tinctness, smoothness, and flexibility of voice, which music both requires and promotes, are directly subservient to the purposes of elocution. And at least so much practical knowledge of music, as readily to mark with the ear and voice, the difference between high and low, strong and feeble notes, greatly facilitates that analysis of speaking tones, which enables one to understand his own faults, and to make such a sound, in a given case, as he wishes to make.

I might add here, that I am not advancing any new theory on this subject. Quinctilian devotes a chapter to the connexion between eloquence and music; and advises the young orator to study this latter art, as an important auxiliary in the care and management of his voice. And a spirited French writer, speaking of bad tones in the pulpit, says, "I much wish that young preachers would not neglect any means of forming their voice and improving their ear; for which purpose, the knowledge and practice of vocal music, would be very useful to them."

There are indeed weighty reasons, not applicable to other men, why they who are devoted to the sacred office should cultivate an acquaintance with this sacred, fine art. It elevates and sanctifies the taste of a Christian scholar. It prepares the minister of the gospel to employ an influence in regulating the taste of others; an influence that shall be salutary, and becoming his office, or at least, not pernicious, in regard to the style of music that is adapted to public devotion. Till Christian pastors become generally better qualified to exert such an influence it will not be strange if this department of public worship shall continue in the hands of authors, and teachers, and

performers, who will so conduct its solemn services as to extinguish rather than inspire devotional feeling. Besides, the minister who knows nothing of the science of adaptation, as applied to music and poetry, will often select hymns so unpoetical that they cannot possibly be sung with discrimination and spirit; or perhaps a hymn, that is full of inspiration, he will read with so little feeling, that it will almost of course be sung in a manner equally inani

mate.

SECT. 3.-Pitch of Voice.

This is a relative modification of voice; by which we mean that high or low note, which prevails in speaking, and which has a governing influence upon the whole scale of notes employed. In every man's voice, this governing note varies with circumstances, but it is sufficiently exact to consider it as threefold; the upper pitch, used in calling to one at a distance; the middle, used in conversation; and the lower, used in cadence, or in a grave, emphatic under key. Exertion of voice on the first, exposes it to break; and on the last, renders articulation thick and difficult, and leaves no room for compass below the pitch. The middle key, or that which we spontaneously adopt in earnest conversation, allows the greatest variety and energy in public speaking, though this will be raised a little by the excitement of addressing an assembly. To speak on a pitch much above that of animated conversation, fatigues and injures the lungs; though this, of all mistakes, is the one into which weak lungs are most likely to fall. The speaker then, by his own experiment, or, (if he wants the

requisite skill,) by the aid of some friend, should ascertain the middle key of his own voice, and make that the basis of his delivery. Whether this is high or low, compared with that of another man, is not essential, provided it be not in extreme. Among the first secular orators of Britain, some have spoken on the grave, bass-key; while Pitt's voice, it is said, was a full tenor, and Fox's a treble.

The voice that is on a bass-key, if clear and well toned, has some advantages in point of dignity. But a high tone, uttered with the same effort of lungs, is more audible than a low one. Without referring to other proofs of this, the fact just now mentioned is sufficient, that we spontaneously raise our key in calling to one at a distance; for the simple reason that we instinctively know he will be more likely to hear us in a high note than a low one. So universal is this instinct, that we may observe it in very little children, and even in the call and response of the parent bird and her young, and in most brute animals that have voice. The same principle doubtless explains another fact, recently alluded to, that feeble lungs are inclined to a high pitch; this being the effort of weakness, to make up what it lacks in power, by elevation of key; an effort which succeeds perfectly for a few words, but produces intolerable fatigue by being continued.

The influence of emotion on the voice, is also among the philosophical considerations pertaining to this subject. A man under strong intellectual excitement, walks with a firmer and quicker step than when he is cool; and the same excitement which braces the muscles, and gives en

ergy to the movements of the body, has a correspondent effect on the movements of the voice. Earnestness in common conversation assumes a higher note, as it proceeds, though the person addressed is at no greater distance than before.

A practical corollary from these suggestions is, that the public speaker should avoid a high pitch, at the beginning of his discourse, lest he rise, with the increase of interest, to painful and unmanageable elevation. Through disregard of this caution, some preachers, of warm temperament, sacrifice all command of their voice, as they become animated, and rather scream than speak. Blair lays it down as a useful rule, in order to be well heard, -"To fix our eye on some of the most distant persons in the assembly, and to consider ourselves as speaking to them." But to apply this rule to the outset of a discourse, would probably lead nine out of ten, among unpractised speakers, to err by adopting too high a pitch. Walker, on the other hand, advises to commence," as though addressing the persons who are nearest to us." This might lead to an opposite extreme; and the safest general course perhaps, is to adapt the pitch to hearers at a medium distance.

Hearers are apt to be impatient, if a speaker compels them to listen; though they more readily tolerate this fault at the beginning, than in any other part of a discourse. The preacher is certainly without excuse who utters his text in so low a voice as not to be understood, and the special necessity for avoiding this, is probably a sufficient reason for the good old practice of naming the text twice. But for a few sentences of the exordium, where the sen

timent commonly requires composure and simplicity, it is. better to be scarcely audible, than to shun this inconvenience by running into vociferation. The proper means of avoiding both extremes, is to learn the distinction between. force and elevation; and to acquire the power of swelling the voice on a low note. This introduces our next topic of consideration.

SECT. 4.-Quantity.

This term I use not in the restricted sense of grammarians and prosodists, but as including both the fulness of tone, and the time, in which words and sentences are uttered. With this explanation I hope I may be permitted to use the term in a sense somewhat peculiar, without touching the endless discussion it has awakened in another department.

In theory, perhaps every one can easily understand, that a sound may be either loud or soft, on the same note. The only difference, for example, betwixt the sound produced by a heavy stroke and a gentle one, on the same bell, is in the quantity or momentum. This distinction as applied to music, is perfectly familiar to all acquainted with that art. As applied to elocution, however, it is not so easily made; for it is a common thing for speakers to confound high sounds with loud, and low with soft. Hence we often hear it remarked of one, that he speaks in a low voice, when the meaning is, a feeble one; and perhaps if he were told that he is not loud enough, he would instantly raise his key, instead of merely increasing his quantity on the same note. But skill in modulation