this distinguished advocate of 'natural' reading and speaking, Mr.
Grant, writing in 1835, says: 'Oratory is not his forte, ... he goes
through his addresses in so clumsy and inanimate a way that noble lords
at once come to the conclusion that nothing so befits him as unbroken
silence. He speaks in so low a tone as to be inaudible to those who are
any distance from him. And not only is his voice low in its tones, but
it is unpleasant from its monotony. In his manner there is not a
particle of life or spirit. You would fancy his grace to be half asleep
while speaking. You see so little appearance of consciousness about him
that you can hardly help doubting whether his legs will support him
until he has finished his address.'

The writer of this justly says of the Archbishop's writings: 'They
abound with evidences of profound thought, varied knowledge, great
mental acuteness, and superior powers of reasoning.' But his 'natural'
theory in regard to speaking, did not, it appears, avail with him, even
when backed by such abilities.

'Nature,' says the Archbishop, 'or custom, which is a second nature,
suggests spontaneously the different modes of giving expression to
different thoughts, feelings, and designs, which are present to the mind
of any one who, without study, is speaking in earnest his own
sentiments. Then, if this be the case, why not leave nature to do her
own work? Impress but the mind fully with the sentiments, etc., to be
uttered; withdraw the attention from the sound, and fix it on the sense;
and nature, or habit, will spontaneously suggest the proper delivery.'

Such instruction as this is not unlike that which Hamlet gives to
Guildenstern, for playing upon a pipe, and would be, in the majority of
cases, hardly more efficacious: 'Govern these ventages with your fingers
and thumb, give it breath with your mouth, and it will discourse most
excellent music. Look you, these are the stops.' Guildenstern replies:
'But these cannot I command to any utterance of harmony; _I have not the
skill_.' The last sentence tells the whole story. The Archbishop, with
all his great abilities, had not the requisite _skill_ in oratorical
delivery.

So this may be said to be the conclusion of the whole matter: the main
result which can be secured in teaching reading, and in training the
voice, is technique and elocutionary _skill_ of various kinds--a skill
which the student can bring into his service, when voicing his
intellec