This will sufficiently account for the fashion which prevailed in those days universally, of applying their time chiefly to the acquisition of skill in letters, not sounds; in writing, not speaking; in words presented to the eye by the sure pen, not in those offered to the ear by the uncertain or erroneous tongue.
Afterwards, when some of the nations of Europe wisely set about the cultivation of their native tongues, in proportion as they grew more perfect, the Latin fell into disuse; till at last it was reduced to its former state of a dead language, and confined chiefly to books. But whilst the Italians, French, and Spaniards were vying with each other, in the improvements of their several tongues, by giving all manner of encouragement to so useful a work, by establishing several societies and academies for the purpose, from whose joint labours excellent grammars and dictionaries were produced; by the assistance of which, and the instruction of masters, not only natives, but foreigners might acquire the most accurate knowlege of those tongues with ease; the English alone remained in the old track, and never to this hour, either by public or private encouragement, have taken one step towards regulating or ascertaining theirs. And yet this seems to have been a point of much more moment to them, and to which they were in a more peculiar manner, and much earlier called upon to give their attention, as the church service, upon the reformation, was performed in their own tongue, which is not the case to this day in those countries, where Latin still maintains that post. The refiners of those living languages justly gave great attention to sound and pronunciation, in the regulations which they established; the English, who from the nature of their constitution and public worship, had infinitely more occasion for the refinement and regulation of their tongue in that respect, left theirs wholly to chance. Nor are we to wonder at this, when we consider that we have made no alteration in our institutions, with the alteration of times and circumstances. Our establishments for training youth, pursue invariably the same plan, and inculcate only the same studies, which they did before the reformation, when Latin was the universal language; nor has any change been made since the English came into general use. At that time there was no necessity to apply to the study of it; and the barbarous structure of its words could afford no inducement to try what might be done in it, by the power of sounds. Accordingly those who taught English, were amongst the most ignorant of mankind. Their whole business was only to teach pupils the letters, to spell, and read words, no matter with what kind of tones, so as they were well acquainted with the characters, in order to fit them for the Latin school; where the learned languages only being the object of attention, their farther progress in English was neglected. Is not this the case at this day? Are not the rudiments of English now taught by low and ignorant masters, for wretched stipends, and for the same ends? Is it afterwards any-where regularly taught? Does not Latin still continue to be the chief language taught in schools, in the same manner as when it was the chief language used on all the important occasions of life? Only with this difference, that whilst it was in a manner a living tongue, by being used in conversation, more care was probably taken with regard to pronunciation, which at present is chiefly transferred to understanding and writing it correctly; and whoever has a mind to make himself master of those points, may have all the guidance of rules, and aid of preceptors: but with regard to the English, he is left to make his own way, as well as he can. This will serve as an explanation of many extraordinary phænomena in this country. Such as, that there are numbers who understand Latin well, who do not understand their native tongue. That there are many who can write Latin elegantly, who are remarkably incorrect in their English style. And that there are many who can produce excellent compositions both in Latin and English, who can neither read aloud, or repeat those very compositions with tolerable propriety, much less with grace. Of these facts, I dare venture to say, there is not one of my hearers who cannot immediately suggest to himself sufficient instances. The natural consequence, indeed, of neglecting the art of elocution, is that of reducing a living language at best to the state of a dead one. For in just and true elocution alone, consists the life of language; that which is false or disagreeable, places it below its dead written state, by the uneasiness and disgust which it occasions. If language, when spoken, gives no pleasure, if it excites no emotions, it is in that case, for the mere purpose of information, far below that which is written; inasmuch as the reader of words can take his own time to make himself master of their meaning, and consider their force. But if public speaking in any country should in general rather give pain than pleasure, occasion satiety, instead of rouzing attention, and far from illustrating, should render the sentiments obscure, the people of that country will be necessitated to give their attention to written language; they must prefer the invention of man, to the gift of God; and the noblest ends, and highest delights which language can answer or afford, will be frustrated and lost. Whether we are in that condition or not, let our army of writers, and scarcity of speakers declare.
They who have seen in the clearest light the fatal consequences of this course, did not, at the same time, see the only method by which it might be changed. They did not know how impregnable are the bulwarks which surround the fortress of custom to all attacks by storm, though they may easily be reduced by sapping the foundations. And though the tyrant may be dethroned by reason; yet cannot reason supply his place. His scepter can be wielded only by one of his own race, and custom alone can succeed to custom. All that reason can do, is to preside at the election, and endeavour to fix the choice on the most worthy.
Till a new custom, therefore, shall have opened the way to skill in the art of speaking, so that it may be as easily and certainly attainable, by pursuing that road, as skill in the art of writing now is, by pursuing the others, the latter path must continue to be most frequented. And nothing can assist the new custom in its progress, but the same means that brought forward the old. The art of speaking, like that of writing, must be reduced to a system; it must have sure and sufficient rules to guide such as apply to the study of it; it must have masters to teach it, and to enforce the rules by examples. This alone can ensure success to the studious in that way; and till that be done, it cannot be expected that many will employ their time in laborious researches into an intricate, difficult, and obscure subject, without the least moral certainty of attaining their point, when a clear, obvious, and certain method lies open to them, of arriving at, what they imagine to be, the same end. But had they a like certainty of success in the one way, as in the other, there cannot be any doubt to which the preference would be given, not only on account of the superior advantages resulting from it, but also the superior pleasure which would attend their progress, and the delight which would crown the attainment of that art. How exquisite that must have been when eloquence was at its height, may be gathered from the testimony of Cicero, who, in his Brutus, does not scruple to affirm, "That neither the fruits nor glory which he derived from eloquence, gave him so much delight as the study and practice of the art itself." His words are, "Dicendi autem me non tam fructus & gloria, quam studium ipsum exercitatioque delectat."
The neglect, therefore, to this hour, of so useful, so necessary, so delightful an art, may well excite wonder and amazement. And, indeed, it is hardly possible, but that it should long ere this have got some footing amongst us, had not all, who have pointed out the defect, and proposed methods of supplying it, agreed in laying the blame at the wrong door, and consequently pointing to a wrong quarter for redress. Thus the nation in general, influenced by their sentiments, has, from year to year, waited like the countryman,
All writers on this subject have agreed in laying the fault on the schools and universities, and that the redress can only come from them. Than which there cannot be any thing more unjust as to the charge, nor more ill-founded than the conclusion.
Thus the author of the Spectator says——"We must bear with this false modesty in our young nobility and gentry, till they cease at Oxford and Cambridge to grow dumb in the study of eloquence." And one of the bishop of Cloyne's queries is, "Whether half the learning and study of these kingdoms is not useless, for want of a proper delivery and pronunciation being taught in our schools and colleges?" Mr. Locke bears hard upon the masters, for not instructing their pupils in English, as well as Latin and Greek, in the following passage. "To write and speak correctly, gives a grace, and gains a favourable attention to what one has to say: and since it is English that an English gentleman will have constant use of, that is the language he should chiefly cultivate, and wherein most care should be taken to polish and perfect his style. This I find universally neglected, nor no care taken any-where to improve young men in their own language, that they may thoroughly understand and be masters of it. If any one among us have a facility or purity more than ordinary in his mother tongue, it is owing to chance, or his genius, or any thing, rather than to his education, or any care of his teacher. To mind what English his pupil speaks or writes, is below the dignity of one bred up amongst Greek and Latin, though he have but little of them himself. These are the learned languages, fit only for learned men to meddle with, and teach; English is the language of the illiterate vulgar: though yet we see the polity of some of our neighbours hath not thought it beneath the public care to promote and reward the improvement of their own language. Polishing and enriching their tongue, is no small business amongst them; it hath colleges and stipends appointed it; and there is raised amongst them a great ambition and emulation of writing correctly: and we see what they are come to by it, and how far they have spread one of the worst languages possibly in this part of the world, if we look upon it as it was in some few reigns backwards, whatever it be now. The great men among the Romans were daily exercising themselves in their own tongue; and we find yet upon record the names of orators, who taught some of their emperors Latin, though it were their mother tongue. 'Tis plain the Greeks were yet more nice in theirs: all other speech was barbarous to them but their own; and no foreign language appears to have been studied or valued amongst that learned and acute people; though it be past doubt that they borrowed their learning and philosophy from abroad." To this Mr. Locke adds, "I am not here speaking against Greek and Latin; I think they ought to be studied, and the Latin at least understood well by every gentleman. But whatever foreign languages a young man meddles with, (and the more he knows, the better) that which he should critically study, and labour to get a facility, clearness, and elegancy to express himself in, should be his own; and to this purpose he should daily be exercised in it."
To the same effect, have many other eminent authors written on this subject; but surely they must have been under the influence of strong prejudice, to charge men with neglect of points, which do not at all belong to their office; and with the omission of studies and arts, which they never profess to teach. A master of a grammar-school is to teach grammar, not oratory; he is to teach Latin, and Greek, not English. And this is what all masters of endowed schools are bound to do; and it is upon these terms, that all others receive their pay. But it may be said, that these studies might be added to the others, and taught at the same time. Surely, they who say so, have not given themselves time to reflect on the nature of these studies, or the state of our established mode of education; else they would see that what they expect is an absolute impossibility. Can any man communicate more knowlege than he is himself possessed of? Can any man teach an art which he never learned? Can any man instruct others in a language, in which he never was instructed? Can either any art or language be regularly taught without a well digested system of rules? And if no such system has hitherto been formed, either with respect to the English language, or the art of speaking it, how shall any man set about teaching them? It will be said, that it is a shame for a master to be ignorant of these. But why more a shame for him, than any other gentleman who has been trained exactly in the same way? or why is more expected from him? Because it would be of great benefit to his pupils. So it might, but if in his course of education, previous to his entering upon that employment, he has had no lights given him as to those points, is he likely to find much leisure in so laborious an office, to investigate the principles of an unpractised art, or the rules of an unstudied language? It is probable that he would make a greater progress in that way, than others of equal abilities, and equal advantages of education, who have dedicated whole lives of leisure to those studies, without ever arriving at the end proposed? But suppose he could teach them, how could he find time to do it? The low stipend which custom has established, as the pay to masters of grammar-schools, obliges most of them to take such numbers of scholars under their care, even to get a tolerable subsistence, that it is with the utmost difficulty they are at present able to prepare them for the university, in the usual time allotted for that purpose, by teaching only Greek and Latin; how is it then possible for them to think of introducing the study of new things, which would require nearly as much time and pains, as those which they are bound to teach, and which they cannot accomplish, without the utmost stretch of application? Though, indeed, considering the salaries paid by parents to masters of grammar-schools, that they are near half of what they pay their grooms, and that they are at least a full fourth, if not a third, of what they pay to the dancing master or fencing master, the music or riding master, the teacher of French or Italian, it must be allowed that they have a just right to expect that those two supernumerary studies should be thrown into the bargain. Nor would it be at all surprising, if some parents should also expect of the master of a grammar-school, that he should teach their sons to dance, because he has legs, and can walk; as well as that he should teach them the art of speaking, because he has a tongue, and can talk. If no attention has been given to these points in the previous part of education, what reason have we to suppose that the evil can be remedied at the universities? The business of tutors and professors there, is to finish young gentlemen in such studies as they had begun at school, or to instruct them in such new arts and sciences, as they are obliged by their several establishments to teach. If the English language, and the art of speaking, be not in the number of those, what reason have we to expect that they should be taught? Whoever discharges his duty, in what he professes to teach, will find but little leisure to attend to any thing else; or if a few should attempt it, they would upon trial find, that they could make so little progress in instructing others without the help of rules or principles, and they would meet such obstacles in their way, on account of inveterate bad habits contracted through early neglect, as would soon make them give up the voluntary and fruitless labour.
The reason, therefore, that the belles lettres, and philosophy in all its branches, are the only things now taught in a course of liberal education, is obvious enough; because it is for those only that institutions and endowments have been made; by which means they have been reduced to systems, and are regularly taught; they who have been regularly instructed themselves, can teach others by the same rules; and they are induced to take upon them the office of instructing others, from the rewards and emoluments which attend it. From an opposite cause it is, that the English language and the art of speaking are not taught; because there are no institutions or establishments for the purpose; in consequence of which, they have not been reduced to systems, or taught by rule; and no one can regularly instruct another in what he has not regularly acquired himself; nor are there hitherto any rewards or emoluments annexed to such an office.
That there has been no encouragement given, to this day, for the establishment and cultivation of two such important articles to all British subjects, can be accounted for on no other principle, but that of custom, founded upon the strongest prejudice. From the first time that a Latin grammar is put into our hands, we are taught to believe, that a complete knowlege of Latin and Greek will of course give a complete knowlege of English; that reading the ancient writers upon oratory will furnish us with all the powers of elocution; that the same master who instructs pupils in the one, can also teach the other; and that, therefore, any particular establishments for those purposes would be unnecessary: and this prepossession has been so early in life, and with such force stamped upon us, that neither the experience of more than two centuries, nor daily demonstration to the contrary, are able to erase it. Nor need we wonder, that the prejudice has been so universal, when we reflect that some of the most eminent men that these countries have produced were strongly tinctured with it: nay, when we find, in the passage before quoted, that the clear-sighted and candid Mr. Locke was so blinded by it, as not to see that, in the very instance mentioned by him, with regard to the French, he had attributed our deficiency to a wrong cause. For though he has laid the whole blame of the want of culture and improvement in the English tongue, on the masters of grammar-schools, yet he shews clearly, that the culture and improvement of the French took their rise from another source; where he says, 'We see the polity of some of our neighbours hath not thought it beneath the "public care to promote and reward the improvement of their own language." Polishing and enriching their tongue is no small business amongst them; "it hath colleges and stipends appointed it;" and there is raised amongst them a great ambition and emulation of writing correctly.' Was it not, therefore, more natural to impute the low state of English amongst us to the want of such institutions and encouragement, than to the neglect of masters who do not profess to teach it? And was it not more rational to expect the improvement of our tongue from the same methods which brought forward the French; from public encouragement, from colleges and stipends appointed it, than from one which never was found to answer, nay, which, in its own nature, never can answer the end? In like manner, in speaking of elocution, he has imputed our general deficiency in that point also, to the neglect of the masters of grammar-schools; though, at the same time, he clearly points out the only means by which knowlege in that art can be acquired, in these-words: 'This (speaking of elocution), as all other things of practice, is to be learned not by a few, or a great many rules given, but by exercise and application, according to good rules, or rather patterns, till habits are got, and a facility of doing it well.' Now, if there be no such system of rules in being, with regard to English elocution, how can a master give his pupils practice according to good rules? Or what pattern can he afford them, but in himself? And is such a model likely to be a perfect one? Is it not probable, that masters of grammar-schools may have contracted bad habits in that respect, as well as any others trained in the same way? Will the profession itself inspire them with propriety of pronunciation, proper management of the voice, and graceful gesture and deportment? It is time to put an end to such gross prejudice. After waiting for more than two centuries, to no purpose, in hopes that things would mend in one way, it is more than time that another course should be tried. The only method which can be followed with success, is obvious enough. When Cicero gave a definition of elocution, he, at the same time, pointed out the means by which it is to be acquired. His words are these: "Pronunciatio est vocis, et vultus, et gestus moderatio, cum venustate. Hæc omnia tribus modis assequi poterimus, arte, imitatione, exercitatione[14]." Here we see that art is placed first; and, indeed, without that guide our labour would be either fruitless, or productive of error. Imitation alone can go no farther than to give us the manner of those whom we imitate; if that be bad, the imitation of it must be so too; but if it should be good upon the whole, and faulty only in part, it doth not follow that we shall acquire both in the same degree; on the contrary, it is generally the case, that the faulty part only, as being the most easily caught, is the consequence of imitation without art: and practice grounded upon such imitation, can only serve to confirm and rivet us in error.