forget the testimony of our enemies. 
 They have gone off declaring that the Union in the hands of the 
 North was fatal to slavery. [Loud applause.] There is testi¬ 
 mony in court for you. [A voice, “See that!” and laughter.] 
 
 In the first place I am ashamed to confess that such was the 
 thoughtlessness—[interruption]—such was the stupor of the 
 North—[renewed interruption]—you will get a word at a time; 
 to-morrow will let folks see what it is you do not want to hear— 
 that for a period of twenty-five years she went to sleep, and 
 permitted herself to be drugged and poisoned with the Southern 
 prejudice against black men. [Applause and uproar.] 
 
 Now as to those States that had passed “black” laws, as we 
 call them; they are filled with Southern emigrants. The southern 
 parts of Ohio, the southern part of Indiana, where I myself 
 lived for years, and which I know like a book, the southern part 
 
TACT 
 
 99 
 
 of Illinois, where Mr. Lincoln lives—[great uproar!—these parts 
 are largely settled by emigrants from Kentucky, Tennessee, 
 Georgia, Virginia, and North Carolina, and it was their vote, 
 or the Northern votes pandering for political reasons to theirs, 
 that passed in those States the infamous “black” laws; and the 
 Republicans in these States have a record, clean and white, as 
 having opposed these laws in every instance as “infamous.” 
 Now as to the State of New York; it is asked whether a negro 
 is not obliged to have a certain freehold property, or a certain 
 amount of property, before he can vote. It is so still in North 
 Carolina and Rhode Island for white folks—it is so in New 
 York State. [Mr. Beecher’s voice slightly failed him here, and 
 he was interrupted by a person who tried to imitate him. Cries 
 of “Shame!” and “Turn him out!”! 
 
 No man can unveil the future; no man can tell what revolu¬ 
 tions are about to break upon the world; no man can tell what 
 destiny belongs to France, nor to any of the European powers; 
 but one thing is certain, that in the exigencies of the future 
 there will be combinations and recombinations, and that those 
 nations that are of the same faith, the same blood, and the same 
 substantial interests, ought not to be alienated from each other, 
 but ought to stand together. [Immense cheering and hisses.] 
 I do not say that you ought not to be in the most friendly alliance 
 with France or with Germany; but I do say that your own 
 children, the offspring of England, ought to be nearer to you 
 than any people of strange tongue. [A voice, “Degenerate sons,” 
 applause and hisses; another voice, “What about the Trent?”! 
 If there had been any feelings of bitterness in America, let me 
 tell you that they had been excited, rightly or wrongly, under the 
 impression that Great Britain was going to intervene between 
 us and our own lawful struggle. [A voice, “No!” and applause.] 
 With the evidence that there is no such intention all bitter feel¬ 
 ings will pass away. [Applause.] 
 
 We do not agree with the recent doctrine of neutrality as a 
 question of law. But it is past, and we are not disposed to raise 
 that question. We accept it now as a fact, and we say that the 
 utterance of Lord Russell at Blairgowrie—[applause, hisses, and 
 a voice, “What about Lord Brougham?”]—together with the 
 declaration of the government in stopping war-steamers here— 
 [great uproar and applause]—have gone far toward quieting 
 every fear and removing every apprehension from our minds. 
 [Uproar and shouts of applause.] And now in the future it is 
 
100 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 the work of every good man and patriot not to create divisions, 
 but to do the things that will make for peace. [“Oh, oh!” and 
 laughter.] On our part it shall be done. [Applause and hisses, 
 and “No, no!”] 
 
 On your part it ought to be done; and when in any of the 
 convulsions that come upon the world, Great Britain finds her¬ 
 self struggling single-handed against the gigantic powers that 
 spread oppression and darkness—[applause, hisses, and uproar]— 
 there ought to be such cordiality that she can turn and say to 
 her first-born and most illustrious child, “Come!” [“Hear, 
 hear!” Applause, tremendous cheers, and uproar.] I will not 
 say that England can not again, as hitherto, single-handed man¬ 
 age any power—[applause and uproar]—but I will say that 
 England and America together for religion and liberty—[a 
 voice, “Soap, soap,” uproar and great applause]—are a match 
 for the world. [Applause; a voice, “They don’t want any more 
 soft soap.”] Now, gentlemen and ladies—[a voice, “Sam Slick”; 
 and another voice, “Ladies and gentlemen, if you please!”]— 
 when I came I was asked whether I would answer questions, 
 and I very readily consented to do so, as I had in other places; 
 but I will tell you it was because I expected to have the oppor¬ 
 tunity of speaking with some sort of ease and quiet. [A voice, 
 “So you have.”] 
 
 I have for an hour and half spoken against a storm—[“Hear, 
 hear!”]—and you yourselves are witnesses that, by the interrup¬ 
 tion, I have been obliged to strive with my voice, so that I no 
 longer have the power to control this assembly. [Applause.] 
 And although I am in spirit perfectly willing to answer any 
 question, and more than glad of the chance, yet I am by this very 
 unnecessary opposition to-night incapacitated physically from 
 doing it. Ladies and gentlemen, I bid you good evening. 
 
 Henry Ward Beecher . 
 
XVII 
 
 DIGNITY 
 
 N OT long ago, I found a venerable friend of mine in 
 a reminiscent mood. His memory extended into 
 the early lyceum days. He had heard many of the orators, 
 whose names are recalled at frequent intervals, by the 
 industrious compilers of anthologies of great orations. 
 
 Among the many anecdotes and descriptions of public 
 speeches of other days, within his experience, I was par¬ 
 ticularly interested in his vivid contrast of the platform 
 attitudes of two orators of international reputation. 
 
 One was an authority on social topics. He was very 
 particular about the platform or stage settings for a 
 lecture. He insisted that they must be arranged accord¬ 
 ing to his directions. Then he requested that the lighting 
 should be so adjusted as to bring him into the high light. 
 When all the arrangements, that he required, were made, 
 he appeared before the audience with all the “pomp and 
 circumstance” of the stage entry of the star in a tragedy, 
 when more melodramatic traditions obtained in the 
 theatre. 
 
 “Drawing himself to his loftiest proportions,” he 
 would advance toward the audience with solemn and 
 ponderous gravity. When he reached the carefully select¬ 
 ed position from which he proposed to speak, he would 
 stand, thrust his right hand into the breast of his but¬ 
 toned coat, pause for an unusually long time, stare im¬ 
 pressively at the audience, and then begin in a heavy 
 orotund voice and a bombastic style. It is true, he was a 
 
 101 
 
102 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 man of real ability and he impressed his audience, but, in 
 spite of his style rather than by means of it. 
 
 The other was one of the greatest pulpit orators of his 
 generation. He was a man of rare spirituality and win¬ 
 ning personality. When he appeared for a lecture, he 
 walked easily and naturally upon the plaform, and, as it 
 were, took the audience by the hand. His position on the 
 platform caused him no concern. He spoke from any¬ 
 where. He did not seek the spotlight. He began in a 
 simple, deliberate, straightforward way. He conversed 
 with his audience, intimately but not familiarly, and upon 
 the plane of the average hearer. It was, as if he said, 
 “Come, let us reason together.” His simple manliness, 
 self-poise, directness, culture, sincere personality, and 
 honesty of purpose captivated any audience. He always 
 commanded such respect, that, when he finished, his 
 hearers felt, with one accord, as a distinguished orator 
 generously said of a great contemporary, “True nature 
 seemed to be speaking all over him.” 
 
 The first speaker’s solicitude was, “How do I look?” 
 “How do I act?” The second speaker’s concern appeared 
 to be, “Have I something to say?” “Have I confidence 
 in it?” “Can I persuade my hearers to accept it?” 
 
 I need scarcely ask my reader which represents true 
 dignity on the platform or elsewhere, the formalism, the 
 ponderous bearing, the stilted manner of the first type, 
 or the earnestness, the straightforwardness, and the self- 
 control of the second. 
 
 May I ask, have you ever seen a speaker approach an 
 audience in that humble and self-depreciative manner, as 
 if he were apologizing for daring to open his mouth in 
 public; or, incited either by an excess of nervous excita¬ 
 bility or animal spirits, wildly gesticulate; or overcome 
 by an overplus of emotionalism, loudly rant? Did any of 
 these command your respect ? The answer is obvious. 
 
DIGNITY 
 
 103 
 
 * Dignity in public speaking, like dignity under all other 
 circumstances, is made up of a number of elements. No 
 doubt you have heard someone speak of one of these 
 elements, simplicity for example, as if he regarded it as 
 an equivalent of dignity. True simplicity is a compo¬ 
 nent part of dignity, but, by itself it may just be nciivete. 
 Then, what are the essentials of dignity in public speak¬ 
 ing? Some, at least, of them are sincerity in purpose, 
 clearness and honesty in thinking or the logical treatment 
 of verified matter, transparency in statement, and sim¬ 
 plicity and directness in delivery. The seriousness of 
 dignity may be varied and lightened by wit, humor, or 
 genial satire. It is marred by raillery, sarcasm, triviality, 
 or affected smartness. In conclusion, the dignified public 
 speaker is impressive but not ponderous, intimate but not 
 familiar. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 Study, memorize, and interpret in delivery, orations by 
 
 (a) Lord Chatham. 
 
 (b) Edmund Burke. 
 
 (c) John Bright. 
 
 (d) Daniel Webster. 
 
 (e) Henry Clay. 
 
 (f) Daniel O’Connell. 
 
 (g) Wendell Phillips. 
 
 (h) Henry Ward Beecher. 
 
 (i) Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 (j) Sir Wilfrid Laurier. 
 
 (k) A. J. Balfour. 
 
 (l) David Lloyd George. 
 
 (m) Theodore Roosevelt. 
 
 (n) Woodrow Wilson. 
 
 Other equally good lists, and without number, may be 
 made from the English and American orators. Any study 
 of the subject would be limited, indeed, that did not in¬ 
 clude the oratory of continental Europe, and of Ancient 
 Greece and Rome. Any comprehensive anthology of ora¬ 
 tory will include the ancient and modern masterpieces. 
 
XVIII 
 
 SPEAKING WITH AUTHORITY 
 
 T O speak with authority is to speak with confidence. 
 
 To speak with confidence is to speak without fear. 
 To speak without fear is to speak with knowledge. To 
 speak with knowledge is to speak after preparation. 
 
 Then, the basis of speaking with authority is prepara¬ 
 tion. The price that he, who would excel as a public 
 speaker must pay, is application. Why is it that the 
 possession of a ready and easy flow of words has wrecked 
 so many promising oratorical careers? Simply because 
 the possessors of such fluency substituted this aptness 
 in words for careful preparation in thinking. I have 
 come to regard the possession of fluency in language by 
 a young man, as a positive hindrance to future distinction 
 in public speaking, and for the reasons I have given. 
 When will men realize that eloquence does not consist in 
 words, but in ideas? You have heard some eminent 
 public speaker convince, persuade, and move to action; 
 and you have exclaimed, “This is a gift,” “The orator 
 is born not made.” I think one would be safe in assert¬ 
 ing, that no man ever attained distinction in public speak¬ 
 ing without constant and unremitting effort. I know 
 that one of the most distinguished pulpit orators of a 
 great metropolitan city spends night after night, each 
 week, in the careful development and perfecting the 
 thought and wording of the following Sunday’s sermons. 
 I know also that a certain statesman of international 
 
 104 
 
SPEAKING WITH AUTHORITY 
 
 105 
 
 reputation gives the same thorough preparation to his 
 public utterances. We do wish that the extemporaneous 
 or impromptu speaker, who begins anywhere and ends 
 nowhere, would either get to work or quit, for, as some¬ 
 one has said, “We are tired of the babbler, the spouter, 
 and the chinwagger.” 
 
 Through preparation the public speaker develops a 
 knowledge of his theme. He acquires the facts about it. 
 He secures information concerning it. He learns to 
 know his subject. “You must know what you want to 
 say, to be able to say it.” 
 
 Knowledge expels fear. If the public speaker does 
 not have his facts and information well in hand, he is 
 apt to stumble, to flounder, to “flap and splash” about. 
 He struggles with his thought. He fears he will have 
 nothing to say. An evil genius prompts him to stay on 
 his feet. Failure stares him in the face. Panic seizes 
 him. His mind becomes a blank. He sits down, a sorry 
 spectacle, a pitiful example of one overcome by that fear 
 which arises from the neglect of the preparation of the 
 ideas, from lack of knowledge. 
 
 Now that fear is eliminated through knowledge, con¬ 
 fidence reigns. The speaker no longer fears that he will 
 have nothing to say, for he knows that he has something 
 to say. Control replaces agitation; deliberation, nervous 
 confusion; definite expression, fumbling for words. 
 
 The result is, that the speaker can now speak with 
 certainty and confidence. His investigation into the 
 subject has rendered him competent. He can speak with 
 authority. 
 
 Someone may say, “I have given all possible prepara¬ 
 tion to a subject, but on account of limitations in ability 
 or education, I still have feared to speak, because I knew 
 that some members of the audience were much better 
 qualified than I.” Do not let such fear prevent you from 
 
106 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 speaking. No individual is the repository of all the 
 knowledge on any subject. Each of us may have some¬ 
 thing to contribute. When you have investigated the 
 subject thoroughly and organized the material clearly, 
 you are justified in assuming that you can speak with 
 some degree of authority. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Choose a subject within your experience—I use the word 
 “Experience” in its widest significance. State it in the 
 form of a proposition, e.g., “Resolved that athletic sports 
 should be encouraged.” Assume the side of the question 
 that agrees with your sentiments. Ponder and read on the 
 question until you are satisfied that you have mastered it. 
 Organize the material or “brief” it. Speak with assurance 
 born of knowledge. 
 
 II. Treat a number of questions as outlined in I. 
 
XIX 
 
 DICTION 
 
 T HE language of public speaking should befit the 
 speaker, be intelligible to the hearer, and be ap¬ 
 propriate for the subject. These are qualifications that 
 adequate diction must possess. 
 
 You may have attended some school function, when a 
 pupil delivered an address prepared by the teacher. The 
 words were beyond the experience of the pupil. In his 
 mouth, they were unbefitting and absurd. A perform¬ 
 ance of this nature, always makes makes me think of a 
 child masquerading in his father’s hat. 
 
 Or you may have listened to a speaker of limited ex¬ 
 perience and meagre education, endeavoring to clothe his 
 naive thinking by the conscious employment of words, 
 in the use of which he was capable of exercising but little 
 discrimination. You must have been struck with the in¬ 
 eptitude and unsuitability of the diction. 
 
 Or you may have heard a speaker who attached more 
 importance to words than to thoughts; who seemed to 
 cherish the error that eloquence lies in words and not in 
 ideas, and who expressed the most commonplace thinking 
 in ostentatious language. You will recall, that he was 
 as conscious of his high-sounding phrases as an over¬ 
 appareled and dandified individual is of his clothes. 
 
 Then, there is the speaker, who possesses a copious 
 vocabulary and exercises discernment of distinctions in 
 the selection of words, but is so obsessed with a certain 
 
 107 
 
108 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 finicality in this choice, that his diction conveys the im¬ 
 pression of fastidiousness. 
 
 A speaker, of the type just referred to, may also be 
 tempted to a conscious cleverness or smartness in the 
 use of words. Such diction conveys the impression of 
 unnaturalness, stiltedness, and artificiality. In the hands 
 of a skilled craftsman in the use of language, it may 
 possess aptness and a certain superficial attractiveness, 
 but it is wanting in vigor and sincerity. Such language, 
 no matter how dexterously manipulated, reminds one of 
 artificial flowers. Manufactured roses may bear a strik¬ 
 ing resemblance to real roses, but the life, the spirit, the 
 fragrance are lacking. 
 
 Diction, then, should not be formal, but living and 
 organic. It should not be imposed upon ideas, but rather 
 generated by intense concentration and clear thinking at 
 the time of speaking. The vocabulary employed by the 
 speaker under these conditions, will be made up of thor¬ 
 oughly digested and assimilated words. These are the 
 only words he has a right to use. Such language, like 
 that of conversation, will be simple, vital, concrete, and 
 suggestive, as befits the speaker. 
 
 The language of the public speaker should be intelligible 
 to the hearer. To interest an audience, the speaker must 
 refer to the experience of his hearers, to “what they retain, 
 from what they have seen, heard, read, done, and felt.’’ 
 The diction used by the speaker, to interest his hearers, 
 must approximate the language used by them in the ex¬ 
 pression of these experiences. I do not mean by this, 
 that he should obviously pander to, or seek to ingratiate 
 himself with a particular audience by using the vernacular 
 of the class or locality to which its members belong. 
 I do not agree with what was evidently Will Carleton’s 
 persuasion in this matter, when he wrote: 
 
DICTION 
 
 109 
 
 “He with no oratorical display 
 Spoke to farmers in their own rough way.” 
 
 Someone spoke truly when he said, “All classes of people 
 like simple, sincere, and good language.” I do mean to 
 say, however, that the speaker must not, “shoot over the 
 heads” of his hearers, by using words they do not under¬ 
 stand. 
 
 As implied in the opening paragraph of this chapter, a 
 thorough understanding of the subject must tend to such 
 a modification of the language, as to render it suitable to 
 the theme. It must be evident that it is necessary for 
 anyone, who may essay to speak in public, to improve 
 his diction and increase his vocabulary. The advice 
 usually offered to such a one—and I do not see how it 
 can be improved upon—is, “Study the masterpieces of 
 literature, especially the Bible; memorize passages from 
 the great orations; read present-day literature; cultivate 
 the acquaintance of cultured persons; and possess and use 
 a standard unabridged dictionary.” 
 
XX 
 
 VIGOROUS EXPRESSION 
 
 U PON looking over some old correspondence the 
 other day, I came across a letter from the late 
 Dr. Scovel, sometime President of the University of 
 Wooster, in which he defined oratory as “clear thinking, 
 vigorously expressed.” He might have added, as with¬ 
 out doubt he inferred, that vigorous expression depends 
 upon clear thinking. 
 
 The process of clear thinking in public speaking func¬ 
 tions in a definite concentration of the mental energies 
 upon each of a succession of distinctly individualized 
 ideas, systematically ordered to a logical conclusion. The 
 degree of the vigor of the resulting impression is in direct 
 ratio to the degree of the strength of each concentration. 
 All this constitutes the basis of vigorous expression. 
 
 Then, on the mental side there are three factors that 
 contribute to vigor in delivery, namely, a precise purpose, 
 concentration upon definite ideas, and an appreciation 
 of the relationship of these ideas to each other and to 
 the particular object of the speech. Let me make a 
 comparison. You have set out for a certain place. You 
 knew the exact location of your destination. You were 
 familiar with prominent objects in the landscape, which 
 served to direct you to the end of your journey. You 
 moved along, surely, boldly, firmly. In other words you 
 pursued your way vigorously. 
 
 On the other hand, if the speaker’s thinking is vague, 
 
 110 
 
VIGOROUS EXPRESSION 
 
 111 
 
 his expression will be hesitating, uncertain, and weak. 
 A number of years ago, I spent my holidays with a 
 camping party in a section of the country where there 
 were very few settlers, and where the roads were little 
 more than trails through the woods. I had taken some 
 examination papers along with me and I spent part of 
 my time marking them. The report had to be forwarded 
 to the school inspector before a certain date in my holiday, 
 so I had to seek the nearest post-office, in order to mail it. 
 My knowledge of the location of the post-office was very 
 vague, and of the road leading to it, vaguer still. To 
 make matters worse, I set out late in the evening. As 
 you can imagine, I proceeded hesitatingly and doubtfully. 
 I did not, because I could not, strike out spiritedly and 
 vigorously. 
 
 The most important factor in the actual process of 
 vigorous expression is concentration. Shall we consider 
 this matter negatively? You may have heard someone 
 speak in public in a listless, indifferent manner. He 
 seemingly lacked interest in his theme. His attention 
 was unfocused, relaxed, and drifting. In short, he did 
 not concentrate upon his ideas definitely and intensely. 
 As a result his delivery lacked vitality and strength. 
 
 Or you may have listened, or tried to listen to another 
 type of speaker, whose attention fluttered about irregularly 
 and incoherently among his ideas. He lacked that pris¬ 
 matic and sustained concentration possessed by the most 
 effective public speakers. You will recall, that, as a 
 result, he was nervously excited and agitated in manner. 
 His delivery lacked purpose and force. 
 
 Shall we consider the matter positively? Concentra¬ 
 tion upon each idea draws all the mental energies together 
 to a given point, and fixes the entire attention upon a 
 single thought at a time. This focusing of attention 
 
112 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 results in intensity in action, or to apply to public speak¬ 
 ing, vigor in delivery. 
 
 While energy in expression is, in its origin, mental, it 
 is revealed through our physical being. The bodily vigor 
 in delivery, however, is subordinate to, governed by, and 
 an expression of the mental concentration. Delivery in 
 public speaking so centred, so generated, and so con¬ 
 trolled is vital, animated and vivid. Possessing poise, 
 and reserve, it suggests power and vigor. 
 
 If one would speak vigorously, he must appear before 
 an audience with a definite purpose, careful preparation, 
 and with the ability to think clearly and concentrate in¬ 
 tensely. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Choose a subject, gather material bearing upon it. Submit 
 the material to an exacting logical organization, so that 
 the specific purpose of the speech and the relation of each 
 thought to that purpose will be clearly fixed in your mind. 
 Deliver the speech to a large number of hearers focusing 
 their attention definitely and intensely upon each idea, and 
 according to its relative importance. 
 
 II. Repeat the process of I with a number of subjects. 
 
XXI 
 
 WHEN TO END A SPEECH 
 
 W HAT is more tedious than prolixity? You will 
 remember the insufferable weariness you experi¬ 
 enced when you were afflicted with a story teller who 
 insisted upon reciting every detail with meticulous care; 
 or how your attention flagged during the reading of an 
 unduly long book, until it rebelled at the prospect of 
 being dragged through the remaining chapters, and you 
 compromised by skipping to the end to find out the 
 denouement; or the intolerable boredom you endured at 
 the hands of some hyper-conscientious public speaker, 
 who did not realize that it is unnecessary “to tell every¬ 
 thing you know about a subject”; or one “whose minute 
 puerility, in his sterile abundance, detailed till nothing was 
 remembered and described till nothing was perceptible .’* 
 Many an otherwise effective speech is botched by this 
 desire to “hang on.” I have never known a speech to 
 have been impaired by brevity. I have listened to so 
 many that were marred by prolixity. How often you 
 have heard this of a speaker, “His speeches are good, but 
 too long.” The public speaker should never strain the 
 patience of his hearers until they are tempted to stamp 
 him down or to entertain an unholy wish that something 
 would happen to eliminate him. 
 
 A real friend and wise counsellor of mine, with whom 
 I frequently confer in the preparation of public talks or 
 in the arrangement of programmes, always begins our 
 
 113 
 
114 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 conference with a reiteration of this warning, “Remem¬ 
 ber, it is always better to leave your hearers wanting more 
 than to surfeit them.” This admonition prevents many 
 a sin of commission. 
 
 There are three causes chiefly responsible for undue 
 length in speechmaking. In the first place, there is the 
 inclination to include too great a multiplicity of details. 
 You cannot say all there is to say on a subject in the time 
 usually allotted for a speech, and which it is not good 
 policy to extend. What, then, should be included and 
 what excluded? From the mass of material available, 
 the speaker should, in his preparation, select those argu¬ 
 ments essential to the adequate treatment of the subject 
 and reject everything not imperatively necessary to the 
 support of these arguments, or, in other words, reject 
 everything that is not definitely relevant. 
 
 In the second place, there is a tendency to excessive 
 wordiness arising from anxiety lest the individual 
 thoughts will not be intelligible, or, in other words, to be 
 too explicit. Such a speaker must learn to have greater 
 confidence in and rely more upon the intelligence of his 
 audience. 
 
 Then many speakers become wearisome on account of 
 the unnecessary repetition of ideas. Of course, repetition 
 of an idea may be employed as a device to secure greater 
 emphasis. On the other hand, if it is not so employed, it 
 weakens the emphasis and compromises the effect of the 
 speech by unnecessarily prolonging it. 
 
 The public speaker is well advised who assumes that a 
 speech unduly prolonged, whether on account of the 
 faults to which I have called attention or the nature of 
 the subject, or any other cause, becomes uninteresting 
 and tiresome to the audience. Through the lack of ob¬ 
 servance of the caution implied in this chapter many an 
 otherwise admirable effort has failed in effectiveness. 
 
WHEN TO END A SPEECH 
 
 115 
 
 Then, when shall a speaker end a speech? I can best 
 answer that question in the words of Edward Everett 
 Hale, “Have something to say and say it.” Someone has 
 added, “And then sit down.” 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Brief a ten-minute speech on “The influence of the modern 
 newspaper.” Deliver the speech including all the points 
 outlined in the brief, and not exceeding the time limit of 
 ten minutes. 
 
 II. Repeat the process in I in a fifteen-minute speech on “The 
 Value of Polar Expeditions.” 
 
 III. Repeat the process in I in a twenty-minute speech on “The 
 advantages accruing to the participants in athletics.” 
 
 IV. Repeat the process in I in a thirty-minute speech on “The 
 Evolution of the British Empire.” 
 
XXII 
 
 HOW TO ATTAIN THE PURPOSE OF A SPEECH 
 
 T HE translation of the theme of this chapter into 
 popular parlance would read, “How to get the idea 
 over.” He who prides himself on the academic or con¬ 
 ventional nature of the expression of his ideas will not 
 be inclined to regard, “How to get the idea over,” with 
 favor. Nevertheless, the phrase arrests the attention. 
 It is vivid and suggestive, and I shall use it frequently in 
 this chapter. 
 
 “Getting the idea over” implies effecting the purpose 
 of a speech or securing action along the lines advocated 
 by so presenting the matter or argument that the hearers 
 are convinced of the validity of the facts, reasoning, and 
 conclusion. 
 
 To “get the idea over,” then, the speaker must impress 
 the main idea or conclusion upon his listeners, since their 
 acceptance of it is vitally necessary if he is to persuade 
 them to the course of action he wishes them to pursue. 
 But a simple statement of the main idea will be very 
 unlikely to ensure its acceptance. It must be supported 
 by proof in the shape of facts, authorities, etc. If he 
 can succeed in leading or dominating his hearers into 
 acknowledging the correctness of his evidence, the accu¬ 
 racy of his reasoning, and the soundness of his judg¬ 
 ments, he will have convinced them. 
 
 The nature of the presentation of the matter of a 
 speech, or the delivery, is of very great importance in 
 the process of convincing an audience. The speaker must 
 
 116 
 
ATTAINING THE PURPOSE OF A SPEECH 117 
 
 “come to grips” with his hearers. He must seize and 
 direct their attention to his thoughts. He must control 
 their mental energies to, and concentrate them upon, each 
 idea, and compel them straight to his inference. Thus he 
 insures the acceptance of the conclusion. 
 
 If the speaker succeeds in convincing his hearers, and 
 if he is sincere in his object—that is, if he adds the 
 energy of conviction to his reasoning—he will achieve 
 his purpose in addressing them. He will impel them to 
 act as he would have them act. 
 
 When the speaker has attained his aim, when he has 
 persuaded, or aroused, or impelled his hearers to that 
 action he earnestly wishes them to take, he has succeeded 
 in “getting the idea over.” 
 
 Let me illustrate: not long ago a fiscal agent gave me 
 a description of his method in salesmanship. “To make 
 my method in salesmanship more vivid,” he said, “I will 
 regard you as a prospective buyer. I would approach 
 you with the settled determination to sell you some shares. 
 To accomplish this, I would first set about qualifying or 
 preparing you to invest. This process of qualification or 
 preparation consists of an endeavor to convince the pros¬ 
 pective buyer of the soundness of the proposition. If I 
 should succeed in this you would be ready for the next 
 step, namely, to be persuaded to buy. 
 
 “In the first stage of the process of the qualification 
 of a probable client, the purpose is to get consent that 
 the agent may proceed with a discussion of the proposi¬ 
 tion. To secure this permission, I would make a con¬ 
 scious effort to focus your attention upon certain ideas 
 designed to interest you, and thus dispose you to listen 
 sympathetically to the description of what I desired to 
 sell you and eventually to accept my proposal. 
 
 “I would begin operations deliberately, aggressively, 
 and directly. I would concentrate your attention, for 
 
118 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 instance, on the following: ‘If you have a few hundred 
 dollars for which you have no immediate use; if I can 
 show you how you can invest this money to unusual 
 advantage; if I can assure you that after the most careful 
 scrutiny on your own part, and the most thorough inves¬ 
 tigation by any competent expert, that the enterprise is 
 sound, will you consider my proposition?’ In all proba¬ 
 bility you would say, ‘Go ahead,’ and I would have 
 accomplished my preliminary purpose.” Thus the agent 
 gets his introductory idea “over.” 
 
 If a speaker can stand on a platform and do with a 
 number of persons what this man was successful in doing 
 in individual cases, he will succeed in “getting the idea 
 over,” in attaining the purpose of his speech. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Impress your hearers with: 
 
 (a) Desirability of membership in a benevolent society. 
 
 (b) The advantages of endowment insurance over straight 
 life insurance. 
 
 (c) The necessity for Old Age Pensions. 
 
 (d) The necessity for teaching agriculture in the public 
 schools. 
 
 (e) The necessity for a business course in the High 
 Schools. 
 
 (f) The advantage of membership in a debating society. 
 
 (g) The necessity for church affiliation. 
 
XXIII 
 
 VIVIDNESS 
 
 S PEAKING on the desirability of showing sympathy 
 one might say, “It is highly desirable that one should 
 endeavor to alleviate suffering, relieve distress, comfort 
 the sorrowing, and hearten the discouraged.” Or one 
 might treat it after this fashion—in prose, of course, 
 since one is not a poet, and without colloquialisms: 
 
 “When you see a man in woe, 
 
 Walk right up and say ‘Hullo!’ 
 
 Say ‘Hullo!’ and ‘How d’ye do?’ 
 
 ‘How’s the world a-usin’ you?’ 
 
 Slap the fellow on his back, 
 
 Bring your han’ down with a whack. 
 
 Waltz right up, an’ don’t go slow; 
 
 Grin an’ shake an’ say ‘BIullo!’ ” 
 
 The former example is a general, heavy, and uninter¬ 
 esting discussion of the subject. It is colorless. In the 
 latter, Mr. S. W. Foss presents a realistic and colorful 
 picture of the exercise of sympathy. It is vivid. 
 
 General statements rarely attract attention because they 
 are abstract, vague, and cold. Ideas conveyed by illus¬ 
 tration or reference to experience always excite interest 
 because they are concrete, graphic, and clear. Henry 
 Ward Beecher said, “An illustration is a window in an 
 argument and lets in light.” 
 
 Thoughts are vividly expressed when treated con¬ 
 cretely—for example, by illustration. The speaker must 
 
 119 
 
120 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 derive his illustrations from his own experience. On the 
 other hand, it would be idle for him to use illustrations 
 without the experience of his hearers. Therefore, while 
 the speaker, to be vivid, must illustrate from his own 
 experience, he must adjust his illustrations to what he 
 conceives to be the experience of his audience. The 
 appeal of the poetry of Ebenezer Elliott, the Corn Law 
 Rhymer, to the English laboring poor, through the me¬ 
 dium of their experience, affords a good example. Here 
 is a stanza from “Caged Rats’": 
 
 “Ye coop us up, and tax our bread, 
 
 And wonder why we pine; 
 
 But ye are fat, and round, and red, 
 
 And filled with tax-bought wine. 
 
 Thus twelve rats starve while three rats thrive 
 (Like you on mine and me), 
 
 When fifteen rats are caged alive, 
 
 With food for nine and three.” 
 
 May I again remind my readers that experience in¬ 
 cludes “all that one retains from what one has seen, 
 heard, read, done, and felt.” 
 
 The whole matter may be summed up as an appeal to 
 the imagination by couching ideas in images, examples, 
 comparisons, anecdotes, etc., within the experience of 
 both the speaker and the hearers. May I digress for a 
 moment, at this point, to say that there is a popular 
 conception that the imagination is freakish, capricious, 
 whimsical, and abnormal? This is not correct. Such a 
 conception confuses imagination with fancy. On the 
 contrary, the imagination is normal, serious, and truthful. 
 It is based upon actual impressions derived from reality. 
 
 It is this power of imagination or ability to “other” 
 himself into the life of the plain and simple and create 
 out of common experiences that enables Lloyd George 
 to make such a remarkable popular appeal. The follow- 
 
VIVIDNESS 
 
 121 
 
 ing peroration from one of his speeches will give a taste 
 of his quality: “You have hundreds of thousands of men 
 —working unceasingly for wages that barely bring them 
 enough bread to keep themselves and their families above 
 privation. Generation after generation they see their 
 children wither before their eyes for lack of air, light, and 
 space, which is denied them by men who have square 
 miles of it for their own use. Take our cities, the great 
 cities of a great empire. Right in the heart of them 
 everywhere you have ugly quagmires of human misery, 
 seething, rotting, at last fermenting. We pass them by 
 every day on our way to our comfortable houses. We 
 forget that divine justice never passed by a great wrong. 
 You can hear, carried by the breezes of the north, the 
 south, the east, and the west, ominous rumbling. The 
 chariots of retribution are drawing nigh. How long will 
 all these injustices last for myriads of men, women, and 
 children created to the image of God—how long? I 
 believe it is coming to an end. 
 
 “I remember a story told in my youth of a very re¬ 
 markable but rather quaint old Welsh preacher. He was 
 conducting a funeral service for a poor old fellow who 
 had a very bad time through life without any fault of 
 his own. They could hardly find a space in the church¬ 
 yard for his tomb. At last they got enough to make a 
 brickless grave amidst towering monuments that rose 
 upon it, and the old minister, standing above it, said: 
 ‘Well, Davie Vach, you have had a narrow time right 
 through life and you have a narrow place in death. 
 But never mind, old friend; I can see a day dawning 
 when you will rise out of your narrow bed and call out 
 to all those big people, “Elbow room for the poor.” ’ I 
 can see the day of the resurrection, the dawn of the resur¬ 
 rection of the oppressed in all lands already gilding the 
 hilltops.” 
 
122 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 It may be well at this point to urge that clear thinking 
 is essential to apt, manifest, and intelligible images and 
 illustrations. Vagueness cannot beget distinctness. 
 
 The imaginative treatment of thinking in public speak¬ 
 ing vitalizes the ideas, informs the language, animates the 
 voice, and gives form and suggestiveness to gesture or 
 bodily expression. In other words, it makes for vividness. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. In a speech on each of the following subjects, illustrate 
 each point by an example taken from the same field: 
 
 (a) An Altruistic Life. 
 
 (b) The Evils of Gambling 
 
 (c) The Power of Oratory. 
 
 (d) The Advantages of Travel. 
 
 (e) The Patriot. 
 
 II. In a speech on each of the following subjects, illustrate 
 each point by an appropriate comparison drawn from some 
 other field: 
 
 (a) Honesty in Politics. 
 
 (b) Government Ownership and Operation of Railroads. 
 
 (c) National Morality. 
 
 (d) Agricultural Courses for Farmers. 
 
 (e) Necessity for Business Methods in Charitable Work. 
 
 III. Apply I and II to audiences representing specific groups, 
 selecting the examples and comparisons upon the basis of 
 a reference to their particular experience. 
 
XXIV 
 
 PERSONALITY 
 
 S O much has been written, wisely and unwisely, about 
 personality that I hesitate to discuss it. Also a theme 
 that includes the “three attributes of consciousness, char¬ 
 acter, and will” is too comprehensive for treatment in a 
 short chapter. However, since it is such an important 
 factor in public speaking I am forced to give some atten¬ 
 tion to it in this book. This consideration must neces¬ 
 sarily be brief and cursory. 
 
 A great contemporary of Edmund Burke said of him, 
 that if a person were to withdraw into a doorway to 
 escape a rainstorm, and if, under these circumstances, he 
 casually met and engaged in conversation with Edmund 
 Burke, even though he were not aware of his identity, he 
 would regard him as an extraordinary man. I have not 
 the quotation by me and my statement of it may not be 
 exact, but I think what I have written conveys the import 
 of it. What was it that distinguished Burke as a man of 
 such superior quality? Personality. 
 
 Personality is based upon the unique life possessed by 
 each individual. Why, may I ask, are you the person 
 you are and not someone else? Why is it that one indi¬ 
 vidual differs from every other individual? Why did a 
 distinguished modern philosopher write, “no matter how 
 much two people, say twins, look alike, talk alike, think 
 alike, or feel alike, we still hold that they are different 
 beings”? Well, the reason you are “this person and not 
 the other” is because you possess a unique life, that is, 
 the only one of its kind. 
 
 123 
 
124 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 A person is referred to as a man of strong personality 
 when he has developed his own or unique life. This de¬ 
 velopment of the unique life or the growth in personality 
 is conditioned upon direction and exercise. The direction 
 is towards some desirable ideal; the exercise is the effort 
 required to grapple with and overcome those obstacles 
 that would prevent the realization of this ideal. In short, 
 growth in personality is a struggle onward and upward, 
 through conflict and conquest, at the beckoning of the 
 ideal. Exercise develops vigor. Hence the definition, 
 “Personality is personal force or power.” I would qualify 
 this definition and have it read thus—Personality is 
 unique or individual personal force or power. 
 
 Personality, then, is characterized by vigor and posi¬ 
 tiveness. May I make a negative study? You have 
 known examples of those supine, effortless, colorless indi¬ 
 viduals who repress any impulse to opinion or decision 
 with “I don’t know,” or “I can’t.” These are neutral 
 personalities. 
 
 Personality is a word that is bandied about a good 
 deal in these days, and consequently applied with little 
 discrimination and mistaken connotation. How often we 
 hear this, “He does not know much about the subject, but 
 then he has such a wonderful personality.” I know of 
 some who are growing heartily tired of “What a wonder¬ 
 ful personality.” It is frequently used about as intelli¬ 
 gently as “It is just grand.” Such “personalities” are too 
 often distributors of “candied mush” and sentimental 
 bosh. In plain words, they are purveyors of flattery; of 
 flattery for selfish ends; of unhealthy, repulsive flattery, 
 that mosquito-like feeds upon the immature and the 
 mawkish and too often leaves its victims morally weak¬ 
 ened and diseased. Such “personality” makes the neurotic 
 weep and the “judicious grieve.” It is a pseudo-per¬ 
 sonality. 
 
PERSONALITY 
 
 125 
 
 Then there are real personalities. The real progress of 
 the individual is the development of personality, the 
 growth in personal force and power. How may this be 
 accomplished? I know of no other way than by over¬ 
 coming. If you, my reader, have heard of another way 
 will you kindly tell me about it? To continue, he who 
 would develop personality must be unconquerable. He 
 may be temporarily defeated, he is never permanently 
 conquered. He must be able to say with Henley, 
 
 “I thank whatever gods may be 
 For my unconquerable soul. 
 
 In the fell clutch of circumstance, 
 
 I have not winced or cried aloud, 
 
 Under the bludgeonings of chance. 
 
 My head is bloody but unbowed.” 
 
 Or with another great poet, “We fall to rise, are baffled 
 to fight better.” A personality so developed is healthy, 
 compelling, real. 
 
 If the public speaker will add the magnetic and im¬ 
 pelling force of such a personality to the authority of 
 thorough preparation, the convincingness of clear think¬ 
 ing, and the sincerity of conviction, his effort must be in 
 the highest degree effective, his appeal must be irresistible. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Memorize, assimilate, and interpret orally each of the fol¬ 
 lowing, allowing yourself to respond fully to the theme, the 
 individual conceptions, and the spirit of the selection: 
 
 (a) Out of the night that covers me, 
 
 Black as the pit from Pole to Pole, 
 
 I thank whatever gods may be 
 For my unconquerable soul. 
 
126 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 In the fell clutch of circumstance, 
 
 I have not winced or cried aloud, 
 
 Under the bludgeonings of chance, 
 
 My head is bloody but unbowed. 
 
 Beyond this place of wrath and tears 
 Looms but the horror of the shade, 
 
 And yet the menace of the years 
 Finds and shall find me unafraid. 
 
 It matters not how strait the gate, 
 
 How charged with punishment the scroll, 
 
 I am the master of my fate, 
 
 I am the captain of my soul. 
 
 Henley. 
 
 (b) At the midnight, in the silence of the sleep-time, 
 
 When you set your fancies free, 
 
 Will they pass to where—by death, fools think 
 imprisoned— 
 
 Low he lies who once so loved you, whom you loved so, 
 Pity me? 
 
 Oh to love so, be so loved, yet so mistaken! 
 
 What had I on earth to do 
 With the slothful, with the mawkish, the unmanly? 
 Like the aimless, helpless, hopeless, did I drivel, 
 
 Being who? 
 
 One who never turned his back, but marched breast 
 forward, 
 
 Never doubted clouds would break. 
 
 Never dreamed, though right were worsted, wrong 
 would triumph, 
 
 Held we fall to rise, are baffled to fight better, 
 sleep to wake. 
 
 No, at noonday, in the battle of man’s worktime, 
 
 Greet the unseen with a cheer! 
 
 Bid him forward, breast and back as either should be, 
 “Strive and Thrive” ! cry, “Speed—fight on, fare ever 
 There as here!” 
 
 Browning. 
 
PERSONALITY 
 
 127 
 
 A SONG TO THE VALIANT 
 
 (c) I’ll walk on the storm-swept side of the hill 
 In my young days, in my strong days, 
 
 In the days of robust pleasure. 
 
 I’ll go where the winds are fierce and chill— 
 On the storm-swept side of the daring hill— 
 And there will I shout my song lays 
 In a madly tumbling measure. 
 
 Hilloo the dusk, 
 
 And hilloo the dark! 
 
 The wind hath a tusk 
 And I wear its mark. 
 
 The day’s last spark hath a valiant will: 
 Hilloo the dark on the wind-swept hill! 
 
 From the hour of pain 
 Two joys we gain— 
 
 The strife and the after leisure. 
 
 When the fang of the wind is bared and white, 
 In the strong days, in the wild days, 
 
 In the days that laugh at sorrow, 
 
 I love to wander the hills at night— 
 
 When the gleaming fang of the wind is white— 
 Nor yearn a whit for the mild days, 
 
 Or the ease of life to borrow. 
 
 Hilloo the whine 
 In the pungent cone 
 Of the dreaming pine 
 On the hill, alone ! 
 
 The bare trees moan with a dead thing’s cry; 
 And their skeletons crawl along the sky, 
 
 Like a dinosaur 
 Who would live once more 
 
 In the flesh that blooms tomorrow. 
 
 I’ll walk on the sheltered side of the hill 
 In my old days, in my cold days, 
 
 As the sap of life is waning 
 
 I’ll find a road where the trees are still— 
 
128 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 On the sheltered side of the placid hill— 
 
 And dream a dream of the bold days 
 When the leash of Time was straining 
 Adieu the snows 
 And the fang that rips ! 
 
 And hilloo the rose 
 With her velvet lips ! 
 
 Where the brown bee sips with his gorgeous lust 
 I’ll pay back earth with her borrowed dust; 
 
 Nor shall I grieve 
 At the clay I leave 
 
 But joy in the gifts I’m gaining. 
 
 Lord, hear Thou the prayer of a poet’s soul, 
 
 In his fire days, when his lyre plays, 
 
 And his song is swift with passion. 
 
 Give to him prowess to near the goal 
 While his limbs are firm and his sight is whole 
 Make brief his stay in the dire days 
 When the paling heart is ashen. 
 
 The storm-swept sides 
 Of the hill belong 
 To the soul that rides 
 To the gates of song; 
 
 May his days be long where the wild winds play; 
 On the sheltered side let him briefly stay; 
 
 When his muse grows dumb 
 Let the darkness come 
 
 In the Orient’s fine, swift fashion. 
 
 Wilson MacDonald. 
 
 (d) Under the wide and starry sky, 
 
 Dig the grave and let me lie. 
 
 Glad did I live and gladly die, 
 
 And I laid me down with a will. 
 
 This is the verse you grave for me: 
 Here he lies where he longed to be, 
 Home is the sailor, home from the sea, 
 And the hunter home from the hill. 
 
 Stevenson. 
 
PERSONALITY 
 
 129 
 
 (e) Then, welcome each rebuff that turns earth’s smooth¬ 
 ness rough, 
 
 Each sting that bids nor sit nor stand but go! 
 
 Be our joys three parts pain! strive nor hold cheap 
 the strain; 
 
 Learn nor account the pang; dare, never grudge the 
 throe! 
 
 Browning. 
 
 II. Select a subject concerning which you have deep convic¬ 
 tions. Let the treatment of the material be based upon 
 clear thinking and sincere sentiment. Let the delivery be 
 a communication of individualized and logically ordered 
 ideas and a spontaneous expression of your reaction to 
 those ideas. In other words, let it be at once logical and 
 intensely sincere. 
 
XXV 
 
 THE SPONTANEOUS EXPRESSION OF THE 
 
 FEELING 
 
 T HE imitative, artificial, and superficial elocution of 
 other days—unfortunately it still “drags superflu¬ 
 ous on the stage”—went to the ridiculous length of pre¬ 
 scribing a complete set of rules for the expressions of the 
 emotions. For example, one rule prescribed a high pitch 
 for the expression of joy, and another a low pitch for 
 sorrow. The resulting unreal intonations represented 
 nearly the last word in absurdity. Trusting that in the 
 near future such stupid, preposterous, and ludicrous rules 
 will all be relegated to the limbo of things worthless and 
 foolish, I will not transgress any further upon the time of 
 my reader with a discussion of them. 
 
 A few years ago I read an amusing description of a 
 service in a colored church “down South” in a popular 
 novel that had just appeared. The parson was described 
 as a very impressive individual, rather gorgeously or 
 loudly—it depends upon one’s point of view—apparelled. 
 In fact he was “gotten up regardless.” He wore prodig¬ 
 iously checked trousers, brown coat, and vest of many 
 colors, among which red and yellow predominated. His 
 kinky hair and beard glistened from a generous applica¬ 
 tion of “hair ile.” He began the delivery of his sermon 
 by rolling his eyes heavenward and assuming a “fare- 
 you-well-Brother-Watkins” tone. As he contemplated the 
 unregenerate condition of his flock his voice was broken 
 with sobs, and tears coursed down his cheeks. Then he 
 assumed an attitude of fierce denunciation, and wound up 
 
 130 
 
EXPRESSION OF FEELING 
 
 131 
 
 in a wild confusion of vocalization and gesticulation. It 
 was thrilling—at least to his parishioners. A vivid reali¬ 
 zation of the awfulness of their unregeneracy expressed 
 itself in moans, groans, and other ejaculations. 
 
 The worthy colored preacher worked himself up to an 
 extravagant display of superficial emotionalism, and then 
 just “let go.” He drifted about in a succession of moods, 
 without regard to relevancy of thought or suitability of 
 language. 
 
 But, my reader may urge, “you have chosen an extreme 
 example.” I acknowledge it. However, there are differ¬ 
 ent degrees of this immoderate and uncontrolled emotion¬ 
 alism. Our colored friend was simply more extravagant, 
 that was all. 
 
 Any display of excessive sentimentalism in public speak¬ 
 ing is repulsive to the normal hearer. It is responsible 
 for the popular prejudice against any expression of feeling 
 or emotion. To avoid it many public speakers repress all 
 emotional impulse, no matter how sincere. This is a 
 mistake. The result is a suggestion of indifference or 
 lack of interest that is fatal to effective delivery. Such a 
 speaker mistakes repression for control. 
 
 I shall discuss very elementarily and hastily the genesis 
 and spontaneous expression of emotion. Associated with 
 or included in every conception or idea or thought are 
 certain reactions or feelings or emotions. These reactions 
 are, of course, based upon previous experiences. For 
 instance, if I say “Alum” your mouth will involuntarily 
 pucker; if I say “Carrion” you will be nauseated; if I 
 say “Sunshine” you will experience a feeling of pleasure. 
 These examples are elementary, but I think they will 
 serve to illustrate the point with sufficient vividness. 
 Then when the attention is concentrated upon an idea the 
 associated feeling is generated inevitably, and, if not 
 repressed, will express itself spontaneously. 
 
132 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Now how can emotions be controlled? Sincere feelings 
 spring spontaneously and immediately from ideas. They 
 are anchored to ideas, as it were, and thus controlled. The 
 colored speaker’s moods were not anchored to any ideas, 
 and his delivery drifted off and was wrecked on the rocks 
 of excess and extravagance. To put the matter in another 
 way, feelings must not be repressed but balanced by 
 thought. 
 
 The conclusion of the matter is, therefore, that the 
 emotions issue directly from the ideas; that this emotional 
 spontaneity should not be repressed, but controlled; that 
 it is naturally regulated by maintaining the relationship 
 between the feelings and the thought, or by balancing the 
 feelings and the ideas. Clear thinking, then, is the basis 
 of both the spontaneous expression and the control of 
 feeling or emotion in public speaking. 
 
 ASSIGNMENTS 
 
 I. Choose some poems or prose extracts, the thought and 
 sentiments of which you have sympathetically assimilated. 
 Read or recite them simply, sincerely, and conversationally, 
 as if for congenial friends. Eliminate repression and self- 
 consciousness by a complete abandon, or an unrestricted 
 surrender to your reactions. 
 
 II. Speak upon a subject with which you are conversant, and 
 concerning which you have strong convictions. Let your 
 delivery be a direct, conversational expression of clearly 
 defined ideas and intense feeling. Let your surrender to 
 your feelings be immediate, involuntary, unrestrained. 
 
XXVI 
 
 VOICE EDUCATION 
 
 I T is difficult properly to develop a voice without the 
 personal supervision of a specialist in voice culture. 
 The chief reason for this is, no matter how minute the 
 instructions accompanying prescribed exercises anyone 
 attempting to train his own voice lacks the sensation or 
 consciousness of the proper functioning of the agents, 
 and of the right conditions of voice production necessary 
 to his guidance. The most common faults of voice are 
 throatiness, harshness, hoarseness, hardness, lack of 
 resonance, unresponsiveness, inflexibility, and poor carry¬ 
 ing power. These defects arise from faulty conditions of 
 voice production; chiefly from interferences with the free 
 vibrations of the vocal cords, and the full use of the 
 resonance space. The aim in voice culture is to substitute 
 the correct condition of voice production, and thus by 
 removing the cause, eliminate the defects. Then for the 
 faults enumerated there will be substituted control, free¬ 
 dom, resonance, flexibility, good carrying power, and 
 responsiveness to and co-ordination with mental processes. 
 Voice Education is designed, as someone has said, “To 
 make poor voices good, and good voices better.” 
 
 In voice training exercises should be practised care¬ 
 fully and regularly, and, upon the occasion of speaking in 
 public, forgotten. Then the improved conditions of voice 
 production will reveal themselves spontaneously and to 
 the degree of development. 
 
 The following exercises are offered with the hope that 
 
 1 on 
 
 loo 
 
134 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 anyone who may attempt to improve his voice by prac¬ 
 tising them will derive some benefit. 
 
 I. Exercises for Breathing: 
 
 1. Place one hand on the diaphragm or across the 
 body, just below the breast bone. Inhale and 
 let the breath focus at the hand. 
 
 2. Endeavor by the repetition of 1 to establish the 
 diaphragmatic placing and control of breath, 
 that the progress will be involuntary. Under all 
 circumstances, whether in life breathing or 
 breathing for vocalization, the inhalation should 
 focus at the diaphragm. 
 
 3. Strengthen the diaphragm and develop tone 
 support. 
 
 (a) Breathe in and out slowly. 
 
 (b) Inhale slowly during six counts, hold the 
 breath during two counts, exhale during 
 six counts. 
 
 (c) Increase the length of time of inhalation 
 and exhalation. 
 
 (d) Inhale a large breath and hold it as long 
 as possible at the diaphragm. 
 
 4. Take the exercises given under 2 and 3 with 
 the throat muscles relaxed. In other words, 
 co-ordinate activity at the diaphragm with pas¬ 
 sivity at the throat. The breath must be con¬ 
 trolled at the diaphragm and not by constricting 
 the muscles at the throat. 
 
 5. Rhythm of Breathing. 
 
 The object in developing rhythmic breathing 
 is to render the breathing in expression respon¬ 
 sive to the mental processes so that each mental 
 impulse to expression will stimulate a breath. 
 Consequently, for expression, frequent breaths 
 should be taken. In fact, in perfect breathing 
 
VOICE EDUCATION 
 
 135 
 
 for speaking, a breath should be taken spon¬ 
 taneously for the expression of each concep¬ 
 tion. 
 
 (a) Breathe in and out slowly and regularly. 
 
 (b) Breathe in and out regularly, but with 
 different degrees of rapidity. 
 
 (c) Inhale during two counts. Vary this exer¬ 
 cise by varying the number of counts. 
 
 (d) Divide a stanza into its thought phrases. 
 Read it by creating the conceptions, and 
 allowing each conception to generate a 
 breath for its conception. Thus the co¬ 
 ordination of the mental and vocal proc¬ 
 esses may be stimulated. Vary this exer¬ 
 cise by using not only different stanzas 
 but also prose excerpts. 
 
 II. Exercises for vocalization: 
 
 A clear and definite conception of the tone or 
 combination of tones, or in other words, of the 
 exercise, must, in every case precede the pro¬ 
 duction. Practice, to be effective, must be in¬ 
 telligent. An absolute essential of good tone is 
 good support, that is a sufficient quality of 
 breath well controlled at the diaphragm. Hence 
 the necessity of the development to be secured 
 from the exercises from breathing. Relax the 
 muscles of the jaw and carefully avoid throat 
 constriction in taking different exercises. 
 
 (a) Support of tone. 
 
 1. With good breath conditions sing the 
 vowel a as in father, firmly and evenly 
 during five counts. 
 
 2. Practise 1 varying the length and 
 strength of the tone. 
 
136 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 (b) Resonance of tone. 
 
 1. Sing a 
 
 2. Sing o a 
 
 4. Sing oo o a 
 
 3. Sing ea 
 
 Each of these exercises should be taken on 
 different notes of the scale. 
 
 (c) Flexibility of tone. 
 
 1. Practise the exercises given under 
 Resonance of tone. 
 
 2. Sing the scale, using la. 
 
 3. Divide a stanza into its thought phrases. 
 Sing each thought phrase on a different 
 note. Do not in any case go beyond 
 the singing or speaking range. How¬ 
 ever, it is well to seek to increase the 
 range, but this must be done with the 
 careful avoidance of throat constriction. 
 
 (d) Tone Color. 
 
 1. Repeat aloud lyrics that make a strong 
 appeal. It is necessary to appreciably 
 affect the voice that the reader shall 
 read the lyrics interpretatively and iden¬ 
 tify himself with, and abandon him¬ 
 self to, the experiences and emotions. 
 Thus will he not only develop tone color 
 but stimulate responsiveness in the 
 voice. 
 
 (e) Carrying power of voice. 
 
 Good carrying power of voice depends upon: 
 
 (a) Correct conditions of tone production. 
 
 (b) Conversational attitude towards the 
 audience. 
 
 Thus no matter how large a space the audience 
 may occupy, if these mental and vocal condi- 
 
VOICE EDUCATION 
 
 137 
 
 tions prevail the voice will reach individual and, 
 at the same time retain its conversational 
 naturalness. 
 
 1. Sitting, and speaking conversationally, re¬ 
 peat a stanza or paragraph to some imaginary 
 person whom you imagine seated near you. 
 
 2. Place him further away and repeat 1. Of 
 course the expression should be spontane¬ 
 ously accentuated. 
 
 3. Repeat in increasing distances. 
 
 4. Practice 1, 2, and 3 standing. Be careful to 
 retain the conversational tone. 
 
 It was not the intention to outline a comprehensive 
 course in voice culture, either in process or exercise, but 
 rather to suggest a few exercises that anyone interested 
 in improving his voice and without the opportunity of 
 expert supervision might practise with benefit. 
 
XXVII 
 
 PHYSICAL EDUCATION 
 
 HE body is an agent of expression. Physical 
 
 expression is termed pantomime. It is revealed in 
 
 gesture, attitudes of the body, facial expression, etc. In 
 conversation the succession of conceptions dominates a 
 continuously varying and suggestively expressive panto¬ 
 mime. Therefore, pantomime is a natural, spontaneous, 
 and necessary form of expression and must not be re¬ 
 strained. Nor, on the occasion of reciting, should the 
 reader consciously insert gestures, etc. The pantomime 
 must be a response to an inner impulse. The proper con¬ 
 dition for spontaneous and expressive pantomime is that 
 condition of ease, freedom, and lack of self-conscious¬ 
 ness that is experienced in intimate conversation. 
 
 Since anyone can, and everyone does, experience this 
 condition to a greater or less degree, why are any sug¬ 
 gestions in physical education necessary? Unfortunately, 
 there are very few who have retained their normality 
 physically and who are not affected by muscular constric¬ 
 tions and self-consciousness. There are very few who 
 “feel natural” in public speaking. Consequently, training 
 is necessary that will develop the free and natural func¬ 
 tioning of the agents of expression individually and as a 
 unity and the coordination of this unity with the action 
 of the mind in thinking. The vital center of the physical 
 unity is the chest. As in the case of the suggestions for 
 vocal training, it is not the intention to outline a com- 
 
 138 
 
PHYSICAL EDUCATION 
 
 139 
 
 prehensive course in physical training, but rather to pre¬ 
 scribe a few simple exercises which will tend, if practiced 
 intelligently, to develop desirable physical conditions for 
 expression. 
 
 The object of physical training for expression, then, is 
 to induce a condition of responsiveness. It is necessary, 
 therefore, to give exercises for the liberation of the 
 muscles of the body. But for anyone to stand with all 
 the muscles released would suggest devitalization. The 
 vital center must be established. Then, with the center 
 established and the parts moving freely in relation to that 
 center, freedom, control, and ease are secured. These are 
 the physical conditions of naturalness, and, when they 
 prevail, the reader can and should forget all about ges¬ 
 tures, attitudes, etc. Then the body will respond nor¬ 
 mally, animatedly, and suggestively. The resulting pan¬ 
 tomime will be an unobtrusive and harmonious part of 
 the expressional unity. 
 
 EXERCISES FOR ESTABLISHING THE VITAL CENTER 
 
 OF THE BODY 
 
 1. Place one hand upon the center of the chest and the 
 other across the back and directly opposite it. Sepa¬ 
 rate the hands by muscular expansion, not by breath 
 expansion. In doing this, do not grip the throat 
 muscles. 
 
 2. Place the tips of the fingers on the points of the 
 shoulders. With the arms in this position, stretch 
 them as far as possible, and move them with a cir¬ 
 cular motion, expanding the chest. 
 
 3. Raise the arms to a vertical position. Clench the 
 hands. Draw them down, as if pulling a weight, 
 and expand the chest. Do not grip the throat 
 muscles. 
 
140 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 4. Raise the arms forward and to a horizontal posi¬ 
 tion. Clench the hands. Draw back quickly and 
 abruptly, expanding the chest. 
 
 5. Stand at arm’s length from the wall. Place hands 
 against the wall. Touch wall with chest. Do not 
 bend knees. 
 
 EXERCISES FOR RELAXATION 
 
 1. Neck: 
 
 Stand or sit erect. Let the head fall forward on 
 the chest. Relax the jaw. With this condition of 
 relaxation, move the head to side, back, and front, 
 describing a circle. Describe this circle with the 
 head moving first to the right and then to the left. 
 
 2. Shoulders: 
 
 (a) Stand erect. Raise the shoulders with the 
 arms relaxed. Drop them. 
 
 (b) With relaxed arms, shake or sway the chest 
 rapidly from side to side. 
 
 (c) Relax the arms. Swing them in a circle, first 
 forward and then backward, with the shoulder 
 as center. 
 
 3. Arms: 
 
 (a) Stand erect. Raise and extend the arms until 
 they are on a level with the shoulders. Let 
 them drop inertly. Do this in every possible 
 direction. 
 
 (b) Raise and extend the arms until they are on a 
 level with the shoulders. Then relax the arm 
 in sections, i.e., fingers, wrists, elbows, and 
 shoulders. 
 
 (c) Raise and extend the arms over the head by 
 successively energizing the muscles of the up¬ 
 per arm, wrist, and fingers. Then drop the 
 
PHYSICAL EDUCATION 
 
 141 
 
 arm by relaxing the parts in the reverse order, 
 i.e., fingers, wrists, lower arm, upper arm. 
 
 (d) Raise and extend the arms on a level with 
 shoulders in every direction possible by ener¬ 
 gizing the parts successively, as in (c). Also 
 relax the parts successively, as in (c). 
 
 (e) Repeat the energizing and relaxing of the parts 
 of the arm until they bend. Then the arm 
 will gesture naturally, gracefully, and vigor¬ 
 ously. 
 
 4. Fingers: 
 
 Relax the fingers of the right hand. Grasp the left 
 hand with the right by placing the thumb of the 
 right hand in the palm of the left and the fingers on 
 the back. Shake the left hand until the fingers feel 
 limp and heavy. Reverse the hands and repeat the 
 exercise. 
 
 5. Legs: 
 
 Stand well balanced or poised, with the weight of 
 the body on the right foot. Raise the left leg from 
 the hip. Relax the muscles from the knee down. 
 Drop the leg, allowing it to fall by its own weight. 
 Change the weight and repeat the exercise. 
 
 6. Back: 
 
 Sit erect and square. Let the head fall forward as 
 in 1. Relax the shoulders and arms. Then relax 
 the muscles of the back, and let the torso drop for¬ 
 ward of its own weight. Take the original position 
 in the reverse order, i.e., by energizing first the back 
 and then the neck. Repeat this order to either side. 
 
 EXERCISES FOR POISE 
 
 (a) Stand erect, with weight on both feet. Relax 
 the whole body. Then assert or energize the 
 vital center, the chest. 
 
142 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 (b) Place the entire weight on the right foot, and 
 repeat the exercise. 
 
 (c) Place the entire weight on the left foot, and 
 repeat the exercise. 
 
 Thus the center of the body is asserted, to which the 
 parts are related in their proper relationship, and about 
 which they function naturally. Control and responsive¬ 
 ness are established. The natural dignity, ease, and free¬ 
 dom of the body are restored. These are the physical 
 conditions for public speaking. They are the conditions 
 for all other occasions. By developing and establishing 
 these physical conditions through the prescribed exercises, 
 and then forgetting all about them when appearing be¬ 
 fore an audience, naturalness in pantomimic expression, 
 unmodified by physical constrictions, will be substituted 
 for conscious posturing, affected gesturing, or crude and 
 meaningless gesticulation. 
 
XXVIII 
 
 PROBLEMS 
 
 T HE basic aim in any method of training for public 
 speaking should be to endow the student with the 
 ability to express his own thinking plainly. Clearness 
 and sincerity in thinking, lucidity and naturalness in de¬ 
 livery are the most important questions in training for 
 public speaking. The method of teaching public speak¬ 
 ing through the memorization and delivery of the great 
 orations has not proven an unqualified success. It pro¬ 
 vides no experience in the expression of original thinking. 
 This method is open to criticism also in that it develops 
 a tendency to stress the form rather than the matter. 
 
 I have substituted a method of training, based upon a 
 series of problems, which require original thinking by 
 the student. In order to derive full value from these 
 problems, it is desirable that the student shall make, and 
 thoroughly impress upon his mind, an outline of the argu¬ 
 ment of each speech. He should prepare or practise the 
 speech for delivery, in the environment of public speak¬ 
 ing, before a real or imaginary audience. Psychologi¬ 
 cally, it is not absurd to practise before an imaginary 
 audience. It is quite as valid as to practise before a real 
 one. The student should apply the principles, exercises, 
 and advice contained in the foregoing chapters of this 
 book. He should not write the speeches out in full and 
 memorize them. As a result of this method of prepara¬ 
 tion, the speaker’s attention is withdrawn from the 
 thought and occupied with remembering the words. 
 
 I have assigned a list of subjects in connection with 
 
 143 
 
344 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 the series of problems. No given topic or question can 
 be interesting to everybody. Yet to derive the greatest 
 value from the preparation of a speech, the student of 
 speaking must be interested in it. However, it should not 
 require the exercise of very great originality or ingenuity 
 to select a suitable and interesting theme. 
 
 The aims of the prescribed problems are: 
 
 1. To provide training in the search for material. 
 
 2. To develop discrimination in the relevancy or 
 irrelevancy and the saliency or subordination of 
 matter. 
 
 3. To give practice in the effective arrangement of 
 material. 
 
 4. To stress the necessity of verifying matter. 
 
 5. To afford experience in regarding questions from 
 different points of view. 
 
 6. To train to alertness in criticism and refutation. 
 
 7. To induce pertinent discussion. 
 
 8. To treat matter vividly by the apt use of example, 
 illustration, and comparison; and, interestingly, by 
 the employment of examples and illustrations 
 within the experience of the hearers. 
 
 9. Through clear thinking, to induce an explicitness 
 in language, a simplicity in style, and a frankness 
 and directness in delivery. 
 
 10 . To reinforce clear thinking with that sincerity 
 which produces conviction. 
 
 1. Read a number of selections frcm descriptive lit¬ 
 erature. Tell each in your own words. 
 
 2. Give a number of original descriptions. 
 
 3. Read a number of stories. Tell each in your own 
 words. 
 
 4. Recount a number of original experiences. 
 
PROBLEMS 
 
 145 
 
 5. Choose a number of subjects. Analyze and ex¬ 
 plain each after the fashion of the teacher. 
 
 Choose the affirmative or the negative side in each of 
 the following problems, and then deal with it as indicated 
 in the accompanying directions. The argument or the 
 treatment of each question should be preceded by an 
 introduction and followed by a conclusion. 
 
 The introduction should call the attention of the 
 hearers to the nature and origin of the subject under 
 consideration; should make clear the reason why the 
 question deserves the attention of the audience; should 
 aim to “render the audience well-disposed towards the 
 speaker’s personality, attentive to his speech, and ready 
 to be instructed by his argument.” 
 
 The conclusion should be a concise restatement of the 
 main points that were made in the development of the 
 argument of the speech. The recapitulation of the main 
 arguments may be followed by a personal application to 
 the audience of the case that has been made out and an 
 appeal based upon it. The nature and degree of the ap¬ 
 peal, which must be more or less emotional, must be 
 determined to a great extent by the character of the audi¬ 
 ence. A highly intellectual audience is somewhat skepti¬ 
 cal of emotional appeals. The conclusion, then, may be a 
 summary and an appeal. 
 
 1. Subject: The province or municipality should 
 
 provide work for all who cannot secure employ¬ 
 ment for themselves. 
 
 Directions: Give three reasons in support of the 
 attitude you assume on the question, and state 
 your conclusion. 
 
 2. Subject: The tendency of the people to concentrate 
 
 in the cities is detrimental to the best interests 
 of a country. 
 
146 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Directions: Support your attitude on the question 
 with three reasons; support each main reason 
 with one subsidiary reason; conclusion. 
 
 3. Subject: Tariff should be imposed for revenue 
 
 only. 
 
 Directions: Support your attitude on the question 
 with three reasons; support each main reason 
 with two subsidiary reasons; conclusion. 
 
 4. Subject: Military drill should be compulsory in 
 
 public schools. 
 
 Directions: Introduction; support your attitude on 
 question with four reasons; support each main 
 reason with three subsidiary reasons; conclu¬ 
 sion. 
 
 5. Subject: Prohibition is conducive to temperance. 
 Directions: Introduction; support your attitude on 
 
 question with two reasons; support the contrary 
 attitude with two reasons; give two arguments 
 in refutation of the latter two reasons; conclu¬ 
 sion. 
 
 6. Subject: Religion should be taught in the public 
 
 schools. 
 
 Directions: Introduction; support your attitude on 
 question with two reasons; support the contrary 
 attitude with two reasons; give two arguments 
 in refutation of the latter two reasons; support 
 each argument with one subsidiary reason; con¬ 
 clusion. 
 
 7. Subject: Commercial reciprocity between Canada 
 
 and the United States would benefit Canada. 
 Directions : Same as 6, but with two subsidiary 
 reasons in each case. 
 
 8. Subject: Farmers are justified in organizing them¬ 
 
 selves into a new political party. 
 
PROBLEMS 
 
 147 
 
 Directions: Same as 6, but with three subsidiary 
 reasons in each case. 
 
 9. Subject: Municipal ownership of public utilities is 
 desirable. 
 
 Directions: Same as 1, but reinforce each reason 
 with an example. 
 
 10. Subject: The government should enact legislation 
 
 providing for the compulsory arbitration of all 
 labor disputes in connection with public service 
 corporations. 
 
 Directions: Same as 2, but reinforce each reason 
 with an illustration drawn from the same field. 
 For example, if you were considering the de¬ 
 sirability of the municipal ownership of street 
 cars in connection with the city of A, you might 
 refer to the success or failure of their operation 
 by the city of B. 
 
 11. Subject: The government should inaugurate a sys¬ 
 
 tem of medical inspection for the public schools. 
 Directions: Same as 3, but reinforce each reason 
 with an illustration drawn from another field. 
 For example, if you were considering the sub¬ 
 ject of organization in connection with church 
 work, you might illustrate from the business 
 world. 
 
 12. Subject: The right of suffrage should be limited to 
 
 those who can read and write. 
 
 Directions: Same as 4, but reinforce each reason 
 with two illustrations, one from the same and 
 one from another field. 
 
 13. Subject: Judges should be elected by popular vote. 
 Directions : Same as 5, but reinforce each reason 
 
 with two illustrations, one from same and one 
 from another field. 
 
148 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 14. Subject: Women should receive the same remuner¬ 
 
 ation as men, in the teaching profession. 
 Directions: Same as 6, but reinforce each reason 
 with two illustrations, one from the same and 
 one from another field. 
 
 15. Subject: Chinese immigrants should be admitted 
 
 on the same conditions as those from Central 
 Europe. 
 
 Directions: Same as 7, but reinforce each reason 
 with two illustrations, one from same and one 
 from another field. 
 
 16. Take each of the foregoing problems and without 
 
 sacrificing relevancy of thought allow yourself 
 freedom of discussion in connection with each 
 point. 
 
 17. Prepare a ten-minute speech on a rural topic for a 
 
 rural audience. 
 
 18. Prepare a ten-minute speech on an urban topic for 
 
 an urban audience. 
 
 19. Prepare a ten-minute speech on a rural topic for an 
 
 urban audience. The difference in treatment 
 between the 17 and 19 will be in the method of 
 illustration. 
 
 20. Prepare a ten-minute speech on an urban topic for 
 
 a rural audience. The difference of treatment 
 between 18 and 20 will be in the matter of 
 illustration. 
 
 21. Subject: Life imprisonment should be substituted 
 
 for capital punishment. 
 
 Directions: (a) Discuss the nature, origin and 
 
 facts of the question. 
 
 (b) Discuss the general reaction of 
 the question. 
 
 (c) Discuss your personal reaction to 
 the question. 
 
Appendix 
 
 HINTS FOR ORGANIZING AND CONDUCTING 
 
 A DEBATING SOCIETY 
 
 There was a time when the Debating Society was 
 an institution in every community. It afforded every 
 ambitious young person an opportunity for self-improve¬ 
 ment. Every sort of question was debated with a deter¬ 
 mination to win. Participation in these debates entailed 
 extensive reading and deep thought, and produced alert, 
 clear, and persuasive speakers. Someone has asserted, 
 and with justification, that these debating societies were 
 the nursery of the great orators of those days. 
 
 For some time subsequent to the period referred to, 
 the people seemed to lose interest in public discussions. 
 The debating society became almost extinct. Synchro¬ 
 nous with this was a notable decline in the number of 
 outstanding speakers and in the quality of oratory. 
 
 Recently, however, there has developed a remarkable 
 recrudescence of interest in public speaking. One result 
 of this re-awakening has been the organization of de¬ 
 bating societies in almost every community throughout 
 the country. 
 
 Since the debating society affords most favorable 
 opportunities for the profitable application of the prin¬ 
 ciples and suggestions offered in this book, I have thought 
 it well to append practical information and directions for 
 the guidance of those who may be interested in the 
 organization and functioning of such a body. 
 
 140 
 
150 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 HOW TO ORGANIZE A DEBATING SOCIETY 
 
 The organization of a debating society or club should 
 be simple. The individual in any community who is 
 sufficiently interested to take the initiative in the organi¬ 
 zation of the society should select from his acquaintances 
 two or three—always a very limited number—of those 
 he deems to be most interested and influential. He should 
 take them completely into his confidence and invite their 
 co-operation. 
 
 Having fully discussed the purpose and the mode of 
 operation of the proposed club, in order to have some¬ 
 thing definite and tangible to announce, the self-appointed 
 temporary committee should notify those likely to be 
 interested. The notification of the purpose, place, and 
 hour of the first meeting may be given by oral or written 
 invitation. If it is more desirable that the notice should 
 be general, it should be given by public announcement. 
 
 When those interested are gathered at the time and 
 place fixed upon, someone—usually the person who has 
 taken the initiative in connection with the formation of 
 the society—calls the meeting to order and nominates 
 someone to act as chairman by saying, ‘‘I move that Mr. 
 A be chairman.” When the nomination is seconded, he 
 puts the question to the meeting. This is done by saying, 
 “Those in favor of Mr. A will indicate it by raising the 
 right hand,” or, “By saying ‘Aye/ ” When the ayes have 
 been counted, he should call for the noes. If the noes are 
 in the majority, another nomination must be asked for. 
 If the ayes are in the majority, he will declare Mr. A 
 elected. Mr. A then takes the chair and calls for nomi¬ 
 nations for the office of secretary. With the choice of 
 secretary, who is elected in the same way as the chair¬ 
 man, the meeting is prepared for business. 
 
 The next step is a formal statement of the object of 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 151 
 
 the meeting. The chairman now calls upon someone 
 competent to do this. The person designated should state 
 the purpose of the meeting, discuss the nature of the work 
 to be undertaken by the society, and urge the benefits 
 to be derived from active membership. Then he, or some¬ 
 one else, should move that those present should proceed 
 to organize a debating society. When the motion is 
 seconded and carried, a committee should be appointed 
 to draw up a constitution. 
 
 The Committee on the Constitution should withdraw 
 until the draft is completed, and then return and present 
 it to the meeting. The members of the gathering have 
 the right to discuss each article when it is read, and move 
 and adopt such amendments as will, in their estimation, 
 improve it. The constitution, as it is finally adopted, is 
 the law governing the members in their relations to the 
 club. The officers provided by the constitution are the 
 interpreters and administrators of the terms of the con¬ 
 stitution. 
 
 It is desirable, for the future success of a debating 
 society, to get off to a good start. Consequently, as soon 
 as the constitution is adopted, it is well to invite those 
 who wish to become members to sign it and pay whatever 
 fee is required. Then the members should at once elect 
 such officers as are provided for by the constitution. Of 
 course these officers must be elected from the duly quali¬ 
 fied members. 
 
 The society is now in a position to arrange a program 
 for the next meeting. This should be done before 
 adjournment. 
 
 THE CONSTITUTION 
 
 The following is a simple form for the constitution 
 of a debating society. This constitution may be modi¬ 
 fied at the will of the society and according to the condi¬ 
 tions providing for amendments to the constitution. 
 
152 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 PREAMBLE 
 
 We, the members of the-Debating Society 
 
 of-believing that it is to our advantage to 
 
 institute and maintain a Society devoted to debating and asso¬ 
 ciated subjects, and that membership in such a Club and par¬ 
 ticipation in its activities will encourage a spirit of fellowship, 
 provide means of intellectual interest and entertainment, en¬ 
 courage a search for information, stimulate a desire for knowl¬ 
 edge, afford opportunity for developing the power of effective 
 public speaking, familiarize with the questions of the day, 
 develop clear thinking and mental alertness, foster independent 
 judgment, and promote intelligent citizenship, do establish and 
 adopt this constitution. 
 
 Article I 
 NAME 
 
 This Society shall be known as- Debating 
 
 Society of-. 
 
 Article II 
 MEMBERSHIP 
 
 Section 1. Any person of good character may be admitted to 
 membership by affixing his signature to the Constitution and 
 paying the initiation fee (if any is required). 
 
 Section 2. Any member, who violates or evades the rules of 
 the Constitution; or persistently neglects or refuses to perform 
 the assignments alloted to him by the programme committee; or 
 refuses to be controlled by the rules of procedure governing 
 public assemblies and debating contests as interpreted and 
 administered by the President or the President pro tern, or the 
 Chairman of the Debate; or neglects to perform such financial 
 obligations as membership in the Club entails, may be expelled 
 by a two-thirds vote of the members present. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 153 
 
 Section 3. A vote shall not be taken on a motion to expel until 
 the first meeting following that at which it was offered. 
 
 Section 4 . Any member, expelled by the Society, may be rein¬ 
 stated upon an assenting vote of two-thirds of the members 
 present. 
 
 Article III 
 OFFICERS 
 
 Section 1. The Officers of the-Debating Society 
 
 shall be a President, Vice-President, Secretary, Treasurer, and 
 a Programme Committee. These officers shall be elected by a 
 majority vote. 
 
 Section 2. The term of office in the Society (after the first 
 term) shall be one year and until the election and qualification of 
 successors. The length of the first term shall be decided upon 
 at the first election of Officers. 
 
 Section 3. The election of Officers shall take place on the 
 -day of the month of-. 
 
 Section 4. The President shall preside at all meetings, state 
 the question for debate, introduce each speaker, and announce the 
 decision of the Judges. 
 
 Section 5. The Vice-President shall perform the duties speci¬ 
 fied in Section 4, in case of the inability or refusal of the 
 President to do so. 
 
 Section 6 . The Secretary shall perform the duties belonging 
 to his office. He shall keep a record of “the things done and 
 passed” in the Society, but not of things said and moved. It is, 
 however, “generally expected of the Secretary that his record 
 shall be a journal and, in some sort, a report of proceedings.” 
 
 Section 7. The Treasurer shall receive and hold all the 
 moneys of the Society; and shall disburse moneys only upon the 
 signed orders of the President acting upon the instructions of the 
 Society. The Treasurer shall present written report at the 
 Annual Meeting of the Society. 
 
 Section 8 . The Programme Committee shall select proposi¬ 
 tions for debating, assign the affirmative and negative speakers, 
 select the Judges of debate, and make whatever assignments and 
 arrangements may be necessary. The Programme Committee 
 shall do this not later than the preceding meeting. 
 
154 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 Article IV 
 MEETINGS 
 
 Meetings shall be as follows:— 
 
 Section 1. Regular Meeting on (Friday) of (each alternate 
 week). 
 
 Section 2. Annual Meeting on the - of (April) for 
 
 hearing the Reports of the Secretary and Treasurer, and for 
 electing Officers. 
 
 Article V 
 
 FEES AND ASSESSMENTS 
 
 Section 1. The initiation shall be (fifty cents). 
 
 Section 2. The dues shall be (five cents) per month. 
 
 Section 3. Special assessments may be levied by a two-thirds 
 vote of those present. 
 
 Article VI 
 AMENDMENTS 
 
 Any member may propose amendments to the Constitution. 
 Notice of Amendment must be presented in writing at the pre¬ 
 ceding meeting. An amendment to the Constitution shall be 
 declared carried on a majority vote. 
 
 HOW TO CONDUCT A DEBATE 
 
 How shall debating be conducted in order that the 
 greatest value shall accrue to the members, or in order 
 that they shall receive the best training for the public dis¬ 
 cussion of the questions of practical life? I shall outline 
 different methods of conducting a debate, and endeavor 
 to arrive at that method, which will be of the greatest 
 advantage to the whole society. 1. Intensive Debating— 
 In this type of debating a topic is assigned. A limited 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 155 
 
 number of persons—usually three—is chosen to present 
 and defend either side of the question. Each speaker is 
 allotted a definite time to present the phase of the question 
 he essays to discuss, and to refute the arguments of his 
 opponents. The members of each group select their own 
 leader and assign to each individual the aspect of the 
 question from their point of view, that he is to advocate 
 and defend. This prevents unnecessary overlapping and 
 allows opportunity for the greatest advantage to be taken 
 of the allotted time. Each leader, in addition to intro¬ 
 ducing his side of the question, sums up, at the conclusion 
 of the debate, and thus is permitted two speeches. The 
 amount of time allowed for each speech should be such as 
 to render neither the individual arguments nor the whole 
 debate wearisome for the audience. The question should 
 be assigned and the debaters chosen by the programme 
 committee. Interruptions by the debaters during the 
 progress of the debate are not permitted except when a 
 contestant transgresses the rules of debating. 
 
 ADVANTAGES OF INTENSIVE DEBATING 
 
 (a) The direct contest between the two sides, and the 
 struggle for victory is a strong incentive to thorough 
 preparation. 
 
 (b) The rivalry and the consequent thorough prepara¬ 
 tion induce logical thinking, less irrelevancy in statement, 
 greater alertness in the detection of fallacies, and more 
 effective delivery. In other words, it is the best means of 
 developing skill in debating. 
 
 (c) The necessity for the preparation of both sides of 
 the question is emphasized. Daniel Webster once said 
 that if he had time for the preparation of but one side of 
 a question, he would devote it to that of his opponent. 
 The value of such preparation for purposes of refutation 
 must be apparent. 
 
156 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 DISADVANTAGES OF INTENSIVE DEBATING 
 
 (a) Too few participate with a consequent tendency 
 to the lessening of the general interest in the work of the 
 society. 
 
 (b) On account of the somewhat automatic function¬ 
 ing it does not provide the best opportunity for training 
 in parliamentary procedure. 
 
 (c) A debater may be assigned the side of a question 
 that is contrary to his convictions. His argumentation 
 must necessarily be formal, and insincere. Consequently 
 he does not derive the maximum of benefit from his effort. 
 
 2. General Debating.—In this type of debating, a prop¬ 
 osition is assigned to the whole club. Each member is 
 expected to take part in the debate and to speak according 
 to his convictions. General debating very closely ap¬ 
 proaches the conditions of discussion in the majority of 
 public meetings. 
 
 ADVANTAGES OF GENERAL DEBATING 
 
 (a) Each member is enabled to debate according to 
 his sentiments. 
 
 (b) An excellent opportunity is offered for the prac¬ 
 tice of parliamentary procedure, since the order of speak¬ 
 ing is not assigned beforehand to the speakers. 
 
 DISADVANTAGES OF GENERAL DEBATING 
 
 (a) There is not the same inducement to thorough 
 preparation. 
 
 (b) There is a tendency for those who are diffident 
 about speaking in public to defer to those who are not so 
 afflicted. Thus those who are in the greatest need of the 
 experience do not benefit by their opportunities. 
 
 3. Direct and General Debating.—The greatest degree 
 of improvement can be secured by a form, that is a com- 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 157 
 
 bination of intensive or direct and a modified general 
 debating. The organization of such a debate is simple. 
 The programme committee assigns the subject and chooses 
 (three) debaters to support each side, and also prepares 
 a list of the remaining members of the club, other than 
 those who are acting as chairman, judges, etc. Each 
 debater from the general list, when called upon, is ex¬ 
 pected to speak according to his convictions. Thus, the 
 first part of the debate is carried on after the method 
 designated “Intensive Debating,” and the latter, approxi¬ 
 mates “General Debating.” The time allotted for each 
 speech in the general debate should be much less than that 
 allotted for each speech in the direct debate. 
 
 This method includes all the advantages of both Inten¬ 
 sive and General Debating. 
 
 SUBJECTS FOR DEBATING 
 
 The subject of a debate should be interesting alike to 
 the debaters and to the audience. The questions best 
 qualified to engage the attention are those that are related 
 to practical life. For example, there is a marked tendency 
 on the part of college students, at the present time, to 
 choose questions that are connected with their studies. 
 
 A short time ago I attended a debate between repre¬ 
 sentatives of the student bodies of two of the great 
 universities. The chairman, referring to the more prac¬ 
 tical nature of the questions chosen for formal debating 
 at the present time, made humorous reference to the sub¬ 
 jects of debate, where he was a student. “For instance,” 
 he said, “I recall that we debated on this proposition, 
 ‘Resolved, that the chicken is of more value to the human 
 race than the cow.’ After we had debated the question 
 ‘long and loud/ we arrived at the conclusion that the 
 chicken was of greater value to the human race than the 
 cow, since it could be eaten before it was born and after 
 
158 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 it was dead.” He went on to say that the subjects chosen 
 for college debates of long ago reminded him of a debate 
 between two teams of colored debaters. After wrestling 
 strenuously and furiously with the proposition, “Resolved, 
 that the moon is of greater value to the human race than 
 the sun,” the decision was announced in favor of the 
 affirmative, because it was clearly proven that the sun 
 shone in the day time when it was not needed. 
 
 The following types of subjects should be avoided: 
 
 (a) Those that are of no interest to those concerned 
 with the debate. 
 
 (b) Those that are so palpably true that there is no 
 basis for a difference of opinion, e.g., “Any side of a 
 square is equal to any other side of the same square,” or 
 “The barbarities committed by the German soldiers in the 
 great war were censurable,” or “Gladstone was a great 
 statesman.” 
 
 The most suitable subjects for effective debating, as I 
 intimated earlier in this article, are those that possess a 
 real interest for those participating in the debate, and for 
 the audience. The most promising sources for such ques¬ 
 tions are to be found in the practical life of today, in the 
 political, international, social, industrial, educational, and 
 economic conditions and movements of the times. 
 
 The following list of subjects will serve to illustrate: 
 
 International—The League of Nations is a guarantee 
 against future wars. 
 
 Political—(Dominion) A high tariff is necessary for 
 the prosperity of the Dominion of Canada; (Provincial) ; 
 Group government is detrimental to the best interests of 
 the people of the Province of Ontario; (Municipal); 
 Dominion or provincial party lines should be ignored in 
 municipal elections. 
 
 Social—Children under sixteen years of age should be 
 prohibited by provincial law from working in factories. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 159 
 
 Educational—The Provincial Government should enact 
 legislation providing for a system of consolidated schools 
 in the rural sections of the Province of (name of prov¬ 
 ince). 
 
 Industrial—State boards of arbitration, with compul¬ 
 sory powers, should be appointed to settle disputes 
 between employers and employees. 
 
 Economic—Tariff, for protective purposes only, upon 
 goods, the manufacture of which has been established in 
 Canada, should be withdrawn; or, Commercial reciprocity 
 with the United States is necessary to prosperity in 
 Canada; or, Canada should seek to establish commercial 
 reciprocity with the United States. 
 
 The members of the program committee of a debating 
 society can select many excellent subjects for spirited 
 debating from questions of public interest in their own 
 community. 
 
 THE PROPOSITION 
 
 A definition for debate is, argumentation for and 
 against. This implies that in a debate there are two sides 
 to the subject that is being discussed. 
 
 When a subject is offered for debate it should be pre¬ 
 sented in such a form as to indicate two distinct sides— 
 an affirmative and a negative. The only rhetorical form 
 that lends itself to such a suggestion is the proposition, 
 e.g., Resolved, that capital punishment should be abol¬ 
 ished. Clearly, in this example, there are two sides, the 
 affirmative, “It should be abolished,” and the negative, 
 “It should not be abolished.” 
 
 Questions may be of two kinds, fact, and policy or 
 theory. The particular nature of a question determines 
 the wording of the proposition. For example, the propo¬ 
 sition, “Resolved, that the alliance between Great Britain 
 and Japan is in the interest of world peace,” is based upon 
 
160 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 a fact, something that exists now, and the debate is a dis¬ 
 cussion of whether the status quo shall or shall not be 
 continued, and the proposition, “Resolved, that there 
 should be educational qualifications for voting,” gives 
 expression to a question of policy, and the debate upon 
 the question consists in offering arguments in support of 
 the desirability or the undesirability of adopting that 
 policy. In a question of fact, the verb “to be” is used. In 
 a question of policy or theory, it is customary to use 
 “should.” 
 
 A proposition should be phrased so clearly that each 
 debater, if he is sincere, will place the same interpretation 
 upon it. This enables the contestants to debate the real 
 issue intended by the framers of the question. If there is 
 ambiguity in the wording of the proposition, the debate 
 may degenerate into a mere dispute over the meanings of 
 terms. Take the proposition, “Resolved, that the govern¬ 
 ment should discourage the inculcation of a spirit of 
 militarism in the pupils of the public schools.” What 
 “government,” federal or provincial? What is meant by 
 “militarism”—defence, aggression, or both? It may 
 readily be seen that if there is not an agreement as to the 
 interpretation of the terms of a question the fundamental 
 issue may be forgotten in the debate. 
 
 A proposition should include but one idea or main issue. 
 Thus the opponents in a debate are compelled to “come to 
 grips.” Should the proposition contain two ideas of ap¬ 
 proximately equal importance, the affirmative might 
 choose to make one of the ideas the main issue, and the 
 negative the other. Consequently the debate would be a 
 failure since each side would be discussing a different 
 issue. In the proposition, “Resolved, that the Depart¬ 
 ment of Education of the Province of (Ontario) should 
 eliminate military drill from the public schools since it 
 inculcates a spirit of militarism,” there are clearly two 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 161 
 
 main issues, and, as a result, the proposition is unsatis¬ 
 factory for a debating society. Then a question may be 
 too broad and involve more than one issue. The question, 
 “Resolved, that the policy of the Government of 
 (Ontario) is in the best interests of the province,” is 
 faulty for debating purposes since the policy of a govern¬ 
 ment includes every phase of its legislation—financial, 
 educational, social, agricultural, etc. It is evident that 
 there are a number of main issues. 
 
 It is customary to word a proposition affirmatively. 
 This places the burden of proof upon those who uphold 
 the affirmative side. Thus, in the proposition, “Resolved, 
 that the Chinese should be excluded from Canada,” the 
 affirmative is required to advocate a change in the policy 
 of the Canadian Government in regard to Chinese immi¬ 
 gration, and consequently shoulder the burden of showing 
 the desirability of a change. 
 
 A proposition should be worded simply, concisely, defi¬ 
 nitely, and accurately. These characteristics in phrasing 
 will make for clearness, unanimity in interpretation, and 
 as a result, for effective and satisfactory debating. 
 
 A proposition should be phrased so as to avoid giving 
 either side an advantage. In the proposition, “Resolved, 
 that the superior generalship of Wellington was the sole 
 cause of Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo,” the word 
 “superior” makes all discussion futile. It is an example 
 of “begging the question.” 
 
 ORDER AND FUNCTIONS OF THE SPEAKERS 
 
 The plan outlined in this section for the speakers in a 
 formal or direct debate is only a suggestion. It is one 
 way. Several desirable modifications might, no doubt, 
 be suggested. 
 
 In order to directly and immediately arrive at the pur¬ 
 pose of this article, I will assume that the “proposition” 
 is phrased affirmatively, that it involves but one main 
 
162 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 issue, and that this issue is so clearly stated and empha¬ 
 sized that no one of ordinary perspicuity could miss it. 
 I will also take for granted that there are three speakers 
 on each side, that each speaker will be permitted one 
 speech, that each speech will be limited to a specified time, 
 and that the debate will be closed by a second speech by 
 each of the leaders, that the negative, as well as the 
 affirmative, will present constructive arguments, and that 
 each speaker is assigned the phase of the constructive 
 argument that he will develop. 
 
 The leader of the affirmative opens the debate by dis¬ 
 cussing the question briefly and generally, explaining the 
 meaning of the terms, defining the main issue, accepting 
 frankly the burden of the proof, stating what he and his 
 colleagues hope to prove, and outlining the organization 
 of the affirmative argument, that is, announcing the 
 phases of the question that each is assigned to attack or 
 support. He then proceeds to discuss the particular 
 aspect of the case that has been assigned to himself. 
 
 The leader of the negative follows. If the interpre¬ 
 tation placed upon the question, and the definition of the 
 main issue by the affirmative be just and fair, the leader 
 of the negative should state frankly that he accepts them. 
 To do otherwise would convey an impression of insin¬ 
 cerity and prejudice his case with the judges. He should, 
 then, endeavor to refute, concisely and convincingly, the 
 main arguments offered by his opponent. He should not 
 devote the whole of his period to refutation, but should 
 reserve a part of it to present arguments in support of the 
 view or the solution of the problem, that he and his 
 colleagues have decided to advocate. For example, in 
 the question, “Resolved, that Orientals should be excluded 
 from Canada,” the negative, in attacking the policy sug¬ 
 gested by the affirmative, places itself under obligation to 
 offer some other, and presumably better, solution for the 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 163 
 
 problem, e.g., the imposition of severe and definitely 
 defined restrictions, instead of exclusion. 
 
 As has been suggested, each speaker should so appor¬ 
 tion his allotted time between the refutation of his op¬ 
 ponents’ arguments and the discussion of his constructive 
 policy and arguments, as to permit himself the oppor¬ 
 tunity of doing some measure of justice to both. He 
 should, in the main, adhere strictly to the predetermined 
 division of time. Of course, unexpected developments in 
 his opponents’ case may require some modification of the 
 apportionment of his time. 
 
 Each of the succeeding speakers should spend part of 
 his time in the discussion of the fallacies in the argu¬ 
 mentation of his immediate opponent or refutation, and 
 the remainder urging additional points in support of that 
 which his side advocates. 
 
 When each member of the teams has spoken, the debate 
 is closed, as stated above, by the two leaders. The leader 
 of the negative speaks first, and the final speech is made 
 by the leader of the affirmative. No new arguments may 
 be introduced in the closing speeches. Each speaker sum¬ 
 marizes the main arguments urged by his colleagues, and 
 endeavors to show the inconclusiveness of the arguments 
 and refutation of his opponents. Each should endeavor 
 to stress very strongly the clearness and convincingness 
 of the case made out by his own side and the inconclusive¬ 
 ness and inadequacy of that of the other side. 
 
 Should there be a general debate it would, as indicated 
 in another section, take place at the conclusion of the 
 formal debate. 
 
 GATHERING MATERIAL 
 
 It is obvious that the person who essays to debate 
 should secure all the material on the question that is 
 available for him. Of course material that is accessible 
 to debaters who are resident in the larger cities, with their 
 
164 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 extensive libraries, is inaccessible to those who live in the 
 smaller villages or in rural communities. It is advisable 
 for the latter to choose subjects upon which they can 
 readily secure literature. However, on account of the 
 wide circulation of the newspapers, and the availability 
 of books and magazines, at the present time, there are 
 few questions that are not appropriate to both urban and 
 rural debaters. The advantages that accrue to the debater 
 as a result of research, other than those that are derived 
 from the preparation for debating, are the development 
 of a wider range of information, a facility in the selection 
 of relevant matter, and the ability to read intelligently. 
 I would, however, at this point, sound a note of warning. 
 Care should be taken that the reading is not made a sub¬ 
 stitute for thinking. 
 
 In order to begin an intelligent search for material it is 
 necessary to make a temporary analysis of the question, 
 that is, to decide upon the meaning of the term used, the 
 main issue, and the principal headings and sub-headings 
 under which the treatment of the subject may be devel¬ 
 oped. As one pursues the reading, however, the pre¬ 
 liminary analysis of the question may be very much 
 modified. In the meantime, it has served to direct intelli¬ 
 gent research, and has led to relevant reading. 
 
 The shrewd debater reads on both sides of the question. 
 In fact, to be conversant with the side of the question 
 advocated by one’s opponents is indispensable to success¬ 
 ful debating. And, besides, a thorough and critical 
 acquaintance with both sides of the proposition enables a 
 debater to more clearly and correctly define the issue, dis¬ 
 cover and strengthen the vulnerable points in his own 
 arguments, and anticipate the weaknesses in those of his 
 opponents. 
 
 During the process of reading and research, it is neces¬ 
 sary for the debater to have a note-book beside him. A 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 165 
 
 number of pages should be devoted to each heading and 
 sub-heading. Probably, since re-arrangement of material 
 is frequently necessary, e.g., a point inserted under one 
 heading, will be found later to be more relevant to another, 
 loose leaves or cards are preferable to a note-book. The 
 material secured should be inserted under the heading to 
 which it belongs. It should be quoted exactly, associated 
 with the exact quotation, should be accurate as to the 
 source, i.e., the authority; book, title and page; article, 
 where and when published. 
 
 The material derived from reading or research may be 
 termed evidence. Such evidence may be divided into two 
 classes, namely, facts, e.g., accepted statistics, unques- 
 tional scientific truths, acknowledged historical facts, or 
 undeniable current events; and authority. The value of 
 evidence based upon authority depends upon the reliability 
 of the source from which it is derived. The source or 
 authority must be disinterested, and competent to pro¬ 
 nounce upon the subject under discussion. He may be a 
 person of intellectual, or moral, or religious superiority; 
 or of unquestioned standing, acknowledged reputation in 
 some line of research, occupation or profession; or of 
 eminence as a statesman or exponent of international 
 law, etc. 
 
 Of course, “authority” is not confined to persons. A 
 standard dictionary is regarded by some as indisputable 
 in matters of pronunciation and definition of terms. The 
 Bible is universally accepted by Christian people on relig¬ 
 ious questions. Evidence based upon authority is of value 
 in actual debating only when the source is given. The 
 degree of the value of such evidence depends upon the 
 degree of the reliability of the authority. 
 
 Then, the question arises, “where can I secure informa¬ 
 tion to guide me in my search for material?” Obviously, 
 I cannot enumerate every source. Some are persons 
 
166 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 competent to give advice about special subjects, library- 
 catalogues, such indexes to magazines as Pool’s Index and 
 the Reader’s Guide. 
 
 Subjects based upon problems of public interest are 
 chosen for debating more frequently than any other. 
 Much information concerning these problems may be de¬ 
 rived from official publications of the bodies interested. 
 Usually these can be secured on request. Some of these 
 are the publications of the different Government Depart¬ 
 ments, universities, industrial boards, municipalities, 
 social and religious organizations, manufacturers’ asso¬ 
 ciations, peace societies, agricultural societies, etc. 
 
 The various departments of the Provincial and Domin¬ 
 ion Governments issue reports on matters coming under 
 their supervision. A letter or post card to the depart¬ 
 ment will bring copies of its reports to you. The agri¬ 
 cultural and other departments of the various provincial 
 governments and the Trade and Commerce, Railways and 
 Canals, Agricultural, Labor, Statistical, and other depart¬ 
 ments of the Dominion Government, all issue informative 
 reports. Political handbooks also contain much material 
 useful to debaters. 
 
 The files of the nearest newspaper office would also be 
 useful. But newspaper editors should not be asked to 
 prepare material for debaters. They are too busy for 
 that. 
 
 The logical treatment and organization of the evidence, 
 or the process of proof based upon it is known as argu¬ 
 mentation, and the result is the argument. 
 
 THE BRIEF 
 
 In the preceding section of this series, I indicated the 
 sources and discussed the recording of the material or 
 evidence for a debate. 
 
 In this section I shall concern myself with the organi- 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 167 
 
 zation of the evidence. This systematization of the ma¬ 
 terial constitutes the outline of the argument, and is 
 designated the brief. A brief is indispensable to a 
 beginner. Without the logical marshaling of ideas 
 represented in it, he would be very unlikely to offer a 
 well-ordered argument. The brief fixes the ideas in the 
 mind of the debater according to their importance and 
 correct relationship. Consequently it is essential to clear¬ 
 ness and relevancy in debating. Of course, in the actual 
 debate the speaker should not confine himself simply to 
 repeating the severe and meagre wording of the outline. 
 He should amplify the main and related ideas into what 
 is known as a speech, without interfering with their order 
 or altering their relationship. 
 
 A brief comprises three parts: (1) the introduction; 
 (2) the proof, and (3) the conclusion. Of these divisions 
 the most important is the second. In a debating contest 
 in which there are a number of speakers on either side, 
 each leader delivers the introduction and the conclusion 
 for the argumentation of his colleagues and himself. 
 Each of the speakers, other than the leaders, may regard 
 the speeches of the previous speakers on his side as suffi¬ 
 cient introduction and launch immediately into his argu¬ 
 ment, or he may briefly summarize the points already 
 made by his colleagues, before entering upon the refuta¬ 
 tion and the phase of the proof that has been assigned to 
 him. Each intermediate speaker’s conclusion should be 
 a concise recapitaulation of the points he has made in 
 his own speech. 
 
 The introduction of a brief and the main introduction 
 in a formal debate should contain, as succinctly as clear¬ 
 ness will permit, a discussion of the origin of the ques¬ 
 tion, a definition of the terms employed, and a statement 
 of the main issue. 
 
 The proof is the essential part of the brief. The 
 
168 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 outline of the proof consists of a classification of the 
 evidence according to the degree of its importance and 
 applicability. The main arguments, which bear directly 
 upon the main issue and are therefore the most important, 
 should be selected first; then, such subordinate evidence 
 as is related directly to the main arguments; then, the 
 subsidiary points that are related to the subordinate evi¬ 
 dence, etc. It is too evident for comment that the sub¬ 
 ordinate and subsidiary ideas are indirectly related to the 
 main issue through the main arguments. It is customary 
 to reduce this organization of the evidence to a form. In 
 this way, the argument is more vividly impressed upon 
 the mind of the speaker. The usual practice is to state 
 the main issue at the head of the form, and beneath this 
 the subordinate, subsidiary, and auxiliary arguments, 
 margined and designated by letters and figures, according 
 to the degree of their importance or the directness of their 
 relationship to the main issue. For example, the main 
 arguments may be indicated by Roman numerals; the 
 subordinate by capital letters; the subsidiary by Arabic 
 numerals, and the auxiliary by small letters. The differ¬ 
 ent degrees of importance assigned to the terms subordi¬ 
 nate, subsidiary and auxiliary are of course arbitrary. 
 
 The following will serve as a type of the form for the 
 outline of an argument. It is subject to such modification 
 as the number of subordinate, etc., arguments may indi¬ 
 cate. I have outlined but one main argument. Each of 
 the other main arguments, in an extended brief, would be 
 similarly treated. 
 
 Statement of Main Issue. 
 
 I. Main Argument. 
 
 A. Subordinate Evidence. 
 
 1. Subsidiary Facts. 
 
 (a) Auxiliary Points. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 169 
 
 B. Subordinate Evidence. 
 
 1. Subsidiary Facts. 
 
 (a) Auxiliary Points, etc. 
 
 The conclusion includes a brief and concise summary 
 of the chief points made in the argument, and a restate¬ 
 ment of the proposition which the speaker assumes has 
 been proven. 
 
 RULES OF PROCEDURE 
 
 On account of the necessary limitations of the space 
 allotted for this section, the subject of procedure has not 
 been dealt with exhaustively. I have selected only those 
 rules that I deem of immediate interest for those clubs 
 and assemblies for which this series of articles are de¬ 
 signed. I have included, also, some matters of interest 
 for such assemblies other than the rules of procedure, as, 
 for example, the duties of the presiding officer, decorum, 
 etc. Of course, I can claim no originality in the prepa¬ 
 ration of this section. Rules of procedure are based upon 
 accepted usage. If this section possesses any merit, it 
 lies solely in the fact that I have derived the rules from 
 authoritative sources. 
 
 The presiding officer opens the meeting by taking the 
 chair and calling the members to order. Announces the 
 business before the meeting in the order upon which it 
 is to be acted; receives and submits all motions and propo¬ 
 sitions presented by members; interprets, when necessary, 
 a point of order and practice; restrains members, when 
 engaged in debate, within the rules of order; authenticates 
 with his signature all the acts and proceedings of the 
 organization; receives, and announces to the assembly, all 
 communications. 
 
 The presiding officer shall not participate in the debate 
 or proceedings in any other capacity than as such officer. 
 
170 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 However, he may vacate the chair by requesting some one 
 else, usually the vice-president, to take it, and take part 
 in the proceedings. 
 
 When the presiding officer rises to speak, any other 
 member who may have risen for the same purpose should 
 sit down. This, however, does not give the presiding 
 officer the right to interrupt anyone to whom he has given 
 the right to speak. 
 
 The presiding officer should give close attention to the 
 proceedings of the assembly, and to what is said in de¬ 
 bate. He may read sitting, but he should rise to state a 
 motion or put a question to the meeting. 
 
 No member should disturb the meeting or another 
 member by whispering to others, by passing the presiding 
 officer and the speaker, by taking books or papers from 
 or writing upon the chairman’s or secretary’s table with¬ 
 out permission. In short, members should govern them¬ 
 selves as ladies and gentlemen. 
 
 The business of a meeting is usually set in motion, 
 especially in reference to some particular subject, by some 
 member submitting a proposition. When a member 
 wishes to address or make a communication to an assem¬ 
 bly, he must first “obtain the floor.” He does this by 
 rising in his place and addressing the chairman by his 
 title; the member may then proceed. In case two or more 
 members should arise to address him at the same time, 
 the chairman should grant permission to speak to the one 
 whom he heard first. In case his decision is disputed, 
 the matter may be referred to a vote of the members, the 
 name of the person to whom the chairman granted per¬ 
 mission to speak being submitted first. 
 
 A motion should be carefully put into form before its 
 adoption is moved. It should then be moved and seconded. 
 The mover should place a written copy of the motion 
 in the hands of the chairman. It is then before the as- 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 171 
 
 sembly for debate. At the conclusion of the debate the 
 vote is taken. The result becomes the judgment of the 
 meeting. 
 
 In case an amendment is offered to a motion, it is put 
 first to vote. Should there be an amendment to the 
 amendment, the amendment to the amendment is put to 
 question first; then, if it be not accepted, the amendment; 
 and if it be not accepted, the original motion. 
 
 A motion to adjourn is worded as follows: “That this 
 meeting adjourn.” It is not debatable, or subject to 
 qualification. It takes precedence over all other ques¬ 
 tions. If carried in the affirmative the meeting is ad¬ 
 journed to the next sitting day. If, however, the motion 
 is to adjourn to a time other than the next sitting day, 
 it is debatable. 
 
 A speaker should not mention a previous debater by 
 name, but rather as the previous speaker, or my worthy 
 opponent who spoke last, or some equivalent expression. 
 
 TAKING OF VOTE 
 
 When a motion is made and seconded and the debate 
 upon it is brought to a close, the chairman then inquires 
 whether the assembly is ready for the question. If no 
 member rises, the question is stated and the vote taken. 
 The method of voting may be by silent assent, by showing 
 of hands, by roll call, or yeas and nays, by ballot. In 
 case the members are equally divided, the chairman may 
 vote. But if he chooses to refrain from voting, the de¬ 
 cision is in the negative. 
 
 Committees may be selected by the appointment of the 
 chairman, or by ballot, or by the nomination and vote 
 of the assembly. The person named first on the commit¬ 
 tee usually acts as chairman. However, this is a matter 
 
172 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 of courtesy, since a committee has the right to choose its 
 own chairman. 
 
 Every debating society should possess a manual of 
 parliamentary law. The standard Canadian book on this 
 subject is Bourinot’s Rules of Order. 
 
 HINTS TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER 
 
 1. The presiding officer of a debating club should have 
 a knowledge of parliamentary rules and practice. 
 He can secure this knowledge from a manual of 
 parliamentary law. 
 
 2. He should be just and impartial in his rulings. 
 
 3. He should be self-controlled and courteous. 
 
 4. He should render his decisions promptly. 
 
 5. If necessary, he should give the reasons for a 
 decision, and give them clearly, concisely and 
 convincingly. 
 
 HINTS FOR DEBATERS 
 
 1. Speak concisely, relevantly, and exactly. 
 
 2. Do not waste your time in verbosity, or attempts 
 at rhetorical flights. 
 
 3. If your opponent has drifted away from the main 
 issue, or if he endeavors to stress a minor idea, so 
 that it will appear as a main idea, that is, if he 
 tries to “draw a herring across the trail,” restate 
 the question and define the issue again. 
 
 4. Conclude your speech with a summary of what you 
 have endeavored to accomplish. Sum up what you 
 have said and impress it upon your hearers in a 
 very few sentences that they will remember. 
 
 5. Do not write out your speech in full. Speak from 
 notes. 
 
 6. Confine your argumentation to the phase of the 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 173 
 
 question assigned to you. Do not attempt to cover 
 the whole ground. 
 
 7. Be courteous to your opponents. 
 
 8. Treat your opponents’ arguments fairly. 
 
 9. A good time to start to summarize is at the warn¬ 
 ing bell. 
 
 10. Do not “hang on” after you have been warned by 
 the presiding officer that your time is up. 
 
 A LIST OF PROPOSITIONS 
 
 The assignments for the application of the different 
 principles discussed in this book include a number of 
 problems stated in the form of propositions suitable for 
 debating, and other problems that may be so stated. 
 
 The following list of propositions has been made out 
 from questions of more or less interest to the public at 
 the present time. Should the members of any debating 
 club find few questions in this list of interest to their 
 particular group, it will not be difficult for them to select 
 propositions with such qualification: 
 
 1. The government should exact legislation for the 
 compulsory arbitration of all labor disputes. 
 
 2. Municipal ownership of public utilities is desirable. 
 
 3. Prize fighting should be prohibited by law. 
 
 4. The tariff should be revised at the next session of 
 parliament. 
 
 5. High license is preferable to prohibition as a 
 method of dealing with intemperance. 
 
 6. Partisan politics should be eliminated from mu¬ 
 nicipal elections. 
 
 7. Football is a hindrance to the best interests of the 
 high school course. 
 
 8. Convict labor should be employed in improving 
 public highways. 
 
174 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 9. The Province of (Ontario) should establish a sys¬ 
 tem of consolidated schools for rural communities. 
 
 10. The Government of the Dominion of Canada 
 should not continue to operate the railroads. 
 
 11. Capital punishment should be abolished. 
 
 12. Organized labor is a greater menace to the com¬ 
 monwealth than organized capital. 
 
 13. A system of compulsory voting should be adopted 
 in Canada. 
 
 14. There is need in Canada for the Progressive 
 Party. 
 
 15. The boycott is a proper policy for organized labor. 
 
 16. Labor-saving machinery has been injurious to the 
 laboring classes. 
 
 17. Indians should no longer be treated as wards of 
 the government. 
 
 18. The Province of (Ontario) should provide for 
 permanent compulsory segregation of the feeble¬ 
 minded. 
 
 19. The elimination of profits offers the best solution 
 of the liquor problem. 
 
 20. Social functions which involve lavish expenditures 
 are unjustifiable. 
 
 21. Trial by jury should be abolished. 
 
 22. Examinations are a fair test of scholarship. 
 
 A TYPICAL PROGRAM 
 
 1. Members Called to Order.—The chairman takes 
 the chair and calls the members of the club to 
 order. He should include, with this duty, a few 
 remarks regarding the business, etc., of the meet¬ 
 ing. This opening speech should be short. By not 
 indulging in long talks the chairman can expedite 
 the program of the meeting. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 175 
 
 2. Reading and Adoption of Minutes.—The chair¬ 
 man calls upon the secretary to read the minutes of 
 the last meeting. When the secretary has com¬ 
 pleted the reading, the members are permitted to 
 discuss and correct, if necessary, the secretary’s 
 report. The chairman then puts the motion for 
 the adoption of the minutes of the last meeting as 
 read or corrected. 
 
 3. General Business.—The chairman asks if there is 
 any business to be brought before the meeting. He 
 receives and submits, in the proper manner, all 
 motions and propositions presented by the mem¬ 
 bers. He then puts to a vote such motions as are 
 moved and seconded. 
 
 4. Debate (Direct).—The chairman introduces the 
 
 debate with a few remarks, announces the ques¬ 
 tion, and introduces the speakers in the order as¬ 
 signed to them, beginning with the leader of the 
 affirmative. It is well to confine the introduction 
 of each speaker to a mere announcement of his 
 name and the order of his position on the team,— 
 “I will now introduce to you the second speaker on 
 the negative, Mr. A-.” 
 
 5. Debate (General).—The chairman now calls upon 
 the other members of the club in the order in which 
 their names appear on the prepared list that has 
 been placed in his hands, to participate in the 
 debate. 
 
 6. Retirement of Committee on Adjudication.—The 
 chairman requests the judges to retire and decide 
 which side shall be declared the victor. The judges 
 usually retire to another room in order that they 
 may freely discuss the debating and the debaters. 
 It is customary for the judges to select one of 
 their number to act as chairman before proceeding 
 
176 
 
 PUBLIC SPEAKING 
 
 to the discussion of the debate. They should make 
 their decision upon the matter, and the manner of 
 debating, or, in other words, upon the argumenta¬ 
 tion and delivery. 
 
 7. Recitation or Music.—This entertainment should 
 be introduced when the judges are reaching their 
 decision. It relieves the strain placed upon the 
 attention of the audience by introducing a pleasing 
 variety. 
 
 8. A Speech.—This speech should be upon some sub¬ 
 ject of interest selected and assigned by the pro¬ 
 gram committee. It should be limited to ten 
 minutes. 
 
 9. Paper on Current Events.—The person to whom 
 the duty of preparing this paper upon current 
 events is assigned should select carefully and dis¬ 
 cuss briefly, illuminatingly and interestingly, the 
 most important world events that have occurred 
 since the last meeting. 
 
 10. Announcement of the Judges’ Decisions.—The 
 chairman of the meeting calls upon the chairman 
 of the committee on adjudication to announce the 
 decision. It is desirable for the chairman of the 
 judges to include, with the announcement of the 
 decision a discussion of the merits and faults of the 
 debating, and to offer some helpful suggestions to 
 the debaters. 
 
 11. Adjournment.—The chairman puts to a vote a 
 motion, duly moved and seconded, to adjourn 
 until the date of the next regular meeting. If 
 this motion receives a majority of the votes of 
 those present, the chairman declares the meeting 
 adjourned until the date of the next regular meet¬ 
 ing. 
 
 THE END 
 
Date Due 
 
 mm 
 
 
 
 
 &fcSt#¥€ 
 
 
 
 
 Tfok;r^. f 
 
 '• 4 ‘Ui> o 
 
 ; ' Glridve 1 
 
 
 Mr 2 0 ’4 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 *P 2 0 ’15 
 
 
 
 
 faculty 
 
 
 
 
 faculty 
 
 
 
 
 j 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 If) 
 
 
 
 
PN4121.K59 
 
 Public speaking : a natural method 
 
 p 
 
 rinceton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1012 00144 6782