Imágenes de páginas

rical Magazine of June 1799, I delivered an opinion, that, in several points, Mr. Pitt considerably resembles Dr. Robertson. Like that eminent historian, he displays great powers of combination, of bringing together every circumstance and argument that can elucidate his plans or evince his propositions. He sets before us a subject in all its parts, dependencies, and relations. The comprehensive view which he takes, enables him to clear his ground as he goes along, and precludes every necessity of repetition. He makes his hearer and reader perfectly masters of his reasoning and its foundation. This constant and habitual exertion of a comprehensive mind produces clearness of arrangement, as it enables him to dispose every part of his orations in such a way, as he perceives will render them most effectual. Elo-. quence naturally calls forward more forcible reasoning than history, from minds equally strong; but it does not naturally produce more profound reflections: greater depth, therefore, must result from superior knowledge and superior powers. In the cOMPASS and

[ocr errors]

depth of his understanding, I think Mr. Pitt is doubtless superior to that great man to whom I have compared him above. Force, of reasoning, however, he has in common. with another extraordinary personage, Mr. Fox; profound observation and expanded views, with a still greater personage, Mr. Burke; but there is one point in which he excells these uncommon men; that is, the appropriate appositeness of his arguments to the question at issue. We have not only before us every thing that is requisite, but nothing that is not requisite. If we consider the speeches of these three great men, Pitt, Fox, and Burke, as we should do a proposition in Euclid, enunciating a certain. theorem to be proved true or false, and estimate the arguments of each by their exclusive tendency to prove the proposition enunciated, we must certainly give the preference to Pitt. The closeness of Pitt has converged the rays of Fox's genius; whoever peruses his speeches during Lord North's Administration, and his speeches. during Mr. Pitt's, will find that, excellent

as they were in the former period, they are still more excellent in the latter, having their amazing force more compacted and better directed. In the latter period we seldom find that vehement declamation, that profusion of invective, which frequently marked his speeches in the former. Indeed, when we compare Fox's speeches in the House of Commons with those he makes in mixed clubs, where he has every thing his own way, and nobody to oppose him, we perceive a very striking difference. In the one he assumes positions neither self-evident, proved, nor universally admitted to be true, and declaims upon them as if they were axioms; in the other he advances no proposition without either, true or plausible grounds. The acuteness, indeed, of Pitt very readily perceives a flaw in an opponent's argument. His eloquence, as well as that of Burke and Fox, is original. We do not find that it so specially resembles that of any other orator, ancient or modern, as to give ground to believe that he has followed a model. While closely attentive to logical

Precision, he has not neglected rhetorical art. His language is proper, elegant, and harmonious.

About the same time another member appeared on the side of Opposition, also displaying talents very superior to those of the majority of parliamentary speakers.. Mr. Sheridan having earned and acquired a Character by his comic poetry, surpassing

hat of any writer since the time of Conreve, came to display in the senate a geius that had procured him such applause On the theatre. Penetrating acuteness of discernment, fertility of invention, variety, abundance, and brilliancy of wit, force and Justness of humour, Sheridan possesses

bove most men. His powers he directs with great dexterity, so as to give them all Possible effect. He is an elegant classical

cholar, and has an exquisite taste. His mind, however, is not enriched by know

ledge equal to its capacity: hence his eloquence, though manifesting great ingenuity Occasional observation, seldom contains a


[ocr errors]

considerable quantity or variety of new information. That he can reason well, appears often in the strength and shrewdness of his remarks and inferences; but his speeches cannot be said to have argumentation for a leading characteristic. His arguments are singly forcible, rather than collectively chained. Sheridan is not peculiarly eminent for continuous reply, although his speeches, in opening a debate or discussing a question proposed by himself, be distinguished for ability, ingenuity, and eloquence. But, if his replies are defective, it requires no great penetration to see that the deficiency is owing to the want of particular knowledge, not of general powers. He has dealt more in sarcasın than any speaker in the house. Burke, indeed, could be as sarcastic as any man; but was not so often so as Sheridan. I remember, when Sheridan, Fox, and Burke were co-ope rators in politics, to have heard a gentleman give the following character of the severities which each of them occasionally employed, and Sheridan most frequently. The sar


« AnteriorContinuar »