London Philosophical Societij. 231 



if I am not," continues Mr. W., " insufficiently read in 

 the present subject, Dr. Lawson was the first of the modera 

 professors of rhetoric, who endeavoured to systematize the 

 passions for the use of students in oratory. But while this 

 tribute of attention is offered to the memory of the lecturer 

 of Trinity College, and to the exception of every other 

 lecturer of the science, we are not to enter into the ideas 

 implied in the apology of the doctor at the conclusion of 

 the ninth lecture, expressly intimating, not only that rheto- 

 ricians had defined the passions imperfectly, but that mo- 

 raHsls had fallen into similar negligences; that his 

 ideas on the subject were completely new ; and, as such, 

 the theory would be considered an innovation, and so be 

 liable to censure. Now this was evidently to the exclusion 

 of the disquisitions contained in the voluminous treatises of 

 Dr. Hulcheson on the Passions ; the best perhaps extant : 

 books which had been published only a few years before, 

 and which caused controversy sufficient to produce illustra- 

 tions of the moral sense, and which Dr. Lawson might 

 possibly have perused ; books which prove to us, that there 

 can be no exciting reason previous to affection, instinct, or 

 the moral faculty ; and that the conscience is distinct from 

 the sense of moral cood and evil ; and so that we may dis- 

 cover, that what tasne is to natural discernment, conscience 

 is to the moral sense, improved by knowledge and carc.^" 



In pursuance of the inquiry, it may be curious perhaps 

 to observe, that allhcnigh Walker and Sheridan have 

 descanted with considerable feeling and energv on this 

 branch of the science, yet neither the one nor the other 

 has satisfied the various inquiries of philosophical 

 and interrogating students. In his essay on the Pas- 

 sions, Wr. Walker has adopted the meth()d of Mr. She- 

 ridan, — callinff the true signs of the passions, 1st tones, 

 2d looks and gestures. And although the master of inflec- 

 tion had most°certaiiily the ability to analyse the former, 

 and to dwell with considerable advantage on the latter, he 

 consigns ivhhout definition, and leaves the student, who 

 feels himself deficient, to turn his studies to some other 

 department of learninef, where nature may have been more 

 favourable to his wishes. The other lecturer exerted every 

 energv within his power ; but unfortunately his judgement 

 was deficient, and his will in coiuequcnce was inadequately 

 directed. Perhaps it is the circumstance of having sub- 

 mitted imperfect idea-i or definitions of the speaking voice, 

 which has rendered the works of Mr. T. Sheridan so totally 

 useless to students in elocution. We must not feel sur- 

 prised then, that the author of British Elocution proceeded 

 P 4 no 



