Ir gives us great pleasure to remark, that, of late years, Elocution has been regarded as an object of considerable importance, and that it is now beginning to be considered as an essential branch of polite education. That the orators of antiquity devoted their most assiduous attention to the acquisition of a graceful and efficient delivery, appears from the writings both of Cicero and Quintilian; and that, in their efforts to accomplish this point, they were guided by rules evidently founded on a knowledge of that variety of modulation of which the voice is in a great measure susceptible, seems obvious, from the following passage, quoted from Cicero's work, De Oratore: "Mira est natura vocis; cujus quidem e tribus omnino sonis, inflexo, acuto, gravi, tanta sit, et tam suavis varietas, perfecta."

Concerning the application of accents to the notation of speaking sounds, (for the precise manner in which the ancients applied them to this purpose has not been handed down to us,) modern writers on Elocution, even at a period so recent as the middle of the last century, were able to form but very vague and indistinct notions. Mr Sheridan attempted, indeed, in a series of lectures written about that time, to lay down rules for reading and speaking with propriety, and, in a treatise on the Church Liturgy, endeavoured to point out, by the use of accents, the true method of delivering particular sentences; but as these accents marked the words which required a greater percussion of the voice, without any reference whatever to the tone or inflexion with which such passages were to be delivered, they conveyed little or no satisfactory information. For what could be expected, on this subject, from an author who compared the notes of speech to those of a drum, differing only in degrees of force; or from Mr S.'s cotemporary,

HIND

Involved in much the same labyrinth of confusion and error lay the science of Elocution, till the time of Mr John Walker, who, by completely analyzing the voice, discovered, that, whether words are uttered with the tone of passion, or without it, they must be pronounced sliding either upwards or downwards, or else go into a monotone, or song; and that these slides cannot, where emphasis is concerned, be used indiscriminately. Mr Walker, who thus shewed us that accent of force uniformly, in our language, coincides with accent of tone, and who, by means of this analysis, founded a system* (and it has never been shewn to be in any material points incorrect) to direct us in the pronunciation of almost every species of sentences, we must therefore acknowledge as the father of Elocution in this country, and consider his productions as the source from which, since his time, elocutionary information has been chiefly derived.

It must be confessed, however, that Mr W.'s works, from the diffuse manner in which the several branches of the science are handled, are not exactly adapted to the purposes of tuition. In consequence of which, some teachers, in the Northern Metropolis in particular, have modelled and abridged his system; and in order to combine cheapness with utility, have annexed to it a copious selection of pieces in prose and verse. This freedom taken with the original, it is far from our design to cen

VOL. XV.

4 S

sure; still we cannot refrain from expressing our surprise, to see a reviewer who has noticed one of these performances, bestow on the compiler those encomiums which are due only to Mr Walker: ["Both teachers and students will find Mr Ewing's performance serviceable, since his rules are, in general, good," &c. Monthly Review, No. XLV.; and to find the compiler himself studiously avoid mentioning even the name of the author whose works he has literally transcribed.

Mr Roberts, author of " A Guide to Elocution," with an equal share of illiberality towards Mr W., but with a greater degree of arrogance, in his preface expresses himself thus: "Having felt great inconvenience from the want of an efficient Elocutionary Class-Book, I at length resolved on the formation of one on my own plan." We have been induced to compare the theory contained in this work, with the doctrines which had been published by others; and we are sorry to say, that this gentleman has added to the mass of treatises on the subject, without bringing forward one new observation which will bear the test of examination. We would therefore strenuously advise Mr R., and others who may feel in themselves an impulse to become authors, but whose talents are not fitted to make any new and correct discoveries in this or any other branch of science, to take care lest their works should mislead, rather than assist, those who consult them. Of this tendency is Mr R.'s 7th rule, page 19. "Where a relative," says he, "follows immediately after an antecedent, the antecedent must have the falling inflexion." To point out the inefficacy, not to say absurdity of this rule, we select the following passage: We should avoid all gaming, which tends to give a feverish stimulus to the mind. Hence, the sense may be, either," We should avoid all gaming, of that particular kind which gives a feverish stimulus to the mind," or, "We should avoid all gaming; for all gaming (not merely a particular species of it)

tends to give," &c. &c. This sentence affords an instance of a relative and an antecedent, the one immediate ly following the other, and yet it is evident, if the former paraphrase is our meaning, we must use the rising inflexion; and, if the latter, the fall ing inflexion. Mr R.'s rule, therefore, effects nothing. Let him observe, that, if the relative clause mo difies or restricts the meaning of the antecedent, the antecedent must have the rising inflexion; but if it merely extends the meaning, the antecedent must have the falling inflexion. The same observations may be made to disprove the truth of his 11th rule, which, so far as it respects inflexion, runs thus: "If the clause to which the substantive is attached be declarative, it must terminate with the falling inflexion; if otherwise, the rising inflexion." Then follows a set of examples, from which this passage is selected. "He was a prince accomplished, magnificent, and brave." Now, as it must be evident to every one, that when the ellipsis in this phrase is supplied, (he was a prince who was accomplished, &c.) the passage will be under the same circumstances with the example adduced, to point out the fallacy of the 7th rule.

It were tedious to follow this author through his exemplification of his 9th rule, (" Adjectives generally require accentuation,") such as his accenting "palet" death, as if it were contra-distinguished from death which was NOT pale. We certainly agree with this author, in his assertion that adjectives, when opposed to each other, require to be pronounced with ac centual force; but this is not less true of any other parts of speech similarly situated.

We cannot dismiss the work of this soi-disant philologist, without noticing his observation on reading verse. As he seems to pride himself on his wonderful discovery, that verse should be read exactly as if it were prose, we would advise him to get his poetical extracts, in all future editions of his "Guide," printed as prose, since we can see no propriety

in his preserving the appearance of verse to the eye, when, by his mode of pronouncing it, he does not intend the ear to recognise its peculiar characteristics.

A mode of proceeding quite opposite to that of the two gentlemen whose works we have been noticing, is adopted by Mr J. H. Hindmarsh, editor of a volume of extracts, entitled, the Rhetorical Reader. He generously avows Mr Walker as the author of the principles which he prefixes to his compilation; a volume which, we venture to affirm, contains a more copious selection of the elegancies of English literature than any book of the kind hitherto published. The second edition, which made its appearance last month, is enriched with upwards of ninety pages of fresh extracts, from the most popular and favourite poetical and prosaic writers of the day-a circumstance which must highly recommend it on the score of novelty.

In elucidating Mr W.'s system, by a judicious choice of examples, as well as in his further attempts to exemplify the rules, by inflecting several of the pieces, we must do

Mr H. the justice to say, that we think he has been, generally speaking, very successful; while his observations on pronunciation, that are occasionally to be met with in the form of notes, are warranted by the most polite usage of the language.

It were to be wished, that, in speaking of a performance so highly creditable to the judgment and taste of this gentleman, we could have concluded our remarks without having occasion to notice a slight degree of irregularity in the notation, which we would have him amend in future editions. For instance, "I do intreat the candid reader to believe me," would have been more uniform with his usual mode of marking the inflexions, had he placed the rising inflexion on lieve, thus, liéve. This, and a few similar inadvertencies, appear to us to be rather typographical errors, than the effect of design. Upon the whole, we have seen no work better calculated than Mr H.'s Rhetorical Reader to promote the object it professes to have in view; namely, the improvement of British youth, in a graceful and efficient delivery of their native tongue.