498 
JOURNAL OF THE PLYMOUTH INSTITUTION. 
question put by himself), that his said subject was Elocution, and 
to describe its nature and derivation at considerable length, show- 
ing that it was neither discourse, whether in prose or verse, nor 
eloquence, but complementary to both, and tantamount to ex- 
pression in music, as lately explained and taught by a Monsieur 
Lussy. 
He observed, with reference to that gentleman's work, that if 
musical expression could be taught, so, a fortiori, could elocution, 
but that genius alone could carry formulae to their highest pitch 
of utility, and even snatch a grace beyond them. Genius being 
then characterized, he asked whether study, practice, and genius 
were required for the attainment of elocution, and whether it was 
therefore an art, and (in reply to himself) answered both questions 
in the affirmative, adding, that, though perhaps more easily learnt 
than some others, it was an art that must always greatly attract, 
delight, and iufluence mankind. 
He next suggested the impossibility of success on the part of 
orators, historians, advocates, and preachers who neglected elo- 
cution, and the great discredit that would fall upon poetry, if its 
rhythm, grace, fire, and delicate beauty were not duly set forth 
by its exponents. He then went on to assert, that elocution was, 
in fact, the histrionic art — with less attention to pose, gesture, and 
facial expression, but, nevertheless, the soul of the said art, as 
being the manager of the voice, without which its other charac- 
teristics, aforesaid, would possess neither significance nor propriety. 
Having asked why, under all these circumstances, elocution was 
so seldom heard of in this country, he proceeded himself to answer 
the question, by making the average Briton set forth his objections 
to it at length. These he made out to be, its uselessness in the 
present state of society ; its non-necessity to a man who really 
had anything to say, and who could resort to print for what 
others said, without reference to their manner of saying it ; the 
discredit into which preaching and poetry had fallen ; the suffi- 
ciency of theatres to the drama; his inability "to see" himself 
reading aloud to his family, and his dislike to persons who did so, 
or spouted in public, because he had an idea that they were 
generally conceited beasts. 
After taking up and answering these objections, seriatim, the 
lecturer attributed the Briton's dislike of elocution to sheer 
hatred of trouble, fear of ridicule, and mauvaise honte ; and, after 
