Yet the oratory of this celebrated preacher would have answered in no other profession than his own, and served to complete my idea of the true distinction between pulpit, bar, and parliamentary eloquence. Kirwan in the pulpit, Curran at the bar, and Sheridan in the senate,—were the three most effective orators I ever recollect, in their respective departments.
Kirwan’s talents seemed to me to be limited entirely to effective elocution. I had much intercourse with him at the house of Mr. Hely, of Tooke’s-court. While residing in Dublin, I met him in private society at a variety of places; and my overwrought expectations were a good deal disappointed. His style of address had nothing engaging; nothing either dignified or graceful. In his conversation there was neither sameness nor variety—ignorance nor information; and yet, somehow or other, he avoided insipidity. His amour propre was the most prominent of his superficial qualities; and a bold, manly, intractable independence of mind and feeling, the most obvious of his deeper ones. I believe he was a good man, if he could not be termed a very amiable one; and learned, although niggardly in communicating his information.
I have remarked thus at large upon Dean Kirwan, because he was, altogether, the greatest orator I ever heard, and because I never met any man whose true character I felt myself more at a loss accurately to pronounce upon. It has been said that his sermons were adroitly extracted from passages in the celebrated discourses of Saurin, the Huguenot, who preached at the Hague (grandfather or great-grandfather to the late attorney-general of Ireland).[[75]] It may be so; and in that case all I can say is, that Kirwan was a most judicious selector, and that I doubt if the eloquent writer made a hundredth part of the impression of his eloquent plagiarist.
[75]. Voltaire in his “Age of Louis the XIV,” says, “James Saurin was born at Nismes, 1677:—he was the best preacher of the reformed church; but he dealt too much in what was called the refugee style. He was created minister to the noblesse at the Hague; was a learned man—but addicted to pleasures: he died 1730.”
I should myself be the plagiarist of a hundred writers, if I attempted to descant upon the parliamentary eloquence of Sheridan. It only seems necessary to refer to his speech on Mr. Hastings’s trial;[[76]] at least that is sufficient to decide me as to his immense superiority over all his rivals in splendid declamation. Most great men have their distinct points of superiority, and I am sure that Sheridan could not have preached, nor Kirwan have pleaded. Curran could have done both—Grattan neither:—but, in language calculated to rouse a nation, Grattan, whilst young, far exceeded any of them;—and in mere flow of words, Yelverton was above all.
[76]. I had an opportunity of knowing that Mr. Sheridan was offered 1000l. for that speech by a bookseller, the day after it was spoken, provided he would write it out correctly from the notes taken, before the interest had subsided; and yet, although he certainly had occasion for money at the time, and assented to the proposal, he did not take the trouble of writing a line of it! The publisher was of course displeased, and insisted on his performing his promise: upon which Sheridan laughingly replied in the vein of Falstaff:—“No, Hal!—were I at the strappado, I would do nothing by compulsion!” He did it at length—but too late! and, as I heard, was (reasonably enough!) not paid.