Yesterday was fo agreeably inftructive, that we

long'd impatiently to hear you again upon the fame Subject.

C. For my part, I made what Hafte I cou'd, left I fhou'd have come too late: For, I was unwilling to lofe any part of your Difcourfe.

A. Such Conferences are very useful, among those who really love Truth, and talk with Temper: for then they exchange their beft Thoughts, and exprefs them as clearly as they can. As for myfelf, Gentlemen, I find an Advantage in converfing with you; feeing you are not difpleas'd at the Freedom I take.

B. Let us leave off Compliments, Sir; I know best how to judge of myfelf: and F I per

I perceive clearly that without your Affiftance I fhou'd have continu'd in several Errors. I intreat you, Sir, to go on, and fet me intirely right in my Notions of Eloquence.

A. Your Mistakes, (if you will allow me to call them fo,) prevail among moft People of Worth and Learning who have not examin'd this Matter to the Bottom.

B. Let us not lofe Time in Preamble: we shall have a thousand Things to fay. Proceed therefore, Sir, to rectify my Miftakes; and begin at the Point where we left off Yesterday.

A. Of what Point were we talking, when we parted? I have really forgot. C. You were speaking of that kind of Eloquence which confifts intirely in moving the Paffions.

B. Yes: but I cou'd not well comprehend that the whole Design of Rhetorick is to move the Paffions. Is that your Opinion, Sir?

A. By no means.

C. It seems then I mistook you Yefterday.

A. What wou'd you fay of a Man who fhou'd perfwade without any Proof; anđ affect his Hearers, without inlightening them? You cou'd not reckon him a true Orator. He might feduce People by this Art of perfwading them to what he wou'd,

without

without fhewing them that what he recommends is right. Such a Perfon must prove very dangerous in the Commonwealth : as we have seen before from the Reafoning of SOCRATES.

B. It is very true.

A. But on the other hand, what wou'd you think of a Man, who in his publick Difcourfes fhou'd demonftrate the Truth, in a plain, dry, exact, methodical manner; or make use of the Geometrical way of Reasoning; without adding any thing to adorn or enliven his Difcourfe? wou'd you reckon him an Orator?

B. No: I fhou'd think him a Philofopher only.

A. To make a compleat Orator then, we must find a Philofopher who knows both how to demonftrate any Truth; and at the fame time, to give his accurate Reafoning all the natural Beauty and Vehemence of an agreeable, moving Discourse, to render it intirely eloquent. And herein lies the Difference betwixt the clear convincing Method of Philofophy; and the affecting, perfwafive Art of Eloquence.

C. What do you fay is the Difference? A. I fay a Philofopher's Aim is merely to demonftrate the Truth, and gain your Affent; while the Orator not only conF 2 vinces

vinces your Judgment, but commands your Paffions.

C. I don't take your Meaning exactly yet. When a Hearer is fully convinc'd, what is there more to be done?

A. There is still wanting what an Orator wou'd do more than a Metaphysician, in proving the Existence of God. The Metaphyfician wou'd give you a plain Demonftration of it; and ftop at the fpeculative View of that important Truth. But the Orator wou'd further add whatever is proper to excite the most affecting Sentiments in your Mind; and make you love that glorious Being whofe Existence he had proved. And this is what we call Perfwafion.

C. Now I understand you perfectly well.

A. You fee then what Reason CICERO had to fay, that we must never separate Philofophy from Eloquence. For, the Art of perfwading without Wisdom, and previous Inftruction, must be pernicious: And Wisdom alone, without the Art of Perfwafion, can never have a fufficient Influence on the Minds of Men; nor allure then to the love and practice of Virtue. I thought it proper to obferve this by the by, to fhew you how much those of the last Age were miftaken in their Notions of this Matter. For, on the one

hand

hand there were fome Men of polite Learning, who valued nothing but the Purity of Languages, and Books elegantly written; but having no folid Principles of Knowledge, with their Politenefs and Erudition, they were generally Libertines. On the other hand, there were a Set of dry, formal Scholars, who deliver'd their Inftructions in fuch a perplext, dogmatical, unaffecting manner as difgufted every body. Excufe this Digreffion. I return now to the Point; and must remind you that Perfwafion has this Advantage beyond inere Conviction, or Demonftration; that it not only fets Truth in the fulleft Light, but reprefents it as amiable; and engages Men to love and purfue it. The whole Art of Eloquence therefore confifts in inforcing the cleareft Proofs of any Truth, with fuch powerful Motives as inay affect the Hearers, and employ their Paffions to just and worthy Ends; to raise their Indignation, at Ingratitude; their Horror, against Cruelty: their Compaffion

F 3

Omnes animorum motus, quos hominum generi rerum natura tribuit, penitus pernofcendi; quòd omnis vis ratioque dicendi in eorum qui audiunt, mentibus aut fedandis, aut excitandis, exprimenda eft. CIC. de Orat. lib. j. §. 5. Maximaque pars orationis admovenda eft ad animorum motus nonnunquam aut cohortatione, aut commemoratione aliqua, aut in fpem, aut in metum, aut ad cupiditatem, aut ad gloriam concitandos: fæpe etiam a temeritate, iracundia, fpe, injuria, crudelitate revocandos. Ibid. lib. ij. §. 82.