us; nor was there any incitement to the knowlege and practice of that art, whether of pleasure, profit, or honour, which with us is not of equal strength.

We, as well as the ancients, have councils, senates, and assemblies of the people (by their representatives) whose deliberations and debates turn upon matters of as much moment, where oratory has fields as ample, in which it may exert all its various powers, and where the rewards and honours, attendant on eloquence are equal. "If we look into the history of England, for more than a century past, we shall find, that most persons have made their way to the head of affairs, and got into the highest employments, not on account of birth or fortune, but by being, what is commonly called, good speakers."

Nor is oratory less necessary to us at the bar, than it was to the ancients; nor are the rewards of profit, fame, and preferment, less attendant on it there; as has been experienced by all in that profession, who took pains to improve their talents in that way.

But there is one point, a most momentous one, in which oratory is essentially necessary to us, but was not in the least so to the ancients. The article I mean, is of the utmost importance to us; it is the basis of our government, and pillar of our state. It is the vivifying principle, the soul of our constitution, without which, it cannot subsist; I mean religion.

"As the religion of the ancients consisted chiefly of rites and ceremonies, it could derive no assistance from oratory; but there is not the smallest branch of ours which can be well executed, without skill in speaking; and the more important parts, calculated to answer the great ends, evidently require the whole oratorial powers."

Let it be observed, that in this profession alone, there are more persons employed throughout these realms, than there were citizens of Athens, at any given period.

Since, therefore, we have so much stronger motives to the cultivation of this art, what can be the reason that even an attempt towards it has never hitherto been made? One would imagine, that in a country where the ancients are admired, revered, nay, almost adored, that we should certainly follow their example, and adopt all their wise institutions, so far at least as they coincided with the spirit of our government, and were of equal necessity to the well being of the state. But on the contrary, we seem to have made it a law, that we should sit down contented with seeing and admiring their excellence, but that we should never attempt to use the means, by which alone we might be enabled to rival them. If it were difficult to come at the knowlege of those means; if the method taken by the ancients, in educating their youth to qualify them for such great performances, had not been handed down to us; or if there were any thing in the method itself, which would be found impracticable in these times, there might be some excuse for not taking the same course. But on the contrary, when many of their most eminent writers have minutely described to us the precise course of education, passed through by all who were liberally trained; when they tell us, that both at Athens and Rome, one of the chief studies was that of their native language in each country; and that the art most assiduously sought after, and practised in both, was that of oratory: shall we be surprised that their languages were more polished and beautiful, and consequently that all works which depended upon the elegance and charms of language, should be more finished than those of a people, who never took any pains in that way? or that oratory, and all the arts dependant on it, or connected with it, together with all the benefits and advantages resulting from it, should appear in a more conspicuous light, in regions, where that art was cultivated with the utmost pains and labour, than in a country where it has been utterly neglected. Is there any natural impediment in our way, is there any invincible obstacle to the pursuit of these studies, and to the attainment of these arts? Have we not a language to study as well as they? and do we not, on many accounts, stand in more need of studying that language? Have we not the same organs of speech, the same features, the same limbs, muscles, and nerves, that the ancients had? What want we then, but to apply ourselves to the regulation of these, and to study their true use in enforcing and adorning our sentiments, when delivered by speech, to rival or even excel them in their favourite art? How did the ancients attain this art? By study, and practice. Would not the same means bring us to the same end? And have we not the advantage of all their lights to guide us in our enquiries? Have we not the foundation of their experience to build upon, ready to our hands, whenever we are wise enough to set about raising the noble edifice? Did the ancients possess any advantages over us from nature, either in point of intellectual faculties, or the animal œconomy? With respect to the mental powers, it is undoubtedly clear, that we have carried our discoveries much farther than they did, both in the physical and moral world. And with respect to the bodily organs, true philosophy must deride any attempts, to shew that we are not framed exactly in the same manner. In all the sciences, to which we have applied, we have far outdone them; and if they still excel us in many of the arts, it is either because we have wholly neglected their cultivation, or where we have made the attempt, we have taken a wrong course; and unwisely deserted the method pointed out by the ancients towards their attainment, and which, with them, had been always crowned with success.

In short, the difference between the ancients and us, arises from one obvious cause. In the course of education, we have pursued most of the studies, which they did; but some we have wholly omitted. In all studies, which we followed in common with them, we have far excelled them: that they have excelled us in those which were peculiar to themselves, cannot be a matter of wonder. The chief points in which they differed from us, were the study of their native language, and oratory. And it can be indisputably shewn, that they possessed no advantage over us, but what arose, either immediately, or consequentially from their knowlege, skill, and practice; in grammar, rhetorick, and oratory. Now, as we have excelled them far, in all the studies to which we have applied, there can be no good reason assigned, that with a due degree of attention and pains, we might not surpass them in these also? On the contrary, I hope, on another occasion, to be able to prove, that from certain lights furnished by time, from peculiar advantages arising from our pure and holy religion, and from the nature of our admirable constitution, we might, with moderate pains, and in no long space of time, as far surpass them in those arts, and all that depend upon them, or have a connection with them, as we have already done in the sciences.

But though, upon trial, we should not find ourselves able to surpass the ancients, let us not shamefully suffer ourselves to be outdone in those arts by the moderns. If the Briton should own himself unequal to the contest with Greeks and Romans, let him not yield the palm to Frenchmen also. If, in despair of victory, he should say like Mnestheus in Virgil, "Non jam prima peto," let him add to his countrymen, "extremos pudeat rediisse!"

Believe me, there is no time to be lost. The Italians, the French, and the Spaniards, are far before you. Their languages and authors are well known through Europe, whilst yours have got admission only into the closets of a few. You have but to rouze yourselves from your lethargy, and to exert your native vigour, soon to outstrip them all. Should you set about refining and ascertaining your language, with the same spirit of industry, which you have often exerted on less important occasions, the work will not be long accomplishing;