No. 6. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 449 



iu the audience, which is more excusable in the audience than it is 

 in the speaker. The secret of ket'pinji; {^ood order is in saying some- 

 thing good and in making people hear it. 



2. Man^' otherwise good Institute workers are incapacitated lor 

 eiiective work by reason of defect of voice or articulation. It is only 

 at special times and places that they can be used with good effect. 

 It requires a knowledge of their defects to program them properly. 



3. The Institrtte worker should be enthused in his work and he will 

 imjjort enthusiasm to his audience. P^uthusiasm is what counts iu 

 the struggle for supremacy in any line of work. 



4. Institute addresses should seldom be lengthy. During the day 

 sessions twenty minutes is usually long enough. An evening lecture 

 should seldom exceed thirty minutes. The character of the address 

 and the ability of the si)eaker must determine it. 



Speakers had better let the audience be the judge® of their ability 

 and "proceed to close" when a weariness or want of attention in the 

 audience suggests it. 



5. Speakers are usually much more interesting and effective if 

 their addresses are given extemporaneoush' than when read from 

 manuscript. Very much, however, depends upon the reading. How 

 often have we been deeplv mortified to hear a reallv valuable and 

 well prepared paper worse than sacrificed by the miserably poor 

 reading of it. 



If properly rendered written addresses are even more valuable 

 than impromptu or extemporaneous ones, because of their being 

 condensed into briefer space, clothed in better and more expressive 

 language, and expressive of more profound and deliberate thought, 

 as well as of more accurate information. It would be better if some 

 speakers would always write their addresses. We believe, however, 

 that extemporaneous addresses are usually better received and more 

 effective, and all constantl}' employed Institute lectures sliould 

 qualify themselves to speak extemporaneously. 



6. It is a very happy qualification in a lecturer to be able to inter- 

 sperse his serious talk with a humorous anecdote or story illustrating 

 his thought, but the humorous and frivolous should never preponder- 

 ate over the more serious and earnest thoughtfulness which should 

 characterize institute work. The attempt to introduce mirth and 

 story into a talk by one whose natural talent runs in the opposite 

 direction, usually proves a dismal failure. 



Institute lecturers should aim to interest the intellectuality of their 

 audience rather than to cater to the humorous and often foolish 

 sense of their audiences by ridiculous and mirth provoking stories, 

 that have neither illustration or point in them. 



29—6—1901 



