in Athens. In the contest "De Corona," Eschines begged the judges to require that Demosthenes should be compelled to answer his arguments in the same order in which he had brought them forward. But the arrangement of Demosthenes showed his skill, and aided in his success. It was entirely different from that which Eschines would have prescribed.

For the sake of convenience, then, in the preparation of a discourse, as well as to establish a general formula of the proper order in a discourse, it has been usually divided into the Exordium, Narration, Pro- ' position, Discussion, and Peroration. Of these we shall see that the essential parts of a discourse are the Proposition and the Discussion; and the others, though important, are only subsidiary. These all, in the order mentioned, constitute the special as well as general arrangement of a discourse: we proceed to explain them in order :

1. The Exordium, otherwise called the Introduction or Proem, is designed as it were only to open the interview between the speaker and hearer, or between the writer and reader. In this, a general salutation is made, and the occasion and circumstances of the discourse are set forth.

It has been observed by Aristotle, and the same fact has been already mentioned, that the Exordium is not one of the essential parts of a discourse, since we may enter at once, and often without abruptness,

upon the consideration of the theme of the discourse. In short discourses it is usually very brief, and frequently omitted altogether; in larger works, published in volumes, the Exordium, generally explanatory of the nature of the work, and the circumstances under which it was written, is contained in the Preface, or set Introduction, which prepares the mind to enter upon the work itself.

Of the Exordium, and especially in that form called the Preface, it has been justly said that it should not be composed until after the work is written, because it is only then that any author can declare what its contents are, and the circumstances which attended its production; and there would be danger of announcing too much, and of promising a certain line of treatment which the after circumstances might render impossible.

The title of a book is also of the nature of an introduction-that is, it is the statement of its subject; and this, although it is known and kept in mind throughout the preparation of the work, in a general way, is often specifically determined on, after the book is written. Sometimes the introduction is in the form of the correction of an error, on the given subject: it is then called an introduction corrective; and thus, too, according to the special design, we have the introduction narrative, or preparatory, or inquisitive.

2. The Narration is a setting forth of the facts

connected with the case, which have given rise to the discussion in question. This is very frequently contained or absorbed in the Exordium, and is sometimes included in the Proposition itself; but in an artistically constructed discourse it usually enters as a distinct part; and in many kinds of discourse it occupies the chief place; thus, in History and Biography, narration presents men and objects as they move or are acted upon, in a succession of time, sometimes without reference to the existence of the causes or effects.

3. The Proposition, which is the first essential element of a discourse, is the statement of the particular theme or subject of the discourse; and it bears of course the closest relation to the special object of the discourse. To illustrate this last remark, take The Force of Habit."

any theme, such as

Before we begin to treat this theme it is evident we must know the object which the discourse has in view; is it to explain the philosophy of the force of habit," or to prove that the law holds good with all our faculties? It may be that we design to take these for granted, and merely to exhort the young to cultivate good habits and avoid bad ones. Justly, then, the proposition is the subject of our discourse, when it is considered in relation to its object.

In the statement of the proposition it is not unusual to divide it into distinct heads or subordinate

propositions, to be maintained; and it is usual sometimes to state, if it be a matter of controversy, the points of difference between the writer and his oppo

nent.

4. Next in order comes the Discussion. This has been divided by some writers into the Confirmation and Refutation, and has to do with the rhetorical use of arguments, already explained, and with their arrangement, which is also of very great importance.

First, then, as a general rule, the writer confirms his proposition—that is, he brings forth his proofs of the proposition in the best array and strongest order. This, of course, will depend in some degree upon the person addressed, and the circumstances under which the discourse is prepared.

But, in the second place, he must consider the relation sustained by the arguments to each other; some arguments are only of value as connected with others; each link alone may be weak, but put together they may constitute a powerful chain.

With these remarks we proceed to observe, that the most obvious arguments should take precedence in a discussion. Of this nature are the à priori arguments, or those which reason from cause to effect. These attack the mind more readily than others, and engage the attention more easily. They are, indeed, altogether the strongest arguments used.

Next after the a priori arguments are ranged those

included under the heads of Sign and Example; and these, in general, in the order of their strength, for the strong arguments generally prove the right, while the weaker only prove the expediency. It will be remembered that the whole subject of testimony has be referred to this class. Such being the order of confirmation, what then should be the order of Refutation? It is by no means to be supposed that the refutation of an adversary's objections, should always be placed last in the order of arguments. Sometimes, if the opponent have advanced some very strong and apparently unanswerable objections, it is deemed proper to state them at the outset of the discussion, and to sweep them away by refutation before we begin to establish our own proposition; otherwise they hang like a cloud over us in our attempt to cast the light of truth upon the subject. In ordinary cases, that is, where the objections are of reasonable strength, it is considered proper to place them about in the middle of the discussion. The reason of this

is a strong one. If we leave these objections to the last, many persons, who know of their existence, will be affected prejudicially towards our argument, thinking that we are overlooking or neglecting them.

Even when it seems necessary to defer the refuta

tion to the last, it may be well to mention the existence of the objections early in the discourse, and to