ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far beyond our poor power to add or to detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us, the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave their last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom; and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

II. Directness

Closely akin to simplicity as an aid to clearness is directness. This comprises brevity and straightforwardness of construction. It means the avoidance of intricate, wordy, clumsy or stilted sentences. Such sentences call to mind the following specimen from Benjamin Franklin's proposal to revise the Book of Job. As a sample of improvement, he advocated that the sentence, "Doth Job fear God for naught?" be changed to, "Does your majesty imagine that Job's good conduct is

the effect of mere personal attachment and affection?" With all his proverbial common-sense, the renowned Franklin erred here. And every speaker errs who proceeds on the theory that a statement is impressive in proportion to the number of words which it contains, or to the ponderous and involved manner in which it is made. If an idea can be as fully expressed in five words as in ten, the extra five are usually a waste, and frequently a hindrance to clearness. A wordy speaker might say, for example, "A collection of the most famous and most widely known and popular essays that have endeared themselves to lovers of literature for many generations will be published by Smith and Company for all those who enjoy reading." With a terse speaker this would become, "A collection of the essays most popular with many generations of readers will be published by Smith and Company." The gain in clearness, and force as well, is obvious.

There are occasions, of course, when long sentences are necessary to express the speaker's thoughts. In such cases he should preserve clearness by direct, straightforward construction. For this purpose, the observance of two simple rules will aid greatly. First, the order of subjectpredicate-object or attribute should generally be observed. Exceptions may be made occasionally for the sake of coherence or variety. Secondly,

all modifying words, phrases, and clauses should be kept as close as possible to the words modified. It is remarkable how frequently sentences are ambiguous, misleading, or unfathomable only because of injudiciously placed modifiers. Take, for example, the following typical cases:

I neither am Republican nor Democrat. Both the platforms of the rival parties are unsatisfactory.

He was asked to marry the defendant repeatedly.

The attorney hurried from the court-house, where he had been trying a tramp in an automobile.

The clipping was brought from an address which had been published the night before by a messenger boy.

These sentences strike one as absurd, and yet unclearness arising from just such errors is by no means uncommon. The speakers usually know better, of course, but, owing to carelessness, or to open disregard of form, they acquire a habit of obscurity.

D. FORCE

The fourth requisite for an effective style of speaking is force. This quality is in no small part inherent in unity, coherence and clearness.

But additional emphasis may be secured by special attention to arrangement, diction, illustration and proportion.

I. Arrangement

The essential thing to bear in mind about arrangement is to use the most significant material where it will do the most good. This principle applies even to the order within single sentences, where weight may often be added by placing the important words at, or near, the opening or closing; also by arranging series of words, phrases or clauses in the order of increasing importance. But a more important consideration is the arrangement of sentences in the development of the various phases, and of phases in the speech as a whole. For emphatic effects in the body of the speech, the best opportunities are in the section which immediately follows the introduction, and in that which immediately precedes the conclusion. As the speaker finishes his introductory remarks and launches into the substance of his topic, the audience is apt to be particularly alert to size up the strength of his case. Therefore, whenever the plan of procedure can be so arranged, it is wise to open with one of the most significant phases of the discussion. A typical illustration of such an arrangement was afforded by a political speech which I recently heard. The opening words

were, in effect, "You all want to know the truth about the eight hour law." The treatment of this very important factor in the current presidential campaign was followed by less heated issues, such as the tariff, woman suffrage, appointments, etc.; but for closing, the speaker had reserved his most emphatic point, America's foreign policy, because of the strength inherent in the final position, as pointed out in a previous chapter. The outstanding places in the separate sections are, similarly, at the beginning and the end. As a rule the greatest advantage may be gained here by the use of a topic sentence in opening, and a summary sentence in closing the section. The topic sentence gives prominence to the idea to be discussed, and the summary sentence, expressing the gist of the thought developed in the section, presents an emphatic close. A typical illustration of this is afforded by the following brief excerpt from a speech by Mr. Charles C. Pearce.

"We are just in the throes of tariff revision. Early in March was introduced the Payne bill containing a number of modified duties. At once a highly significant struggle began in Washington. The country seems to have settled upon a downward revision of the tariff, yet each group is jealously guarding its own particular interests. Steel, for example, rasps: 'Touch not our sacred schedules!' Lumber and pulp cry: 'Cut down