Eloquence at the Bar. achieved, is partially at least closed to the forensic orator. The power of biasing men's judgment by working upon their feel ings is certainly the most striking branch of the art of rhetoric, and it is said by Quintilian to be by far the highest manifestation of oratorical power. But its application to forensic disputes is greatly checked by the rule against irrelevancy, as the issue there to be decided is not a point of policy or ex pediency, but the truth or untruth of particu lar propositions of fact or of law. This is a matter to be determined by the reason, and therefore an appeal to the emotions is usually quite beside the question. It must be remembered that Erskine and Brougham and Lyndhurst were men of rare natural talents, who delivered their great orations under exceptional circumstances, highly favorable to loftiness and fervor of thought and of expression. Their greatest forensic speeches were made in political or quasipolitical trials, which took place in times of extreme political excitement, and attracted universal public interest. Such an opportu nity as was afforded to Lord Brougham by the trial of Queen Caroline has never been surpassed or equalled in the case of any other advocate, and the highest efforts on the part of the orator were not more than appropriate to the greatness of the occa sion. Many of Erskine's most celebrated speeches were made in the course of great government prosecutions for treason, or li bel, or sedition, at a time when the limits of the law on these subjects had not been firmly settled, and the doubtfulness of the law, combined with the peculiar nature of the cases and the heat of political feeling to produce a high degree of public excitement, and to make the trial a matter of national
215
importance. It was natural, therefore, that the advocate who felt that so much depended upon his exertions, and that they attracted so much public attention, should put forth all his efforts and employ all the resources of rhetoric in order to ensure success. Such opportunities for high and stirring eloquence have hardly ever presented themselves to the advocate in recent times. It must be admitted that, if we compare the speeches now delivered at the bar with the productions of the Greek and Roman orators, we find that the ancient orators greatly surpassed the modern in force and beauty of expression and delivery, in bold but chaste ornamentation, and in rhetorical fervor and energy. Public speaking was a matter of much more importance in ancient times than it is at present, for it was the chief means of advancing or retarding public measures, and almost the only means of giv ing to the speaker's ideas upon any subject such a publicity as is now easily obtainable by means of the press. And the character of the audience in those times was highly favorable to oratorical displays, as it was greatly influenced by passion and sentiment, while highly appreciative of all kinds of rhetorical beauty. Hence there was every incentive to the orator to take pains to attain proficiency in his art, and to elaborate and beautify his speeches to the utmost. And, accordingly, it is well known that the an cient orators not only went through a long course of preparatory training to fit them selves for a public career, but also expended a great amount of labor upon their individ ual efforts. Those speeches of theirs which have come down to us were nearly always fully written out before they were spoken, and in many cases were never spoken at all.
