324 On the Nature and Utility of Eloquence. 



fhould be intelligible; that the arguments Ihould 

 be cogent; that the arrangement fhould be ad- 

 vantageous; that the exprefllon fhould be fuit- 

 ablej that the pronunciation fhould be varied and 

 diflin^l ; thefe are not the precepts of one age 

 or one country ; they are as necefTary to be ob- 

 ferved at this time, as they were when Ariftotle 

 or Quintilian firft inculcated them. 



Inftead, therefore, of concluding with Dr. 

 Browne, that eloquence is of a vague, unfleady 

 nature, or with Leland, that the enthufiaft would 

 fail beeaufe he is no orator, let thefe inferences 

 be drawn ; that eloquence is fixed on fleady and 

 unchangeable principles ; that it is exceedingly 

 extenfive in its ufe, and relates to every kind of 

 difcourfe or fpeech that can be imagined : that 

 he who follows its precepts in one inflance, is in 

 that inflance truly eloquent, however he may fail 

 of fuccefs, when attempting another kind of 

 fpeaking, whether it be of a higher or lower de- 

 gree ; and, in fliort, let Dr. Campbell's definition 

 be thought the true one, when he fays, that 

 *' Eloquence is the art by which a difcourfe is 

 adapted to its end." This definition folves all 

 difHculties, explains, and, as it were, embodies all 

 rules, and is the grand axiom, by which the pro- 

 priety of every fubordinate rhetorical precept 

 mufl finally be tried. If fuch conclufions can be 

 fatisfadorily drawn from the foregoing thoughts, 



the 



