INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If if was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 I

74-17,779

HAMPLE, Judy Jones, 1947- WILLIAM WIRT: A STUDY OF RHETORICAL STANCE.

The Ohio State U niversity, P h.D ., 1974 Speech

University Microfilms, A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan

© 1974

JUDY JONES HAMPLE

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WILLIAM WIRT: A STUDY OF

RHETORICAL STANCE

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Judy Jones Hample, B.A., M.A.

i'< * j< * &

The Ohio State University

1974

Reading Committee: Approved By

Professor Goodwin F. Berquist Professor Paul C. Bowers Professor James L. Golden w m . Adviser yhrtment of Communication ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study might never have been completed without the valuable guidance of several understanding persons. My deepest gratitude is extended to my adviser, Professor Berquist. His extensive knowledge of history and public address aided me in maintaining a perspective or the historical and rhetorical emphases of this work; his continu­ ing interest, patience, enthusiasm and encouragement kept me working on the project. I am deeply indebted to Professors Golden and Bowers for reading the draft and making valuable suggestions for improvement.

Additionally I would like to acknowledge my appreciation to Professor

Golden for introducing me to the methods of rhetorical criticism uti­ lized in this study and to Professor Bowers for introducing me to the methods, joys and rewards of historical research. I am also grateful for the courtesies of librarians and archivists. Especially, I wish to thank the staff of the Archives of the Virginia State Library for continually aiding me in resolving conflicting accounts of aspects of William Wirt's life. VITA

October 16, 1947. Born - Henderson, Tennessee

196 9 ...... B.A., David Lipscomb College Nashville, Tennessee

1969-1971 . . . . University Fellow, Department of Communication The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

197 0 ...... M.A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1972-1973 . . . . Lecturer and Director of Forensics, Department of Speech Comimmication, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois

1973-1974 . . . . Assistant Professor and Associate Director of Debate, Department of Communication Arts and Sciences, Western Illinois University, Macomb, Illinois

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Rhetoric

Studies in Rhetorical Theory: Professors James L. Golden and Goodwin F. Berquist

Studies in Rhetorical Criticism: Professors James L. Golden and Goodwin F. Berquist

Studies in History and American Public Address: Professors Paul C. Bowers and Goodwin F. Berquist TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... iii

VITA ...... iv

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

A Rhetorician in the Making Methodology Available Arguments About the Subject Interests and Peculiarities of the Audience The Uncontested Term The Rhetorical Syllogism or Enthymeme Aesthetic Distance Implied Character of the Speaker Speaker's Purpose Speaker's Argument Speaker's Language Wirt's Achievement of Rhetorical Stance Survey of Literature

II. THE CULTURAL STANCE OF POST-REVOLUTIONARY VIRGINIA. . . . 25

Political Environment Social Ideas and Mores Books, Reading and the Belles Lettres Tradition Educational Development Elementary Education Secondary Education Higher Education Harvard William and Mary/King's/Yale Pennsylvania Summary

III. RHETORICAL ESSAYIST ...... 54

Essays: A Communication Medium Rhetorical Strategies Instruction in the Achievement of Eloquence Definition of Eloquence

v Chapter Page

The Orator's Education Nature versus Nurture Rhetorical Theory The Speaker Ethical Manifestations of Character Delivery Message Argument Language Occasion Rhetorical Stance

IV. RHETORICAL BIOGRAPHER 137

Biography of Henry Contradictory Accounts of Henry's Life Audience Expectations Anticipation of Publication Summary of the Henry Biography Patrick Henry: Moral Example Patrick Henry: Patriotic Ideal Patrick Henry: Rhetorical Model Henry's Liberty or Death Speech: A Case Study Rhetorical Stance Available Arguments About the Subject Interests and Peculiarities of the Audience Implied Character of the Speaker

V. PUBLIC ADVOCATE 191

Talents and Abilities as an Orator Reputation as a Lawyer-Politician Occasional Addresses "Discourse on Jefferson and Adams" "Address to Students of Rutgers College" "Address on the French Revolution" Rhetorical Stance

VI. CONCLUSIONS 225

Summary Conclusions

BIBLIOGRAPHY 239

vi CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A word is a vehicle, a boat floating down from the past, laden with the thought of men we never saw; and in coming to understand it we enter not only into the minds of our contemporaries, hut into the general mind of humanity continuous through time.-'-

This is the study of a word specialist: William Wirt, an orator, lawyer, essayist and biographer. Wirt's special genius was his ability to breathe life into Patrick Henrv as the "Voice of the Revolution," to captivate the heart of an audience with the suspenseful drama of

Aaron Burr's trial for treason and to conjure up eloquent classical and contemporary models exemplifying moral virtue for the emulation of

Virginia youths. Communication was his medium and for this he merits our attention.

Early nineteenth century Americans recognized particular talents in Wirt's literary, oratorical and forensic skills. In the words of a contemporary literary historian, "Although no one reads his speeches now, O Wirt was one of the great American orators of his time."" The series of familiar essays (narrative descriptions of people and problems) "The

Letters of the British Spy," "The Old Bachelor," "The Slyph,” "One of the People," "The Sentinel" penned by Wirt have survived only in dust-

-^Charles Horton Cooley, .Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Wind (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922), p. 69.

^Jay B. Hubbell, The South in American Literature 1607-1900 (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1954), p. 241.

1 covered anthologies because they too have lost their timeliness. As a

lawyer, Wirt vied with the presently acclaimed statesmen of the era:

Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, Emmet Martin and William

Pinkney. Not only was Wirt a private legal counsel but he served the office of the United States Attorney General longer than any other man

in history. Yet with the possible exception of the trial of Aaron Burr,

Wirt's name is seldom associated with any tenet of constitutional law

or any popular issue of his era. For twentieth century Americans, the

sole merit of William Wirt appears to be his biography of Patrick Henry.

Though severely criticized as panegyric in his own day, Wirt's work

affords the first glimpse of Henry the orator. While Wirt's biography v>as been somewhat displaced by the subsequent interpretations of Willison,

Meade, Arnold, Tyler and William Wirt Henry, this study will demonstrate

the overwhelming influences which Wirt's biography had on these writers.

The Henry biography embodies the epitome of Wirt's ideas, goals and values. Wirt, like his ideal, Patrick Henry, was responsive to the

social and cultural influences of eighteenth and nineteenth century

America. Through Henry, Wirt saw an opportunity to assimilate his views

on eloquence and inspire the youth of Virginia to resurrect their

"degenerating" culture. As a biographer, essayist and orator, Wirt

assumed the role of a cultural critic. All of his spoken and written words were responsive to the transitory nature of the American culture

from 1750 to 1830. The Revolutionary War and consequent efforts to con­

struct a new nation had vast impact on the politics, economics, educa­

tion, literature, morals and manners of society. Just as this was "an 3 O age of contradictions," so was the life of one of its critics-— William

Wirt.

A Rhetorician in the Making^

The contradictions of William Wirt's life were manifold: Wirt was devoted to literature but made his living by practicing law. As a lawyer, he gained a reputation as an ornamental speaker with minimal legal reasoning. While serving in several political offices, and even while running for President, Wirt protested that he disliked politics.

He spent twelve years resolving the conflicting comments on the life of

Henry, only to be assessed then and now as a writer of romantic fiction seeking fame and fortune. Finally, he saw his function as a cultural critic to educate youthful Virginians concerning their eloquent his­ torical past, but suspicions of vainglorious motives somewhat hindered his attempts at moral leadership. As a young lawyer he evidenced a weakness for alcohol. By the close of his legal career he had not only conquered his drinking problem but had attained sufficient respect to

3 Russel Blaine Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation 177 6- 1830 (New York: Harper and Row, 1960), p. 9.

^lThis sketch of the highlights of Wirt's life is compiled from the following sources: John Pendleton Kennedy, Memoirs of the Life of William Wirt, Attorney General of the United States (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849), 2 vols; Benson J. Lossing, Eminent Americans (New York: John B. Alden, 1883); Vernon Louis Parrington, Main Currents in American Thought (Mew York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1927), vol. II; James T. Adams (ed.), Dictionary of American History (Mew York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1942), vol. I; Appleton's Cyclopedia of American Biog­ raphy ; and the National Cyclopedia of American Biography. 4 become the President of the Maryland Bible Society. In short, Wirt underwent conflicts between what he felt he ought to do and what he actually did.

A Marylander by birth, but Virginian by choice, Wirt aspired to greatness. Because he was orphaned at the age of eight and self- supporting by fourteen, Wirt did not have as much leisure time as he desired to pursue a career in letters. Yet by virtue of hard work and perseverance, Wirt achieved modest fame as a Virginian essayist. As an essayist, he wrote of great men past and present, of orators and patriots, of the romantic past— all with a moral insight into his own day. His admiration for great men was epitomized in his controversial portrayal of Virginia's great orator, patriot and statesman, Patrick Henry. This

1817 biographical and rhetorical treatise reveals more than anything else in his life his ambition and determination to succeed. By marriage,

Wirt was blessed with the acquaintance of a number of distinguished

Virginia families— the Jeffersons, the Madisons, the Monroes, the Gilmers and the Randolphs. By personal knowledge and expertise in tutoring,

Wirt became associated with the Benjamin Edwards family. The Edwards were later to distinguish themselves in politics in Illinois and Ohio.

Like his orator-ideal, Henry, Wirt was admitted to the bar at an early age: Henry was admitted at the age of twenty-four and Wirt, twenty. Seven years later, Wirt assumed duties as clerk of the House of Delegates, thus launching a lengthy career in state politics. His success was swift and sure, so much so that at the age of thirty-five,

Wirt was personally asked by President Jefferson to prosecute Aaron Burr for treason. Legal prominence and literary acclaim seemed to go hand in hand.

His familiar essay series and the Henry study caused his peers to recog­ nize him as a litterateur of some note. In the same year The Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry was published, Wirt was named

Attorney General of the United States— an office he held longer than anyone in history, serving under both Monroe and Adams. In executing ths duties of the Attorney Generalship, Wirt’s reputation as an orator- statesman soared, but not as a philosophical and constitutional legal mind. fn more than one occasion, spectators crowded the courtrooms to delight in Wirt’s eloquent rhetorical displays. He developed such a pleasing style that he was frequently asked to deliver occasional address­ es. As a man of high moral virtue and knowledge, Wirt was thought to be a good choice to educate youth in morals, patriotism and oratory on such occasions as the deaths of Adams and Jefferson.

Although somewhat accomplished in law and letters, Wirt was no politician. His personal dislike for the whole of politics and his lack of political sophistication by themselves virtually eliminated any chance of success for his— the first— third party candidacy for the Presidency in 1832.

In reflecting on his life, Wirt looked with regret and displea­ sure to his contributions to Virginian society. The apparently declining manners and virtues of the Virginians, their apparent disinterest in education and oratory, and their neglect of past Virginian worthies com­ bined to form Wirt into a rhetorical-cultural critic. But did Wirt really see himseif as an instructor of youth because he was morally committed to these ideals or was he simply seeking fame for himself? The determination of his motivations is the function of this study.

Essentially, this study attempts to assess the rhetorical worth of a historically important figure. Through the investigation of the verbal and non-verbal communication of a product of nineteenth century thought and action, it is hoped that further insights can be gained in the nature, scope and function of rhetoric.

Methodology

To determine the motivations behind Wirt's rhetorical output and its consequent effects on his audience, two systems of criticism seem applicable: rhetorical stance and the ethics of argument.

Viewing rhetoric as the "art of persuading"'* Wayne Booth main­ tains that a rhetorician's essential function is to organize a chain of arguments ". . .about this subject for this audience that will bridge the gap between what you believed when you came and what . . . you . . .

7 believe when you depart." In his Rhetoric of Fiction, Booth argues that this rhetorical dimension in literature is inescapable. Rhetorical stance involves the balance between the available arguments about the subject, the peculiarities and interests of the audience and the implied character of the speaker. In short, balance occurs when the speaker succeeds in changing the minds of his audience. "What makes the rhetoric

"’Wayne C. Booth, "The Rhetorical Stance," Mow Don't Trv To Reason With Me (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), pp. 25-34. This article originally appeared in College Composition and Communica­ tion, October, 1963. 6 Booth, "The Revival of Rhetoric," ibid., p. 42.

^(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 105. of Milton and Burke and Churchill great is that each presents us with the spectacle of a man passionately involved in thinking an important Q question through, in the company of an audience." Rhetorical balance is, according to Booth, a difficult concept to explain. He urges that the best comprehension of "balance" is achieved by understanding the three corruptions or "unbalanced" stances: pedant’s stance (overvalu­ ing the subject matter), advertiser's stance (overvaluing pure effect) and entertainer's stance (overvaluing speaker's personal charm).

Viewing rhetoric as language designed to move men to action,

Richard Weaver is concerned with the ethical motivations and implications of the speaker's efforts to adapt his message to a particular audience.

The rhetor's function is "... to determine what feature of a question is most exigent and to use the power of language to make it appear so."^

Steeped in the philosophical issues regarding the nature of man,^ in his Ethics of Rhetoric, Weaver offers a useful methodology for deter­ mining the ethical nature of a speaker.11 His system is particularly useful in assessing the ethical implications of a speaker's use of lan­ guage and his type of arguments. In his essay on "The Spaciousness of

Q Booth, "The Rhetorical Stance," p. 32. Q ‘Richard L. Johannesen, Rennard Strickland and Ralph T. Ewbanks, Language is Sermonic (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1970), p. 220.

^Richard M. Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences (Chicago: Univer­ sity of Chicago Press, 1948) and Weaver, Visions of Order (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964). 11 Richard M. Weaver, The Ethics of Rhetoric (Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1953). 8 12 Old Rhetoric," Weaver indicates three dimensions of language adaptation

to a nineteenth century audience: uncontested terms, rhetorical syllo­

gisms (or enthymeme) and aesthetic distance. In understanding and judging the ethics of a speaker's argument, Weaver offers three useful critical tools: the allegory of the noble lover, hierarchy of argument and the ultimate terms.

These two systems of analysis will be integrated in the follow­

ing manner for purposes of making evaluative judgments about the ethical implications of the rhetoric of William Wirt. The general organiza­

tion of this synthesis will follow what Booth views as the three elements of rhetorical stance: the available arguments about the subject, the ueculiarities of the audience and the implied character of the speaker.

Available Arguments About the Subject

The first constituent of rhetorical stance is the available arguments about the subject. Investigation into this element will con­ sistently involve the critical consideration of Wirt's arguments regard­ ing the several issues he addressed. More than this, however, the use of

Booth's notion of stance demands an evaluation of Wirt's arguments in the most general possible communicative context, viz., the extent to which his arguments contributed to, or corrupted, his rhetorical balance.

The pedant's stance is the kind of imbalance at issue here. This corruption is an overemphasis on the available arguments. In Booth's own words, the pedant's stance consists of ", . . ignoring or underplaying the personal relationship of speaker and audience and depending entirely

12Ikii-» PP* 164-185. on statements about a subject— that is, the notion of a job for a par-

13 ticular audience is left out." Thus, the pedant holds himself aloof

from his listeners, releasing arguments without any personal commitment to those who may hear.

Interests and Peculiarities of the Audience

This element of rhetorical stance involves pleasing the audience

or at least balancing a message with the needs and ideas of the audience

Ethical presentation bv a speaker is essential. The imbalance accruing

from an unethical source results in an advertiser's stance which "...

comes from undervaluing the subject and overvaluing pure effect: how to win friends and influence people.Booth maintains that such a per­ version is more detrimental in the long term than ignoring the audience.

The speaker seeking rhetorical balance is aware of the peculiarities and interests of his audience, although he does not accommodate his argu ments merely because it is the popular thing to do. The three char­

acteristics of the nineteenth century audience discussed by Weaver are

relevant peculiarities.

The Uncontested Term

The uncontested term is one which seems to "invite a contest, but which apparently is not so regarded in its own context.These

terms are characterized by overwhelming generality, "phrases loose in

Booth, "The Rhetorical Stance," p. 27.

^Ibid., p. 30.

"^Weaver, E t h i c s , p. 166. 10 people" and "weakly defensible." Such, terms were admissable because of the previous indoctrination of the audience. With these listeners, the speaker had a "right of assumption" which allowed him to build on what mankind had "sanctified with usage." In short, the author of these general terms did not have to argue the significance of everything he held significant because the audience already adhered.

The Rhetorical Syllogism or Enthymeme

The "judicial flavor" of old rhetoric frequently served to remind people of what they already believed, not to make them think. Nineteenth century orators, like pulpit ministers, were men who spoke from an

"eminent degree of conviction.Because of the audience's identifi­ cation with the orator's ideas, the orator frequently used the enthymeme.

This syllogism occasionally has one of the three propositions missing, and the audience is willing to supply it. "The missing proposition will be in their hearts" and will be grounded in agreement upon some funda­ mental aspect of the subject being discussed. The old orator was logical, but not formally so.

Aesthetic Distance

Opaqueness or aesthetic distance characterized the generalized p h r a s e .

There is an aesthetic, as well a moral, limit to how close one may approach an object; and the forensic artists of the epoch. . . seem to have been guided by this principle of artistic decorum.^7

1 ^Ibid.. , pp. 172-173.

17I b i d ., p. 175. 11

Since the orator of this age felt that he was speaking for corporate humanity, he was not particularly concerned with singularity. "He was the mouth piece for a collective brand of wisdom which was not to be

18 delivered in individual accents." The essential contrast between nineteenth and twentieth century rhetoric, according to Weaver, is one of emphasis: twentieth century rhetoric emphasizes what people wish to hear, while nineteenth century rhetoric emphasized what people believed or had experienced. This rhetoric was also "polite" because its "... diffuseness conceals a respect for the powers and limitations of the

.,19 a u d i e n c e .

When a piece of oratory intended for a public occasion. . . is. . . filled up with repetition, periphrasis, long grammatical forms, and other impediments to directness, we should recall that the diffuseness all this produces may have a purpose. The orator may have made a close calculation of the receptive powers of his audience and have ordered his style to meet that, while continuing to 'sound good' at every point. This represents a form of con­ sideration for the audience.

Implied Character of the Speaker

The third element of rhetorical stance involves the personal role of the speaker in the communication situation. The corruption of this constituent resulting in imbalance is the entertainer's stance: 21 . . the willingness to sacrifice substance to personality and charm."

According to Weaver, three indices of the ethics of the speaker are indicated by his purpose, his argument and his language.

1 8 I b i d . , p. 182.

l 9 I b i d . , p. 184.

2 0 Ibid.

2^Booth, "The Rhetorical Stance," p. 32. 12

Speaker's Purpose

Weaver isolates three kinds of speakers based on Plato's Phaedrus, postulating three types of lovers: nonlover, evil lover and noble

lover. The particular posture a speaker can assume indicates his view of man and reality. In this context, rhetoric is viewed as a type of l o v e . ^

The nonlover is characterized by objectivity and prudence. He follows a policy of "enlightened self-interest.” Audience involvement is irrelevant to the nonlover. Never does this type of speaker commit extreme acts under the influence of passion. Association with the non­ lover does not "excite public comment," that is, this relationship has no effect on one's social standing. Finally, the nonlover bears no envv or jealousy of anyone's wealth or associates.

This kind of speaker uses a neuter language— an objective and scientific communication. Further, the nonlover uses utilitarian, rather than rhetorical, language in that no attempt is made to persuade the listeners. Finally, this language excites no interest, alarm or plea­ sure. This kind of spealcer-audience relationship is ". . . preferred by

23 all men who wish to do well in the world and avoid tempestuous courses."

Reports of experiments and business letters exemplify this utilitarian l a n g u a g e .

The evil lover is motivated by selfish appetite, and his lan­ guage influences listeners in the direction of what is evil. The object of such communication is exploitation— the basest form of rhetoric.

22 Weaver, Ethics, pp. 14-15.

^ I b i d . , p. 9. 13

Base rhetoric seeks to "keep its objects from the support which personal courage, noble associations, and divine philosophy provide a man."2^

It is important to the evil lover to have a following. When he acquires such a clientele, he ". . . strives to possess and victimize the object 9 S of his affections." Having his oxvn way is paramount for the evil lover. Such techniques are evident in the typical hard-sell salesman and the demagogue.

The noble lover, on the other hand, possesses a generous nature which confers blessings on his listeners and causes him to ignore himself.

Love is exhibited as creative rather than exploitative. The noble rhetorician attempts to lead listeners to a likeness of the god whom they admire and honor. Religious writers and ministers most frequently attempt to confer such blessings on their receivers.

Speaker's Argument

". . . The rhetorical content of the major premise which the

9 fi speaker habitually uses is the key to his primary view of existence."

Major premises are expressive of values, and "a characteristic major premise characterizes the user." The ethical implications of a speaker's major premises coincides with a hierarchy of arguments: definition, similitude, cause to effect and circumstance.

Arguments from definition— the nature of the thing— are highest in Weaver's hierarchy. Definitional arguments indicate that generic

24I b i d . , p. 11.

2~*Ibid . , • p. 13.

2 ^ I b i d ., p. 55. 14

classes have a nature which can be predicated to their species. The underlying postulate, that things have a nature, encompasses a broad view of the world and as a consequence those "... who habitually

argue from genus are in their personal philosophy idealists."

Second in this argumentative hierarchy is the argument from

similitude. Those who argue via similitude "invoke essential. . .

correspondences. . . . Thinkers of the analogical sort use this argu­ ment chiefly." Such arguments are expressive of a "oneness of the world."

"Proponents of this view tend to look toward some final, transcendental unity." This form is used widely "by poets and religionists." Argu­ ments from similitude are frequently achieved through the metaphor,

07 figuration, comparison and contrast. '

The third type of argument is cause to effect— which also includes

O O consequence. 0 This argument is important because all men use it because

of their historical nature. Causal argument operates in the realm of

current conditions, while the argument from consequence attempts to

predict a course of action for future conditions.

The least ethical argument a speaker can pose is one from circum­

stance. Circumstantial arguments are "the nearest of all arguments to

purest expediency. This argument merely reads the circumstances— the

’facts standing around'— and accepts them as coercive, or allows them to

dictate the decision." Because this argument stops at the mere percep­

tion of fact, it is the least philosophical of all possible arguments.

27Ibid., pp. 18, 23, 127-135, 150-152, 202-206; Visions of Order, p. 42.

2^Johannesen, et^ a l . , pp. 53, 56; E t h i c s , p. 57. 15

Since Weaver "held that "A man’s method of argument is a truer index of his beliefs than his explicit profession of principle. . it is critical to determine the speaker's method of reasoning as well as the what and why of arguing an issue.

Speaker’s Language

retermination of the ethical character of a speaker is implied in his use of "ultimate terms." A term is simply ". . . a name capable of entering into a proposition. . . a single term. . . awaiting only the

> necessary coupling with another term; and it cannot be denied that single names set up expectancies of propositional embodiment. These terms evidence themselves in the process of naming, specifically "god," "devil" and "charismatic" categories. They are absolutes in that they are terms which command uniform respect. God terms refer to expressions "... about which all other expressions are ranked as subordinate and serving dominations and powers. Its force imparts to the others their lesser degree of force, and fixes the scale by which degrees of comparison are understood." Such terms as "progress," "fast," "science," "efficient," and "modern" are a few of the many examples Weaver offers. Devil terms are the direct opposite of god terms— ultimate in negation and repulsion.

"Un-American" and "prejudice" are indicative of the nature of devil terms. Charismatic terms, the third type, possess a power which seems to have been given in some mysterious, irrational way. They operate independently of any referent and are effective because they have common

29 Ethics, p. 211. 16 consent. Weaver uses "freedom" to illustrate the charismatic term.

Weaver closes this discussion by insisting that "an ethics of rhetoric on requires that ultimate terms be ultimate in some rational sense."

Wirt's Achievement of Rhetorical Stance

The philosophy underlying Weaver's ethical system is that a speaker ought to "speak to men not as they are, but as they are capable

31 of becoming." To achieve that goal, the speaker must balance his arguments for his particular audience with the audience's perception of his character and ideas. The purpose of this investigation is to evaluate

William Wirt's endeavors to balance his instruction to youth with his audience's peculiarities and their perception of his character. By determining the origin, nature and impact of Wirt's arguments on instruct­ ing youth, by assessing the peculiarities of Wirt's audience in regard to their expectations of biographers, essayists and public advocates and finally by examining Wirt's implied character in the stance he takes toward his audience, one can assess William Wirt's rhetorical balance.

Survey of Literature

Historians and literary critics emphasize Wirt's contributions to the nineteenth century in three areas: essays, biography and speeches.

In reviewing the available literature for this study, these three areas will serve as guidelines. Before dealing specifically with each area of

3 0 I b i d . , p. 232.

31 Weaver, Visions of Order. influence, however, it is important to mention two sources of material which are useful for all phases of the study: Wirt's correspondence and

John Pendleton Kennedy's Memoirs of the Life of William Wirt, Attorney go General of the United States.

O O Wirt's correspondence with his close friends— Dabney Carr,

St. George Tucker,^ Francis Gilmer^— and with members of his family^ offers valuable insights into Wirt's motives, aspirations and activities.

These letters afford views on Wirt as an essayist, biographer and speaker.

An exhaustive account of the nature, purpose, conflicts, execution and audience response of each of his areas of endeavor is to be found in his correspondence.

^(Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849), 2 vols.

Letters of the Carr Papers, Wirt Papers, Dabney Family Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia; and Wirt Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Caroline.

34 Letters of the Tucker-Coleman Papers, College of William and Mary, Earl Swem Library, Williamsburg, Virginia; Tucker Family Papers, Colonial Williamsburg Library; Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore, Maryland; Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washing­ ton, D. C.; Wirt Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia and Wirt Family Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

35 Letters of the Francis Walker Gilmer Papers and the Wirt Papers, University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Virginia; Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia; and Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

'Letters of the Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.; Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland; Wirt Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; and Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia; Wirt Papers, Chicago Historical Society, Chicago, Illinois; Wirt Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia; Wirt Papers, William and Mary College, Williamsburg, Virginia; Wirt Papers, Virginia Historical Society, Richmond, Virginia; Wirt Papers, Free Library of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Wirt Papers, Peabody Institute Library, Baltimore, Maryland. 18

Kennedy wrote the biography of Wirt at the request of Wirt’s wife. The biography is useful in that it offers a comprehensive view of

all aspects of Wirt's career; it furthermore is the only full length biography of Wirt. Kennedy’s inclusion of original documents increases

the merit of this work because Wirt's letters, speeches and other docu­ ments are scattered. The documents communicate Wirt's literary style, his manners and his ideas. It is important, however, to note that in

several instances Kennedy has deleted portions of these documents which

tend to make apparent some of Wirt's foibles. Unfortunately, Kennedy

appears to have succumbed to three inherent "promptings of man" which

William Thrall argues all nineteenth century biographies exhibited:

37 the instincts to commemorate, moralize and satisfy curiosity.

In acquiring insights into Wirt's role as an essayist five sources

of materials proved especially useful. First, The Virginia Argus and

The Richmond Enquirer newspapers from 1801 to 1805 offer first-hand

accounts of Wirt's essays and their reception by Virginians. Second,

the series of essays in which Wirt portrayed a hypothetical Britisher

traveling in contemporary Virginia was reprinted as The Letters of the

38 British Spy in 1810 with a valuable biographical sketch by Peter Cruse.

39 Similarly, the series called The Old Bachelor appeared in 1814.

Fourth, the first of two dissertations on Wirt, one by Frank P. Cauble,

offers an interesting and valuable summation of Wirt's literary career,

A Handbook to Literature (New York: Odyssey Press, 1936), p . 54.

OO (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr.), 10th edition.

(Richmond: Thomas Ritchie and Fielding Lucas). 19 giving specific emphasis to Wirt’s familiar essays. Cauble, in this analysis, is concerned with Wirt and his friends' influence on Southern culture.^® Finally, two v/orks by Jay Hubbell— The South in American ^ 1 Literature 1670-1900^ and "William Wirt and the Familiar Essay in

Virginia"^— are particularly helpful both in assessing the role of the familiar essay in Virginia and also in producing pertinent facts con­ cerning authorship of each essav in each series. Generallv, Hubbell evaluates the nature, purpose and effects of essay collections appear­ ing in nex-zspapers in the early 1800's.

This concern for Wirt's role in the developing Southern culture is extended in analysis of his role as a biographer. Particularly effective in this regard is William R. Taylor's nenetrating analysis of / Q Wirt's contributions to the state of mind in the ante-bellum South.

Taylor illustrates Wirt's use of Patrick Henry as the embodiment of the natural aristocrat. By tracing Wirt's own development in legal and literary realms, Taylor helps us to comprehend the Southern culture of

Wirt's day. Dimensions of this theme are further explored in a 1957 article in the William and Marv Historical Quarterly. ^ Here Taylor

^"William Wirt and His Friends: A Study in Southern Culture, 1772-1834," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 1933.

41 (Durham: Duke University Press, 1954).

^ William and Mary Quarterly, Series II, Vol. XXII (1943). / ^ Cavalier and Yankee (New York: Harper and Row, 1957).

"William Wirt and the Legend of the Old South," Series III, Vol. XIV (1957),.477-493. 20 examines Wirt’s motivations in writing the Henry biography. He is particularly interested in Wirt's reasons for choosing Henry instead of one of the Randolphs or Richard Henry Lee. The biography, according

to Taylor, is ". . . a success story, it is social panegyric and it is a nature idyll"— all of which reflect Wirt's image of the Revolutionary era as a "golden age" of heroes.

Other materials pertinent to the study of the Henry biography include numerous reviews and the reactions of Wirt's contemporaries.

Among the most useful are articles appearing in the following journals:

The Monthly Ledger, The Literary and Evangelical Magazine, The Edin­ burgh Review, Port Folio, Analectic Magazine and the North American

Review; all of these reviews were printed in the period 1817-1818.

Especially helpful in assessing Wirt's use of "facts" about Henry are

the biographies which have appeared since Wirt's. These include Moses

Coit Tyler, Patrick H e n r y S. G. Arnold, The Life of Patrick Henry

William Wirt Henry, Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondence and Speeches

AO leorge Morgan, Patrick Henry; George Willison, Patrick Henry and His

W o r l d and Robert Douthat Meade, Patrick Henrv Practical Revolutionary."^

^(Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1888).

( N e w York: Miller, Orton and Mulligan, 1857).

^ (New York: Charles Scribners' Sons, 1891), 3 vols.

^(Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1929).

^ (New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1969).

"^(Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1969). 21

A rhetorical study of Henry has been used to compare Wirt's insights into Henry's oratory with those of a twentieth century rhetorician.

Louis Mallory's study of Henryk examines the life and speeches of Pat­ rick Henry against the political and social background of his times;

Mallory's purpose is to assess the method and extent of Henry's influence.

Mallory relies heavily on Wirt's account and attempts to harmonize it with the Tyler and William Wirt Henry accounts. In spite of the fact that Mallory has reservations about Wirt on certain points, he generally accepts Wirt's account— especially regarding Henry's speeches. The Mal­ lory study is a three-part analysis consisting of the history of the issues and times, the man and the speaker and Henry's methods and tech­ niques. In examining Wirt's assessment of Henry's oratory, the unpub­ lished Roane manuscript in the Cornell University Library proved helpful.

This document contains an account of one observer's reaction to Henry's

"Liberty or Death" speech. In this regard, a number of letters were also utilized. Among the most valuable were Wirt's correspondence with

52 It. George Tucker and Thomas Jefferson.

In assessing Wirt's third form of social contribution— oratory— a variety of materials was used. The best analysis of Wirt's legal

53 career was afforded by the historical study of Joseph Charles Burke.

“*^Louis Arthur Mallory, "Patrick Henry: Orator of the American Revolution," unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1938. c o The Wirt-Jefferson correspondence has been compiled and printed in pamphlet form by the Virginia State Library. This material is located in the William Wirt Papers stored there. C O "William Wirt: Attorney General and Constitutional Lawyer," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1965. 22

The Burke dissertation examines Wirt's role as Attorney General with special emphasis on his influence on that office. He focuses on what he considers to be the seven significant aspects of Wirt's legal career: the Aaron Burr trial, Attorney General (private lawyer and public official), international law, the contract clause: states rights versus vested rights, the Bank of the United States, the commerce clause and the

Cherokee Nation cases. Burke seeks to evaluate Wirt within the frame­ work of nineteenth century jurisprudence. His concept of the courts as sites of instruction, entertainment and oratorical display are useful for understanding the system in which Wirt operated.

The determination of Wirt's effectiveness in speaking has been greatly facilitated by accounts of his speeches in The Richmond Enquirer,

The Intelligencer, The Baltimore Gazette and The Boston Patriot. Assess­ ment by his contemporaries may be found in Francis Gilmer's Sketches'^ and Frederick William Thomas' Southern Tales and Sketches.

Four of Wirt's speeches are examined in detail in this study: his closing remarks in the Aaron Burr trial, his eulogy on the death of Adams and Jefferson, his celebration of Liberty's triumph in France and his address to Rutgers College. All of these were printed in pam­ phlet form after their delivery. The texts for the Burr trial can be located in a reprint of Wheaton's account in the Wirt Papers of the

(Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, Jr., 1828). The original draft of these Sketches is located in the Francis Gilmer Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. The original draft is used in this study.

■^(Philadelphia: A. Hart and Carey Hart, 1853). 23

Virginia State Library as well as in The Richmond Enquirer from August c r to September of 1807. Wirt’s "Discourse on the Lives and Characters of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams" is also in the Virginia State Library.

The text of the celebration of the "Triumph of Liberty in France," given to the citizens of Baltimore, can be found in the Peabody Institute

Library in Baltimore. Finally, the address to the Peitheasophian and

Philoclean Societies of Rutgers College exists in pamphlet form in the

Library Company of Philadelphia.

In order to comprehend fully the aura of Wirt's rhetoric, it is crucial to place Wirt in a historical-cultural perspective. Two authors have proved especially helpful in this regard. First, Richard Beale

Davis, in both Francis Walker Gilmer: Life and Learning in Jefferson's

Virginia^^ and Intellectual Life in Jefferson's Virginia 1790-1830"*^ offers an insightful analysis of the religious and educational systems, the economy, fine arts, law, oratory and literature; importantly, Davis pays particular attention to Virginia's standards of evaluation and

5q importance. Second, Jay B. Hubbell, in South and Southwest, ' offers an in-depth analysis of literary influences and the responses of writers to their cultural surroundings.

This survey does not purport to deal with every source used in

"^In Chapter V ("Public Advocate"), these textual differences will be explained.

(Richmond, Virginia: Diety Press, 1939).

(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1964). 5Q ^(Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1965). this analysis of William Wirt; rather, it focuses on those sources lending the most valuable insights into Wirt as an essayist, biographer and public advocate. CHAPTER II

THE CULTURAL STANCE OF POST- REVOLUTIONARY VIRGINIA

Post-Revolutionary America was self-conscious and self-centered; this was true in no place more than in Virginia. Attempts to preserve the "glamorous age of the Revolution" with its heroes and patriots bear testimony to the pervasiveness of vanity and state pride. These

Revolutionary heroes demonstrated that one could simultaneously master law, politics, literature and oratory. The preservation of this remark­ able society became largely a matter of literary conscience. In his essays, letters, biographies and speeches, the communicator saw a neces­ sity for urging his contemporaries to emulate these foregoing worthies.

Virginian manners, literature, politics and education, according to the writer or speaker, ought to exhibit respect for the best in cul­ tural development. It x>;as almost as though all eyes were on Virginia, the pace-maker and trend-setter of .American culture. In short, Virginia believed herself to be the best of all possible worlds and frequently deluded herself into believing that the rest of the nation shared her prejudices.

In this context, the communication of William Wirt takes on a special significance. With few exceptions, Wirt adapted his message to the Virginian minds by reinforcing and reminding them of what they already believed. In the introduction to this study, we noted Weaver's

25 26 thesis that the rhetor in nineteenth century America was more concerned with reinforcing existing ideas than in persuading listeners to adopt new ones. To understand fully Wirt's instruction to youth regarding political, social, educational and literary ideals, it is important to examine major trends in each of these areas. By looking briefly at the political, social, educational and literary development of Virginia from 1750 to 1830, it is possible to lay the foundation for determining the relevance, validity and audience impact of Wirt's essays, biography and speeches.

Political Environment

In the political arena, Virginians of the early nineteenth century appear to have had good reasons for boasting. Their dominant role in the development of the American nation and the Virginia dynasty of four early Presidents established beyond question their leadership in politics. Their success in developing system and stability out of chaos and instability had been no easy task.

In the middle of the eighteenth century "instability was the essence of the American nation."1 The colonies were weak and subservient to the British authorities who regulated governmental ani econcmic affairs.

As a consequence of this British control, colonial government was a 2 "product of trial and error."

1Howard M. Jones, 0 Strange New World (Mew York: Viking Press, 1952), p. 275.

Harry Carman, jet^ elI. , A History of the American People (New York: Alfred A.' Knopf, 1967), Vol. I, Third Edition, 121. 27

Despite some socio-political differences the American colonies were strikingly similar to their British predecessors. Virginia, more than any other colony, resembled Great Britain. The similarities be­ tween Virginia and the mother country were largely due to both the type of settlers in the Virginia colony and Virginia's contributions to

England during the war with France. Unlike most other colonies, Virginia had been settled by "representatives of the English people at large" instead of particular religious sects or criminals. This, coupled with

Virginia's contributions in money, men and loyalty to aid in the con­ flict with France, deeply involved Virginia in affairs that concerned

3 both the colonies and Great Britain.

One major difference in philosophy between the colonies and

England resulted from the question of sovereignty. Britain maintained that the colonies were simoly incapable of managing their own political affairs. Factional splits, corruntion, and governmental inexperience led Britain to believe in her own superiority in this sphere. A second, and more compelling, reason for British disapproval of autonomous govern­ ment by the colonies was an economic one. England was looking for a supply of raw materials that was difficult to obtain elsewhere; success in this search promised large profits.^ Virginia fulfilled its role in this regard by supplying tobacco. The colonial economic system was largely dependent on Britain because the British forbade the manufacture

3 Lyon G. Tyler, History of Virginia (New York: The American Historical Society, 1924), Vol. II, 10-20.

^Jay Hubbell, The South in American Literature (Durham: Duke University Press, 1954), p. 3. 28 of colonial goods. As a consequence, the colonials turned to the land because it was still cheap, plentiful and fertile. As a result colonial society, particularly Virginia with its vast productions of tobacco, became an agrarian society.-* Interpretations of the causes of the Ameri­ can Revolution attribute the colonial uprising to this economic and poli­ tical control by the British while other historians emphasize the threat

r of tyrannical control over colonial virtues and ideals. One thing is clear: the American Revolution exemplified multiple causation.

The far-reaching effects of the Revolution were evident in virtually all phases of American life. It was more than a political victory; it was a social and economic one as well. When the war was resolved, the colonists were left independent in the broadest sense of the term. State rivalries had essentially been ignored to produce unity for a common cause. With the ending of the Revolution, state interests and political factions became a major obstacle to development of the new nation. In an attempt to strengthen the central government without destroying the individual states, the colonists formulated, first, the

Vrticles of Confederation and eventually, the Constitution.

Debate over this Constitution brought into play two political

^A. A. J. Johnson and Herman E. Krooss, The American Economy (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1960), pp. 152-154. g Vernon L. Parrington, Main Currents in American Thought (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1927), Vol. I; Bernhard Knollenberg, Origin of the American Revolution: 1759-1766 (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1960); Bernard Bailyn, The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967) and Gordon S. Wood, The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969). 29

parties: the Federalists, who were pro-Constitution, and the Anti-

Federalists (Jeffersonians), who were anti-Constitution. The Federalists

aimed to secure strong central government ruled by the wise and good.

Led by Alexander Hamilton, John Adams and John Jay, the Federalists

represented the mercantile and moneyed interests of New England. In

contrast, the Jeffersonians were concerned with the maintenance of state

governments rooted in the common people. These Jeffersonians favored

the interests of their constituents in the agrarian South and frontier

West.

With the election of George Washington as the first President

in 1788, the Federalist party assumed national control. During their

twelve years in office they "organized the new government, set precedents

that have never been broken, established a sound financial system, ob­

tained the withdrawal of the British from the Northwest, eliminated the

Spanish threat to the Southwest, and prevented the United States from

becoming involved in a general European war."^ The Federalists were

defeated in the election of 1800, despite their achievements, and never

again regained full control of the Federal government. With Washington's

retirement, the Federalists were forced to select new candidates for the

election of 1796. John Adams and Thomas Pinckney were the Federalists

opposing the Jeffersonian candidates, Jefferson and Aaron Burr. Adams won the election by a slight margin. On assuming office, Adams was

catapulted into the conflict with France, and by his determined will

(against the wishes of many fellow Federalists) succeeded in preventing

American involvement.

■^Carman, p. 271. 30

Through the skillful campaigning of Jefferson, the Federalists lost power in 1800. Jefferson held a deep-seated belief in the rights of man. He succeeded in uniting dissatisfied planters and farmers in

Virginia and Jeffersonians in other states in opposition to the Federal­ ists. "They were bound together, not by similar ideals, but by the belief that their grievances could be attributed to Federalist control of the central government."8 In the election of 1800, the Federalists nominated John Adams and C. C. Pinckney, and the Pepublicans again nominated Jefferson and Rurr. Jefferson's victory marked the beginning of a long Republican rule. But before he left office, Adams succeeded in completely staffing the judicial system with Federalists. This act was to plague Jefferson and his successors for years. In Adams' ap­ pointment of John Marshall as Chief Justice,

. . . the Federalists had a champion who repeatedly proved him­ self capable of upholding the ideals of Washington and Hamilton, and from 1801 to 1835 he handed down a long list of notable de­ cisions that emphasized his Federalist view of the Constitution. Marshall fought economic instability and local interests hostile to national economic growth. . . . he did all in his power to magnify and strengthen the sovereignty of the national state and to safeguard the general American respect for the interests of private property. In the eyes of the Jeffersonians, Marshall was a thorough-going reactionary. As they were to learn to their distress, he was also one of the most powerful men in the Federal Government.

In 1807 Jefferson's administration underwent a severe test resulting from the trial of Aaron Burr for treason. This incident and its effects on Jefferson (who believed Burr guilty), will be discussed in detail

8Ibid., p . 307.

^Ibid., pp. 318-319. in Chapter V.

Jefferson was succeeded in 1808 by his friend and former Sec­ retary of State, James Madison. Madison, too, was a Virginia planter who had been a member of Virginia’s first constitutional convention, the Continental Congress, the Virginia legislature, the Philadelphia

Convention, and the House of 'Representatives. Although he had played the leading role in the ratification of the Constitution and the writing of The Federalist Papers, he broke with the Federalists after the Con­ stitution was adopted.

The most significant event of the Madison administration was the War of 1812 against (Treat Britain. In France and England's struggle for world supremacy, the United States (like other noncombatant nations) was subjected to all sorts of indignities and inconveniences, the tra­ ditional fate of neutral merchants in war time. Because of English interference with trade, impressment of seamen and desires for west­ ward expansion, the United States declared a war which it neither wanted

lor was prepared to fight. With the defeat of Napoleon's French forces in Europe in 1814, Britain was able to mount a full-scale attack on the United States. She began her attack on America by marching first on

Washington, then New Orleans, Maine and Plattsburg. The most signifi­ cant victory for the Americans was the Battle of New Orleans (fought two weeks after the Peace Treaty was signed)— a battle which made Andrew

Jackson a hero. The conflict was concluded with the signing of the

Treat-''' of Ghent. This treaty provided for cessation of hostilities, release of prisoners and restoration of conquests in this "peace without victory.For the first time since the nation’s founding, attention

could be focused on domestic rather than foreign problems.

The next three terms saw the administrations of James Nonroe

and John 0. Adams. Acquisition of lands, encouragement of agriculture and manufacturing and educational development were a few of the indica­

tions of an emphasis on domestic policies.

Adams was defeated in the election of 1828 by Andrew Jackson, whose name was identified with majority rule and enual rights. Jackson was an opponent of banks, a popular military hero and an opponent of

aristocracy. In him many Westerners saw "the symbol of the age." In

the era of the common man, Jackson popularized democracy and served as

a spokesman of the national will.

Virginia's role in the development of the new nation was exten­

sive. The close resemblances of the Virginia planter and the British

country squire, the desire and ability to rule alone, the leadership

evidenced by the Revolutionary patriots and the talents and ideas of

’’residents Washington, Jefferson, Madison and Monroe underlay the Vir­

ginian's pride in the political arena. Although inflated, this pride was more justified than not.

Social Ideas and Mores

With the political spotlight focused on the Virginians, they

felt the necessity for maintaining high standards of manners and morals.

In their political leaders they demanded the embodiment of the good,

10Ihid.,‘p. 356. the honest and the virtuous. Simplicity and a strong reliance on nature characterized the mind of the late eighteenth century Virginian.

Interpretations of intellectual thought differ. The people of this era ". . . wrote little, debated little, very likely thought little, according to Parrington.H The colonials "... wrote easily and amply, and turned out. . . a rich literature of theory, argument, opinion, and polemic.In any case, they were responsible for disseminating the social philosophy called democratic which spread among its people a unique individualism of thought and action.

One of the strongest features of the educated Virginian was his emulation of the classical past, with particular praise for Plutarch

13 and other classical historians. Although this classical revival had its birth in England, it is misleading to assume that America became a carbon copy of England. The "cultural lag" in the transmission of ideas isolated colonists to a large extent. Furthermore, American thinkers only transplanted those ideas which they found most accommodating to their purpose. ^ This reliance on classical doctrines had important influences upon colonial policies.^ As the last section will indicate, the classical influences on literature and oratory of this period were abundant.

According to Russell Nye, the two compelling concepts which

Uparrington, I, 131.

l^Bailyn, p. 1.

Jones, p. 237; Bailyn, p*. 28.

l^Russell Nye, The Cultural Life of the New Nation 1776-1830 (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960), p. 5.

l^Jones, p. 248. 34 structured thought in this period were those of man and nature. Though the term nature was an ambiguous one in the eighteenth century, one of its more common interpretations envisioned nature as "a static, perfect

16 framework of divinely, rationally conceived structures. ..." Nature was God's compliment and guide. Intellectually and aesthetically, eighteenth century man appreciated the order, perfection and harmony of nature. In this context, man was found to possess both reason and passion; these were compatible but passion could control reason.

In contrast, the nineteenth century manifested a greater concern for the inner side of man— his passions and emotions. Emotional aspects of man's nature were thought to possess a higher order of truth than reason; the blending of emotion, passion and intuition resulted in the

Imagination.^7 One notable, exception to this nineteenth century inter­ pretation was Thomas Jefferson. Rejecting the idea of nature as a source of intuitive knowledge, Jefferson viewed nature as a mechanistic process

18 through which "the business of the universe was accomplished."' Jeffer­ son stressed the knowledge to be gained from books rather than nature.

The eighteenth century man saw himself as a free individual. A profound belief in the freedom and value of the individual was one of the most imoortant outcomes of the American Revolution.

"^Nye, p. 10.

17Ibid.

1 8 Lester J. Cappon (ed.), The Adams-Jefferson Letters (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), Vol. II, 456. See also William R . Taylor, Cavalier and Yankee (New York: Harper and Row, 1957), pp. 30-31-. 35

Originally the colonists were transplanted with English ideas, customs and habits ingrained; but as time elapsed this became less impor­ tant. Both their belief in their own abilitv to make wise choices and their diligent efforts at self-improvement helped to free colonials of

English custom, precedent and tradition. Commitment to the ideals of a new nation founded on progress, natural rights, self-government, rationality and the benevolence of man, nature and God took precedence over tradition.^" Patriotism, the willingness to consider country before self, was a consistently lauded character trait. No place more than Virginia exhibited this quality; Virginia became the "personifica- 20 tion of American valor and success."

Early in their development, the colonials evolved their own social structure. The upper class consisted of the "gentlemen of the best families” who possessed liberal education, thorough knowledge of the world and an easy and carefree lifestyle. The middle class was

. . . generous, friendly, and hospitable in the extreme; but mixed with such an appearance of rudeness, ferocity, and haughtiness, wfich is in fact only a want of polish, occasioned bv their de­ ficiencies in education and a knowledge of mankind, as well as their general intercourse with slaves. . . .

The lower class consisted of the poorest farmers and the slaves. Nor surprisingly, the Revolution served as a catalyst to integrate the classes in Virginia. Stanard describes the state ball held at the Capitol to

^"'Nye, pp. 52-53. 2Q Thomas Nelson Page, The Old South (New York: Charles Scribner s Sons, 1892), p. 138.

21I h i d -pp. 112-113. 36 celebrate the peace: MNo social lines were drawn. Equality was the

?2 popular slogan. America was a republic now. Down with rank!"" But these egalitarian sentiments faded after the war. The Pevolution was, in reality, no leveling movement, nor were its leaders interested in destroying class lines. Patriots expected to achieve victory in "a

9 Q revolution of gentlemen, by gentlemen, and for gentlemen." But the newly independent "gentlemen" were unable to keep abreast of the latest social niceties. When Americans traveled abroad to England, they en­ countered problems. Since 1776, European society had bypassed Americans.

Customs, manners and language had become barriers to the unfamiliar.

Americans were particularly distrustful of certain elements of Europe's polite society: its comic theater, decorative arts and so forth— all

9 / of which Americans felt were superficial. In time these suspicions and criticisms were displaced by an emphasis on study abroad as training for the cultured individual.

One final'aspect of Virginian life deserves attention: the role of women in society. The Virginia woman had very few advantages. She seldom read or endeavored to improve her mind, but was generally a good housewife. Importantly, this was not a matter of choice on the woman's part. "Fride, intellectuality, hardness of mind— these were to be eschewed by ladies.America saw itself as a land of men.

7 7 Mary Nextfton Stanard, Richmond: Its People and Its Story (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1923), p. AD. 23 John C. Miller, Origins of the American Revolution as quoted in Nye, p. 106.

“^Taylor, pp. 46-47.

“"’Nye, p. 142. 37

The nature of the Virginian has been well summarized by one con­

temporary :

One of the first things that strikes a Northern man, who flounders into Virginia, or either of the more Southern states, laded with a pack of prejudices as large as a peddler's is, that he has, all life long, been under a very mistaken notion of the state of their manners. . . . Before I had been long in this part of the world, I discovered, to my great surprise, that the people were very much like other folks, only a little more hospitable. . . .^

Plainly, the Virginian believed in nature and man. Particularly, he was certain that man was capable of wisdom in ruling himself. Typical of other colonists, the Virginians adhered to rather rigid class dis­

tinctions. The impetus of their training in manners and morals was

directed to the upper class. Virginians were proud of their heritage

and sought to retain the high position they believed belonged to men of

their stature.

Books, Beading and the Belles Lettres Tradition

In the middle of the eighteenth century, Americans were still being influenced by the seventeenth century emphasis on plainness in

style. The advent of the Romantic movement, coupled with publications

such as Edward Young's Conjectures on Original Composition in 1759, brought a spontaneity, natural genius and uniqueness to English criticism

27 which found echoes in America in the post-Revolutionary era.

The Revolutionary era itself had produced a pride in "native

O £ James P. Paulding, Letters From the South (New York: Harper and Bros., 1835), Vol. I, 33.

97 Benjamin T. Spencer, The Quest For Nationality (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1957), pp. 8-9. 38 texture and style." Meanwhile, doctrines of nature and the arts were being derived from Scottish philosophers and rhetoricians. National­ istic eagerness for the development of the American genius resulted in pleadings for magazines to develop this literary pride. Sublimity was a key to eighteenth century literature's attempt to recapture the heroic past. By hymning the acts of Revolutionary heroes, "... future bards would set the pattern of national virtue. . . and wandering over the scenes of Revolutionary battles they would fix heroic associations in

28 the minds of coming generations."

One of the most powerful forces for simplicity in literature was the sermon. Theological controversies called attention to the lack of effective communication. The period from 1700 to 1775 witnessed a preference for toleration over controversy and appeals for a direct, simple, lucid prose style.

The colonials apparently came to the conclusion that in proportion as they avoided ambiguity of expression they would avoid controversy over meaning; and so the classical ideal of sweet reasonableness even in matters of ^' ’ as its counterpart a decent pro­ priety in diction

Probably the greatest single influence on the style of the eighteenth century Virginian was belletristic writing. The most influ­ ential of these thinkers were Henry Home (Lord Kames) and Hugh Blair.

"The study of Blair's Lectures and other texts of the same kind probably had more to do with the literary conservatism of the South than the

28Ibld., pp. 14-15.

29 'Howard Mumford Jones, Ideas in America (Cambridge, Massachu- setts: Harvard University Press, 1^45), p. 89. 39

30 study of the ancient classics." Characteristic of the literature on belles lettres was the belief that taste was allied to a moral sense grounded in principles common to all men. For instance, Karnes urged that certain qualities like proportion and regularity were universally and naturally agreeable. This standard of common taste was the criteria for acceptance of all belletristic efforts.^ Blair, like Karnes, assumed the existence of a universal taste in all nations. However, Blair stressed the importance of natural inclination and talent for detecting elements of genius more than Karnes. Through Blair's

. . . encomiums on genius, the sublime, and figurative language in the writings of ruder stages of society, he [Blair] encouraged American authors to believe that the utterances of the young nation, unpolished though they were, might surpass in imaginative power the more sophisticated productions of Europe.

Importantly the influence of Blair, Karnes and others was largely re­ stricted to writers or upper class citizens interested in matters of style and taste. The limited circulation of books and reading materials clearly demonstrated that everyone was not interested in literary and educational matters.

To judge the status of literary culture in the colonial era by the presence or absence of printing facilities would be a mistake: the presence or absence of books is a truer index. Because of the expense of the book, the colonial bought it to use and not as an escape from life. The large number of utilitarian volumes ranged from medical

30Hubbell, pp. 177-178.

~^Henry Lord Karnes Home, Elements of Criticism, 3 Vols. (Edin­ burgh and London: 1762).

3^Jones, Ideas, pp. 33-34. AO treatises, handbooks on agriculture and gardening, treatises on politi- cal science and occasional works of travel, to history and biography.

John Locke was the most popular English philosopher in America even well into the nineteenth century; his Essay Concerning Human Understand­ ing was widely circulated. Out of a sense of duty, the colonial read the Greek and Latin classics such as the works of Homer, Xenophon, Ovid,

Cicero, Vergil, Caesar, Horace and Sallust. Eor pleasure or utility, he imbibed in the English literary masters such as Chaucer, Sper-ser,

Shakespeare, Milton, Drvden, Addison and Pope. In general, women were not expected to read anything except books prepared specifically for them. During the latter part of the eighteenth century, women were more

3 A and more becoming readers of popular works, especially fiction.

Early nineteenth century citizens were particularly interested in reading light literature such as novels and essays. Although few

Americans of this era wrote fiction, they were particularly eager to read it. By the early nineteenth century, earlier objections to the immorality of novels had largely disappeared. The most popular essay form for Virginians was the familiar essay. Topics ranging from con­ ditions of women to oratory were encompassed in their pages. Virginian essayists modeled their efforts after the Spectator, Tatler, Guardian,

Rambler and World.

In the Revolutionary period, especially in the Southern hack

33Hubbell, p. 10.

34Ibid., pp. 10-12. 41

35 country, books xxrere scarce. We know that Jefferson had many books and that he criticized Patrick Henry and John Marshall for having so few. Primary types of hooks included history, biographv, travel, law, political science, philosophy, natural science and belles-lettres.

Interest in the classics continued, but an increasing amount of reading was in translation. Widely read authors of the day included Locke,

Swift, Bolingbrolce and Hume; Milton, Montesquieu and Voltaire were read less.3*’ All played a role in the development of political, economic and cultural tides in this era.

Without Locke, Sidney, Milton, Montesquieu, Voltaire— and perhaps I should add Cicero, Demosthenes, Livy and Herodotus— it is con­ ceivable that there might have been no Virginia Bill of Rights and no Declaration of Independence— at least in the form we have them. The books which nourished the founding fathers were, I dare say, more substantial fare than those on which most of our contemporary Washington legislators and bureaucrats have been fed.^^

The number of families with good libraries was probably smaller in 1789 than in 1775 and certainly smaller than in 1830. This was pri­ marily true because the Revolution most affected the cultivated classes.

Generally, books were more plentiful in the towns and large plantations of the Tidewater region than in the uplands or west of the Appalachians.

Cultivated Virginians and Carolinians who had gone westward continued

to buy books because they were looked upon as a necessity by many planters

35 Jefferson sold 10,000 volumes of his personal library to the Library of Congress to alleviate his financial problems following the War of 1812. Dumas Malone (ed.), Dictionary of American Biography, X (1933), 31.

36Ibid., pp. 94-97.

37Ibid., -p. 98. 42 who had to endure the isolation of plantation life. University libraries, as one might expect, were well stocked, particularly the University

, . . 38 of Virginia.

The period 1789 to 1830 was one of slowly changing literary

tastes. The drift was toward romanticism, but the eighteenth century

classics were still widely read. In Virginia, as in England, Scott,

Moore and Byron were almost immediately popular, but Wordsworth, Cole-

39 ridge, Shelley and Keats made their way much more slowly.

Xn the first quarter of the nineteenth century literature and literary criticism were in both North and South chiefly the work of men in professional circles, and their readers belonged irainlv to the cultivated classes whose economic and political ideas were 4-0 conservative.

Educational Development

Until the early 1800's, Virginian education was essentially a

private concern; lack of public funds and scattered populations miti­

gated against centralized public education. In the rare instances in which a local school was available, the quality of instruction was often

poor.^ Teachers were often clergymen or educated indentured servants,

but in the final analysis, it was the private tutors and secular teachers

of parochial schools who supplied the "backbone of education" in the

38Ibid., pp. 179-188.

o q Richard Beale Davis, "Literary Tastes in Virginia Before Poe," William and Mary Quarterly, second series, vol. XIX (January, 1939), 55-68.

^Hubbell, pp. 186-187. Also see Robert E. Spiller (ed.), Literary History of the United States, (New York: The Macmillan Com­ pany, 1948), I. .

^ Ibid., p. 8. 43 / 2 South. Professional training for teachers did not exist. Town meet­ ings, church boards and parish officials hired whomever they pleased.

Teachers received low social status and even lower pay. The common people were educationally deficient and frequently illiterate. Books were scarce; essentially, the Bible, platform speakers and occasional newspapers provided all the intellectual stimulation for most of the citizenry.

The educational system of Virginia was forced to grow out of the plantation tutorial system, the infrequent free schools and a small number of secondary level academies. Up until the Revolution, well-to- do young men were sent away to an academy, tutored at home or sent to

Europe for education and travel. The severing of relationships between the colonies and Britain resulted in few Americans studying or traveling abroad. It was not until about 1815 that colonists, especially Vir­ ginians, again sent their sons abroad for a cultural education. A brief review of the development of a system of education at the elementary, secondary and collegiate levels will indicate the method and quality of education available to Virginians.

Elementary Education

During the first half of the eighteenth century, American school- books were usually reprints of British texts. The ending of the Revolu­ tion saw American presses pouring out several texts specifically aimed

fry •““Harold Underwood Faulkner, American Political and Social History (Mew York: F. S. Crofts, 1947), p. 62. at American readers; between 1804 and 1832, the number of different

schoolbooks published in the United States increased from 93 to 407.

For the elementary student, the New England Primer remained the stand­

ard text, as it had been since 1600. The Primer contained "the alpha­

bet, illustrated couplets, the Shorter Catechism, selections from Watte's / Q Hvmns, and various rules of behavior."

In 1770, Jefferson proposed a Bill for the More General Dif­

fusion of Knowledge; had it passed, it would have made a significant

contribution to Virginia's elementary school system:

Jefferson had proposed beginners' schools in each ward (a unit supporting one militia company) of each county, annually elected visitors (supervisors), teachers from the laboring classes (farmers and mechanics), choice of one able child in each twenty for further training at public expense, and support solely from countv-levied taxes.44

English literature, reading, writing, arithmetic and ancient and Ameri­

can history were viewed by Jefferson as critical tools to equip the people

generally for life and citizenship. Eventually, Jefferson saw his

original proposal enacted in bits and pieces. He continued to urge

improved elementary education until 1818 when he turned his attentions

to higher education. His crusadings were echoed by Joseph C. Cabell,

Andrew Stevenson and William C. Rives.4^

^Nve, pp. 156-157. 44 Richard Beale Davis, Intellectual Life in Jefferson's Virginia 1790-1830 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1964), p. 31. 45

Jefferson’s elementary education idea was perceived as a type of charity school. The fact is that the schools were not intended exclu­ sively for the poor; by using a "benevolence" approach, Jeffersonians hoped to elicit support from both liberal and conservative ranks. The emphasis was on education, not charity.

Elementary school education experienced no major advances until

Horace Mann. As late as the 1830’s there were still few public schools.

Those in existence were poorly supported— individually, by parents.^

Secondary Education

Secondary education, unlike elementary, was never thought of as appropriate for all men. Theoretically, such schools were designed for all, but both the exclusion of technical training and the emphasis on preparation for higher education or teaching mitigated against wide applicability. Jefferson and his followers primarily saw the secondary system as being selective, for those who could afford it. Jefferson's envisioned district schools were not significantly different in general curriculum and organization from those which he and other educated

Virginians attended before, during, and after the Revolution. "Men like Patrick Henry and William Wirt had never gone beyond such schools, though they spoke and wrote fluently with full-blown classical embellish­ ments .

Grammar schools or classical academies were common labels for the

^ H a r v e y Wish, Society and Thought in Early America (New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1950), p. 286.

^Davis, Intellectual Life, p. 34. 46 approximately seventy schools in Virginia between 1790 and 1830. Basic subjects covered in these grammar schools included classical languages, basic mathematics and some English composition. Usually science and

French accompanied such a curriculum. Occasionally, "commercial" sub­ jects such as shorthand and accounting were also offered.^ The clas­ sical academies appear to have differed slightly in the subjects taught.

According to Nye, by 1800 the standard academy curriculum offered mathe­ matics, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, surveying, geography, logic, public speaking, English, commercial studies and usually a course in science— physics, biology, botany or geology.^ These academies served as preparation for college or for business and lesser professions. These schools dominated the scene until the public school began. Importantly, it was no oversight that the Virginian educational system was exclusively for boys; the Virginian emphasis was on building leaders for the new republican society.

Higher Education

"The American university began as a center for the radiation of religion and culture outward into an undeveloped, expanding society, a fact which has influenced the development of American higher education from that day to this."-^ Of the "colonial nine" colleges in existence prior to the American Revolution, seven were founded by Protestant church groups under sectarian control.

A8Ibid., pp. 35-38.

^ % y e , p. 162. /

^Davis, Intellectual Life, p. 171. The first American colleges were modeled on British universities

as they existed in the seventeenth century. However, the pressures of

American conditions quickly forced the colonists to modify the tradi­

tional British university pattern. The American college, unlike the

British, was not composed of "subcolleges" grouped about a center, but

developed rather as an autonomous, free-standing institution. Its

sponsorship was privately denominational, with control usually vested in

a board of ministers and lay persons who were not academicians. During

the eighteenth century, American universities drifted gradually toward

secular education. "The impact of the Enlightenment, the emergence of

a powerful middle class, the separation of church and state, the contro­ versy over independence and revolution, all contributed to the seculari­

zation of American education and loosened the ecclesiastical grip on

universities.""^ From 1750 to 1800 the control of American colleges

passed from the church, to the church laymen, and finally into pre­

dominantly non-sectarian hands.

The American Revolution had a great effect on the educational

system. It affected most college curriculums because British occupa­

tion of the cities necessitated the closing of the colleges. One-fourth

of all college students entered some form of military service. In

addition, British cessation of funds and imported books, added to the burden of a wartime inflation, made college financing almost impossible.

The Revolution also infused colleges with a nationalistic spirit. "If

-^Ibid., p. 173, adapted from Hofstadter and Metzer, Academic Freedom (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955).

^ I b i d ., p. 175. 48 education were necessary to the success of the Republic, as its founders unanimously asserted, education to produce national leadership was a

SI public responsibility."

The ending of the Revolution brought increased demands on higher education because of the chartering of a number of colleges in Southern states. This expansion of collegiate education brought into focus the long-existent struggle between church and state. The secularization of eighteenth century society emphasized political freedom and individual rights, thus putting church colleges on the defensive. The majority of colleges founded after 1783 were intended to produce, if not ministers, at least Christians. To turn control of higher education from the church over to the state seemed unthinkable to many Americans, steeped as they were in a long tradition of religious education. This was par­ ticularly true since after 1746 it seemed the state might sometime be controlled by deists, rationalists and Jeffersonian "infidels."^4

Several attempts were made by political leaders to confiscate control of the private, denominational colleges after 1785. Harvard,

Yale, Princeton, Columbia, Pennsylvania and William and Mary stood them off. It was not until the settlement of the Dartmouth College case of 1819 (argued successfully by Daniel Webster against William Wirt) that state institutions were subject to state— not denominational— control and denominational colleges established by minority sectarian groups, once having obtained a charter, were to be free from state interference.

53t1Ibxd . ,.

54Ibid., p . 176. 49

"The way, therefore, was opened for public and private institutions of higher education to develop separately, with the victory to the most powerful

One of the major elements in the curriculum of those colleges was rhetoric. We have already seen an increasing Virginian interest in rhetoric and belles lettres. This, coupled with the increasing emphasis on collegiate education, resulted in development of rhetorical training on the college and university level.

With the growing interest in, and refinement of, rhetorical theory and practice came a corresponding collegiate emphasis on require­ ments for student rhetors. A brief glimpse of the programs of some of the leading colleges of the day will give a good indication of the direction of the trend toward rhetorical training. This development, according to Wallace, can be categorized in three stages: the Harvard system, formulated in the seventeenth century; adoption of the Harvard plan by William and Mary and Yale and partial acquisition bv King’s,

■Dartmouth, Rhode Island and others; and demands for functional training in English— xHiich sparked the planning of the College of Philadelphia

5 6 at mid-century and permeated a number of other institutions.

Harvard

The original Harvard curriculum required student participation in . . declamations, syllogistic disputations, orations and common-

55Ibid., p. 177.

"^Karl Wallace, A History of Speech Education in America (Nextf York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1954), p . 65. 50 placing. All these had been similarly practiced in Britain and

Europe.In each of these areas, there was grave concern about student performances. Records of the Harvard overseers indicate that "regular public exhibition of oratory," tutoring in "Elocution, Coirroosition in

English, Rhetoric, and other parts of the Belles Lettres" and formula- c o tion of the "Speaking Club" were all a part of the emphasis.

Generally Harvard instructors tended to follow Ramus, Talon, and Dugard in dividing the classical field of rhetoric into logic and a limited "rhetoric" consisting of elocutio and pronunciatio. As a consequence, students tended to overlook persuasion in the process of studying inventio and dispositlo. The desire for ornamental display evidenced itself in students' search for training in elocutio and

59 pronunciatio, rather than in persuasive efforts.'

William and Marv/King1s/Yale

Similar rhetorical emphases were occurring at Yale and William and Mary College. One of the primary innovations was the Englisl declamation, which was introduced in 1751.^ Crocker and Carmack point to the format and effect of these declamations:

57Ihid., pp. 65-66.

58 Lionel Crocker and Paul A. Carmack (eds.), Readings in Rhetoric (Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1^65), np. 450-451.

59 William Norwood Brigance, A History and Criticism of American Public Address (New York: Russell and Russell, 1943), Vol. II, 18-19.

60 Crocker and Carmack, p. 451. 51

Twice a week five or six deliver a Declamation Memoriter from the oratorical Rostrum; the President makes some observations upon the manner of Delivery and sometimes upon the Subject; and some­ times gives some small Laurel to him who best acts the Part of an Orator. These declamations are beforehand sunervised hv their Tutor, who corrects the Orthography and Punctuation.

From accumulated evidence, it appears that the Harvard plan of orations,

Latin syllogistic disputations and declamations also extended to William and Mary College, College of New Jersey and King's College. Importantly,

"by 1770 every one of the established colleges had included more forensic disputes, orations, and declamations in English in their rhetorical

t,62 exercises.

Practically all colleges in the latter half of the eighteenth century studied rhetorical theorv with emphasis upon princinal classical sources, including Ouintilian's Institutes, Aristotle's Rhetoric and

Poetic, Cicero's De Oratore. critical epistles of Horace and Longinus, and of course Hugh Blair's Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres.

"Both classic and English speeches and sermons continued to be read and studied, and in the lower classes often memorized and declaimed as

6 3 well, as companions to the readings and lectures in theory."

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania possessed the first colleges to experiment with dialogues, poems, essays and other literary forms which were read aloud

as speaking exercises. The emphasis on the training of youth in the

61Ibid., pp. 451-452.

^Brigance, pp. 20-21.

63Ibid. 52

English tongue w a s undoubtedly greatly influenced by Benjamin Franklin, and especially by two of his pamphlets: Proposals Relating to the Educa­

tion of Youth in Pennsylvania (1774) and the Idea of the English School

(ca. 1751). In his proposals, Franklin emphasized speaking and writing skills which develop clarity and distinctness. Franklin's rhetorical education program featured: (1) study of model speeches; (2) elements of rhetoric and logic; (3) translation of classics: and (4) latest

British literature of Milton, Locke, Addison, Pope and Swift.

Franklin was a clear spokesman for the awakened interest in public speaking that was developing out of the religious revivals, the rise of the lawyer class, and the formation of business and trade organizations in which he himself had taken the lead. Political agitation in the. ensuing decades intensified this interest in speaking well.^

In the educational as well as social and political orientation,

the Virginians emulated their British ancestors. Educational standards were far from ideal, but the Virginians were making some systematic attempt to revise their system. Elementary, secondary and higher education all received attention. An equally important influence was the beginning of the belletristic tradition in Europe; this school of thought quickly spread to Virginia. The Virginians' concern for style,

taste and polite literature was largely derived from the influence of essays, novels and other books concerned with style.

Summary

In the political, social and educational development of Virginia, we have observed the hardships that were met. Virginia was a struggling

^Wallace, p. 67. colony seeking to make itself a model for others to emulate. She could boast greatly in political areas because of her leadership in the devolu­

tion and the establishment of the republic. Socially, Virginians were

concerned with maintenance of an aristocracy and with insuring that they

received the best training in manners and morals. Educationally,

Virginia was handicapped. The upper classes contained practically all

the educated citizenry. Even the women of these upper classes were

excluded from academic training. In William Wirt, as we shall see,

these political, social and educational developments fostered a strong

sense of involvement and a stronger state pride. CHAPTER III

RHETORICAL ESSAYIST

Communication was a serious undertaking in colonial society.

The written word appears to have been a major impetus to interchange and dissemination of thought. This chapter proposes to examine the role which essays played in this communication process. Specifically, the role of essays in Virginia and Wirt's role, strategies and in­ struction to youth in the achievement of eloquence will be analyzed.

These factors will alloxj for insights into Wirt's stance as rhetorical essayist.

Essays: A Communication Medium

The essay was a common form of dissemination of ideas in colon­ ial Virginia.'*' The launching of the Spectator series by Addison and

Steele in 1711 popularized a particular form of literature, the "famil­ iar essay." Colonial newspapers carried extensive reprints of essays collected from the Tatler, Spectator, Rambler and Guardian. But more importantly, a number of eighteenth century American writers attempted to imitate the style and form of their British counterparts. A survey

^"Elizabeth C. Cook, Literary Influences in Colonial Nex^spapers 1764-1850 (New York, 1912), provides an excellent reviexv of the essays published in the Virginia Gazette as well as other newspapers of colon­ ial society.

54 55 ? of colonial newspapers indicates the extent of this imitation."

The familiar essay served a unique function in society. Dis­ solution of formal barriers, thus creating an intimacy between speaker and audience, enabled essayists to discuss personal and controversial

3 subjects on a one-to-one level. Functionally, familiar essavs repre­ sented and interpreted aspects of life in an aestheticallv interesting manner; stylistically, they appeared as narratives, descriptions of 4 people and places or reflections on past and present human problems.

As distinguished from other essay forms,^ the familiar essay served a

three-fold function: to interest or startle; to interpret or evaluate

a subject; and to exploit deliberately the personality of the narrator.^

The narrator need not appear in the essay, although he frequently does.

Unless the essayist takes pains to identify himself, one cannot assume

that he is the narrator.

Sometimes over many years an essayist will present a particularly consistent, definite, and interesting personality in his works, and readers come to associate this personality with the essayist's name so frequently that it is hard for them to even consider the possibility that the essayist might actually be quite a different person.

^Ibid. Also see, Jav B. Hubbell, "William Wirt and the Familiar Essay," William and Mary Quarterly, series II, vol. XXIII (1943), 136. 3 John L. Stewart (ed.), The Essay (New York: Prentice-Hall, 1952), p. 530.

^Ibid., pp. 530-531.

^Ihld. Stewart provides an excellent insight into a]1 major essay forms and their functions.

6Ibid., p. 530.

^Ibid. , 'pp. 530-531. The familiar essays of William Wirt demonstrate that Virginia readers clearly recognized the persona of at least a few of their periodical writers. Of the many Virginia essayists in the early nine­ teenth century, none was more poDular than Wirt. As we shall see, readers immediately identified with the characters of Wirt's imagina­ tion. Interestingly enough, Wirt's essays and fictional characters were not entirely fantasies. In offering moral instruction to Virginia' youths, Wirt used the general stvle of the Spectator as well as por­ trayals of his contemporaries to embody the principles under discussion.

That Wirt was strongly influenced by the model of the Spectator is undeniable. Writing under the guise of a British spy, Wirt bemoans the lack of social reverence for worthy authors by lamenting

. . . the eternal oblivion, into which our old authors, those giants of literature, are permitted to sink, while the world stands onen-eved and onen-mouthed to catch everv modern, tinselled O " abortion, as it falls from the press.0

In the same essay, Wirt praises the Spectator's ability to "raise, genius and to mend the heart," primarily because its exhortations were annli- cable to the whole of society. If he were the sovereign of a nation,

Wirt says he would insure that every adult and child read the Spectator.

This literary model embodies ancient and modern learning and wisdom, as well as exemplary composition for instruction in style. Finally the spy urges that the Spectator deserves perpetual attention because of its "... morality, literary information, 'sweetly contagious serentity

Q William Wirt, The Letters of the British Spy (Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, 4th edition, 1810), p. 244. Hereafter cited as British Snv. 57

pure and chaste style and curiosity."9 Interestingly, these were the

identical principles which Wirt’s essays were designed to teach.

As a popular essayist, Wirt authored several series: "The

Letters of the British Spy," "The Rainbow," "The Sentinel," "The Slyph,"

"One of the People," and "The Old Bachelor." In this particular study,

"The Slyph" and "The Sentinel" will be excluded because neither is

directly relevant to the purpose of this investigation. Both were dis­

continued before completion, because Wirt became involved in more pres­

sing concerns. Perhaps most importantly, "The Sentinel" and "The Slyph" were never satisfactorily associated with Wirt’s name in the minds of his audience. Wirt's literary acclaim was derived primarily from the

letters of the Old Bachelor and the British Spy. These two series and

"The Rainbow" will be examined as to their origin, composition and

purpose. Because of the uniqueness of the "One of the People" and "The

Sentinel" essays, they will be considered in Chapter V. We are concerned here with Wirt’s essays which were designed to instruct youth in eloquence.

"The Letters of the British Spy" appeared in The Virginia Argus

in August and September of 1 8 0 3 . Writing under the guise of a British

9Ibid., p. 242.

^Essays were printed in newspapers because there was no maga­ zine in publication in Richmond in 1803; according to F. L. Mott's A History of American Magazines, pp. 204-205, efforts were made to publish The National Magazine (1799-1800) and The Visitor (February 11, 1809 to August 18, 1810), but neither was successful. The first magazine of any repute prior to The Southern Literary Messenger was John Holt Rice’s Virginia Evangelical and Literary Magazine (1818-1828). Recalling that Richmond was a relatively small town, it is understandable that they were unable to support a magazine in addition to their four news­ papers. According to Clarence S. Brigham's "Bibliography of American Newspapers, 1690-1820. Part XVIII: Virginia— West Virginia," Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, new series, vol. XXXVII (1927), 58

spy traveling in Virginia, Wirt amused the Virginians with lectures

on oratory, geography, and portrayals of living contemporaries. In

correspondence with the editor of the Argus, Wirt proposes to afford

readers of these ten essays "a delineation of every character of note

among us, some literary disquisitions, with a great mixture of moral

and political observations."11 In this, Wirt's first published literary

effort, we see an interesting conflict. Mention has already been made

of the influence of Addison and Steele's Spectator ; equal attention

should be given to Wirt's other general model, Sterne, the author of

Tristram Shandy. Sterne's sensitive whimsicality with Addison's urbane

1 ? soundness of mind and soul was the medium Wirt was striving for. " In

Petter's estimation, too much reliance on Addison would have resulted

in a drab and dull account, while too great a reliance on Sterne would have turned into mere mannerism. It was this equalizing attempt which might make Wirt appear inconsistent and a promoter of that 'style of

127, 116, 119-120, 120-121, respectively, those newspapers were: The Virginia Gazette and General Advertiser (semi-weeklv), The Examiner (a semi-^.veekly established by Meriwether Jones and John Dixson on December 3, 1798 and discontinued early in 1804), The Recorder (semi­ weekly, ending in 1806) and The Virginia Argus (origina.il/ named The P.ichmond and Manchester Advertiser and edited by Samuel Pleasants, Jr., a Republican and a Quaker). For further information on newsnapers of this era, see Samuel Merdecai's Richmond in By-Gone Days, pp. 161- 163. These newspapers contained sections devoted to "literary intel­ ligence" even though they were primarily political organs.

11Spv correspondence with editor of Virginia Argus, British Soy, p. 99. For an extensive summary of each essay, see Cauble, pp. 102- 156.

1 2 “Henri Petter, "Satirical and Polemical Fiction," The Early American Hovel (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1971), pp. 114-115. 59 modern productions" to which he objected:

The writer who contends for fame, or even for truth, is obliged to consult the reigning taste of the day. Hence, too often, in opposition to his own judgment, he is led to incumber his idea with a gorgeous load of ornaments; and when he would present to the public a body of pure, substantial and useful thought, he finds himself constrained to encrust and bury its utility within a dazzling case, to convert a feast of reason into a concert of IV sounds. . . . J

Whether for the perpetuation of his fame or for sincere moral instruc­

tion to youth, Wirt appears to have attempted to adapt his style to the

taste of his day.

"The Rainbow" series was first published in The Richmond Enquir­

er between August 11, .1804 and April 19, 1805. Two full series and the beginning of a third were published; only the first series was ever

collected and reprinted.^ James Ogilvie, Scottish schoolmaster and philosopher, originated the series; Wirt contributed two essavs. Using

the private correspondences of members of the Rainbow Association,

Hubbell has determined the authorship of most essays. It appears that

each member of this Association contributed two essays under a pseudonym.

The three series with respective authors have been indicated by Hubbell

in tabular form:'*'”’

The Rainbow : First Series Number Author Title Date

On the Utility of I "0" Miscellaneous August 11, (James Ogilvie) Essays 1804

~^Ibid . , p . 81.

•^Kennedy, I, 121. Kennedy knew nothing of the second series which can possibly explain his brief ten line paragraph treatment.

■^Jay B. Hubbell, "William Wirt and the Familiar Essay," 136-152. 60

First Series (Cont.) Number Author Title Date

II "Y" On the Condition A.ugus t 18, (Wm. Wirt) of Women 1804

III "Examiner" Politeness September 1, (Meriv7ether Jones) 1804

IV "S" French ^evolution; and September 8 (Skelton Jones) Emperorship of and 12, 1804 Bonaparte

v "Z" On the American September 15, (Peyton ^andoloh) Genius 1804

VI "I" On the Building of September 22, (John Brocken- Towns 1804 brief?)

VII "X" On the Illusions of September 2°, (George Tucker) ^ancy 1804

VIII Truth and Eloquence. October 6, An Allegory 1804

IX "M" On the Condition of October 13, (William Brocken- Women 1804 brough)

X "R" On the Establishment October 20, (Thomas Ritchie?) of Charity 1804 Schools

Second Series Number Author Title Date

I "0" On Luxury October 27, (Ogilvie) 1804

II "Y" On Forensic Eloquence November 10, (Wirt) 1804

III "S" On Celibacy; Or, The November 17, (S. Jones) Condition of Old Maids 1804 and Bachelors 61

Second Series (Cont.) Number Author Title Date

IV "Examiner" On Party November 24, (M. Jones) 1804

V "Z" On the American December 1, (P. Pandolph) Genius 1804

VI "X" On Luxury December 22, (G. Tucker) 1804

VII unsigned Reflections on Janurrv 13, (George Pay?) Duelling 1805

VIII "M" on public March 23, (VJ. Brocken- Schools 1805 hrough)

IX "R" A Moral Picture. Part Anril 6, (T. Ritchie?) 1st. Laura: Or, The 1805 Single Homan

Only one number of the third series ever appeared: an unsigned essay,

"On Luxury," which was printed on April 19, 1805. However, the follow- ing six essays were published in conjunction with "The Rainbow" but were not numbered in any one of the three regular series:

Author Title Date

To the Authors of October 24, 1804 the "Painbow"

On the female Sex December 8, 1804

On Suffrage and December 2°, 3.804 Representation

Mr»IT D On Irrepealable Laws January 25, 1805 (S. Jones) 62

Author Title Date

"B" The Progress of Intellect February 8, 1805 ? in a Youth

"X" Vindication of March 30, 18D5 ? Duelling

"The Old Bachelor" essays were published between Decemler 22,

1810 and December 24, 1811. In 1813, five more essays appeared in The

Richmond Enquirer, making the total number of essays thirty-three. One year later, all the collection was republished in book form. As a book,

The Old Bachelor was so popular that it went through four editions by

1818.^ The design and plan of the "Old Bachelor" appears to have been

Wirt's; however, Addisonian and Sternian influences are evident. Most of this volume was written by Wirt in the dramatic person of Dr. Cecil.

Kennedy, Wirt's biographer, maintains that Wirt is primarily responsible for the series. Correspondence clearly indicates that Wirt authored the opening essays, the ninth, seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, thirtieth, thirty-first and thirty-second."^ In sum Wirt is responsible for all the essays issuing from the pen of Dr. Cecil; these constitute approximately three-fourths of the series. Besides Dr. Robert Cecil,

16Ibid., p. 145.

■^Letter, William Wirt to Benjamin Edwards, June 23, 1809 and December 22, 1809, Chicago Historical Society, Chicago, Illinois, Wirt Papers; William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 19, 1810 and March 8, 1811, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia, Wirt Papers: Letter, Thomas Jefferson to William Wirt, May 3, 1811, Kennedy I, 331-332. Also see Kennedy, I, 266, 274, 280, 307 and 313, respectively. 63 three other characters are developed: the Old Bachelor's harp-nlaying niece Rosalie and two nephews, Galen (a young doctor) and Alfred (a young lawyer). Assisting Wirt in this literary endeavor were Henry

St. George Tucker, Louis Hue Girardin, Dabney Carr, Frank Carr, Richard

1 8 Parker and David Watson.

The central theme of "The Old Bachelor" was to be education.

Wirt, having tired of this theme before the series was finished, shifted the emphasis to oratory. The end product consists of a collection of thoughts on manners, avarice, gambling, patriotism, ambition, wealth IP and the condition of women.

According to the Old Bachelor, his purpose in writing was

20 ". . . virtuously to instruct, or innocently to amuse."' Wirt further promised his readers that nothing would secure sanction "... whose aim 21 is malevolent, mischievous or vicious. . . ." In the next essay, Dr.

Cecil expands his declaration of purpose:

. . . the most important function which The Old Bachelor proposes to himself, is to endeavor to awaken the taste of the body of the people for literary attainments; to make them sensible of the fallen state of intellect in our country, compared with the age even of the revolutionary war; to excite the emulation of the rising race, and see whether a groupe of statesmen, scholars, orators, and patriots, as enlightened and illustrious as their fathers, cannot be produced without the aid of wuch another bloody and fatal stimulant.^

■^Cauble, p. 405.

19Kennedy, I, 272.

70 "The Old Bachelor," The Richmond Enquirer, January 26, 1811. Also The Old Bachelor (Richmond: Ritchie and Fielding Lucas, 1814), p . 63.

^ Ibid., February 2, 1811. Ibid . , p. 69. 64

In the "Advertisement" of the book's compilation, the editor, Thomas

Ritchie, expresses to his readers some regrets on the writing. In the first place, he apologizes for the rapidity and carelessness with which they were written. In the second place, Ritchie notes the importance of the topic of eloquence in the work.

The subject of eloquence. . . had constituted a Prominent figure in the original design of the work. But the author's hours of leisure becoming more and more rare, as well as shorter, he was forced to leave the Essavs which are published on that topic in a very crude and mutilated state, and to suspend, at least for a time, if not to abandon altogether, the whole project. This he regrets.— For the occupation was delightful to him: and he learned from a variety of quarters that it was not without plea­ sure or profit to the readers of The Enquirer.^

Unfortunately, Wirt's efforts with "The Old Bachelor" were interrupted, just as they had been during the writing of "The Sentinel" and "Tbe

Slyph." Undoubtedly this series would have contained more extensive discussions of Wirt's views on oratory, education and patriotism if he had pursued the original proposal.

Rhetorical Strategies

In his moral instruction to youth, Wirt employed four strategies of communication: anonymity, models, Socratic monologue and dramatic dialogue. Each of these will be examined to determine their design and execution in the essays.

As a rhetorical essayist, Wirt always wrote anonymously. Im­ portantly, although the writing was anonymous, a character was developed to the extent that readers even associated particular subjects to the

^ Ibld. , "Advertisement." persona of the essays. We have already observed the two primary pseu­

donyms under which Wirt wrote: a British spy and an old bachelor. In

each instance, certain objectives clearly motivated Wirt's anonymity.

Five particular motivations appear to have promoted Wirt's

anonymity as a British spy. First, the mask of the spy allowed Wirt

to inspect the country and its people "without attracting to myself a

2 A single eye of curiosity, or awakening a shade of suspicion." Recondl

the plainness and humility of the spy's appearance, coupled witt his manners and conversation, made him appealing to "every line of the Amer

ican character. Thirdly, Wirt delighted in the "innocent roguery"

of his masquerade because it captured his sporty temperament. "To sit

and decoy the human heart from behind all its disguises: to watch the

capricious evolutions of unrestrained nature, frisking, curvetting and

gambolling at her ease, with the curtain of ceremony drawn up to the very sky— Oh! it is delightful! Fourth, Wirt encouraged curiosity

in his selection of title. The sympathy of the country as a whole was

divided between England and France with Virginia being primarily on the

side of France. Virginians were curious to discover the virtues and vices that a British traveler saw in them.

Fire-eating editors in Virginia had for some time been portraying the grave danger America was in because of British hatred for republican principles and her insatiable thirst for commercial dominion. Britain would use every means, it was said, of 'cor­ ruption and conquest' to bring the states hack under her control, 66

and constant vigilance was enjoined to prevent its coming to pass.27

A body of evidence indicates that several Virginians actually believed the spy to be a real Britisher.28 Importantly, Wirt admits attempts to emulate British thought and attitudes.

For the purpose. . . of keeping alive the public curiosity, it was my business to maintain the character which I had assumed, and therefore the sentiments of the Spy are those of a Briton. Would it not have been absurd to clothe a Briton with the opin­ ions and feelings of a Virginian and a Republican?2^

Wirt’s anonymity as an old bachelor facilitated his instruction to youth. We have already noted that Wirt's purpose in this series was to instruct or innocently amuse. In order to appear credible as an experienced counselor, Wirt had to demonstrate his competency.

Achieving identification with the audience, while maintaining supremacy over them was Wirt’s objective: he had to be one of the people speaking for the people. As a counselor, Dr. Cecil describes himself as an edu­ cated, patriotic, enthusiastic, experienced person. Compassion and love are exhibited in his adoption of his two nephews and his niece.

Inlike the British spy, the old bachelor was a native Virginian, sensi­ tive to Virginian goals, ambitions, virtues and vices. Former associa­ tions with British royalty as well as Rriginia farmers allowed him to evaluate and criticize people from all walks of life. The old bachelor

9 7 'Cauble, pp. 110-111, based on accounts of The Annual Register and Virginian Depository for the Year 1800, p . vii.

2^Kennedy, I, 109ff.

29 Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 16, 1804, Vir­ ginia State Library, Pd.chmond, Virginia, Wirt Papers. Peprinted in Kennedv, I, 116. 67 presented himself as a master of three orofessions: law, medicine and the ministry. On sight, the old bachelor could be immediately recog­ nized because of his hobbled walk and paralvzed hand; these injuries were sustained by two bullets in the Rattle of Brandywine. Enthusiasm was, according to Dr. Cecil, the prominent feature of his character.

The zeal with which he pursued a divinity degree is illustrative of this enthusiasm. The sudden desire to shield his fellow creatures from death by teaching them how to die was initiated immediately after his mother died in his arms. To ciualifv himself for teaching others how to die, Dr. Cecil states:

. . . I immediately set about acquiring the Hebrew language; studied the old testament with all the commentaries of the 'Rabbis; procured and read all the remains of Porphyry, Jamblichus, & the whole tribe of eclectic philosophers, who, in the third and fourth centuries attacked the religion of the son of God; together with the able, the eloquent and conclusive replies of the Christian fathers; travelled, minutely & laboriously through the whole course of ecclesiastical history, and perused every thing of any note, pro and con, on the Christian controversy and scheme of salvation, which had ever been published either in Europe or America. And although, at last, T did not feel myself authorised to enter the sacred desk in the character of a teacher, yet I shall never regret my having fortified my own faith against the assaults of sophistry and qualified myself to silence the cavils and witticisms of the infidel.^0

Elements of exaggeration such as these inflated character traits; the old bachelor was "humbly" learned, sophisticated, virtuous and wise.

While attempting to achieve respect and sympathy from his audience,

Wirt was attempting to be one of them. By persuading readers that he shared their thoughts, experiences, ideas and ambitions, Wirt believed

10 The Old Bachelor, p. 5. The Richmond Enquirer, December 22, 1310. he could more virtuously instruct: the old bachelor embodied the prin­ ciples Wirt sought to instill in youth.

It is instructive to observe that Wirt’s anonymity did not pass unnoticed by his friends. Dabney Carr, a close friend and contributor in the latter stages of production, reacted to Wirt's plan:

. . . I am enraptured with it— The plan is an excellent one. . . . the execution is yours, A it is worthy of you— & let me tell you, that you hold a pen, which is capable of dispensing blessings to a nation. . . . those who know you read it, & if it is uncommonly good, they say by Jupiter (as it were) I know but one man who can write in this way, it must be Mr. Wirt. . . .

Recall that a distinguishing characteristic of the familiar essay is it association with the narrator— his character and personality. As a

British spy and as an old bachelor, Wirt employed a strategy of anonym­

ity to secure adherence to his instruction.

As a rhetorical essayist, Wirt made extensive use of the strat­

egy of models. Scarcely a theoretical principle escapes Wirt's illus­

tration with a model or example. Ths most extensive use of models for

Wirt was related to his ability to draw caricatures of living contem­ poraries. Such application of characters represented to him ". . . the

32 liveliest and most impressive way of moralizing. ..." Wirt used models in both a positive and negative sense: positively, his charac­

ter encompassed desirable traits which youth should emulate; negatively

"^Letter, Dabney Carr to William Wirt, March 20, 1810, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore, Maryland, Wirt Papers. 32 Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, March 23, 1811, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia, Wirt Papers. Reprinted in Kennedy, I, 313. 69 traits which should be shunned. Politicians, speakers, writers, philo­ sophers, ministers and lawyers were all sources of illustration. Occa­ sionally, Wirt xras unable to construct a suitable contemporary model; in such instances, classical examples were utilized. Audience familiar­ ity with contemporary models lent them greater impact than for classi­ cal ones.

The rhetorical strategy of Socratic monologye was responsive to the situation. In dealing with a controversial subject such as the education of women, Wirt frequentlv communicated via monologue. Almost as a preparation for persuasion, the function of the monologue was to allow the narrator to think the subject through in the presence of the audience. In short, Dr. Cecil engaged in "soul-searching” regarding the efficacy of a social or moral proposition. This literary technique always preceded the fourth and final strategy, dramatic dialogue.

The dramatic dialogue is an interaction between two or more characters representing differing viewpoints. Its function appears to be two-fold: one, to complete the persuasive process commenced by the

Socratic monologue; and two, to respond to unfavorable audience reac­ tions. When Dr. Cecil engages in discussion with other characters, he is seeking to lead them to "truth," i.e., acceptance of Dr. Cecil's position. Although still holding his premises supreme, the dialogue allows for unfavorable reader response in that it makes the old bache­ lor appear fair and tolerant of opposition. Readers constantly cor­ responded with Dr. Cecil; the dramatic dialogue was a method of letting them know that their reactions, thoughts and differences of opinion were important to him. In this instance, Wirt appears to have been heeding advice he had given his daughter, viz., "The way to make your- self pleasing to others is to show that you care for them." There is no question that the old bachelor wanted to be liked; use of the dia­ logue was proof for the audience.

Anonymity, models, Socratic monologue and dramatic dialogue were strategies aiding Wirt in his rhetorical philosophizing on morals, manners and oratory for the youth of Virginia. Specific examples of these techniques will be forthcoming in the following section.

Instruction in the Achievement of Eloquence

Repeatedly we have emphasized Wirt's instructional inclinations.

As an essayist, Wirt believed that he was to be "like Barlow's American poet, a republican moralist."3^ Wirt's task was noble but challenging:

He was to help restore the simplicity and dignity of manners characteristic of the ancient republics and to help eradicate that predilection for those luxuries which constitute the baubles of our colonial childhood, the badges of aristocratical distinc­ tions we have abjured, and the idols of the abominable passions, which we have sv/orn on the altars of the revolution to expunge from our souls.

As a rhetorical essayist, Wirt's instruction encompassed a variety of subjects. Importantly, he never set forth a definitive, formal treatise on any subject; the essays tend to reflect his immediate thoughts. In the following sections, Wirt's arguments on the subject of eloquence

33 Letter, William Wirt to Laura Wirt, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore, Maryland, Wirt PaDers.

3^Benjamin T. Spencer, The Quest for Nationality (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1957), p. 40. 71 have been synthesized from the entirety of the three essay series under consideration here. While this author grants that no essav had as its overriding function the promotion of eloquence, at the same time, the author does not feel that unjustified liberties have been taken with Wirt’s material. For the sake of simplicity, the achievement of eloquence has been divided into the following topics: definition of eloquence, orator's education, nature versus nurture, classical rhet­ orical canons and occasions for oratory.

Definition of Eloquence

Eloquence, for Wirt, involved the adaptation of all words, in spoken or written form, to achieve a specified purpose or goal. Per­ suasion resided in coordinated action and language. Man communicates with a purpose, and he who most clearly achieves his purpose is most eloquent. In short, eloquence is a driving force in societv and an

o /• especially "powerful engine" in the republic.

One could scarcely fail to notice the similarities between

Wirt's view of eloquence and that of Hugh Blair. This eighteenth cantury British stylist observes that "Eloquence is the Art of Speaking

3 7 in such a Manner as to attain the end for which we speak." In Chapter

II, w e referred to the pervasive influence of Blair's lectures in

Virginia. Probably no Virginian was more influenced by Blair's stylistic thought than Wirt; his letters and references in published writings

"^British Spy, p. 146.

o 7 Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (London: W. Craech, 1806), II, 160. 72 reflect extreme familiarity with Blair's tenets. It should not be sur­ prising to discover, then, that Wirt's view of eloquence closelv resem­ bled Blair's. Wirt's own explanation of the derivation of his views, however, emphasize the role of observation.

The remarks which I propose to offer, have been suggested to me by what I have heard and seen of American eloquence: and although they may have been anticipated bv other writers in other countries and ages, (which I shall not stop to examine) the reader raa’'7 still assure himself that my purpose is not to retail after others, but to depict prevailing faults, which I have^myself observed, and to 'catch the manners living as they rise.'

Wirt's analysis of Virginian eloquence has importance other than the application of classical theories to correcting faults in orators. His rhetorical views apparently represent the first American attempt to reunite rhetorical theory with classical doctrines. Such an

39 accolade has generally been reserved for John Ouincv Adams.' Undoubt­ edly the distinction which others would draw here is that Adams' Lectures were the first systematic attempt to draw such relationships. Neverthe­ less, the significance of Adams' Lectures is reduced when the following factors are considered: (1) Adams' Lectures were published in 1808 while Wirt's essays were published between 1801 and 1803: (2) Wirt's publications appeared in newspapers, making them more accessible to readers than Adams' book; (3) the purpose of both authors was to im­ prove the standard of oratorical effectiveness by isolating its con­ stituents; and (4) there is scarcely a subject covered in the Lectures

~^The Old Bachelor, p. 199.

OQ J. Jeffrey Auer and Jerald L. Baninga, Lectures on Rhetoric and Oratory (Cambridge: Hilliar and Metcalf, 1810), I, preface, 1. 73 which is not also examined by Wirt,4® although Adams offers a more

thorough analysis in most cases. Whether Wirt or Adams deserves primary

distinction is irrelevant; that Wirt deserves some distinction in rhet­

orical theory is plain.

The achievement of sovereignty in eloquence is, according to

Wirt, a sequential process. First, youthful aspirants must seclude

themselves from all those "enervating dissipations which disgrace our

state. . . ."41 Second, the right and moral purpose must be predominate

in the communicator. Third, the apprentice must "brace his mind with a

firm and steadfast courage which turns aside from no labour, and shrinks

from no effort, however arduous, that is essential to his enterprize."42

Fourth, the "glorious pre-eminence" at which the speaker aims must

surpass all considerations for his own personal ease and pleasure.

Finally, and perhaps most challenging to future rhetorical geniuses, is

Wirt's admonition to be willing "to die while he lives, that he may live

after he is dead." Eloquence is power, and Wirt urges youth to take

advantage of their republic, which hails eloquence, but where "... the

4^Ibid. Subjects covered by Adams include an analysis of Cicero’s and Quintilian's treatises, topics, judicial and deliberative oratory, disposition, arguments, pulpit eloquence and moral character of the orator. Importantly, this is not an isolated example. John Witherspoon's Lectures on Eloquence developed prior to the Revolution were not published until 1804; Witherspoon immigrated to New Jersey in 1768.

4^The Old Bachelor, p. 198.

42Ibid.

43 Ibid. 7 4 stage is almost completely unoccupied."44 Continuing, Wirt disparages the lack of anyone in the United States i^ho possesses the indispensable traits of a "perfect orator"— the skill to combine an ample knowledge, a profound, vigorous and penetrating imagination, and tender sensibility with enchanting voice and action. By examining essential ingredients of training one for eloquence— education, the role of nature, knowledge of rhetorical canons and occasions for speeches— Wirt hoped to inspire

Virginia’s youths to promote eloquence.

The Orator's Education

Public orators reauire special educational training. With Wirt, just as with classicists such as Quintilian, the orator's education was a prime concern. Imperfections in the Virginian svstem of education took their toll on the lawyers and orators who publicly addressed them­ selves to social problems. In Wirt's estimation, a general education was insufficient for oratorical development.

. . . It must be obvious, on a moment's reflection, that those who are destined for public speakers, require a peculiar treat­ ment, without which it will be impossible for them to attain the summit of their art, and which would be entirely unnecessary to any other profession.^

Administering one system of juvenile education without variation to all professions explains how poor habits of speaking develop in youth and become so ingrained that it is impossible to remove them in manhood.

44Ibid.

45Ibid., p. 200. 75

To mend this situation, Wirt proposed that a system of education he developed which would prevent, or at least remove, faults in orators*, a system which would . .so chasten our judgments and refine our tastes as to prevent our adoption of them [blemishes] at a more ad-

j m vanced age. 46

The educational system which Wirt envisioned was to be copied from the classical model of the Romans.

In Rome, the education of an orator was peculiar, and began, I think, at four or five years of age: He was placed under the direction and in the family of some distinguished speaker, under the constant influence of whose example he might catch the time, the cadence, the articulation, without which, eloquence cannot po s s ibly exis t.4 ^

Full, clear, brilliant enunciation and melodious sentiment were evidence that the Poman orator knew his profession. In addition to voice manage­ ment, Roman orators exemplified the easy and graceful "flexibility of frame on which attitude and gesture depend, and all that management of the features, which insinuates, with such resistless energy, the con-

A Q victiors and feelings of the sneaker into the minds of his audience."

If the Virginians could be trained in the composites of public speaking, as the 1 omans had been, they could in time come to devote themselves completely to their subject matter:

When a man comes to speak in public, he should be at liberty to give his whole mind to his subject: instead of having it divided and distracted, by the necessity of watching and avoiding the habitual defects of his manner as he goes along: and, except in those few happy favorites whom nature has made perfect, such previous accomplishment of manner as will leave the mind thus

45 Ibid., p. 203.

/;7Ibid. , p. 199.

48Ibid., p. 201. 76

free to devote itself exclusively to the subject, cannot be ex- oected but by a long, rigorous, judicious training in ear.lv youth.49

That Wirt was strongly influenced in his educational views by classical scholars such as Cicero and Quintilian is evident. It is not surprising, however, when one considers that Wirt was a product of a classical education. Wirt's correspondence, essays, speeches and manu­ script collections of translations of Cicero's works'*^ attest to his familiarity with these writers. Additionally, as one who had studied the perfection of oratory and aspired to exhibit such talents, Wirt saw special virtue in such training. If society's values and problems prevented special oratorical training, the least that could be done was to upgrade the system of education generally.

As a rhetorical essayist the improvement of Virginia's educa­ tional system was a freauent topic of discussion; three examples will illustrate his method.

Employing the strategy of the Socratic monologue, Wirt espouses his views on education in the first example by "responding’' to corres­ pondence from his good friend, Lovetruth.While mourning the passing of his dearest friend, Melmoth, Lovetruth laments Melmoth's greatest failing in life and sadness in death; the inability to educate his

49Ibid., p. 203.

■^Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore.

~^T h e Old Bachelor, pp. 65-68: January 26, 1811. children properly in Virginian society. Melmoth is introduced to read­ ers as a patriotic, industrious, benevolent, affectionate, and concerned citizen, friend, husband and parent who endured a most despondent death because he had been unable to educate his children in an appro­ priate manner. On his death bed, Melmoth pleads for a real system of public education for diffusing knowledge in the arts, sciences, oratory and literature: a system of education focusing on oratory, scholar­ ship, patriots and statesmen. Such knowledge is critical because it

52 is inherently linked to the morals, liberty and prosperity of nations.

Since in Melmoth1s opinion, private institutions are incapable of pre­

senting youth with a regular, svstematic, or wide range of instruction, he offers a proposal. Interestingly enough, Melmoth's proposal was one of Wirt's favorites: a board of education under the supervision of the legislature and a National Press responsible for diffusion of moral and intellectual knowledge through all classes of society. The

National Press would be devoted to works of general utility designed

to replace "the useless pomp of typographical luxury. ..." Dissemin­

ation of valuable literary and scientific works by a national press would be relatively inexpensive for the state. Melmoth's envisioned

departments of instruction were founded upon the principal ramifica­

tions of the human mind as categorized by Lord Verulan and the F.ncv-

53 clopedists: sentiment, reasoning and memory.

In another instance, Wirt made use of his "correspondence"

~^I b i d . , p. 71; February 2, 1811.

~^Ibid. , p. 72; February 2, 1811. 78 with John Truename to initiate a plea for more education. Truename pleads for the dissemination of learning among common men. In writing to correct the old bachelor's orientation to the subject of education,

Truename argues:

It is my opinion, old Mr. Bachelor, that it is with us poor ig­ norant people, that you ought to begin. [OB had begun with middle-class youths.] You find great fault with the young gentle­ men who have time and opportunity to learn, for not studying harder than they do, and for not taking more pains to understand things' well, that they may become great and useful men, and an ornament to their country. But it is my opinion, and I have thought so for some time, that it is owing in a great measure to the common people being so ignorant as they are, that our gentlemen are not more anxious to get learning and knowledge; for they see that they can have the direction of affairs without any great deal of knowl­ edge, and this makes them careless about it. But if the common people had learning enough to understand things pretty well. . . igng^ant men would be ashamed to be candidates for public offices. .

• •

To illustrate the ignorance of the common man, Truename recounts an incident in which an unlearned man gave an embarrassing speech. In the following description, he summarizes Mr. D ’s reaction to a speech by a member of his county in the Williamsburg Assembly.

He said, the question was about moving the seat of government from there to Richmond; and after several very good speeches had been made, he saw one of the members from his county rise. Mr. D said, his heart began to beat violently the moment he discovered the man was going to speak; for he knew his ignorance and dreaded what was to come. The member went on for a short time, stammering and blundering and every other word a wrong one, "till at length he said— 'Some gentlemen rejected against this bill because it was not constitutionable. Tor his part he did not know whether it was very constitutionable, but he should vote for it because it would tolerate some ingrievances which aggrafied his constitutes very much." At this the whole house was in commotion. The Fpeaker in the chair hung down his head and bit his lip; some of tie members

~^Ibid. , p. 160; August 20, 1811. 79

coughed and spit and scraped their feet to conceal their laughter; others who had less feeling for the poor man, laughed and shook so that they could hardly keep their seats; and the lobby and gallery fairly roared again. But Mr. d said, he never felt less like laughing in his life; for his cheeks burnt, and his ears rung as if they had been soundly boxed by one of the strongest members in the house. He could not have the face to look up, for he was afraid all the strangers around him would know that the member came from his county. So, he shuffled backwards as slily as he could, 'till he had inched out of the crowd, and then stole off from the house, and firmly resolved not to go there again while that Assembly was sitting; though Mr. D said he had no hand in sending the man there, but had voted against him.-’-'

Mr. D receives Truename's commendations for recognizing the poor man's ignorance. Importantly, with knowledge and education for the common man, all his peers could recognize his incompetence as the spokesman for their cause. Learning would provide subsequent pride in their affairs.

The final thesis of the Truename essays is that Virginians lack decent education because they do not really want it; their excuse of little money lacked validity. To illustrate, Truename utilizes an example of a poor neighboring farmer who chose to spend his available funds on fancy boots, a bonnet and brandy, instead of contributing to a collective fund for hiring a schoolmaster. He confesses his reactions to Dr. Cecil:

. . . I could not help muttering to myself— 'Yes! Said I: this is the way in our country. Boots, bonnets and brandy must be had at any price; but learning must shift for itself; and we shall go on, buying boots, bonnets and brandy, and houses and land, and neglecting to instruct our children, 'till there will not be sense enough among the great bulk of the people to prevent a few cunning ambitious men from taking our houses and land and every thing else

55Ibid., pp. 160-161; August 20, 1811. 80

away from us; and then how shall we get boots, bonnets and brandy?'56

Sound educational training for the common man could revolutionize

Virginia thought and action.

The twenty-eighth number of "The Old Bachelor," offers a final

example of Wirt's educational pleadings. Education, in this essay, is

characterized as a technique for preventing vandalism and ignorance.

The dramatic dialogue is the rhetorical strategy in this account of a

discussion between Dr. Cecil and Alfred. A pamphlet by Joel Barlow5^

entitled, "Prospectus of a National Institution to be Established in

the United States" (published in Washington, 1806) is the foundation

for the essay. Dr. Cecil has asked Alfred, his nephew, to read this

article; their ensuing discussion reveals both the advantages and

disadvantages of erecting a national university. In the conclusion,

Alfred comes to agree strongly with Dr. Cecil that such a proposal is undesirable, although the concern for education is commendable.

Wirt was critically aware of the educational needs of Virginians,

generally; he was anxious to initiate a system of education which could

train orators. To realize such an ideal, he called for an essentially neo-Classical approach to learning.

56Ibid., p. 163; August 20, 1811.

57 Cauble states that this pamphlet belonged to Joel Barlow. "This pamphlet had been written by Barlow as a result of the agitation for a national university which had been going on for some time. As a true believer in states' rights, Alfred says that he wants the govern­ ment to establish a school in every county or parish in Virginia but does not favor a national university." Cauble, pp. 295-296.

5^The Old Bachelor, pp. 177-185; December 24, 1811. 81

Nature versus Nurture

One of the primary determinants of the quality of eloquence, according to Wirt, is related to the nature versus nurture controversy.

Virginians mistakenly believe "that the orator, like the poet is born and not made."'^ Further, Wirt explains:

Nature indeed must give the talents, but art must cultivate them; genius is only the diamond in the quarry; it is labor and art that must bring it forth, purify it, polish it, and invest it with the radiance which constitutes its beauty and worth. Without this it will never shine in the dark, or be otherwise distinguish­ able from stones of no value.

The fallacious assumption that the whole of eloquence is attributed to inspiration, an "immediate gift of heaven" is, according to Wirt, the primary cause of the crippled art of eloquence in the state of Virginia.

The Virginians do not recognize, as did the classical orators such as

Demosthenes, Cicero and the Oracchi, that self-exertion is a necessary ingredient. The ancients knew that their sublime attainments accrued from the "Herculean toils" of a special rhetorical education.

Hence it was, that they were seen tearing themselves from the usual pleasures and amusements of youth, renouncing all the charms and temptations of society, and locking themselves up in a seven years solitude of study and meditation.^

With few exceptions, nature had blessed all men with the capacity for acquiring oratorical skills but it was nurture which made men great s p e a k e r s .

■^William Wirt, "On Forensic Eloquence," The Richmond Enquirer, Rainbow series II, November 11, 1804, p. 4.

61The Old Bachelor, p. 190; May 1, 1813. 82

Through the strategy of models, Wirt applauds Cicero, Demos­

thenes and John Marshall for their reliance on nature plus nurture and

for their attendant rhetorical effectiveness. Patrick Henry, on the

other hand, was an exception who required only the genius of nature to

achieve eloquence.

Industry, and not nature, made Cicero successful. Cicero's knowledge, imagination, sensibility and action caused Wirt to declare him a "perfect orator." Importantly, Cicero's superiority resulted

from his superior industry, not from any superior genius:

. . . it resulted from that exertion, at once enthusiastic and persevering, which we gaze at with admiration, but which we have not the spirit and energy to imitate. But we must imitate it, or sit down, forever contented with our present mediocrity; which may Heaven forbid 1^2

In applying Cicero to Virginia, Wirt reminds Virginians that admitting

that such an orator as Cicero could never be found in their boundaries was "a reflection of our indolence" and not a "proof of modesty."

For why should we despair of reaching the eminence of Cicero?— Is it because nature had done more for him than any man among us?— This I do not believe;— on the contrary, I am satisfied that there are at least, several, I might say many in the United States, not inferior to the Roman in gifts of nature, and who by using the same means, would ascend to the same grade of eminence.^3

Interestingly enough, Wirt had not always been an admirer of

Cicero's oratorical talents. In The British Spy, Wirt had renounced

Cicero as ". . . cold and vapid, and uninteresting and tiresome: not

only destitute of that compulsive energy of thought which we look for

62Ibid., p. 198.

63Ibid.,’ p. 198. 83

in a great man but even void of the strong, rich and avried colouring of a superior fancy.Cicero's De Oratore was to Wirt an "extremely

light and unsubstantial" treatise, little more than "a treatise of rhapsodies."*^ Then Wirt reviews Plutarch's description, which praised

Cicero for his perfect musical voice, grace and dignified, impressive gestures. On these technical skills, Wirt grants that Plutarch is probably accurate. However, these attributes do not make up for Cicero's failings.^ This unfavorable opinion of Cicero was Dri.nted in the

British Spy. Writing to John Taylor Lomax in 1814, Wirt expresses regret at what he had published in 1803 concerning Cicero. In this

correspondence, he mentions a recent purchase of all of Cicero's works.

More specifically he recounts brushing up on his Latin in order to re-read the Orator and the Brutus. Especially, Wirt expresses his

great delight with Cicero and his disgust with the orators of his own d a y :

. . . my heart sinks and dies within me. What children we are, my dear Lomax— what boys, and raw boys too, compared with that wonderful man! I have once wronged him by the publication of an opinion concerning him; but I hope to live to repair the error.

Concluding the discussion, Wirt argues that anyone who has read Cicero's books on oratory will not wonder at his unrivalled eminence: his unique union of talents and toil make him a timeless example. The praise Wirt bestows on Cicero in "The Old Bachelor" was certainly indicative of his

64 British Spy, pp. 135-136.

6 5 Ibid.

6 6 Ibid. '

67 Letter, William Wirt to John Taylor Lomax, July 7, 1814; Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. Also see Kennedy, I, 372. 34 da",ire to correct bis earlier opinion.

Virginia rhetoricians aspirins' to Ciceronian heights of glory were deficient in nurture, not nature. Specifinally, Wirt isolated three fail Inge in industry: lack of a sufficient fund of knowledge; lack of the habit of clone, solid thinking and lack of aspiration for original ornament. Contemooraries exemplified the capability of pro­ ducing "a torrent of words;" yet, their language is destitute of "the • % light of erudition, the practical utility of just and conious thought, or those novel and beautiful allusions and embellishments" which immor­ tal ixe rhetoricians.88 These characteristics were attainable only by hard work and effort.

A second model of nurture, Demosthenes, is censured by Wirt for many of the same faults as originally constituted his image of

Cicero. Demosthenes "deserves, Indeed, the distinction of having more fire and less smoke" than Cicero. Yet in the "majestic march of the mind, in the force of thought, and splendour of imagery," Demos­ thenes possessed no superiority over Cicero. All these elements com-

£ Q prised "manner:" a natural deficiency in Demosthenes1 oratory. (In a later section on Invention, we shall examine this charge in more detail.) Wirt concludes the discussion of the influence of nature on

Cicero and Demosthenes by urging Virginians to emulate these classical m o d e l s .

68Britlsh Spy, 132-133.

69lbId., p. 136. 85

If this manner x^ere the gift only of nature & unattainable by human effort, the case might be excusable. But the fact is con­ fusedly not so. The txro most illustrious examples of this happy manner in the ancient xzorld, were, by nature, most remarkably defective, and these defects were not vanquished but by the severest toils— The manner xihich constituted the croxm of their glory was formed by themselves, and that too against the most stubborn impediments which nature could throxxr in their way. Hoxz consoling, how animating their examples:— 'Go thou and do like­ wise. '

To aid Virginians in emulating the classical models, Wirt iden­

tifies several Virginians superior in both nature and nurture. One

such example is John Marshall, leader of the Federalist party in Vir­

ginia. As the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Marshall was to

exert considerable influence on Wirt's legal career, as xze shall see in

chapter five. According to the British Spy, Marshall's political ad­ versaries insist that "his mind has been so long trammelled by judicial

precedent" as to make him insensitive to great, but singular, questions.

Wirt refers again to his delineation of nature and nurture as an explan­

ation of the fault:

. . . practice may give a man a greater command over one class of subjects than another; but the inherent energy of his mind remains the same, x-zhithersoever it may be directed. From this impression I have never seen anv cause to xronder at x-zhat is called a universal genius: it proves only that the man has applied a pox-zerfu] mind to the consideration of a great variety of subjects, and pays a compliment rather to his superior industry, than his superior i n t e l l e c t .

Clearly, the Marshall example merely reinforces Wirt's position that

nature without nurture is nothing; nature merely sets the boundaries

of a man's talents.

70The Old B a c h e l o r , p. 221.

^British Spy, p. 184. 86

Virginians boasted of only one "orator of nature"— Patrick

Henry. Whether or not Henry’s acclaim x^as derived simply from his own sound judgment and intimate knowledge of the human heart was a puzzling question for his hearers. As a public orator, Henry exhibited apparently inexplicable eloquence; since Virginians were unable to explain the roots of his sublimity, they attributed it to nature. Wirt recounts a few of the descriptions he has heard of this celebrated s p e a k e r :

I am told that his general armearance and manners were those of a plain farmer or planter of the back country; that, in this character, he always entered on the exordium of an oration; dis­ qualifying himself, with looks and expressions of humility so lowly and unassuming, as threw every heart off its guard and in­ duced his audience to listen to him, with the same easy openness with which they would converse with an honest neighbour: but, by and by, when it was little expected, he would take a flight so high, and blaze with a splendour so heavenly, as filled them with a kind of religious awe, and give him the force and authority of a prophet.

Continuing in his discussion, Wirt determines that Henry's greatness was either attributable to his knowledge of the human heart or his

"genuine trembling diffidence," without which Cicero maintained a great orator never rises. It is instructive to note that Wirt leaves the discussion of Henry without ever resolving the question of Henry's natural or nurtured talents. The next chapter of this study aralyzes

Wirt's biography of Henry; the role of nature will be pursued further at that time. Regardless of how Henry's oratorical superiority orig­ inated, his style and technique were thought by Wirt to be instructive

72Ibid. , pp. 144-145. 87 to aspiring Virginian speakers.

Before passing from Wirt’s position on the nature versus nurture controversy, it is worthwhile to attempt to determine how Wirt derived his position. Adherence to the nre-eminence of learning and indus­ triousness over natural genius places Wirt in the classical tradition of Quintilian, a theorist whom Wirt greatly admired. In his treatise on education, Quintilian maintained that nature was a greater asset to a person of moderate ability; art was a greater asset to those with greater ability and talent. The perfect orator is a product of both genius and art.

If you suppose either to be independent of the other, nature will be able to do much without learning, but learning will be of no avail without the assistance of nature.^

Cicero, Wirt's great example of the genius versus art issue, maintained that nature was the more important duality:

. . . it is my opinion that nature and genius contribute most to the powers of elonuence. . . . it is not in the power of art to *7 / ingraft every quality, for these are the fits of nature.

On the ability of art to refine and correct nature, Wirt’s point of view was consistent with Cicero.75 A final source, Blair's Lectures on

Rhetoric and Belles Lettres, merits attention on this question because of Blair's persuasive impact on Wirt's rhetorical conceptions. Rele­ gating the role of nature in rhetoric to a discussion of genius and

75John Watson (translator), Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory (London: George Bell and Sons, 1907), I, Book II, chapter xix, 161.

7^William Guthrie (translator), Cicero, De Oratore, (Oxford: Henry Slatter, 1840), p. 39.

75Ibid. 88 taste, Blair upholds the supremacy of genius or nature. The talent or aptitude for excelling is a gift of nature. That art and study can

7 f\ cultivate natural talent, Blair concurs.

Understanding Wirt's emphasis here seems to be the critical point. With a sound grounding in classical as well as eighteenth century viewpoints on the role of nature in rhetoric, Wirt acknowledges that both nature and nurture are important. Clearly he believes nurture is capable of better results. Wirt's purpose in initiating the dis­ cussion was that public speaking in Virginia was degenerating because indolent orators relied too much on nature. By stressing the role of art and learning in the. development of commonly accepted model orators —

Cicero, Demosthenes and Marshall— Wirt hoped to motivate Virginians to seek such knowledge, training and experience.

Rhetorical Theory

Wirt's theory of rhetoric, or persuasion, was centered in the doctrine of sympathy: a binding of the senses of the orator with those of the audience.

I mean not merely that tender passion which quavers the lip and fills the eye of the babe when he looks on the sorrows and tears of another: but that still more delicate and subtle quality by which we passively catch the very colours, momentum and strength of the mind, to whose operations we are attending: which converts every speaker, to whom we listen, into a Procrustes, and enables him, for the moment, to stretch or lop our faculties to fit the standard of his own mind.

^Hugh Blair, Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres (London: W. Creech, 1806), II, 160.

British Spy, p. 137. 89

In understanding the impetus of sympathy, Wirt urges consideration of

Francis Bacon's notion "... that there should be some transmissions and operations from spirit to spirit, without the mediation of the

. . 7 0 s e n s e s . . . . 10 Such a concept is strikingly similar to David Hume's powerful idea of sympathy as "fellow-feeling:"

No quality of human nature is more remarkable, both in itself and in its consequences, than that propensity we have to sym­ pathize with others, and to receive by communication their in­ clinations and sentiments, however different from or even con- 7Q trary to our own.

For Wirt, the central problem is methodology; that is, how is it possible for one speaker to ". . . gradually invade and benumb all the faculties of the soul as if I were handling a torpedo; while an­ other shall awaken and arouse me, like the clangour of the martial trumpet?"^ Another aspect of this methodological problem concentrates on the effects that remain long after the speaker has ceased. Wirt resolves this difficulty by explaining that a communion of men's spirits enables the speaker to "identify his hearer with himself.Ml<^

This same principle applies to developing a writing skill.

Wirt recalls a friend who, when he sits down to write a composition, sits down first and reads a few pages of his favorite author, Boling- broke.

78Ibid., p. 138.

79V. C. Chappell (ed.), The Philosophy of David Hume (New York: Modern Library, 1963), p. 213.

^British Spy, p. 138. 90

"Having taken the character and impulse of that writer's mind, he declares that he feels his pen to flow with a sm’rit not his own: and that, if in the course of his work, his powers begin to languish, he finds it easy to revive and charge them afresh from the same never-failing source."82

For this reason, it is a wise policy to keep company only with those of magnanimity and genius both in personal life and in the hooks one r e a d s .

Wirt concludes the matter hv urging his readers to realize that the speaker who aspires to persuade others must possess srmpath}:

. . . He may rely on it, that he can no more impart (or to use Bacon's word, transmit) convictions and sensations which he him­ self has not, at the time, sincerely felt, than he can convey a clear title to property, in which he himself has no title.

Sympathy, persuasion, rhetoric— these were the essential founda­ tions of communion between a speaker, his listeners and a particular occasion. For this reason, attention will be focused on the moral character and rhetorical skills of the speaker, the argument and lan­ guage, as well as special occasions.

The Sneaker

Given Wirt's interest in giving moral instruction, it is not surprising to discover his acute concern for the character and reputation of the public speaker. Although no moral paragons, Virginians were unduly criticized by the British as being ". . .an indolent, drinking, gambling, cock-fighting, atheistical race— hardly possessing any other

84 than the virtue common to savage nations— hospitality." Beset with

82I b i d . , p. 141.

83Ibid., p. 142.

8^The Old Bachelor, p. 171; December 17, 1811. 91

such criticisms, it is imperative for Virginians to unite ethical

principles and action to change their image. There are, in particular,

specific ethical manifestations which the orator ought to cultivate:

sincerity, judgment, self-discipline and knowledge. In addition to

ethos, it is important that a speaker's delivery effectively communi­

cate his motives and ideas.

Ethical Manifestations of Character

Sincerity is a distinguishing mark of an ethical orator. "The

man who speaks as if he himself, took no interest in his subject, will

never interest others," says Wirt.85 This proposition is valid regard­

less of whether the speaker appeals to the Dassions or to the under­

standing. The speaker must appear as though he is vitally concerned

with the argument he delivers. It is tragic to assume that an argument

is a cold indifferent object to be delivered in an identical manner.

Since sincerity is primarily conveyed by the delivery, this is Wirt's

area of concern. He recalls bow the greatest forensic reasoner in this

country used to deliver his arguments with great earnestness and vehemence of declamation. Yet powerful as his arguments were in them­

selves, they were twice as effective because of the conviction he con­

veyed to his listeners: he felt sure he was in the right. It was

impossible to listen to him with indifference because there was an

honesty and frankness in his manner which won your affection and con­

fidence at once. "His earnestness raised you on tiptoe: and his

85Ibid.,‘p. 211. 92

argument swept you away like a mountain torrent.

Woe be to those who prefer, to this character, those sly, acute, cunning looks and smart sayings which tell us that they aspire to the reputation of shrewdness and wit: a reputation little in itself, and which, if they succeed in establishing it, generallv, surrounds them with doubt, distrust, apprehension and ill will.

Only adverse effects can result if a speaker attempts to project truth

and certainty on a subject if he does not feel them. Listeners feel

safe in abiding by the conclusions of a man who has demonstrated depth

and power of thought. Earnestness lies at the root of all excellence

in convincing and persuading.

While Wirt admits that a man may work himself into any emotional

state (". . . I am fully persuaded, that by assuming the aporopriate

language and action which belongs to it, a man may soon work himself

into any frame of mind that he pleases"), he urges his listeners not

to do this. The way to discover how a true cause should be argued,

even if the speaker does not feel committed to it, is to observe the man who does believe it and watch his natural actions. "Observe also, how, the man who does not feel it, often attempts to master his insen­

sibility, and to assume the appearance of this feeling, but attempts

Q O it in vain." Such apathy is detectable and the man of sense will not be convinced by it. Wirt's admonitions in this regard are strikingly

similar to Blair's instruction delineating the difference between showing

8 6 I b i d . , n. 212.

87Ibid. 88 Ibid., 213. Modern psychologists estimate that a large portion of sociai communication is non-verbal and that non-verbal clues to meaning are harder to conceal than verbal. hearers that they should he moved and actually moving them. The real

key, according to Blair, is for the speaker himself to be moved. "An

advocate personates his client; he has taken upon him the whole charge

89 of his interests; he stands in his place."

To illustrate the impact of sincerity, Wirt relies on the model

of James Monroe.

All his eloquence consists in the apparently deep self-conviction and emphatic earnestness of his manner; the correspoident simplicity and energy of his style; the close and logical connexion of his thoughts; and the easy gradations bv which he opens his lights on the attentive minds of his hearers.^

Additionally, this overwhelming sincerity permits Monroe to captivate his listeners. Every sentence and every idea progress toward the

speaker's goal— a purpose to which he is committed.

Insincerity was particularly noticeable in New England oratory,

according to Wirt. It was the one trait which clearly set these

"Northerners" apart.

The impression which I have received of them is, that they are trained, like the disputants in the old schools of logic, to be equally ready for every subject: that they can sneak on any one with equal volubility;— but that there is no more variation of feeling, nor consequently of expression in them, than in the brazen mask which covered the face of the actor in Rome. That they are a cold, and at the same time, cunning people, who envy the genius and generosity of a Southern climate, of which thev have but little conception; that they are clannish; that they wear leather breeches, and smell of onions and train oil; that they have a nasal twang, and a provincial whine which give, to a stranger the air of artless simplicity, while, at the same time, they are

89Lectures, II, 385, 238.

^ British Spy, p. 181. 94

artful enough to cheat the devil.^

Curiously, Kennedy attempts to explain the foregoing opinion as more reflective of Southern pre-judice than of Wirt's personal opinion:

"we shall find hereafter, that no man was either more able or more willing to do full justice to the many virtues of our Northern breth-

Q 9 ren than he."^ In any case, insincerity was such a frequent trait

of oratory, particularly in the political realm, that Wirt warned youths to be suspicious of all politicians. Writing in The Old bachelor,

Wirt denounces the insincere motives evident in most office holders:

The man who can poorly and meanly stoop to woo the coy caprices of any body by affecting, on any occasion, opinions which he does not believe, and sentiments which he does not feel, gives but a poor pledge of that firm and noble independence which alone can fit him for any part of honor.

By the same token, a man who designs to take such an office amid in­

dignant frowns and whispers from his peers must be "callous," "obsti­

nate" and "admantine." Demagoguery exists in such forms in Virginia,

and Wirt warns his youthful readers to heed such insincere motives and

aspirations.

Closely aligned with the sincere character is superior judgment.

Wirt, throughout his writings, stressed the importance of sound judgment

as a mark of ethos; particularly, he stressed the need for a strong,

91 Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, undated (probably January, 1810); Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. Also see Kennedy, I, 281.

^ K e n n e d y , I, 281.

^T h e Old Bachelor, p. 85; February 26, 1811. 95 masculine judgment.' In evaluating the quality of thought desirable

in a lawyer, Wirt points out that which is required is a "discernment

sufficientlv clear and strong to eviscerate the principles of each

case; a judgment potent enough to digest, connect and systematize them,

and to distinguish. . . the very feature which gives or refuses to a

principle, a just application." For without such intellectual proper­

ties, Wirt conjectures that a man could not have the fair advantage q c and perfect command of his reading. Blair had given a similar chal­

lenge to the legal men of his own day:

There is a dignity of character, which it is of the utmost impor­ tance for every one in this profession to support. For it must never be forgotten, that there is no instrument of persuasion more powerful, than an opinion of probitv and honour in the person who undertakes to persuade. It is scarcely possible for any hearer to separate altogether the impression made by the char­ acter of him that speaks, from the things he says.9"

Probably the greatest single influence on Wirt's emphasis on

judgment was derived from John Locke's Essay on the Human Understanding.

In writing to a former student, Benjamin Edwards, Wirt declared:

. . . whoever wishes to train himself to address the human judg­ ment successfully, ought to make Locke his bosum friend and con­ stant companion. . . . The man who can read Locke for an hour or two, and then lay him down and argue feebly upon any subject, may hang up his fiddle for life; to such a one, nature must have denied the original stamina of a great mind.9^

04 British Spy, p. 212.

96Lectures, II, 258-250.

^Letter, William Wirt to Benjamin Edwards, February 26, 1809, Wirt Papers, Chicago Historical Society, Chicago, Illinois. Also see Kennedy, I, 263-264. Evidence that the man of judgment acts wisely is found in the simple as

well as complex aspects of life. A particular test in this regard is a

man's emphasis on success. Wirt repeatedly chides those readers who

believe that the test for any action is its success. While engaging in

a Socratic monologue with Lovetruth, Wirt stresses that nobler, wiser men of judgment recognize that such motivations are a primary cause of

Q Q Virginia’s "moral stagnation."

A third important ethical manifestation of the public speaker

is his self-discipline: "the most useful of all learning. Wirt b e ­ moans the lack of this all-important quality in a hypothetical friend,

who had not gained self-discipline,

. . . nor acquired that guarded self-command, without which genius and talents, instead of producing their high and appropriate effect, are always involving their possessor in difficulties and making him conspicuous to his ruin. For the want of this discipline and guard, Herbert's generous and noble sensibility sometimes degen­ erated into insulting harshness and cruelty to others: and his fine mind was frequently hurried into storms and lost in darkness.

His actions lead one to suspect that he himself was pleased with his own

impetuosity; and that he forced the "chivalry of his spirit" beyond its

natural tone, as well as beyond the occasion.

Self-discipline most frequentlv manifests itself in labor and

hard work. We have already noted Wirt's emphasis on individual effort

and application in regard to the nature-nurture question. This trait

also epitomizes the ethical man, the speaker of high moral integrity.

' The Old Bachelor, p . 45; January 15, 1811.

^ British Sp v , pp. 152-153.

100Ibid., pp. 152-153. 97

In disbelieving that "without labor, there is no human excellence," the orator could not be expected to achieve greatness.

Utilizing the rhetorical technique of models, Wirt illustrates the importance of hard work in the case of Lord Mansfield— a man made

101 great by "midnight labor and holy emulation." The old bachelor had become enraptured with a brilliant speech by Lord Mansfield and takes advantage of the occasion to instruct youth:

Let the vain and selfish hunter of popularity, the poor and low spirited intriguer for office, who calls himself a republi­ can, read these sentiments of a British Lord, and blush. Let my young friends who have not yet entered the list of fame, read the same sentiments, and engrave them upon their hearts. They point out the only road that will ever lead to virtuous and last­ ing fame. Aspire to excellence. Labor, the-Roman poet has told, conquers all things. . . . Train the soul to the noblest virtues by the constant contemplation of the noblest examples. Make yourselves capable of serving the people; of serving them greatly and effectually; make yourselves worthy of their love and confi­ dence by the perpetual exhibition of a pure, a virtuous and an useful life, and you will then possess that popularity which follows; the only popularity, I should think, that an ingenuous

and noble mind can ever e n j o y . ^ 2

As with Lord Mansfield, public good will is an outcome of strict disci­ pline and labor. Cognizant of the concurrent criticism of Mansfield,

Wirt maintains that his role is not to judge the accuracy of charges; instead he chooses to explicate for youth the rhetorical virtues of a great genius.

A fourth ethical manifestation of the good orator is his intel­ ligence and knowledge. Being informed on one's subject matter seems an elemental requirement; lack of such a trait results in what Wirt labels

-*-^T h e Old Bachelor, p. 88; February 26, 1811.

-^Q^I b i d . , p. 89. 98 the "noisy blustering and bauling" type of speaking in his day. It was not an uncommon occurrence for a speaker to be trapped in a situation in which he lacked adequate preparation. In such a case, Wirt offers the following advice:

Surely it is much wiser not to speak at all, than to injure our cause b'y speaking amiss.— But if a speech must, at all events, be made, is there no part of the adversary's argument which you can answer and expose, successfully; counterbalancing what you cannot answer by original and independent views of the subject on your own side? If you cannot do this, and yet are not con­ vinced by the argument which you cannot answer, or, if convinced, are not at liberty to yield to it, I pray you be silent.-^3

In continuing his discussion of the competent speaker, Wirt observes that the stormy and imperious manner seen in some of his contemporaries is an insult to their hearers. If accompanied by good argument (which is rare) there is "a pride in the heart of every freeman, which revolts against a dictator and scorns to be driven." On the contrary, if the clamour be merely idle declamation the hearer will probably consider himself treated like a child and hence will demonstrate resentment of such treatment through his contempt. "It is only the manner at once earnest and self-balanced, that can succeed eminently." In this way, the hearer perceives himself to be treated as a reasonable man; thus, he becomes more predisposed to accept the speaker and his arguments. "And if in this auspicious frame of mind, the speaker does not convince him, it must be. . . because he ought not."-^^

One of the most reliable sources of knowledge for training youth

1 0 3 I b i d . , p. 214.

104Ibid., pp. 214-215. was reading, according to Wirt.^^ in particular, Wirt was concerned with the importance of gaining a thorough knowledge of the law. Through a striking contrast of Lord Mansfield and Virginia lawyers, Wirt makes an important point. Thus, he approvingly cites Lord Mansfield’s recom­ mendations for legal training: For ethics, youths are to read Xenophon,

Cicero, Woolastow and perhaps Aristotle; for "the law of nations,"

Grotius, Puffenderf (Barbeyraie's translation), and Burlamanqui; for

"those systems of positive law that have prevailed in their turn,"

Gravina, Justinian (with Vinnius' comments), the Pandeits, Craig de

Feudis, the Corpus Juries Fedalis, and Giannone. These books and writers are thought sufficient to "give you general notions, general leading principles. Wirt's comparison of this training with Virginians' indicates that they are inferior in education. The sources available to the crude, spoiled and crippled trainees in Virginia at best included only Blackstone and the Virginia laws, and occasionally Coke upon

Littleton and a few Reporters. Such was the degrading and inferior education of the future leaders of the state of Virginia.

As an illustration of the powers that knowledge c m bring to a legal mind, Wirt offers the model of Littleton Walker Tazewell under the pseudonym of Sidney. Tazewell, here, is portrayed as a man who epitomizes the mastery of subject matter. In addition to surpassing all his country­ men in knowledge, he also possessed an exemplary ability to argue: "the

•^^Letter, William Wirt to Francis Walker Gilmer, October 9, 1806, Gilmer Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.

•^^The Old Bachelor, pp. 142-143; July 5, 1811. 100

power of keeping continually in the mind’s eye, without winking or wavering, the distant proposition which is to be proven; of advancing

to it, by steady steps on the shortest route; and bearing up, with-the

strength of Atlas, the most extended and ponderous chain of logical

deductions."107 while presenting Tazewell as a model of knowledge,

Wirt points to one failing in his ability: Tazewell always wins every

case whether the position he upholds is ideally right or wrong. Con­

sequently some charge him with possessing a cold, indifferent heart.

The fact is, however, his predominant concern for subject matter made

him appear less sensitive to human needs. Youths ought to imitate his

knowledge and superior application of talent.

The clear similarity between Wirt’s and Blair's concepts of the

lawyer's knowledge is interesting. Blair believes that

. . . The foundation of a Lawyer's reputation and success must always be laid in a profound knowledge of his own profession. Nothing is of such consequence to him, or deserves more his deep and serious study. For whatever his abilities as a Speaker may be, if his knowledge of the law be reckoned superficial, few will

choose to commit their cause to h i m . 108

Thus we have noted Wirt's emphasis on the orator's sincerity,

judgment, self-discipline and knowledge; these are the constituents of

an ethical character. But in addition, the speaker's delivery of his

message is a critical factor in assessing one's rhetorical worth.

Delivery

We have observed Wirt's charge that faulty oratorical habits

IQ^lbid. , pp. 154-155; August 13, 1811.

10^Lectures, II, 250. 101 are correlated with a faulty educational system. Because orators develop poor speech delivery habits as youths, they find it difficult to change in later life. Specifically, articulation, action and imitation may easily reflect a poor education.-*-99

In Wirt's estimation, the well-modulated and managed voice is a rare, but beautiful, sound. Too many orators mutter thickly or drop out syllables with a regularity as stiff, formal and methodical as the vibrations of a pendulum. The orator should start training his voice in early childhood. The best instructor in this regard is a mother who possesses a vivacity of feeling, an ear for music, and a taste for poetical composition.

The boy should be taught to feel and to express all the regular and stately swell, all the deep toned majesty of the heroic measure; all the abrupt and broken grandeur of the pindaric; all the sweet simplicity and delicious tenderness of pastoral verse; all the terrible sublime of the tragic muse, and all the versatility, humor and gaiety of the comic.-*--*-9

A melodious voice guided by taste and judgment could, according to Wirt, enthrall an audience if in addition to this beautiful sound, a noble heart and sound mind are exhibited.

Importantly, this melodious voice ought to accompany action— animated limbs and expression— in delivery. "The Englishman is phleg­ matic," and complaints are often heard regarding their statue-like speeches; and although the Americans are livelier, they often suffer 111 the same fault. Action is the real key to good delivery. To achieve

109The Old Bachelor, pp. 200-217.

1 10Ibid.', p. 215.

m Ibid. , p. 211. 102

this, Wirt suggests that young orators spend hours of observation in the

theater. Over-loaded, extravagant and unnatural gesticulation which is

often practiced on the stage should be shunned. In the words of Shake­

speare, he encourages youth to "suit the action to the word, the word

to the action; with this special observance, that you overstep not the modesty of nature. Of course there is more action on the stage because it is primarily emotion; contrarily, in a speaking situation

of the bar, pulpit or senate, argument does or should predominate.

Action as demonstrated by theatrical performers represents a freedom of

expression which carries over into the ordinary speaking situation.

One could even argue, as Wirt does, that action has advantages over

speech articulation.

Consistent in method, Wirt offers a number of classical models

exemplifying Roman and Greek emphasis on gesture and articulation.

Although the following quotation is quite lengthy, it affords the reader

an excellent example of Wirt’s familiarity with classical models of

speech delivery.

It is true that the gesture described by Quintilian is mucl more various and often much more graceful than that which we witness in this country: yet there is certainly nothing in it which we can conceive to have clothed the orator with thunder. No, it was the voice, the countenance, and the gesture, all conspiring, to drive home to the judgments and hearts of their hearers the impas­ sioned appeals, the cogent arguments, the strong conclusions, the deep convictions of the orator himself. Gesture was not there, as it is here, an enemy to the orator; but on the contrary, it was a most powerful ally, and contributed much to that irresistible energy with which he swept his audience along. We are not to be

112Ibid._, p. 205.

113Ibid., pp. 217-218. 103

surprised, therefore, at the assiduity with which they cultivated the graces and the force of action. Thus Cicero, altho’ he cen­ sured the stage as a school of action, visited, nevertheless, that school himself. "His turn for action," we are told by Plutarch, "was naturally as defective as that of Demosthenes, and therefore, he took all the advantage he could from the instruction of Roscius who excelled in comedy, and of Aesop, whose talents lay in trag­ edy." And Plutarch adds that "in consequence of those helps, Cicero found his powers of persuasion not a little assisted by action and just pronunciation." Of Demosthenes, the same author tells us, that on an occasion which occurred, among his first public efforts, when his speeches had been illy received and he was going home with his head covered and in the deepest distress, Satyrus, the player, an acquaintance of his, followed him, and when Demosthenes imparted to him the cause of his mortification, his friend answered— 'You say true; but I will soon provide a remedy, if you will repeat to me some speech in Euripides or Sophocles.'— When Demosthenes had done, Satyrus pronounced the same speech; and he did it with such propriety of action and so much in character, that it appeared to the orator quite a different passage. Demos­ thenes now discovered how much of the power of the orator depended on pronunciation and gesture. "Upon this, says Plutarch, he built himself a subterraneous study, which remained to our times. Thither he reparied every day to form his action and exercise his voice, and he would often stay there two or three months together." Mark the enthusiasm which made this man immortal! There is no earthly immortality in any walk without this enthusiasm. To return to gesture; we are farther told by Plutarch, on the authority of Demetrius the Phalerean, who says he had it from Demosthenes him­ self, in his old age, that the orator had a looking glass in his house, before which he used to declaim and adjust all his motions. In the present day, the light and unthinking might laugh at such an exercise as ridiculous; but I think with Chesterfield In a parallel case, that the laughers, themselves, would be mucb more worthy of ridicule.

In addition to examining these and other classical worthies, Wirt affords the Virginians an example from their own heritage: Patrick Henry. In him, Wirt felt there was a union of the magic of the eye, the voice and the action; this union resulted in sublime nower. To imprint infallibly on his listener's minds the real eloquence of the celebrated Henry,

Wirt relates a curious incident: A neighbour who had often beard Henry

114Ibid., pp. 218-219. 104 speak, and was struck with admiration for him, accompanied the old bachelor to hear an excellent speech given by another orator. Upon the completion of the speech, the old bachelor's neighbor addressed the speaker: "'0 Sir! if Mr. Henry had had the delivering of that speech, he would have made these people's blood run cold and their hair stand on end.' The remark was certainly true, and the gentleman to whom it was addressed appeared forcibly struck with it."^-* Strewn throughout

Wirt's essays are examples of orators from Cicero to St. Paul who exhibit peculiar talents in delivery. These, however, are never developed in the detail in which the foregoing illustrations are.

As a public communicator, Wirt believed that the orator must be a sincere, self-disciplined, knowledgeable and wise man. Delivery of a speech was the clearest indication of the rhetorician's effectiveness.

Message

Argument and language represented the major constituents of a speaker's message for Wirt. The importance and execution of each will be examined in detail in this section.

Argument

Wirt's discussion of argument is primarily concerned with as­ certaining the relationship between the argument and the "ornamental covering." He makes his position quite clear in stating that an orator

". . . no more deserves the title of superior eloquence because his style is ornamented, than the figure of an Apollo would deserve the

115Ibid., p. 220. 105 epithet of elegant, merely from the superior texture and flow of the drapery." Further Wirt observes, "In reading an oration, it is the mind to which I look. It is the expanse and richness of the conception itself, which I regard, and not the glittering tinsel wherein it may be attired. "-*-16 using the model of the celebrated Irish advocate, John P.

Curran, Wirt formulates general principles concerning the role of argu­ ment in a theory of rhetoric:

They [Curran's speeches] do contain argument which is strong in itself, very often, conclusive and irresistible. But then it is covered with an envelope so magnificent that the argument is eclipsed, lost and forgotten.

When the rich and flowing attire is stripped from the speech, what remains is "a Hercules of an argument." But when it is covered again with the apparel of the orator, it is no longer a Hercules: "His muscles are hidden under a robe of Tyrian dye, his very club begins to bud and bloom, and becomes suddenly metamorphosed into a branch of laurel."„i 18 Wirt hastens to add, however, that he is not calling for a system of dry, rigid and austere argument alone. The banishment of ornament from the bar, for instance, is the farthest thing from his mind. Argument alone never persuades— with the possible exception of a judge; juries are not persuaded by mere argument. In addressing a jury, a man must have some talent to awaken, interest and amuse or otherwise his argument will be forever lost. "Even the dunces of the

116British Spy, p. 135.

■^^Wirt, "On Forensic Eloquence."

118Ibid.‘ 106

profession are so perfectly convinced of the necessity of these auxil­

iary powers, that we find them all practicing some trick of attitude,

look, voice or gesture to attract the eye and attention of the jury."

It is a universal judgment that juries require something besides pure

argument to "dispel their lassitude, to engage their affections, to

fix their attention immovably on the speaker, to dispose them to receive his arguments with avidity and with effect." Rut making captives of

the jury for captivity's sake is not the point: turn that captivity

into the advantage for the client by giving the jury such a fabric of

* 1 1 Q argument as no prejudice nor antagonist can overthrow. x

It is for this reason that Wirt maintains that in a speech

addressed to a jury,

. . . whatever ornaments an orator may admit, argument should be predominant. It should have made an impression on the mind of the jury so paramount, so clear, so distinct and so deep, that when they retire, the argument alone shall involuntarily revert to them— shall haunt them— shall fasten on their recollection with such importunity that they shall be unable to get rid of it: shall bear upon them with a force so strong that they shall be unable to render a verdict against it.^2^*

Curran's speeches are bad models in this regard because they exhibit

fancy, and not argument, as the predominant characteristic. The conse­ quent effect is that the jury, upon deliberation, can only recall the beautiful exhibition of figures with which Curran treated his arguments— whatever they were.

It is not to be expected of juries (and especially of prejudiced ones) that they will take the pains to analyze an advocate's speech

H 9I t u b i-a d . ‘

120Ibid. 107 during their recess. Juries generally possess not this chemical apparatus of the mind, by which the essential argument can be extracted and con­ centrated. Even if they should possess the power to do so, they often choose not to undergo the labor of the process. They listen to the prisoner’s council with too much disinterest and disinclination to receive any impression from the speech which they can resist at the time of its delivery. They are to be convinced by main force and against their will. "They are to be bound hand and foot by the cords of argu­ ment, and deprived of all power of resistance." The speaker who is capable of best performance of this art will make the best example for

1 21 young, prospective orators. x

Wirt also observes that argument and pathos should be situation- oriented; this is a major difficulty in trying to use Curran's speeches as forensic models. The manner in which Curran used fancy and emo­ tional appeal is not necessarily suitable for the young men aspiring to oratorical fame, for they may

. . . be too apt to attempt a similar display of fire and pathos on very inferior occasions. It should be remembered, at what an awful crisis of national suffering and convulsion Mr. Curran delivered these orations; it should be remembered, that the nation was prepared to echo back the boldest of his sentiments; it should be remembered that his own soul had been harrowed up by seeing some of the best men of Ireland. . . led one after another, in mohrnful procession, to undeserved ignominy and death. . . in a situation like this, we shall not wonder that his genius was 1*)*? goaded into the sublime frenzy which his speeches display.

Granting that Curran's speeches were delivered in a natural, just and

122Ibid.' 108 i proper form for the issue at hand, such an explosion of eloquence is no longer merited. But most importantly, "all this luxuriant beauty" was

1 n o unfortunately "without the counterpoise of solid argument."

The most material character of arguments, according to Wirt,

12 is their lucidus ordo. A man's division of argument generally indicates a secret history of the difficulties which the investigator encountered with his subject: one who sees his topic clearly, will present it so; on the other hand, if a speaker encounters difficulty in understanding the essentials of his subject, he will "perplex" the listeners with the prolixity of his argument.The orator should be able to look at his subject and immediately seize upon the most important point and then fit less important ideas accordingly. A major aspect of this problem has been created by strict adherence to the Roman divisions of an oration, this plan is totally unacceptable to Wirt. According to the classical procedure, the speaker generally chooses to be pathetic in his peroration. As a consequence, when speakers reach that part of the speech, whether it be prompted by the feelings or not, "a mighty bustle commences."

The Speaker pricks up his ears, erects his chest, tosses his arms with hysterical vehemence, and says every thing which he supposes ought to affect his hearers; but it is all in vain; for it is obvious that every thing he says is prompted by the head;, . . The hearts of the audience will refuse all commerce except with the heart of the speaker. . .

124 British Spy, p. 210.

125Ibid.', pp. 210-211.

^ ^ Ibid. , pp. 142-144. 109

Regardless of how hard the speaker attempts to achieve this real feel­

ing, his approximation of reality will always show itself as imposture.

"It would seem as if the heart of man stamps a secret mark on all its

effusions, which alone can give them currency, and which no ingenuity,

1 97 however adroit, can successfully counterfeit."’ Unfortunately, some

very popular speakers practice this charade. They practice the start,

the pause— make an immense parade of attitudes and gestures— and seem

to imagine themselves to be piercing their listeners’ hearts with a

thousand arrows. The listener's response to such a parade is gererally

amusement. Wirt states that nothing can be more ill-judged than this

artificial imposture. It is no less objectionable in the exordium:

. . . The moment I see an orator rise with this menacing ma-iesty; assume a look of solemn wisdom; stretch forth his right arm, like the rubens dexter of Jove; and hear him open his throat in deep and tragic tone; I feel mvself involuntarily braced, and in an attitude of defense, as if I were going to take a bout with 1 9R M e n d o z e .x

The introduction's purpose should be to supplement, not to detract from,

the rest of the oration. Such argumentation indicates that the speaker

considers the audience unimportant. John Wickham, a representative

Virginian, exhibits just such a lack of consideration for his listeners.

Wirt holds Wickham up as a model of x?hat Virginians ought not

to do. Wickham's real problem is that because he is such a brilliant

thinker himself, he has a tendency to present his views as dogmas.

It is immaterial to him what others may think; the resulting disadvantage

1 27I_bid- , p. 143.

128t, . , • Ibid. 110

1 9Q is that people are not persuaded by his arguments. y

Language

Simple language is an essential companion to a persuasive argu­ ment. As a public speaker and writer, Wirt attested to the effec­ tiveness of his own simple style: "there is a manner which shows the public tie motive, with more dignity and more effect, than a flashy speech made for pure display— This has been my course— and I find I

130 rise by it." Few men of real talent, however, desire to cultivate this "happiest of manners"— simplicitv. If a survey were to be made, speculates Wirt, it would be discovered that the men of greatest repu­ tation for their strength of mind would be found to be men of the

131 plainnest manners and style.

We observed in Wirt’s discussion of argument some of his views on ornament, as it relates to argument. The ornament should complement the argument, not disguise it. This idea was alluded to again in Wirt's discussion of the type of style he feels the readers of "The Old Bach­ elor" most prefer.

My readers, I know, look for a style, at least grammatically correct, and will be very apt to turn off, in disgust, from one which is not only destitute of the graces and ornaments of com­ position, but which exhibits, also, gross and frequent breaches of orthography. But I know they are not of that class of readers . . . who demand an arrangement and structure so artificial and inverted as to obscure the author's meaning, and lend to folly, the air of the solemn and profound. And if they can conquer the first repugnance which false orthography will give them, I think they will see, with me, amid the rustic plainness of this pen so

129Ibid., pp. 216-219.

^29Letter, William Wirt to Eliza Wirt, December 13, 1818, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore, Maryland.

131^6 Bachelor, p. 106ff; March 12, 1811. Ill

many strokes of nature, as will amply atone for the absence of all other beauties.-^2

In his views of style in composition and oratory, Wirt would appear to be consistent with the premises of Blair, who argued that the simple style was the greatest beauty of all and that only those with the genius

for producing beautiful figures should use t h e m . -*-33

The presentation of a philosophical and chronological history of the development of style with an emphasis on the gradations and

changes'in the styles of different ages and the reason for the changing style would be a most valuable contribution, in Wirt's view. There is

one particular question that this inquiry should answer:

Whether the gradual adornment, which we observe in a nation's style, results from the progress of science; or whether there be an infancy, a youth, and a manhood, in a nation's sensibility, which rising in a distant age, like a newborn billow, rolls on through distant generations, with accumulating height and force, and bears along with it the concurrent expression of that sensi­ bility, until they both'swell and tower into the sublime— and sometimes break into the bathos. -*-34

But upon recalling a few of the statements of Blair, Wirt says he is not certain either hypothesis will explain the phenomenon. Recalling

Blair's opinion that the most sublime style is to be sought in a state

of nature when the scantiness of a language forces a people to notice

the points of resemblance between the great natural objects with which

they are surrounded, and to use for one the terms which describe another.

Wirt concludes that the sublime style may be most frequent when a nation

132 Ibid., p. 131.

133 Lectures, II, 1-2; 6.

^^^British Spy, p. 246. 112

is closest to the primeval state of nature.^-33

The phenomenon of changing ornamental styles throughout the ages was a source of intrigue for Wirt. It was often difficult to comprehend

how "idea] styles" varied according to the age. The following quota­

tions represent Wirt's queries.

The Augustan age is pronounced by some critics to have furnished the finest models of style, embellished to the highest endurable point; and of this, Cicero is always adduced as the most illus­ trious example. Yet it is remarkable, that seventy or eighty years afterwards, when the Roman style had become much more luxur­ iant, and was denounced by the critics of the day as having trans­ cended the limits of genuine ornament, Plinv, the younger, in a letter to a friend, thought it necessary to enter into a formal vindication of three or four metaphors, which he had used in an oration, and which had been censured in Rome for their extrava­ gance; but which, by the side of the meanest of Curran's figures, would be poor, insipid and flat.^-^

In England, how wide is the chasm between the style of Lord Verulam and that of Edmund Burke, or M'T.ntosh's introduction to his Vindicae Gallicae! That of the first is the plain dress of a Quaker; that of the two last the magnificent paraphernalia of Louis XIV of France. In Lord Verulam’s day, his style was dis­ tinguished for its superior ornament; and in this respect, it was thought impossible to surpass it. Yet Mr. Burke, Mr. M'Intosh, and the other fine writers of the present age, have, by contrast, reduced Lord Verulam's flower garden to the appearance of a simple culinary square.-^7

The problem encountered by sublime or ornamental speakers is

that they frequently lose their audience. That is, it is difficult for

a listener to follow the speaker's argument because of the metaphorical

and elevated trappings which accompany it. In this regard, Wirt favors

the discriminating tastes of Lord Verulam and Boyle. Verulam exhibits

135Ibid., p. 248.

•^^Ibid., pp. 249-250.

•^^I b i d . t pp. 250-251. 113 a style worthy of Virginian emulation in that instead of presenting only three or four ideas "rolled over and over again, like the fantastic evolutions and ever changing shapes of the same sun-embroidered cloud, you gain new materials, new information at every breath." Boyle re­ presents this same lack of redundancy and exemplifies "a perfectly patriarchal simplicity."138

No one clearly exemplifies all that is desirable in a simple style more than Benjamin Franklin. Wirt, in a very lengthy description, praises the simple colloquial style of Franklin:

Of Franklin no one ever became tired.— There was no ambition of eloquence, no effort to shine in any thing which came from him. There was nothing which made any demand either upon your allegiance or your admiration. His manner was as unaffected as infancy. It was nature's self. He talked like an old patriarch; and his plainness and simplicity put you, at once, at your ease, and gave you the full and free possession and use of all your faculties. . . . His thoughts were of a character to shine by their own light without any adven­ titious aid. They required only a medium of vision like his pure and simple style, to exhibit, to the highest advantage, their native radiance and beauty. His cheerfulness was unremitting. It seemed to be as much of the effect of the systematic and salu­ tary exercise of the mind as of its superior organization. His wit was of the first order. . . . Such was the man whom I would hold up to your youth, as a model of colloquial eloquence. And to all young men, whose taste has not been depraved by the vicious examples of the age, the appeal may be successfully made.33^

Probably the most popular of all Wirt's uses of models was his description of the Old Blind Preacher. This model more than any other truly captures Wirt's stress on simple, vivid language and on persuasion

13®Ibid., pp. 250-251.

■^^The Old Bachelor, pp. 106-107; March 12, 1811. 114 as sympathy. Not only did Wirt believe that Virginian eloquence was on the decline politically and socially, but in the religious realm as well.

The following description indicates one surviving instance of true pulpit eloquence. On entering a forest-shrouded church building, the

British spy

. . . was struck with his preternatural appearance, he was a tall and very spare old man; his head, which was covered with a white linen cap, his shrivelled hand, and his voice, were all shaking under the influence of a palsy; and a few moments ascertained to me that he was perfectly blind.

The spy observes that the first emotions which struck him were those of

"mingled pity and veneration. But ah! sacred God! how soon were all my feelings changed! The lips of Plato were never more worthy of a prog­ nostic swarm of bees, than were the lips of this old nian!"^^ Because the occasion was the administration of the sacrament, the subject of the sermon was the passion of the Christ. As the minister descended the pulpit to distribute the "mystic symbols," there was "a more than human solemnity in his air and manner which made my blood run cold, and my whole frame shiver.Because of the imagery and simple de­ scription, a verbatim account appears to be in order.

. He then drew a picture of the sufferings of our Savior; his trial before Pilate; his ascent up Calvary; his crucifixion, and his death. I knew the whole history; but never, until then, had I heard the circumstances so selected, so arranged, so coloured! It was all new: and I seemed to have heard it for the first time in my life. His enunciation was so deliberate, that his voice trembled on every syllable; and every heart in the assembly trembled

•^^British Spy, pp. 195-196.

•^^Ibid. , p. 196.

142Ibid. 115 in unison. His peculiar phrases had that force of description that the original scene appeared to be, at that moment, acting before our eyes. We sax? the very faces of the Jews: the staring, frightful distortions of malice and rage. We saw the buffet; my soul kindled with a flame of indignation; and my hands were involuntarily and convulsively clinched. But when he came to touch on the patience, the forgiving meek­ ness of our Savior; when he drew, to the life, his blessed eyes streaming in tears to heaven; his voice breathing to God, a soft and gentle prayer of pardon on his enemies, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do1— the voice of the preacher, which had all along faltered, grew fainter and fainter, until his utter­ ance being entirely obstructed by the force of his feelings, lie raised his handkerchief to his eves, and burst into a loud and irrepressible flood of grief. The effect is inconceivable. The whole house resounded with the mingled groans, and sobs, and shrieks of the congregation. It was some time before the tumult had subsided, so far as to permit him to proceed. Indeed, judging by the usual, but falla­ cious standard of my own weakness, I began to be very uneasy for the situation of the preacher. For I could not conceive, how he would be able to let his audience down from the height to which he had wound them, x^ithout impairing the solemnity and dignity of his subject, or perhaps shocking them by the abruptness of the fall. But— no; the descent was as beautiful and sublime, as the eleva­ tion had been rapid and enthusiastic. The first sentence, x^ith x^hich he broke the axxrful silence, was a quotation from Rousseau, 'Socrates died like a philosopher, but Jesus Christ, like a God!' I despair of giving you any idea of the effect produced by this short sentence, unless you could perfectly conceive the whole manner of the man, as well as the peculiar crisis in the discourse. Never before, did I completely understand what Demosthenes meant by laying such stress on delivery. You are to bring before you the venerable figure of the preacher; his blindness, constantly recalling to your recollection old Homer, Oss.ian and Milton, and associating x^ith his performance, the melancholy grandeur of their geniuses; you are to imagine that you hear his sloxtf, solemn, x7hich holds it, begins the sentence, 'Socrates died like a philosopher'— then pausing, raising his other hand, pressing them both clasped together, with warmth and energy to his breast, lifting his 'sightless balls' to heaven, and pouring his whole soul into his tremulous voice— 'but Jesus Christ— like a God!' If he had been indeed and in truth an angel of light, the effect could scarcely have been more divine. 116

Whatever I had been able to conceive of the sublimity of Mas­ sillon, or the force of Bourdloue, had fallen far short of the power which I felt from the delivery of this simple sentence. The blood, which just before had rushed in a hurricane upon my brain, and, in the violence and agony of my feelings, had held my whole system in suspense, noitf ran back into my heart, with a sensation which I cannot describe— a kind of shuddering delicious horror! The paroxysm of blended pity and indignation, to which I had been transported, subsided into the deepest self-abasement, humility and adoration. I had just been lacerated and dissolved by sym­ pathy, for our Saviour as a fellow creature; but now, with fear and trembling, I adored him as— 'a God!' If this description gives you the impression, that this incom­ parable minister had any thing of shallow, theatrical trick in his manner, it does him great injustice. I have never seen, in any other orator, such a union of simplicity and majesty. He has not a gesture, an attitude or an accent, to which he does not seem forced, by the sentiment which he is expressing. His mind is too serious, too earnest, too solicitous, and, at the same time, too dignified, to stoop to artifice. Although as far removed from ostentation as a man can be, yet it is clear from the train, the style and substance of his thought, that he is, not only a very polite scholar, but a man of extensive and profound erudition. I was forcibly struck with a short, yet beautiful character which he drew of our learned and amiable countryman, Sir Robert Boyle: he spoke of him, as if 'his noble mind had, even before death, divested herself of all influence from his frail tabernacle of flesh;' and called him, in his neculiarly emphatic and impressive manner, 'a pure intelligence: the link between men and angels.' This man has been before my imagination almost ever since. A thousand times, as I rode along, I dropped the reins of my iridle, stretched forth my hand, and tried to imitate his quotation from Rousseau; a thousand times I abandoned the attempt in despair, and felt persuaded that his peculiar manner and power arose from an energy of soul, which nature could give, but which no hrman being could justly copy. In short, he seems to be altogetl er a being of a former age, or of a totally different nature from the rest of m e n . -^3

Wirt's emphasis on the communion of feeling between the preacher and his audience is reminiscent of two of Wirt's ideals on the subject of sym­ pathy: Lord Karnes and Adam Smith. Karnes' notion of an emotion of

courage— a courageous action produces in a listener the passion of

l43Ibid.‘, pp. 197-202. 117 admiration directed toward the author of such action144 appears to have been captured by Wirt in his description of the audience's communion with their suffering Saviour.14^ Clearly this exemplifies Smith's notion of sympathy as denoting "fellow-feeling with any passion what­ ever."146

Although Wirt may have succeeded in describing the height of persuasive effort, his major purpose was to stimulate Virginians to strive for and appreciate such sublimity:

Is it not strange, that such a genius as this, so accomplished a scholar, so divine an orator, should be permitted to languish and die in obscurity, within eighty miles of the metropolis of Virginia? To me it is a conclusive argument, either that the Virginians have no taste for the highest strains of the most sub­ lime oratory, or that they are destitute of a much more important quality, the love of genuine and exalted religion.14'7

It was puzzling to Wirt that this eloquent minister, James Waddell, could go unrecognized; it was even more curious that an infidel such as Godwin could secure the trust and admiration of Virginians. The striking contrast between Waddell and Godwin are further evidence, for

Wirt, that Virginian morality was on the decline. In speaking of

Godwin, Wirt acknowledges a novelty, splendor and boldness in his scheme of morals which would particularly appeal to youthful and ardent minds.

The idea of being emancipated from "old, obsolete and vulgar motives of moral conduct" is immediately pleasing to a young man; unfortunately,

144Henry Home (Lord Karnes), Elements of Criticism (New York: M a son Brothers, 1860), p. 39.

14^British Spy, pp. 195-202.

146Herbert W. Schneider (ed.), Adam Smith's Moral and Political Philosophy (New York: Harper and Row, 1948), p. 75.

l4^British Spy, pp. 202-203. 118 while losing the old standards, the new ones fail to "mix and lay hold of the gross materials of his nature." Whatever the cause of this lack of cohesion, it is the youth who suffers.

. . . the counsels of heaven are above the ken, not contrary to the voice of human reason; and the unfortunate vouth, unable to reach and measure them, recoils from the attempt, with melancholy rashness, into infidelity and deism. Godwin's glittering theories are on his lips. Utopia or Mezorania, boast not of a purer moral­ ist, in xrords, than the young Godwinian; but the unbridled licen­ tiousness of his conduct makes it manifest, that if Godwin's principles be true in the abstract, they are not fit for this system of things; whatever they might be in the republic of Plato.

Cauble argues that Wirt's primary motivation in initiating the description of Waddell was to show a contrast with Godwin. Wirt was concerned with the influence which Godwin's moral philosophy was exert­ ing on young Virginians; to counteract this anti-religious feeling,

Wirt describes an orator whom he has never seen nor h e a r d . Although this author grants that Wirt designed an argument from contrast, the fact that Wirt was more concerned with the general decline of oratory including pulpit oratory than with countering individual philosophies such as Godwin's seems evident. His essays simply do not reflect a persona intent on analyzing and countering specific philosophical pro­ positions. In instances where such an exercise may explain why the

Virginians are not all they ought to be, Wirt illustrates just as he did with Godwin. In addition, had Wirt's purpose been to focus on

Godwin, it seems reasonable to this critic that the bulk of the dis­ cussion would have been devoted to Godwin. Such was not the case:

•^^Ibid. , pp. 203-204.

^^Cauble, pp. 129-130. 119

Godwin is discussed last and is given two pages, while Waddell receives the first eight pages of the description.

Occasion

The final element in Wirt's union of the speaker, his message and the audience is the occasion for the address. While we shall dis­ cover in chapter five that Wirt himself engaged in communication on a variety of occasions, the only one he discusses in the essays is that of commemorating the glorious past. Recognition of the glory of bygone days through oratorical means is an excellent opportunity for training or instructing youth, in Wirt's view.

Mourning the loss of dead heroes of such days is a worthwhile endeavor for an orator. The greatest oratory is produced by great occasions. Virginians had experienced no greater occasion than the

Revolutionary War and no greater models than the valiant leaders of that struggle. Reminding contemporary youth of such glorious leaders was the best possible occasion for public communication.

Wirt argues that Revolutionary leaders were "plain, honest, hardy sons of valor and virtue" compared with the young men around him.

There is as much difference between these two groups as there was between the frugal simplicity and incorruptible honor of the first ages of the Roman Republic and the degeneracy which debased and ruined it.

The orator who attempts to bridge such expansive gaps between genera­ tions has a difficult task.^O

It is the orator's duty to impart the reverie of the past and

150The Old Bachelor, p. 105; March 12, 1811. 120 present character of his countrymen. As a rhetorician, Wirt admits that one of his major purposes is to serve his countrymen and stimulate generous competition with their forefathers in those qualities which

"exalt the soul and ennoble the mind." In particular settings, oratory serves the function of inspiration:

For as long as we remain perfectly satisfied with ourselves, it is very clear that we shall make no efforts at improvement. The man, therefore, who exposes our false pretension, forces upon us an useful, although not a pleasing conviction; and in showing us that we are nothing, compared with the standard of revolutionary excellence, he dissipates the indolent and pernicious dream of vanity, which had lulled us, and puts us on aspiring to an equal­ ity with that illustrious model. Neither the probe, nor the caus­ tic are very pleasant operations: we submit to them, however, for the good that is to follow; and, painful as they are, we submit to them, even with gratitude to the operator. -)-*-

To illustrate the kind of argument that can communicate such occasions, Wirt engages in a lengthy comparison between those who had a part in the Revolution and those who have succeeded it. This com­ parison can be made regarding either individuals or bodies, but he says, "Of the revolutionary individuals who are yet alive, I shall say nothing: they are side by side with the moderns, and the reader may easily make the comparison himself."^2 those glorious dead, Wirt is very selective. In challenging the selection of their equals from the whole of the Revolutionary generation, Wirt alludes to the "acute, profound, all-searching pen of Farmer Dickinson," "the force and nower of thinking which distinguished Alexander Hamilton," and "the vast stores of useful knowledge and the boundless reach and comprehension of

151Ibid., pp. 137-138; July 5, 1811.

1 5 2 I b i d . , p. 138; M a y 7, 1811. 121 mind" of Benjamin Franklin. Finally, Wirt rhetorically questions his readers: "Who is there that pours the bold, majestic tide of Henry's eloquence?— Who is there, alas!— to compare with him— who was in war

153 the mountain storm— in peace, the Rale of spring?" Such men as these were giants in mind and courage; Virginians of the succeeding generations were not comparable. Continuing, Wirt praises the dignity, firmness and wisdom of the Revolutionary leaders as they exhibited their talents in the legislative bodies. These virtues can become tools in the hands of an orator concerned with raising the moral stan­ dards of society.

In relying on a manual, The Rembrancer, Wirt uses the reports, resolutions, memorials, petitions, declarations and statutes of the old congress as a model of patriotism for youth. Specifically, Wirt isolates four benefits which an orator can achieve by instructing youth in such examples. Taking advantage of a setting or occasion such as honoring war heroes will aid youth in that it serves to train the heart to greatness and prevents their spritis "from languishing or being smothered under business of daily living." A speech on such an occasion will also train the mind to greatness, because (1) "It teaches them the difference between solid substance and fantastic shadow;" (2) "It shews them the superiority of thought to words;" (3) "It gives them a perfect standard of manly and nervous eloquence;" and (4) "It raises them above that trick of indolence or weakness of taking a short and partial view of things.These Revolutionary worthies simply thought

1 5 3 Ibid.

154Ibid., p. 141; July 5, 1811. 122 more than their descendants. Contemplation of subjects, as evidenced by their documents, reflects their superiority of thought.

Wirt's conclusion to this whole matter posits the thesis that calamities of war cause men to keep their talents and virtues precise.

Accordingly, the greater the pressures, the more noble the "properties."

Such were the occasions on which Leonidas fought and Demosthenes spoke. Such in every country have been the most splendid epochs of orators and heroes.-^5 in speaking of Revolutionary heroes, the orator moves his listeners in time to the era of Franklin, Hamilton and Henry.

It is this effort which brings home the glory of those past days; this effort w h ich may recreate it.

Rhetorical Stance

As an essayist, Wirt made use of a common form of disseminating ideas in early nineteenth century America. The peculiar genre to which Wirt adhered was the familiar essay, a form designed to interpret aspects of life in an aesthetic manner. The subject matter of Wirt's essays indicates his concern for all aspects of Virginian life: morals, manners, oratory, education, politics, patriotism, condition of women, philosophy, religion, literature and slavery, to mention a few. There is, however, one recurrent theme underlying all of the essays. Wirt saw himself as an instructor of youth in the moral development of eloquence. To this end, he designed his communication in four ways in order to appeal to Virginian youth: his strategies were anonymity, models, dramatic, dialogue and Socratic monologue.

^^Ibid., p. 33; January 10, 1811. 123

Writing anonymously, Wirt develops two characters to espouse his views: a British spy and an old bachelor. Under the guise of a

British spy traveling in America, Wirt assumes the role of a social critic examining Virginia's eloquence and morals. Disguised as an old bachelor, he assumes the dual role of social critic and advisor to youth.

An analysis of Wirt's essays indicates his extensive use of models to illustrate and explain his principles. In addition, models served as a source of emulation. Classical rhetoricians such as Pericles,

Cicero, Demosthenes and Caesar frequently are offered to readers as worthy of moral or oratorical imitation. Eighteenth and nineteenth century figures such as Hugh Blair, Francis Bacon, Bolingbrolce, Edmund

Burke, Lord Mansfield, Lord Chatham and Lord Verulam were described as achieving superior eloquence and style. Probably the most beneficial of Wirt's examples were his extensive portraits of contemporary Ameri­ cans, usually Virginians. Whether for their political finesse, envi­ able moral character, edcisive argument, simple yet elegant style, natural genius, passionate delivery or depth of thought, men such as the following served Wirt as examples to youth: Patrick Henry, James

Monroe, John Wickham, John Marshall, Edmund Randolf, Benjamin Franklin and James Waddell. In short, to Wirt any principle worthy of explana­ tion was worthy of a representative model.

The strategy of dramatic dialogue was a peculiar technique of persuasion. Wirt continually received correspondence from his readers.

On controversial topics such as the education of women, Wirt frequently received complaints. As a ploy to let his readers know that he was 124

fair and cognizant of more than one side of an issue, he sometimes designed his essay in the form of a response. Occasionally, the dialogue between two hypothetical characters— one representing Wirt’s view and

the other, the correspondent's view— was presented in a single essay

form. At other times, Wirt utilized the dialogue in letter form.

Assuming the role of an imaginary character, Wirt would write to the old bachelor complaining of his narrow-mindedness and disregard for any

opinion but his own. Then Wirt would write a response— a logical,

orderly destruction of the imaginary character's arguments— as counsel

from the old bachelor. That is, Wirt did the writing for both partici­

pants in the dialogue: One element represented Wirt's personal view­

point; the other part represented the reader's position. Frequently,

Wirt corresponded with other writers for the series such as Louis Hue

Girardin disguised as Lovetruth or David Watson as Truename. In these

cases, Wirt again refuted their arguments.

Closely related was Wirt's final strategy: the socratic monologue. In this form, Wirt anticipated unfavorable audience reaction

to his arguments; to counter displeasing repercussions, Wirt would

literally think a topic through in the presence of his readers. The

actual product appears as though the old bachelor had no predispositions

to the pro or con side of the issue. In reality, this was a disguised

means of leading readers to Wirt's "truth," i.e., concurrence with his

opinion.

Utilizing anonymity, models, dramatic dialogue and socratic monologue, Wirt sets forth his ideas on the essential requirements for

attaining eloquence. Although these ideas were not developed in any 125 orderly fashion, at least three criteria appear to be critical for achieving Wirt's concept of eloquence: the orator must experience a special kind of education, must rely on nurture more than nature and must possess an awareness of the critical adaptation of ideas to people through speaker, message and occasion.

The determination of Wirt's derivation of princioles has shown heavy reliance on classical writers, particularly Cicero. Eighteenth century rhetorical theorists such as Hugh Blair and Lord Carnes, as well as philosophers like Hume and Locke, greatly influenced Wirt's views on the nature of man and his ideas. Orators such as Demosthenes, Burke and Henry contributed significantly to Wirt's formulation of the ideal public communicator.

Although Wirt certainly lacked originality in many of ideas, he merits credit for presenting these ideas in a uniauelv interesting manner. As a product of classical indoctrination, it is not surprising that he would simply write about what he knew best: classical theory and models. As a self-made man who had continually relied on the virtue of energy, labor and industry to produce his success, it is to be expected that Wirt would emphasize the importance of hard work and nurture over natural genius.

It would be futile to argue that Wirt was the only author of this era who wrote anonymously, using models for his illustrations.

Yet, Wirt had particular reasons for writing under a pseudonym. His models were more than mere illustrations: they were frequently portraits of his ideals which he felt were good reinforcement for instilling principles in youth. Seldom did Wirt state a principle and then say that 126 he would illustrate with an example; rather his principles appear to have been derived inductively from his examples. To a certain extent,

Wirt might be viewed as relying more on people than on principles per se. Given that Wirt was seeking transference of principles to youthful observers, he necessarily had to do more than argue the nobility and practicality of his theses. If readers were successfully persuaded that other people— people they knew personally or by reputation— possessed these admirable traits, then, readers might believe that they too could possess them. The uses of dialogue and monologue, in Wirt's execution, characterize a good deal of originality.

Compared with his contemporaries, Wirt's educational goals and views were revolutionary. Generally, Virginians were not especially concerned with instilling knowledge in their young men. Wirt's emphasis on the specialized training of orators clearly set him apart from the consensus of contemporary thought. Likewise, his extreme concern for eloquence was unique; innumerable people practiced oratory, but Wirt appears to have been more concerned than most about the inferior quality of such practice.

Emphasis on the orator's character and delivery, the argument and language of the speech and the occasions for public address do not collectively represent original thought. Wirt's originality resides more in his synthesizing and selection of theoretical elements from

Cicero, Quintilian, Aristotle, Blair, Homes, Locke, Burke and others.

The rhetorical theory of Wirt clearly represents reliance on no single source; his theory embodies stress on a simple style, logical argument delivered by an ethical man possessing a good voice and active gestures, 127

all combined to lift men to heights they never before experienced. •

Curiously, Wirt was not wholly pleased with his endeavors in

these essays. In a letter to Dabney Carr, Wirt expressed his misgiv­

ings about The British Spy:

Putting aside the traits by which the author sustains his dramatic character, his sentiments are generally just, and sometimes dis­ play the man of feeling. But his disquisitions are too desultory, and the topics too lightlv touched to contain much of the useful. The letters bespeak a mind rather frolicksome and sprightly, than thoughtful and penetrating; and therefore a mind qualified to amuse, for the moment, but not to benefit either its proprietor or the world, by the depth and utility of its researches. The style, although sometimes hanuv, is sometimes, also, careless and poor; and, still more frequently, overloaded with epithets; and its inequality proves either that the author wanted time or indus­ try or taste to give it, throughout, a more even tenor. Yet these letters are certainly superior to the trash with which we are so frequently gorged through the medium of the press."*'

In addition, Wirt was unhappy with the style of "The Old Bachelor."

Writing once more to Dabney Carr, Wirt expresses his apprehensions con­ cerning the forthcoming book:

You see, Ritchie is going to make a book of the old fellow. I don't much like this way of becoming an author, or rather of being made one without having the fear of it, all along, before my eyes. Now, most certainly, if I had intended to sit down and write a book, and become a downright author, I should have chosen a subject better calculated to put me up in the ranks; one calcu­ lated to exhibit the whole of the little compass and strength of my mind. If I had realized the idea that my good name, fame and reputation were at stake, I would have taken care to write to the best advantage— in rural privacy, for instance, and only in the happiest moments of inspiration, after having, by previous meditation, exhausted upon it all my retail shop of thought. Instead of this, I have been dribbling on, with a loose pen, care­ lessly and without any labor of thinking, amidst incessant inter­ ruptions— and with the printer's devil at my elbow, every half hour, jogging me for more copy."*"-^

"*""^Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 16, 1804, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. Kennedy, I, 116-117.

■*"^Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, March 23, 1811, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. Kennedy, I, 313. 128

During the writing of "The British Spy" and "The Old Bachelor,"

Wirt underwent extensive criticism for using models of living contem­ poraries. As we have already observed, he was critical of society's standards in some instances; this criticism made him immensely unpopu­ lar. In discussing current negative public response to his use of models, Wirt relates to Carr: ". . . I am very much trammeled by this impertinence in applying characters. . . . I never draw a character

-ICO without displeasing somebody or other." Already, we have discovered that Wirt's motivations for employing models derived from his belief in their liveliness and impressiveness for moralizing. Wirt's further discussion reveals his attitude toward Carr and toward his own critics:

If it is wrong to draw characters, you are partly in fault, for you said to me, not long before you left" me, "you must begin, presently to draxir characters." Why should not I? What right have the rascals to find fault with me if a vicious character fits them? As to lampooning or throwing stones for pure mischief and vantonness, I would sooner cut off my right hand. But if it is necessary to the purposes of virtue, if it is the most interesting mode that I can adopt to expose a vice, and render it ridiculous or hateful, why should I not do it?-^9

Wirt's apparent inability to accept criticism gracefully and his wish to have Carr share the responsibility for the models reveals Wirt's concern for his own image in this endeavor.

Attendant to the publication of "The Old Bachelor" in book form was some mild criticism of the writing. One such critic was Robert

Walsh, in The Analectic Magazine. Walsh's criticisms are examined because of their variety, justification and emphasis on rhetorical e l e m e n t s .

158Ibid. 129

First, Walsh comments on the sentimentality in the essays.

Wirt's sentiment is described as lofty and delicate. The purpose of these essays is symbolic of the noblest efforts "to spiritualize the character of his countrymen; to engage them in the noblest studies and habits; to mould them to that standard of perfection on which his thoughts and affections are so intensely fixed. Wirt's nobility of effort is briefly compared to Cicero's attempts to produce the con­ summate orator.

Second, while praising Wirt for making use of the most illustrious

British forms of writing, attempting to sustain his disguised character and contributing a significant Latin motto to each essay, Walsh main­ tains that the character of an old bachelor was ill-chosen and tritely developed. Instead of an old bachelor, Walsh urges that Wirt should have written as a widower and that Galen and Alfred could just as easily have been sons as nephews. Fosalie, the old bachelor's niece, easily embodies the characteristics of a daughter. Insights into family prob­ lems ar.d the role of women in education would have been more impressive had they been espoused by a father and husband, rather than by an old b a c h e l o r .

Third, the situation of the old bachelor on his farm is well suited to the agrarian influence on Virginia at this time. This farm is, in Walsh's estimation, well conceived and described. Walsh does take issue, however, with the bachelor's description of a castle appended

1 60 Eobert Walsh, The Analectic Magazine, XII (October, 1818), -267. 130

to the farm. In short, "it is extravagant, and gives an air of absur­ dity to his enthusiasm, " -^l

Fourth, Walsh expresses a feeling of insult at Wirt's adherence

to the idea that political institutions were degenerate in spirit,

intellect, morals and manners. Simply, the lack of Washingtons and

Franklins have not left Virginia without leadership: there exist an even greater variety of leadership because education has become diffused to more groups of people in Virginia, according to Walsh. Members of

learned professions, officers of the royal government, men who culti­ vated letters and philosophy by studying abroad— all these types of people thrive in Virginia more now than during the Revolutionary period.

Finally, "the crying sin of this accomplished author, in all his

1 fi 9 productions, is rhetorical exaggeration." This criticism is espe­

cially challenging because the youth of Virginia, in Walsh's opinion, are guilty of this fault themselves. That is, Wirt engages in the very act which he urges youths to shun: over-blown examples with arguments lost ir metaphorical expression.

In description, he rarely keeps within anv bounds of congruity or probability; he is almost always more or less hyperbolical where he means to be emphatic; his style of sentiment and expres­ sion is generally far too poetical and romantic for the nature of his compositions.163

Walsh mentions descriptions such as those of Lord Mansfield and James

Waddell of the "Spy" as illustrative of this criticism.

161Ibid., p. 269.

162Ibid., p. 288.

16\ b i d . , p. 289. 131

Before closing his review of The Old Bachelor, Walsh makes the

following estimation of Wirt's literary abilities:

He is, in our humble opinion, the finest genius that has yet ven­ tured forth among us in the walk of literature, and we think he could not have failed, if he had been able to pursue it steadily, to overtake the classical models of Europe. As great an ornament as he is to the bar of this country, and as useful as he is now likely to prove to its federal councils, we regret on his own account, and that of the public, his bondage to a profession for which so many minds are qualified, while so few, comparatively, are made to excel in the line in which excellence procures the most extensive and durable glory, for both the individual and his nation. His writings indicate a bouyant and generous enthusiasm; a fertile, graphic fancy; sound and ardent affections; an exalted, heartfelt patriotism; a perennial spring of delicate sentiment, and an unlimited command and choice of expression. If he runs riot, it is always with vigour and elasticity; he is never unin­ teresting nor ungraceful, even in his wildest and most unseasonable flights. He has hardly a page which does not present some cap­ tivating image, or some felicity of language;— which has not an arriere-gout, a relish, of the most refined studies. His diction, however viciously redundant and figurative, cannot be denied the praise of elevation, elegance, and facility; and it is in general of a real richness and massiness which entitle us to anp.lv to h im what Dryden has said of Shakespeare— that if his embroideries were melted down, there would still be enough of sterling gold and silver at the bottom of the crucible.-^4

Walsh appears to have been somewhat guilty of rhetorical exaggeration

h i m s e l f .

The interesting point to be observed is that Wirt's contemporaries

W ’re capable of finding faults with his style and development of char­

acters, but such criticism was always balanced with praises to his noble

motives and generally exceptional talents. Walsh's emphasis on Wirt's

repetition and intense figurative style are elements which Weaver says

are indicative of the polite style of nineteenth century rhetoric.

16AIbid., pp. 292-293. 132

Thus far we have noted Wirt's explicit statements of motives as well as the reactions and evaluations of the audience to these essay series. In order to assess completely Wirt's rhetorical stance and evaluate his motives, internal evidence needs to be examined as well.

By looking specifically to Wirt's argumentative premises and literary terms, we can further assess his balance between speaker, audience and message.

In examining all of Wirt's arguments on the achievement of elo­ quence, six major premises seem evident: (1) eloquence is important to

Virginia society; (2) Virginia's eloquence is declining because of indoO lence; (3) education is inherently capable of eradicating ineffective habits of speech; (4) noble self-exertion and self-denial build char­ acter by eliminating indolence; (5) Revolutionary leaders are worthy of vigorous emulation; and (6) Virginia's manners and morals must surpass those of Britain.

The underlying notions of all of Wirt's communication is that eloquence is important to Virginia's society. Importantly, an explicit statement of this premise was seldom offered; Wirt employed the rhetori­ cal enthymeme because he perceived that his audience agreed with him.

Arguing from definition, Wirt demonstrated that the inherent nature of eloquence was the pervasive force in Virginia society: oral and written communication fostered the development of political, social and educa­ tional institutions. This "divine power" was on the decline because

Virginians had come to rely too much on nature; their indolence and deplorably poor habits of communication served as constant reminders.

In this instance, Wirt argued a cause-effect relationship. The pulpit, the political arena, the courtroom and the occasional commemoration were all sources of proof demonstrating ineffective communication.

Poor habits of speech-making could be obliterated, Wirt reasoned, if they were detected and corrected during a youth's education. Unfor­ tunately, education was so neglected that it was futile to expect miracles from the system. Arguing from definition, Wirt sustained the notion that education was inherently capable of eradicating ineffective habits of speech. The works of classical historians, rhetoricians and philosophers, coupled with eighteenth century British and American men of letters, were for Wirt the basics of a decent education. But most

Virginians were not concerned with either Cicero's or Burke's orations; they were slightly more interested in Blair, Karnes, Boyle, Locke and

Hume. So Wirt reasoned that the egocentric Virginians might be, or at least ought to be, interested in their immediate contemporaries. By looking to men such as Marshall, Wickham, Randolph and Monroe, Wirt hoped to educate Virginians concerning their virtues and foibles.

Seeing the imperfections in the training of their leaders would cause

Virginians to promote the idea of a special kind of education for the orator. Education and learning, because of their properties, were alone capable of instructing youth in effective habits of speech. In order to eliminate their pervasive indolence, Wirt argued that only self-discipline could effect change. Hard work was simply the virtuous, ethical man's approach. Typically, Wirt turned to classical and contem­ porary models to support his premise. A fifth premise that pervades the scope of thought in all the essays is Wirt's idea that Revolutionary leaders are worthy of virtuous emulation. Their solid character, 134 energetic and manly actions and deep and noble thoughts served Vir­ ginia's youths in the best possible manner. Wirt desired a transfer­ ence of character, actions and ideas to his youthful observers. A final premise underlying Wirt's instruction to youth in eloquence was also argued from similitude: Virginian manners and morals must surpass those of Britain. Granting that the Virginian's manners and morals were equal to those of the British, Wirt maintains that this is insuf­ ficient. Virginians must surpass the British in moral and intellectual endeavors. This argument was consistent with the general anti-British, nationalistic pride of Virginians. Convincing Virginians that they were only equal to the British was designed to cause Virginians to aspire to higher goals.

Although Wirt argues from definition, causation and similitude, the thrust of his premises appears to be similitude. The extensive use of models is incorporated to demonstrate a desirable similarity or contrast between Virginia's youths and the ideal. Essentially, they served as precedents, i.e., justifications for argumentation. It is instructive to note that Wirt was fulfilling his nineteenth century persuader's role of reminding Virginians of what they already believed.

One exception ought to be noted: Wirt's insistence on development of an educational system appears to be designed to change reader's minds.

Interestingly, we observed that Wirt's argument on the role of education was posted in definitional form. That is, in the single instance in which Wirt was attempting revolutionary thought, he argued from the nature of the thing. In all other instances, he argued similarity, contrast or cause-effect relationships among ideas already held by 135

readers. If Weaver's distinctions concerning nineteenth century oratory are correct, then Wirt slightly deviates from the norm. Since argu­ ments from similitude are arranged second highest in Weaver's hierarchy, one would conclude that Wirt's motives toward his audience were good but not ideal.

In terms of language and style, Wirt appears to have assumed a desirable stance toward his audience. Consistent with his era,

Wirt employed a number of uncontested terms. The preponderance of these was god terms, indicating Wirt's virtuous motives. God terms such as "moral," "virtue," "eloquence," "nature," and "patriots" exem­ plify Wirt's reliance on terms to raise the level of society. These

terms aroused reader's aspirations and suggested the ideal Virginian society. The only real devil term employed was "indolence;" name- calling was simply not a consistent part of this rhetoric. Importantly,

Wirt never referred to his constituents as "immoral" or "unpatriotic;"

the emphasis appears to have been on lifting listeners to high moral principles by demonstrating their deficiencies in these qualities.

He spoke to readers more as people in danger of losing eloquence and moral virtue than to people never possessing these traits. The extensive use of "youth" seems consistent with Weaver's analysis of the charismatic

term; all of Wirt's instruction is directed to his group— which he maintains holds the key to the future of Virginia. Virginia's youths possess a distinct charismatic trait.

Speaking for corporate humanity as an instructor to youth in

achieving eloquence, Wirt endeavored to achieve a balance among himself, 136 the audience and the message. The noble desire to improve and in­ spire diligence and strength of character in youthful orators implies desirable motivations. An examination of arguments reveals that Wirt primarily argued from similitude, indicating desirable, but not ideal, motivations. Finally, Wirt's polite style and extreme use of uncon­ tested terms in the form of god terms lends Wirt a high ethical stance.

None of these estimations denies the fact that Wirt was in­ terested in achieving a literary name for himself. The concern here is for Wirt's ability to balance his personal ambitions with his attitude toward the audience. As a rhetorical essayist, Wirt appears to have achieved reasonable balance among his ambitions, the interests and needs of the audience and available arguments on eloquence. Had in­ struction been his only goal, it would clearly have been advantageous for Wirt to set forth a better organized and more fully developed treatise. But in addition to instructing, Wirt desired to amuse both himself and his audience. CHAPTER IV

RHETORICAL BIOGRAPHER

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the biographical role which Wirt played in authoring the life of Patrick Henry. Spec­ ifically, an investigation will be made into the following areas: biography as a popular genre, Wirt's choice of Henry as subject, simi­ larities between Wirt and Henry, contradictory accounts of Henry's life, audience expectations and anticipation of publication of the bio­ graphy. A summary of Wirt’s portrayal of Henry will then be offered, followed by a case study of the "Liberty or Death" speech. Finally, a determination of rhetorical stance will be made. The assessment of

Wirt's motives and method of writing Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry will provide further insights into Wirt's rhetorical w o r t h . 1

^ h e Wirt biography has undergone several editions and at least three titles. This list is based on the National Union Catalog and the American Catalog; the list does not include possible pirated versions. A. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry Philadelphia: James Webster, 1817. 2d ed., Philadelphia: James Webster, 1818. 3d ed., Philadelphia: James Webster, 1818. 9th ed., Philadelphia: Desilver, Thomas and Co., 1836. 9th ed., Philadelphia: Thomas, Cowperthwait and Co., 1845. Rev. ed., Ithaca, N. Y.: Mack, Andrus and Co., 1848. 15th ed., Hartford: S. Andrus and Son, [185?]. Rev. ed., Ithaca, N. Y.: Andrus, Gauntlett and Co., 1850. 15th ed., Hartford: S. Andrus and Son, 1852.

137 138

Biography of Henry

To a student of William Wirt, two important questions arise concerning authorship of the Henry biography: (1) given that Wirt had already achieved popularity and demonstrated his abilities as an essay­ ist, why did he decide to present Henry in biographic form? and (2) of all the Virginia patriots— none of whom had been extensively studied except Washington— why did Wirt choose Patrick Henry? The answers to these questions are complex and involve the most intricate motivations of Wirt as a literary person. Three categories of explanation may illuminate Wirt’s aspirations: (1) biography was rapidly becoming a popular genre of writing; (2) the Henry subject offered Wirt an oppor­ tunity to deal with two of his most favorite issues: oratory and instruction to youth; and (3) several similarities existed between

Henry and Wirt.

Doubtless the acclaim and reputation which Wirt had received for his writings in the "Rainbow" series, the "Old Bachelor" and

"The Letters of the British Spy" indicated to him that he was no mediocre writer. Wirt's acute critical talent for reacting to the social- intellectual milieu of the early 1800’s caused him to be acclaimed the "most influential and widely read essayist of his generation in

15th ed., New York: Derby and Jackson, 1859. A reference is made to the 25th edition in 1874; attempts to locate interim publications proved unsuccessful. B. Life and Character of Patrick Henry Philadelphia: Proctor and Coates, [188?]. C. Life of Patrick Henry, 4th ed. New York: McElrath and Bangs, 1831. New York: A. L. Bost Company, [1903], 139 2 America." In the preceding chapter, we observed the communication strategies and issues which Wirt employed in these essays. The editor of the Virginia A.rgus was so pleased with the popularity of Wirt’s contributions that he was moved to make the observation that Wirt possessed an

. . . accurate observation, sound judgment, and a roving, play­ ful fancy that at once surprises and delights. The mind of the writer possesses in a very high degree those facilities for com­ bining and discriminating in whose proper union consists the per­ fection of genius. . . .3

During the years 1805-1815, Wirt enjoyed a reputation as a literary man of note, and was frequently commended for his sketches of living heroes. Despite public approval of his efforts, Wirt was still not nleased because he sought to solidify his literary reputation. Wirt aspired to be famous; in fact, he desired to be able to devote himself to the luxury of literature. He wanted enough fame and money to be able to retire and write. To Benjamin Edwards, Wirt wrote (in regard to running for the Presidency)

I have no such ambition, and my not having it, is one among a thousand proofs that I am unfit for that kind of life; for nature, I believe, never yet gave the capacity without the inclina­ tion. I am x^riting unaffectedly and from mxr heart. I knox-j enough of the world to know that political poxver is not happiness, and that my happiness is nox^here but in private life and in the bosum of my beloved family. I think I may be able to attain distinction enough in my profession to have it in my pox^er, in ten years, to retire from the bar into the country and give myself up to the luxury of literature and my fireside. '

2 William P. Trent, A History of American Literature (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1903), p. 281.

^The Virginia Argus, September 17, 1803.

^Letter, William Wirt to Benjamin Edwards, February 26, 1809 as quoted in John P. Kennedy, Memoirs of the Life of William Wirt (Phila­ delphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849), I, 261. 140

A few months later, Wirt once again avowed similar goals:

It is true I love distinction, but I can only enjoy it in tran­ quility and innocence. My soul sickens at the idea of political intrigue and faction: I would not choose to be the innocent victim of it, much less the criminal agent. Observe, I do not propose to be useless to society. My ambition will lie in open­ ing, raising, refining and improving the understanding of my country­ men by means of light and cheap publications. I do not think that I am Atlas enough to sustain a ponderous work: while a specula­ tion of fifty or a hundred pages on any subject, theological, philosophical, political, moral or literary would afford me very great delight, and be executed, at least, with spirit. . . . This mode of publication is calculated to give wider currency to a work. There is nothing terrible in the price, or the massive bulk of the volume. The price is so cheap, and the reading so light, as to command a reader in every one who can read at all, and thereby tc embrace the whole country. May not a man, employed in this way, be as useful to his country as by haranguing eloquently in the Senate?'’

In short, Wirt wanted literary fame. He recognized that in his era,

"writing was a means of getting known, and getting known for a lawyer

r was crucially important." Even though his previous writings had brought him some acclaim, they had not provided the type of lasting effect that Wirt had hoped. In correspondence with his friend Dabney

Carr, Wirt explicitly admits this as his purpose:

. . . I shall find the joys of ease, independence and domestic bliss— become a very enicure in literary luxuries, and perhaps, perhaps raise some monument to my name to which my posterity, at least, may look with pleasure. . . .

Then for literary fame, I design some time or other, to write lives of the illustrious characters of this state on a plan somewhat like Plutarch’s; it will be a subject light enough for my pen and I think I could do it con amore— so that it would be "in my best manner" as Burns says."^

^Letter, William Wirt to Benjamin Edwards, June 23, 1809 as quoted in Kennedy, I, 265-266.

^William R. Taylor, "William Wirt and the Legend of the Old South," William and Mary Quarterly, XIV (1957), 484.

^Letter, William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 15, 1814, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Librarv, Richmond, Virginia. 141

In a letter to his wife, Wirt cites this as part of his reason. The biography "will end, I hope in money and fame to me,— (almost equally important inheritances to our children) honor to the memory of Mr. H. £ and utility to the public." Such hopes of financial advantage were not groundless. The Letters of the British Spy had made money for both

Wirt and lis publisher. John D. Burk, Wirt had heard, had sold rights to his third-rate history of Virginia for $110,000. John Marshall's profits from his Life of Washington were said to be immense.^ Pro­ spects v ere good if Wirt could get the biography in print within a short time.

This economic ambition seemed attainable:

. . . I was reading last night Stewart's life of the historian Robertson and it has revived with great force a wish I have long conceived and cherished of writing lives of our worthies of the revolution, by pairs— in Plutarch's manner— not for immediate publication, for I remember that you counseled me, and very soundly against that— but to lay them bye and let my family publish them after my death. I have in my eye— Pendleton, Wythe, Richard H. Lee, and Patrick Henry— where shall I get materials for the four, that is, to whom can I apply for a minute account of their younger days— education— habits? Does it occur to you that there are any other of our patriots who are no more and who could be raised ^ from the dead to advantage either of themselves or of an author?

Wirt wrote to Ninian Fdwards in 1807 that "If I can satisfy myself and the public with Patrick Henry, I propose to pursue the 'lives' of

Q William Wirt to Betsy Wirt, April 14, 1805, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland. q Ninian Wirt Edwards, History of Illinois, from 1778 to 1833; and Life and Times of Ninian Edwards (Springfield: Illinois Street Journal Company, 1870), p. 415. Hereafter cited as History of Illinois.

■^William Wirt to St. George Tucker, March 26, 1803, Tucker- Coleman Papers, College of William and Mary Library, Williamsburg, Virginia. 142

1 1 our other distinguished men, on Plutarch's plan." Johnson's Lives of the Poets had sustained Wirt's interest:

I have been reading, of nights, Johnson's lives of poets & famous men, till I have contracted an itch for biography--do not be astonished, therefore, if you see me come out, Sir, with a very material and extended life of some departed Virginian worthy— for I meddle no more with the living— Virginia has lost some great men, whose names ought not to perish— If I were a Plutarch I would collect their lives for the honor of the State and the ad­ vantage of Posterity.^

As he was to do on innumerable future occasions, Wirt turned to St.

George Tucker for advice concerning biography. Tucker's responses to

Wirt were extremely apprehensive. American biography, he observed,

"is a subject which promises as little entertainment as any other in the literary world.Contemporary biographies lacked quality.

Our scene of action is so perfectly domestic, as to afford neither novelty nor variety. Even the biographer of Washington [John Marshall] has been reproached with imposing upon his readers the history of a nation instead of the life of an individual.^

On the other hand, Parson Weems had done the opposite: he had stressed the life of the individual in deference to the life of the nation.

Tucker disapproved of the moralist-biographerHe believed that materials for biographies were scarce because formerly no one ever

11 William Wirt to Ninian Edwards, [date illegible], 1807; History of Illinois, p. 432.

■^Kennedy, I, 122-123; William Wirt to Dabney Carr, June 8, 1804, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

■^St. George Tucker to William Wirt, April 4, 1813, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia; also see Kennedy, I, p. 353.

^^Ibid., Kennedy, I, 352.

15Ibid. ,' Kennedy, I, p. 353. 143 noticed how the great men of Virginia lived. Thus, ’’to live and act like gentlemen, was a thing once so common in Virginia that nobody thought of noticing it."-^

The mere recital of the facts of Henry's life would be most boring, Tucker persuasively argued. Further he noted that true enter­ tainment was impossible unless some of Henry's speeches in the General

Assembly, Congress, Convention or Federal Court were included.

It is clear to my apprehension, that unless a man has been distinguished as an orator, or a soldier, and has left behind him either copies or notes of his sneeches, or military exploits, that you can scarcely glean enough out of his climactarick, to fill a half a dozen pages, that anybody would trouble themselves to read.

Further, orators whose speeches have been preserved will be remembered.

The public characters— those who have distinguished themselves before their fellow men— live on in the minds of generations because concrete demonstrations of their ability have been perserved. In the conclusion of the letter, Tucker advises against biography because so few "remain among us who have known and marked the outlines which ought to he traced; and still fewer are capable of giving the rudest sketch of them [Virginian worthies]. Similar advice was provided by Francis

Gilmer, a literary critic, a lawyer and Wirt's father-in-law, who

16Kennedy, I, 315.

17St. George Tucker to William Wirt, April 4, 1813. Kennedy, I, 353.

18Ibid. 144 believed that the only evidence of Henry's true greatness was his speeches

To illustrate his point, Tucker cites a number of examples, including Richard Henry Lee, John Blair, Dabney Carr, John Page, Beverly

Randolph, General Thomas Kelson, Peyton Randolph, George Mason and

James Madison. Tucker says,

Literary characters may leave their works behind them, as memorials of what they were; soldiers may obtain a niche in the temple of Fame, by some brilliant exploit; orators, whose speeches have been preserved, will be remembered through that medium: judges, whose opinions have been reported, may possibly be known to future judges, and members of the bar; but the world cares little about them; and if they leave no renorts, or meet with no reporter to record their opinions, &c, they sink into immediate oblivion. . . . The truth is, that Socrates himself, would pass unnoticed and forgotten in Virginia, if he were not a public character, and some of his speeches preserved in a newspaper: the latter might keep his memory alive for a year or two, but not much longer.^

Tucker's advice was extremely influential in motivating Wirt to collect

Henry's speeches.

91 Once Tucker advised that biography was a viable option, x Wirt had only to determine the subject. For a number of reasons, he chose

Henry. As we observed in the preceding chapter, oratory and instruction

to youth were two issues with which Wirt concerned himself. He saw in

Henry an opportunity to show off an "Orator of Nature" for the edifi­

cation of youth.

'Francis Gilmer to William Wirt, February 4, 1817, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. (Gilmer was a highly re­ spected lawyer and literary critic in Virginia.)

20ICennedv, I, 354-355. *>1 Ibid. 145

In the British Spy, Wirt made his first reference to Henry's

22 oratory. Wirt had come to believe that a general decline in manners

and morals had occurred in Virginia and even in the nation. He felt

that what was needed to offset this decay was an exemplary life— the

story of a man characterized by great patriotism— on which young men

could model their lives.^3 y0 Jefferson, Wirt wrote:

Mr. Henry seems to me a good text for a discourse on rhetoric, patriotism and morals. The work might he made useful to young men who are just coming forward into life: this is the highest point of expectation; nor do I deem the object a trifling one, since on these young men the care and safety of the republic must soon devolve.

As we observed in his correspondence with his wife, he saw the biography

as useful to the public. His plan was to show the highlights of this

"Orator of Nature" in such a way as to provide edification for vouth.

Undoubtedly Wirt was influenced by the eighteenth century sentimental movement which believed in holding up models for emulation. Not only had he read and witnessed many sentimental plays but he had also

written a sentimental drama. He therefore dedicated the biography to

the young men of Virginia whom he wanted to follow his portraiture.

Otl er literary influences which should not be overlooked are the influences exerted by Wray, Ossian, and Collins. In Patrick Henry, Wirt saw another "bard" whom heaven had endowed with the gift of divine and poetic fire. . . . ^

22 William Wirt, Letters of the British Spy (Pichmond: Fielding and Lucas, 1810), pp. 144-14ft.

■^William Wirt to Thomas Jefferson, January 18, 1810 as emoted in Kennedy, I, 278. Also see Old Bachelor, p. 75.

24Ibid.

2•"’Frank B. Cauble, "William Wirt and his Friends," unpublished

doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, p p . 345-346. 146

In order to portray his oratorical genius, Wirt was convinced that acquisition of Henry’s speeches was crucial. We noted Wirt’s correspondence with Tucker and Gilmer in regard to the role of speeches in biography. Further, Wirt was persuaded that verbatim speech texts were essential. In correspondence with Gilmer, Wirt had insisted:

A speech, not written in the words in vdiich it was pronounced, is no speech. It is a discourse upon the same subject, and will stand or fall upon its merits as a literary composition. . . . We relish a speech, whilst the occasion that has produced it is fresh upon our minds; when the occasion is forgotten, the man no longer remembered, when the public has ceased to talk of it, and years have intervened— how few speeches retain their raciness

A final reason Wirt chose Henry as the source of his study may have been unconscious on Wirt's part: similarities between Henry's and Wirt's lives. both their families made modest beginnings in America after arriving in Philadelphia in the second quarter of the eighteenth century. Henry's family settled in Virginia and the Wirts in Maryland.

Neither Henry nor Wirt received very much formal education. Neither went to college or received any formal legal training: both attained law degrees in their early twenties. Roth became celebrated lawyers and orators: Henry first distinguished himself in the "Parson's Cause";

Wirt in the trial of ^aron Burr.

Cbvious differences existed, which ought not be overlooked. As

Taylor points out, Wirt (both by name and birth) was of German and

Swiss parentage and hence was an outsider; as such, "We had to move further than Henry to reach the top.”27 As a politician, Henry sought

^William Wirt to Francis Gilmer, April 2, 1825, Gilmer Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.

27Taylor, p. 484. 147 state office; Wirt disliked politics and aspired to no office. A final, and perhaps greatest, difference was that Wirt was a man of letters;

Henry clearly possessed no literary interests. But Henry possessed

the oratorical prowess and skill which Wirt always desired. Wirt had diligently acquired his skill by practice, Henry by natural genius.

It is conceivable that the origin of Henry's excellence intrigued WLrt.

One quality which both men possessed was a love for Virginia.

Henry embodied those general traits which Wirt had admired so highly

in Virginians. Despite their faults, Wirt believed Virginians had

. . . many of the noblest qualities that can adorn the human character— A hospitality, the genuine offspring of the heart— unbounded generosity— a courage superior to all difficulties, and an instinctive abhorrence of every little, mean artifice, the miserable expedients of vulgar minds, are among the number— If anything indeed peculiarly distinguishes the Virginian from his confederate brethren, it is a lofty and chivalrous spirit which perhaps the high character of his state has contributed to keep alive— this spirit may betrav him into errors and vices— but if 9 Q properly directed, is the parent of the fairest virtues."

Wirt's decided emphasis on Henry's oratory, coupled with a strong

belief in verbatim speech texts, presented him with a profound chal­

lenge. After perusing all available newspapers, journals and Henry papers and correspondence, Wirt came to the disheartening conclusion

that no single verbatim speech of Henry's existed in print. In hopes

of resolving this problem, Wirt then began corresponding with several

distinguished men— among them Thomas Jefferson, John Roane, St. George

Tucker and Dabney Carr— xvho had on several occasions heard Henry speak

and knew a great deal of his character, abilities, weakness and so

28Pld Bachelor, p. 172. 148 forth. Most importantly in his correspondence with these men, Wirt

0 Q sought descriptions and verbatim accounts of Henry’s speaking.

Contradictory Accounts of Henry ’s Life

As early as 1810, Wirt complained to Jefferson that the incon­ sistent reports of Henry's greatness and the "recent and warm preju­ dices" of Henry's friends and adversaries were so great that he would have like to abandon the project completely. Restrained by his desire

to "discipline the times" with the biography of a celebrated man, how­ ever, Wirt continued his efforts, for "every day, and especially every meeting of the Legislature, convince me that the times require a little discipline, which cannot be rendered so interesting in a didactic form, as if interwoven with the biography of a celebrated man. . . . It is

for this reason, only, that I am so disposed.In a letter to Judge

Carr, Wirt confessed that the biography posed a great challenge:

As for Patrick,— he is the very toughest subject that I even coped withal. If I have anv knack at all in writing, it is in copying after nature: not merely in drawing known characters, but in painting the images in my own mind, and the feelings of mv heart. . . . But Patrick was altogether terra incognita to me. I had never seen him; and the portraits of him which had been furnished me were so various and contradictory as to seem to confound rather than inform me. . . . In truth, I hate excessively to be trammelled in writing, by matter of fact. Don't be so mis­ chievous as to mistake me. I mean that my habit of composition has always been to draw only from my own stores, with my fancy

^William Wirt to St. George Tucker, January 31, 1805, Tucker- Coleman Papers, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia. William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 19, 1810, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia; Kennedy, I, 129. on William Wirt to Thomas Jefferson, January 18, 1810. 149

31 and my heart both as free as the winds.

The reports were so conflicting that Wirt claimed he could never really embody Henry's character. As noted, Wirt disliked being ''trammelled q o by fact." On yet another occasion he had reason to express to Carr his displeasure in dealing with facts. He freely admitted feeling awkward in dealing with truth: this "business of stating facts with rigid precision, not one jot more or less than the truth— what the deuce has a lawyer to do with the truth. . . .— It is like attempting

33 to run tied up in a bag." But even discovering the facts was no easy task. The facts and dates were not as easily accessible as Wirt had initially believed. At every point of Henry's life the contradictions were so great, that Wirt had to send letters all over the state to collect explanations and reconcile their inconsistencies.

I always thought that P.ozzy ranted, in complaining so heavily of the infinite difficulty and trouble which he had to encounter in fixing accurately the dates of trivial facts; but I now know by woeful experience that Bozzv was right. And, in addition to the dates, I have the facts themselves to collect. I thought I had them all ready cut and dry, and sat down with all my statements of correspondents spread out before me; a pile of old journals on my right, and another of old newspaners on my left, thinking that I had nothing else to do but as Lingo says, 'to saddle Pegasvs, and ride up Parnassus.' Such shortsightedness is there in 'all the schemes o' mice and men:' for I found, at every turn of Henry's life, that I had to stop and let fly a volley of ]etters over the State, in all directions, to collect dates and exnlana- tions, and try to reconcile contradictions. '

31 William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 12, 1816, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. If Cauble's account of Wirt's description of James Waddell is accurate, Wirt had already demonstrated his ability to describe an orator whom he had never seen.

32Ibid.

33 William Wirt to Dabney Carr, August 20, 1815, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

34Ibid. Still another difficulty was the discovery of undesirable traits in Henry’s character. "He was a blank military commander, a blank governor, and a blank politician. . . . In short, it is, verily,

3 5 as hopeless a subject as man could well desire." Wirt's critical response to this problem was to disguise the non-heroic traits: "I have dug around it, and applied it all the plaster of Paris that I could command; but the fig tree is still barren, and every bud upon it in­ dicates death instead of life."3(^

The final area of complication with regard to the facts of

Henry's life was that the incidents of his life were monotonous: it was all "... speaking, speaking, speaking. 'T.is true he could talk:

— 'Gods! how he could talk!’"37 A related problem lay in the fact that between 1763-1789— the high point of Henry's career— "not one of his speed,es lives in print, writing or memory. All that is told me is o o that, on such and such an occasion, he made a distinguished speech."

Wirt despaired of writing such descriptions in his biography without

rver furnishing any verbatim account of the speeches themselves. His correspondents confirmed that the speeches published in the debates of the Virginia Convention were far inferior to anything Henry ever

35Ibid.

3 6 Ibid.

37Ibid. 151 delivered.^ Tucker in particular had warned Wirt of the dangers he would undergo in attempting to assimilate Henry’s speeches. In the first place, it was not the custom of the day to publish speeches.

The manner of an orator at that period in Virginia ". . . was no more to be mark’d than that of an Egale in the air, however. . . [one] might look up, and admire the flight of the King of Birds, or the more majestic flights of the orator.In the second place, Henry had scarcely a rival in the area of oratory and to reconstruct speeches for so great a master of the art seemed doubtful.

It seems apparent here that Wirt had written to Tucker ex­ plaining the plan which he had already conveyed to Dabney Carr.^

Tucker replied that he had no doubt that Wirt could make half a dozen speeches as good as Henry made— but not as good as any because the occasion adds to the orator’s effectiveness. Specific reference is made to the March, 1775, speech to illustrate Henry’s unsurpassable elo­ q u e n c e . ^ The plan which Wirt considered and perhaps adopted was copying after Botta— who undertook an account of the American War, him­ self writing speeches for the most prominent characters. Wirt maintains, however, that "... I think with Polybius, that this is making too

39 Ibid. Also see Wirt to Francis Gilmer, September 3, 1816, Gilmer Papers, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.

40 St. George Tucker to William Wirt, August 7, 1815, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

^Ibid. Also see William Wirt to Dabney Carr, August 20, 1815.

42 St. George Tucker to William Wirt, August 7, 1815. 152 ..43 free with the sanctity of history. He continues:

Besides, Henry's eloquence was all so completely sui generis as to be inimitable by any other: and to make my chance of imitat­ ing him still worse, I never saw or heard him.^

Audience Expectations

In interests and peculiarities the readers of the Henry bio­ graphy varied greatly. Virginia suffered from a grave jealousv by most states because of her inordinate number of "great and glorious leaders." According to Gilmer, citizens outside Virginia tended to accept the opinions of Virginians with suspicion, especially in regard to praise of her own sons; "and of all these, Henry is the very person whose superiority they most manfully contest.In an earlier letter,

Gilmer had urged Wirt to recognize that the ultimate success of his volume was dependent on national acceptance:

. . . The life of a patriot, and an orator more than any other, must have its doom nronounced by the nation to whom it is ad­ dressed. . . eloquence whether speaking, or writing, must to all practical purposes be tried by the public— Philosophers, Rhi.lologers, Critics may turn up their noses if they please. . .

Wirt was later reminded that he was not writing the life of a patriot like Washington who had "acted on a theatre large enough for the world to see his exploits, and admire his virtues. . ." but rather one who

/ William Wirt to Dabney Carr, August 20, 1815.

44 Ibid. For evidence that Wirt attempted to verifv the anec­ dotes he heard concerning Henry's speaking, see Letter, William Wirt to Samuel Chase, January 18, 1810, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

“^Francis Gilmer to William Wirt, February 4, 1817, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

^Fran c i s Gilmer, to William Wirt, December 20, 1816, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. 153

operated in a small public assembly, Gilmer expressed the view that the public was essentially expecting an unqualified eulogy of Henry— panegyric in biography was so universal that it was expected and allowed

for. But Gilmer sought to protect Wirt from the harsh criticism he was bound to expose himself to if he should in fact present such a eulogy.1 47

Wirt's stylistic task in adapting to the interests of the au­ dience vas both to gratifv the voung with his poetical narrative and convince the aged of the truth of his story. Even Wirt's editor,

Thomas Ritchie, occasionally found it necessary to strike several high flown passages which he considered panegyric rather than history.^

But considering the humane edification which Wirt clearly had in mind, it is possible that he really felt that as Henry's biographer he would be excused for drawing the veil over Henry's faults and holding up the brighter side of his character for imitation.^ In fact, in writing to Jefferson in October of 1816, Wirt made the following ad­ mission :

You will perceive, that I have borne very lightly on the errors of Mr. Henry's declining years. He did as much good in his better days; and no evils have resulted from his later aherrations. Will not his biographer, then, be excusable in drawing the veil

47 Francis Gilmer to William Wirt, February 4, 1817, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

48 Thomas Ritchie was the editor of The Richmond Enquirer and chief editor for Webster Publishing Company, which published Wirt's biography. William Wirt to Francis Gilmer, January 26, 1817, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

^Cauble', p. 33. over them, and holding up the brighter side of his character, only, to imitation?-*^

Taylor has isolated six .justifications, at least in retrospect, which

Wirt might have used to "gloss over" the imperfections in Henrv's

life: (1) Henry left behind almost no documents of any significance:

(2) stenographic reports were imperfect accounts of what he had said or how he. had said it; (3) Jefferson maintained that it did not matter what Henry had said but what effect he made; (A) men still lived who

could recall the effect Henry had made on certain occasions, but there

seemed to be little agreement on the exact means which Henry had used

to achieve this effect; (5) sense of timing and ability to surprise were the chief resources in court and in debate, but neither of these

could be completely recaptured thirty years later; and (6) little was known of Henry's everyday life and what was known seemed insignificant.-^

In memory. . . he lived on as a man of Great Moments, and William Wirt made the most of them. It was his decision to exploit the S 9 memory and to ignore or exolain away the facts.-

In any case, being confronted with those who would suspect him of nar- tiality merely because he was a Virginian, with those who idolized and mythicized the name of Henry, and with those who thought him an indolent and incompetent character placed severe constraints on Wirt's critical capabilities.

"^Kennedy, I, 364.

“^Taylor, p. 482. Anticipation of Publication

Intensely aware of the conflicting accounts and his betrayal

of historical accuracy, Wirt was apprehensive about the publication

of the biography. In correspondence with Jefferson, Wirt pleaded with him to judge whether the publication would cause him an "injury with C O the public." Even as late as 1815, the consideration of no publica­

tion at all was in Wirt's mind. To Carr, he wrote that unless he could

"nould it into a grace, and breathe into it a spirit which I have never yet been able to do, it shall never see the light. ..." hut in the

event that the project should somehow be accomplished, Wirt promised himself and his friends never to attempt again a similar literary

axoeriment. At one point he considered allowing the manuscript to be

published only after his death.54 frustrated by his difficulties, he wrote to Tucker:

I wish my name had not been given to the public— 0 that I could have got the reward for the copyright, without ever being known in the affair.— I foresee that Patrick will be the ruin of mv literary name. In trying to save him from the jaws of time, I shall lose myself to eternity.— I have been glancing back over what I have written, and if the public forgive it, much more if they applaud it, they ought to be fed with green gourds for the balance of their lives.

William Wirt to Thomas Jefferson, August 24, 1816, "The Con­ fidential Letters from Thomas Jefferson to William Wirt Being Reminis­ cences of Patrick ITenry," John Grihbel Collection, Philadelphia, 1912, a copy in the Virginia State Library.

54Kennedy, I, 337.

55Wi.lliam Wirt to St. George Tucker, August 16, 1815, Tucker- Coleman Papers, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, "William Wirt's Life of Patrick Henry," William and Mary Quarterly Historical Magazine, XXII (1614), 250. 156

By the time the publication was to be in the hands of the reading public, Wirt had prepared himself for the criticism he anti­ cipated. He consoled himself, thinking that no American critic could destroy the book if it in fact had any true merit; if the book possessed no real merit, it would die a natural death. European critics, thought

Wirt, could not be expected to approve anything American. He confessed that there was a part of the book which he felt to be extremely heavy and soporific—

. . . it is that part in which I have been obliged to rely on David Robertson’s reports of Henry's speeches in the Convention, and in the great British debt case. The work would have been ob­ viously very incomplete without this part of it, and yet, with it, that part of the road is very deep and miry. But if the reader does not choose to wade through it, he can hop over it, and so he cannot blame me if he soils his s t o c k i n g s . ^6

57 Summary of the Henry Biography^'

In this section, we will explore Wirt's portrait of Henry.

Specifically, we will note his portrayals as a moral example, as a patriotic ideal and as a rhetorical model. Finally, the "Liberty or

Death" speech will be used to illustrate Wirt's compositional procedures.

Patrick Henry: Moral Example

Patrick Henry was portrayed by Wirt as a puritanical ideal.

In manners, morals and virtues, Henry reigns supreme. His life style

5ft William Wirt to Dabney Carr, September 13, 1817, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. Also see Kennedy, II, 27-28.

■^The following summary is largely derived from Wirt's Sketches, pp. 417-443. 157 was extremely temperate and frugal. In conversation, Henry was never

known to swear or take God's name in vain. Although he was never

associated with any church, he is described by Wirt as a sincere Chris­

tian.

His morals were strict. A.s a husband, a father, a master he had no superior. He was kind and hospitable to the stranger, and most friendly and accommodating to his neighbours. In dealings with the world, he was faithful to his promise, and ounctual in his contracts, to the utmost of his power.

After qualifying the general moral imperfection of all men,

Wirt responds to charges concerning corruptions in Henry's character.

The first charge concerns Henry's love of money. It was thought to have been one of his "strongest passions." This passion had exhibited itself

in several ways: exorbitant fees from criminal clients, attemnts to purchase land with depreciated paper currency, profits from the Yazoo slave trade, and being vain of his wealth in old age. Wirt retorts

in three ways. First, alluding to Jesus' defense of the woman taken

in adultery, Wirt begs the question by saying: "Let these things be admitted, and 'let the man who is without fault cast the first stone.'"

Second, as mitigation of the charges "if they be true" Wirt reminds readers of Henry's financial plight:

. . . during the greater part of his life, [Henry was] intolerably oppressed by uovertv and all its distressing train of conseouences; that the family for which he had to provide was very large; and that the bar, although it has been called the road to honour, was not in those days the road to wealth. With these considerations in view, charity may easily pardon him for having considered only the legality of the means which he used to acquire an independence;

58Ibid.,.p. 418. 158

and she can easily excuse him too, for having felt the success of his endeavours a little more sensibly than might have been becoming.

Third, Wirt responds by maintaining that Henry was neither "proud, nor hard-hearted, nor pernicious," or at least none of bis correspondents indicated such a characteristic. In fact, Henry is described by them as "honest," "one of the kindest, gentlest, and most indulgent of human beings.

Another fault of Henry’s which merits refutation, according to

Wirt, was his passion for fame. It was said that Henry desired to monopolize public opinion and was envious of certain popular figures of the day. In response, Wirt maintains that these are speculative censures, but if they are true they are inconsistent with Henrv's nature. As proof, he cites the example of Henry’s defense of R. II.

Lee's fame, as evidenced by their correspondence. Although he frequently opposed Jefferson, Randolph, Madison or Pendleton, they were never publicly discredited bv Henry.

In closing the discussion of Henry's morals, Wirt again alludes to these charges:

The inordinate love of money and of fame are, certainly base and degrading passions. They have sometimes tarnished characters otherwise the most bright, but they will find no advocate or apologist in any virtuous bosom. In relation to Mr. Henry, how­ ever, we may be permitted to doubt whether the facts on which these censures (so inconsistent with his general character) are grounded, have not been misconceived; and whether so much of them as is really true, may not be fairly charged to the common account

59Ibld., p. 419.

60Ibid., p. 420. 159

of human imperfection.

Interestingly, Wirt did not attempt to gloss over all of Henry's undesirable traits. One deficiency is given special emphasis by Wirt:

indolence. Henry lacked an alert, versatile, organized mind. He was

ignorant of the progress of science.and literature in his own day; his knowledge of these areas was superficially gleaned from conversa­

tion with others. An inventory of Henry's library revealed very few books; of his collection, most were "commonly odd volumes."

An extensive knowledge of human nature was Henry's distinction;

"in this, he was more deeply read than any of his countrymen."He knew men thoroughly; and hence arose his great power of persuasion."

Wirt continues to observe that this emphasis on studying men over books was primarily due to his indolence rather than his deliberate judgment.

Traits such as frankness, simplicity, grace and modesty char­

acterize Henry's personality. The outstanding distinction in this

regard was his pleasant manner; especially, Henry was capable of playing

the role of dignitary when state ceremony demanded.

Patrick Henry: Patriotic Ideal

Throughout Wirt's immortalization of Henry, statesmanship and

patriotic endeavors predominate. Early in his examination of Henry,

Wirt delineates his purpose: determining Henry's role in the Revolu­

tion. Wirt observes that "the Revolution may be truly said to have

61Ibid., p. 421.

*^I b i d . , p. 422. 160 £ O commenced with his resolutions in 1765." “ As a member of the Virginia

House of Burgesses, Henry was a leader— in some instances, the leader— of Virginia's role in the American Revolution.

Wirt traces Henry's political career after the Revolution; in this regard, "the quality which strikes us most is his political in­ trepidity. . . . Frequently, Henry was charged with being a poli­ tical opportunist who waited to determine the popular opinion before committing himself to that point of view. .According to Wirt, multiple proofs existed to refute such charges; he cites five examples to illus­ trate .

In the first case, Wirt argues that the American Revolution began in the upper circles of society; Henry "unquestionably" gave the revolutionary impulse to that group. F/vidence for such an assertion resides in the testimonies of Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, as well as the demonstrated resistance to Henry's measures by people who were later to become "the stanchest friends of the revolution.

"On this great occasion, then, it is manifest, that he did not wait for the popular current; but on the contrary, that it was he alone, who, bv his single power moved the mighty mass of stagnant waters, and changed the silent lake into a roaring torrent."^ Noting the fact that Henry

63Ibid., p. 103.

^ Ibld., p. 432.

65Ibid.

^ Ibid. , p . 433. 161 was essentially obscure, unknown, and without influence at this time,

Wirt argued that these factors attest to his boldness, originality and

independence as a politician; above all, he "pursued the dictates of his own judgment, wholly regardless of personal conseciuences.

Other proofs of Henry's high political motivations include

Henry's spirited oratorical address to the people in the spring of 1775,

culminating in his placing himself "at the head of an armed hand, which he had himself convened for the purpose: and in spite of the entreaties

and supplications of the patriots at Williamsburg. . . presses firmly

and intrepidly on, until the object of his expedition was completely O obtained.1 Henry s oratorical persuasion resulted in the bold measure

of arming the militia— a measure which was severly opposed by Randolph,

Pendleton, Wythe and others commonly applauded for their talents and virtue. In addition, the return of British refugees and Scottish Tories was Henry's idea; this proposal was quite a contradiction of public oninion. Finally, Henry's opposition to the popular inclination to adopt the Federal Constitution demonstrated his independence of thought.

Thus Henry, "with manly firmness, and in spite of an erring worid, with

the revered Washington too at their head, opposed its adoption TTith all

the powers of his eloquence.

As a summary of his analysis of Henry's political worth, Wirt argues that these foregoing charges resulted from envious rivals:

^^Ibld., p . 434.

^ Ibld., pp. 435-436. 162

That a poor young man, issuing from his native woods, unknown, unfriended, and comparatively unlettered, should have been able, by the mere force of unassisted nature to break to pieces the strong political confederacy which then ruled the country, to annihilate all the arts and finesse of parliamentary intrigue; to eclipse, by his sagacity, the experience of age; and by the sole strength of his native genius, to throw into the shade all the hard-earned attainments of literature and science, was en­ tirely too humiliating to be borne in silence. It was neces­ sary, therefore, to resort to some solution of this phenomenon which should at once reduce the honours of this plebian upstart, and soothe the wounded feelings of those whose pride he had brought down.7(-*

Patrick Henry: Rhetorical Model

As a public orator, Henry left no manuscripts behind, according to Judge Winston. Henry's distastes for writing and for coherent, methodical thinking explain why no such manuscripts remain. In assess­ ing Henry's rhetorical worth, Wirt concentrates on three areas: source of argument, delivery and role of nature. This review purports to examine Wirt's major theses in each of these categories, not to present a full statement of his explanations.

The thrust of Henry's argumentation was derived from his knowl­ edge of man, not of books and ideas. Although Henry possessed enough historical knowledge to supply needed analogies and illustrations while speaking, he chose rather to derive his arguments "from the nature of the case itself, and the character of the people among whom that case occurred.This reliance on observation of man and nature made

^^Ibid., pp. 436-437.

7-1-Ibid. , p. 438. 163

Henry an original, sound and practical man rather than a "learned, dreaming, and visionary theorist." This, Wirt maintained, was par­ ticularly beneficial to him.

This habit of relying more on his own meditations than on books, was also, perhaps, of service to him as an orator: for by this course, he avoided the beaten paths and roads of thought; and in­ stead of exhibiting in bis speeches old ideas newly vamped up, and ancient beauties trickled off in modern tinsel, his arguments, sentiments, and figures, had all freshness and novelty which are so universally captivating.7'*

Wirt thought delivery to have been Henry's outstanding trait in speaking. This determination on Wirt's part was not easily made. In attempting to secure Henry's peculiar excellence as an orator from his correspondents for the biographv, Wirt received contradicting resnonses:

Some ascribe his excellence wholly to his manner: others, in great part, to the originality and soundness of his matter. And among the admirers, in both classes, there are not two who concur in assigning the pre-eminence to the same qualitv. Of his matter, one will admire the plainness and strength of his reasoning; another, the concentrated spirit of his aphorisms; a third, his wit; a fourth, his pathos, a fifth, the intrinsic beauty of his imagina­ tion: so in regard to his manner, one will place his excellence in his articulation and emphasis; a second, in the magic power with which he infused the tones of his voice into the nerves of his hearers, and riveted their attention. The truth, therefore, probably is, that it was not in any single charm, either of matter or manner, that we are to look for the secret of his power: but that, like Pope's definition of beauty, it was 'the joint force and full result of all.'73

Throughout Wirt's caricature, Henry is portrayed as an orator of nature. "If the reader shall still demand how he acquired these wonder­ ful powers of sneaking which have been assigned to him, we can only

72 Ibid.

73Itid., p. 43°. 164 answer, with Gray, that they were the gift of Heaven— the birthright of

.,74 genxus.

Henry's Liberty or Death Speech: A Case Study

Of all the public orations of Patrick Henry, the "Liberty or

Death" speech is most widely known among Americans. This has been the declamation preference of generations of American schoolboys. Although some of Wirt's contemporaries criticized the speech as not representing the greatness of Henry, no serious historical criticism was made until

1855 by Hugh Blair Grigsby, the Virginia historian. In a discussion of Henry, Grigsby observed in a footnote that "although. . . mucv of the speech published by Wirt is apocryphal, some of its expressions and the outline of the argument are believed to be authentic. The seriousness of Grigsby's implication cannot be ignored: todetermine with certainty that Wirt published an account of a speech that Henry did not actually make would be disconcerting. But to discover that, in addition, Wirt authored the speech which perpetuates Henry's name today uould be more disturbing. In this section, available evidence will be examined to determine, if possible, Wirt's role in the authen­ ticity of the "Liberty or Death" soeech.

One of Wirt's eulogizers offers an interesting evaluation of the importance of this speech to Wirt's portrayal of Henry.

More injustice is done to speakers in the report of their speeches than to those more cool and deliberate, though inferior men. The

74Ilid., p. 443.

^ T h e Virginia Convention of 1776, p. 150n. 165

reporter, whether skilled in the art of stenography or not, cannot follow them. . . . The address may have carried along the hearers with irresistible power, but it cannot be recreated, even by the speaker himself, after the excitement has passed by. The victory has been won, but the weapons have been scattered, and the order of their combination cannot be restored. It is in great part owing to this fact, that we have now to rely on contemporary forms which he [Wirt] produced for an estimate of that great orator of Nature, Patrick Henry.^

Wirt openly acknowledged the importance which he personally placed on

Henry's address to the 1775 convention. When a representative of the

Port Folio magazine requested of Wirt a section of the biography for printing prior to publication, the part Wirt chose to advertise was the

1775 speech.77 In an October 29, 1816, correspondence with J. E. Hall, the editor of Port Folio, Wirt wrote that he would send a short selec­ tion from his book for the publication. The "Liberty or Death" section

7 8 was, in Wirt's words, to be "published. . . as a specimen of my work."

Cauble uses this example to draw two conclusions: (1) Wirt's use of the word "work" and "book" indicates that he did not use the terms synonymously; that is, he did not intend to indicate that he was the author of the speech— although it shows that Wirt regarded this section as the prize selection of the biography; and (2) "if he had contributed nothing to the form of the speech, it is not probable that he would

7 6 Samuel L. Southard, A Discourse on the Professional Character and Virtue of the Late William Wirt (Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1834), n. 24.

77Port Folio, II (1815), 450-468.

7^Letter, William Wirt to J. E. Hall, October 29, 1816, William Wirt Letter Rook, N s . copy, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 166 have sent it to Hall as a specimen of the entire book."^ The reper­ cussions from this publication were evaluated by Gilmer in a letter to Wirt.

I have seen the little extract in the Port Folio which induced me to mention the subject. In my excursion to Washington & Balt­ imore from whence I have just returned, I was much in literarv circles where the proposed life of Henry was of course often the subject of conversation & conjecture. Opinions were various but always high— and there was hut one point in which the exnectations of all agreed. It was, that, we were to have in the life of Henry by a Virginian the limits of whose brilliant imagination they had already seen displayed in gorgeous array, in the R. Boy; a most extravagant & unqualified eulogy on his subject. Panegy- ricj^in biography is so universal, that we expect it, & allow for it.

At another time, Wirt referred to that section of the biography as the

"happiest part."^

We noted earlier in this chapter how Wirt felt compelled to incorporate verbatim speech texts in his life of Henry; speeches ob­ viously were important in the portrayal of an oratorical genius. Wirt corresponded with several of Henry's contemporaries seeking information.

Included among these were Nathaniel Pope, Tucker, Jefferson, Judge Tyler and Judge Winston. Importantly, these correspondents are all concerned with recalling verbatim accounts of a speech which was delivered thirty- five to forty years earlier. This becomes particularly important since apparently no one had written down any specific phrases or words which

^ Cauble, p. 328.

^Francis Gilmer to William Wirt, February 4, 1817.

81 "William Wirt to Dabney Carr, January 12, 1816. Kennedy, II, 196-198. 167

Henry spoke on the occasion; memory alone was the inspiration. A

critic of the published biography commented on the memories of these

correspondents and Wirt's role in assimilating them: "the sketch of

his speech. . . though but imperfectly caught from the memory of some

of its bearers, is perhaps the best specimen of his manners which we

are likely to get. . . . It is but justice to add, our author himself 09 may be entitled to some portion of its praise." “ ^rom all his cor­

respondents, Wirt received confirmation that Henry was eloquent on

this occasion. As we observed earlier, although Tucker had advised

Wirt that he could probably reconstruct some of Henry's oratory, he

hastened to warn that at least one sneech could not be surpassed.

I have certainly felt more, when listening to him, than I ever did on any other occasion of the kind: particularly when the Convention sat at the old church on Adam's hill, in Richmond, in March, 1775.

It is instructive to note that with regard to most of the speeches of

Henry, Wirt was forced to rely on Robertson’s reporting; but in the

case of the 1775 speech Wirt went to great lengths to reconstruct

verbatim what Henry actually said on his most glorious occasion. This was the speech that was to serve the sons of Virginia as the example of

OA their great patriot in his greatest hour of eloquence.

'~~Virginia Literary and Evangelical Magazine, I (1817), 35.

83St. George Tucker to William Wirt, August 7, 1815. O/ William Wirt, Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry, preface. Hereafter cited as Sketches. 168

The text of the March 23, 1775, oration of Patrick Henry appears to have been derived from at least six sources. First, St. George

8 S Tucker provided an account. ' The extent to which Tucker contributed is unknown. He do know that Wirt says "I have taken almost entirely

Mr. Henry's Speech in the Convention of '75 from you, as well as vour

O/C description of its effect on you verbatim. Tucker is the only source which Wirt actually quotes in regard to the lines 'I repeat it, sir, we must fight!! An Appeal to arms and to the God of hosts,

87 is all that is left us!" Tucker also supplied a physical description of Henry in addition to his actual words. According to a later account by Tyler (who had access to a letter from Tucker to Wirt describing

Henry's oratory— a latter now declared lost by the William and Mary

College Library), the following sections were contributions of Tucker:

Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves longer. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. TJe have petitioned; we have remon­ strated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throng, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the minstry and parliament. Dur petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been snurned with contempt from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, mav we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free; if we mean to preserve inviolate those

O C The letter dated January 13, 1813, which Purports to be a description of Henry's eloquence, has been reported missing from the Tucker-Coleman Tapers for several years but was presumably available to Tyler for his stud'?.

^William Wirt to St. George Tucker, August 16, 1815, William and Mary Quarterly, XXII (1914), p. 252.

^William Wirt, Sketches, p. 140; compare Tyler, p. 122. 169

inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contend­ ing; if we mean not basely to abandon the noble, struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained,— we must fight! I repeat it, sir— we must fight! An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us.

Tucker also adds:

It was on that occasion that I first felt a full impression of Mr. Henry's powers. In vain should I attempt to give any idea of his speech. He was calm and collected: touched upon the origin and progress of the dispute between Great Britain and the colonies, the various conciliatory measures adopted by the latter, ard the uniformly increasing tone of violence and arrogance on the part of the former.

The second account, referred to by Tyler, is the description

obtained from Henry Stephens Randall who obtained it from a clergyman, who had heard it from an aged friend (also a clergyman) who heard the

speech itself. Importantly, however, Wirt did not have access to this

a c c o u n t .

Henry rose with an unearthly fire burning in his eye. He commenced somewhat calmly, but the smothered excitement began more and more to play upon his features and thrill in the tones of his voice. The tendons of his neck stood out white and rigid like whipcords. His voice rose louder and louder, until the wall of the building, and all within them, seemed to shake and rock in its tremendous vibrations. Finally, his pale face and glaring eye became terrible to look upon. Men leaned forward in their seats, with their heads strained forward, their faces pale, and their eyes glaring like the speaker's. Ilis last exclamation, ''Give me liberty, or give me death!" was like the shout of the leader which turns back the rout of battle! The old man from whom this tradi­ tion was derived added that, when the orator sat down, he himself 'felt sick with excitement. Every eye yet gazed entranced on Henrv. It seemed as if a word from him would have led o to n any ' wild explosion of violence. Men looked beside themselves.

^Tvler, Patrick Henrv (1888), pp. 125-127.

^From Randall's Life of Jefferson, I, pp. 101-102, as quoted in Tyler, p. 129. 170

The third source is that of Edward Fontaine, who obtained it in 1834 from John Roane, who himself heard the speech. .\lthough Wirt had access to Roane, this account was not available to him. At the time of the conversation between Fontaine and Roane, Roane was ninety years old and the last surviving witness to the speech. Although

Roane added much detail regarding Henry's gestures, Fontaine's recol­ lection is that Roane largely confirmed Wirt's account. However, Roane apparently reversed the order of the clauses, "is life so dear, or peace so sweet"; further, Roane does not recall the entirety of the

HO speech— as reported by Wirt— for Fontaine.

The fourth description comes to us from the diary of Colonel

William Winston Fontaine. Fontaine reports an account given him by

Tyler's father. Although Wirt corresponded with Judge Tyler, this account was not available to him.

Mr. Henry was holding a paper cutter in his right hand: and when he came to that part of his speech in which he said: 'I know not what course others may take.' He cast a glance at these [opposing] gentlemen, and bending his head forward, and with stooping shoulders, and with submissive expression of countenance, he crossed his wrists, as if to be bound; then suddenly straight­ ening up, a bold, resolute purpose, of soul flashed over his coun­ tenance, and then struggling as if trying to burst his bonds, his voice swelled out in boldest, vibrant tones: 'Give me lib­ erty!' Then wrenching his hands apart, and raising aloft his hand with the clenched paper-cutter, he exclaimed: 'Or give me death!' and ^jmed at his breast, as with a dagger and dropped to his seat."

90 Edward Fontaine, "Patrick Henry— Corrections of Biographical Mistakes," Ms., Cornell University Library.

^Diary of Colonel William Winston Fontaine, February 18, 1859, as reprinted in William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, XVI (January, 1908), 157-161. W. W. Fontaine was a great grandson of Henry. This account is also published in the Tyler's Quarterly His­ torical and Genealogical Magazine, VIII (1927), 173-175. It provides 171

The effect was "electrical," the members were "still as death", continues this account. But then Fontaine begins (admittedly) to follow Wirt's account of the House's reaction. In the preface to the biography,

Wirt notes that Tyler was one of Henry's "most intimate and confiden­

ce? tial friends."

The fifth description was from the pen of Edmund Randolph.

Randolph's account of Henry's speech appeared in the September 2, 1815, edition of The Richmond Enouirer.

Henry was his pure self. Those who had toiled in the artifices of scholastic rhetoric were involuntarily driven into an inquiry within themselves, whether rules and forms and niceties of elo­ cution would not have choken his native fire. It blazed so as to warm the coldest heart. In the sacred place of meeting, the church, the imagination had no difficulty to conceive, when he launched forth in solemn tones various causes of scruple against oppressors, that the British king was lying prostrate, from the thunder of heaven. Henry was thought in his attitudes to resemble Saint Paul while preaching at Athens and to speak as man was never known to speak before. After every illusion had vanished, a prodigy yet remained. It was Patrick Henry, born in obscurity, poor, and without the advantages of literature, rousing the genius of his country and binding a band of patriots together to hurl defiance at the tyranny of so formidable a nation as Great Britain. This enchantment was spontaneous obedience to the workings of the soul. . . . He paused, but be paused full of some rising eruption of eloquence. When he sat down, his sounds vibrated so loudly, if not in the ears, at least in the memory of his audience, that no other member, not even his friend who was to second him, was vet adventurous enough to interfere with that voice which had so recently subdued and captivated.^

new insights into the biography in two ways: (1 ) the reference to Wirt's letter to Tucker, August 16, 1815; and (2) Fontaine's descrip­ tion of Tyler's contribution.

92 William Wirt, preface, p. viii. See also W. W. Henry, I, pp. 166-167.

93 ' Richmond Enquirer, September 2, 1815, p. 4, col. 1 and 2. Reprinted in Arthur H. Shaffer (ed.), Edmund Randolph, History of Virginia (Charlottesville, University Press of Virginia), published for the Virginia Historical Society, pp. 212-213, 172.

The seconding speech of Richard Henry Lee was "everything which rules could effect," but did not compare in impact with Henry's eloquence.

The only words of Henry's which Pandolph quotes are peace "when there was no peace."

The sixth account, unavailable to Wirt insofar as we know, derives from a collection of letters belonging to James Stewart of

Edinburgh, Scotland. In a letter from James Parker, an entirely dif­ ferent picture of Henry's speech is presented.

You never heard anything more infamously insolent that P. Henry's speech: he called the K a Tyrant, a fool, a puppet, and a tool to the ministry. Said there was no Englishman, no Scots, no Britons, but a set of wretches sunk in Luxury, they had lost their native courage and were unable to look the brave Americans in the face. . . This creature is so infatuated, that he goes abo^J; I am told, praying and preaching amongst the com­ mon people.

An editor's note following this excerpt clarifies: "Mr. Parker was always we observe, very hopeful for the success of the British Cause, and 'P. Henry's' name must to him have been anathema."9'’

It should be noted that Wirt's version of Henry's eloquence Q A takes the form of an account. Although Wirt is free with quotations and although these quotations constitute the main body of the account, the version does not appear to have been presented as a speech text.

94 James Parker to Charles Stewart, April 6 , 1775, Magazine of History, III, 158.

9 5 Ibid.

9b William Wirt, Sketches, pp. 138-142. .173

Wirt's treatment is less formal than a simple verbatim rendering.

We have noted six accounts of the Henry oration; importantly, we only know with certainty that one account— Tucker's— was available to Wirt at the time of his writing. It appears that the real contri­ butions were made by Tucker, especially the more ''argumentative and unimpassioned" contents.^7 In addition, Randall and Fontaine seem to have "remembered especially. . . later and more emotional passages.

There is nothing in Tucker's manuscript which is inconsistent with that of Wirt. Based on Wirt's correspondence, we know that Tucker,

Roane and Jefferson saw completed manuscripts of the entire hook, and they were urged to make additions or corrections. Had the ''Liberty or Death" account appeared incorrect or inferior, these correspondents qq could have made changes. '

We noted earlier that Wirt's preface acknowledged Judge Tyler as one of Henry's "most intimate and confidential friends”; that this friend of Henry's could or did write the speech for Wirt seems unlikely to this author for several reasons. First, Roane's report to Fontaine is the only reference to Tyler's authorship of the speech. It is men­ tioned by Tyler in his biography .1 0 0 Second, the extent to which Wirt admits that he relied on the reports of Tucker, Roane and Fontaine

9 7 Tvler, 1888 ed., pp. 128-129.

9 8 I b i d .

9^William Wirt to Dabney Carr, August 9, 1817, Wirt Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina: Kennedy, II, 20-21*.

100Tyler, 133. 174 seem to nullify Tyler's authorship; at the very least, it indicates that Tyler was not completely responsible. Third, in the biography

Wirt expresses his appreciation to Tucker for contributing to the manuscript; there is no apparent reason that Wirt would not have been as gracious to Judge Tyler. Fourth, the speech is presented as an account, not a verbatim direct report, per se.

The "Liberty or Death" speech is probably incomplete, but not apocryphal. Wirt's endeavors to acquire a verbatim account and the roles of Tucker, Poane and Tyler in authoring the speech seem to mitigate against suspicions of apocryphal origin. Mallory, in his 101 rhetorical study of Henry, arrives at essentially the same conclusion.

Mallory derived this conclusion from a stylistic comparison of the

"Liberty or Death" speech and short-hand reports of subsequent speeches.

In Mallory's estimation, Wirt took the high points of the speech,

". . . those soaring moments when language and emotion perfectly com­ plement each other, moments which would naturally be fixed in the memory of the listener, and arranged them so as to give the impression that they alone constituted the orator's remarks. There is abundant evidence to show that Henry did not soar all the time in other speeches, and there is no reason to believe that he did so in this one."^^

Mallory's analysis of Henry's rhetorical techniques, such as the use of rhetorical questions, indicates some resemblance to those

■^■^Louis A. Mallory, "Patrick Henry: Orator of the American Revolution,' unpublished doctoral dissertation, Madison, University of Wisconsin, 1938, pp. 431, 276-286 and 284. 1 fP "“Ibid., p. 285. 175 of Samuel Davies. Wirt points to Davies as being Henry’s rhetorical model; a close examination of their speeches reveals some similarities.

Importantly, this comparison is not drawn in order to prove author­ ship, because similarities could denote either of two things: the speech is really Henry's and reflects Davies' influence or knowing that Henry esteemed Davies greatly, Wirt copied the "Liberty or Death" style from Davies. In any case the similarities are interesting and seem worthy of consideration.

Pilcher confirms the Henry-Davies association. Henry was a member of his uncle's Anglican aprish in Hanover when Davies was at the height of his popularity as a preacher. "It x^as Henry's habit to

take his mother, who x-;as a Presbyterian, to hear the sermons of the dissenting preacher. When he had grox^n to manhood, he continued as a 1 A*) regular attendant at the Presbyterian meetinghouse.”' - Davies was an

internationally acclaimed pulpit orator; "he aroused universal admira­

tion xTlerever he preached and xjon the esteem of his prominent fellow preachers. It is difficult to assess the extent of direct influence which Davies may have exerted on Henry. According to Wirt's biography, hoxvrever, Henry believed that Davies was responsible for Henry's success as an orator.

Davies’ struggles for religious toleration and tremendously pa­ triotic sermons surely struck a sympathetic chord in the freedom-

•I no George William Pilcher, Samuel Davies, Anostle of Dissent in Colonial Virginia (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1971), pp. 53-S^1.

104t, . , • Ibid., p . 67 . 176

loving nature of his hearer. Years later, when Henry rose in the Hanover courthouse to speak against the royal veto of a Virginia law, he may have remembered the great leader of the nonconformists who had so often argued for Teligious rights against the same men he now faced.

Specifically, Pilcher observes throughout his study, at least five evident parallels between Davies' war sermons and Henry's "Liberty or

Death" speech. In the first instance both men spolce of "the common tendency to ignore danger and stressed the fact that wars often broke out whether people wanted them or not."^^ In the second place, both men viewed the dangers of their situations as real, considering that

107 slavery was the only real alternative to an active defense. In­ terestingly, during the war, Davies cautioned dissenters that their right to dissent was contingent upon lovalty to their country. Davies argued, "Let us show ourselves worthy of protection and encourage­ ment, by our conduct on this occasion."108 a minister, Davies saw his mission as one of inspiration to love of country; as a revolutionary leader, Henry saw himself as an example embodying a strong love of country. In the third place, both men denied the concept of peace at 1QQ any price. ' Fourth, stylistic uses of rhetorical questions and

-l^Ibid . ^ p, 84.

106piicfier, "Preacher of the New Light, Samuel Davies, 1724- 1761," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Urbana, University of Illinois, 1963, p. 224.

10 7 Ibid..

l0 8 Davies, "On the Defeat of General Braddock," Sermons, (1845), III.

-^^Pilcher, "Preacher," p. 224. 177 exclamatory statements expressed the greatest similarity; style rather than content was the source of most substantive resemblance.

Finally, the manner in which Davies and Henry were able to "pile fact upon fact" in an attempt to overwhelm the audience with cumulative effects of an argument was similar.Because of the extensive publi­ cation of Davies' sermons even after his death, it is quite conceiv­ able that Wirt had access to samples of his eloquence. Importantly, this is mere speculation since no evidence could be located to indi­ cate that Wirt used Davies as a model in reconstructing the "Liberty or Death" speech.

One of the greatest claims to authenticity lies in the fact that none of Henry's biographers since Wirt— including Morgan, Tyler,

W. W. Henry, Meade and Willison— have made substantive changes in

Wirt's account of the 1775 address Various contradictions of

Wirt's descriptions of Henry's political and social life are to be found in these later biographies, but no contradictory accounts of

Henry's power as an orator have been uncovered. The "Liberty or Death" speech as we know it today exists in Wirt's language; the only change which has occurred is that Henry's speech is no longer given as an

"account" but as a verbatim text of Henry's words. Speech anthologies

1 1 0 I b i d . , p. 225.

lll l b i d . t p p . 226-227.

■^^Compare Wirt, pp. 133-148 with Tyler, pp. 122-184, W. W. Henry, I, pp. 261-275, Willison, pp. 265-268 and Morgan, pp. 178 113 evidence this tendency.

A number of factors combine to indicate that Wirt’s account of

Henry's address in St. John's Church in March of 1775 is not the fab­ rication of an incompetent historical and rhetorical biographer. First,

Wirt contacted all the people whom he could determine actually heard the speech. Second, in the biography Wirt credits Tucker's account in a footnote. Third, all accounts other than Tucker's were written after t \ e publication of the 1817 biography; there is no reason to believe that the Tyler or Roane accounts could not have been based on memory of Wirt's writing in the biography, as well as, or instead of, the actual speech. Fourth, no one has discredited even so much as a single line of Wirt's account. Fifth, Wirt offered the speech in the form of an account; later writers treat the speech as a direct report.

Wirt appears to be presenting a text which eye witnesses uniformly attest is beyond complete verbal description.

Rhetorical Stance

The results of Wirt's effort to solicit descriptions crystal­ lized the conflict of perspectives on the biography. Incomplete and

-^•^Houston Peterson (ed.), A Treasury of the World's Greatest Speeches (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954), pp. 139-142; James Milton O'Neill, Models of Speech Composition (New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, 1921), pp. 328-330; Lewis C. Muner, The American Orator (Boston: Tappan and Whittemore, 1853), pp. 197-199; David Harsha, Orators and Statesmen (Philadelphia: Porter and Coates, 1854), pp. 322-324; Henry Hardwicke, History of Oratory and Orators (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1896), pp. 332-334; William Mathews, Oratory and Orators (Chicago: S. C. Griggs and Co., 1878), pp. 18-20; and Lewis Copeland, World’s Great Speeches (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1942),. pp. 232-234. 179

inconsistent accounts of Henry's greatness combined to frustrate Wirt.

This frustration, coupled with Wirt's insecurity as a writer, prompted him to show the manuscript to several of his friends. In a letter to

Dabney Carr shortly before the publication of the biography, Wirt

explains why he felt the need for critical evaluations:

In all that I have hitherto published, my manuscripts have not been shewn— for the works were spun from my own brain and there was no responsibility for the truth of facts— but the life of Henry is history— history, too, often depending on the conflict­ ing recollections and statements of my correspondents and in regard to which I was and still am anxious to avail myself of every possible chance for accuracy— with this view I submitted the work to several old gentlemen— Hr. Jefferson, Mr. Roane, Mr. Tucker & two or three old gentlemen in Ilanover. . . . I did not like my own work— and. . . was desirous to see how it would strike others and therefore shewed it to half a dozen as different tastes as I could select, trying to form in this way, an epitome of society— the result is flattering yet still perhaps delusive— but I do not regret this submission of the manuscript— for I have been set right in several important facts— and have had a great number of little blemishes removed which had escaped my own attention.

These friends to whom Wirt referred his manuscript generally received it favorably; we have already noticed how Jefferson, Roane and Tucker

115 gave tl eir stamps of approval to the biography. ' William Pope, a friend who lived about twenty miles from Richmond, frequently visited

Wirt's 3aw office in Richmond in order to hear selected passages from

114 William Wirt to Dabney Carr, August 9, 1817.

■^~*The Gribbel Collection, pp. 32-36; Wirt, S k e t c h e s , preface, vi-xvi; Tucker to Wirt Correspondence, Tucker-Coleman Papers, 1811-1816, College of William and Mary and Wirt Papers, 1810-1816, Maryland Histor­ ical Society; Edward Fontaine, "Patrick Henry— Corrections of Biographi­ cal Mistakes," 1872, Cornell University Library, Ithaca, New York and Samuel Southard, A Discourse on the Professional Character and Virtue of the Late William Wirt (Washington, D. C.: Gals and Seaton, 1834). 180 the biography. According to Trent, during the whole performance, Pope could do nothing but weep.'^'*'^ Another Virginia friend praised Wirt's description of the "age of Glory in Virginia." He says that the manu­ script "gave me a delightful acquaintance with those men who made it the age of Glory, it elevates 'my own, my native' State to a proud equality with Athens and Rome, and with all my Virginianism about me

117 I knew not how to part with it." Among other readers was a prom­ inent Richmond citizen, William Brockenbrough, who encouraged Wirt by telling him: "I think you may let it go forth to the World without the least apprehension of its fate."^®

Although Wirt had the encouragement of his close friends, more objective reviewers were critical of the work. These reveiws will be examined in conjunction with a determination of Wirt's stance.

Available Arguments About the Subject

In dealing with the available arguments about Henry, Wirt developed a pedant's stance. This imbalance resulted from an over­ emphasis on the aspects of Henry's life. This charge is best expli­ cated by a reviewer in the Virginia Literary and Evangelical Magazine:

1 1 6 William P. Trent, English Culture in Virginia (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1889), pp. 229-230.

117 Letter to William Wirt from Taylor's Creek, Virginia, January 17, 1817. Signature is illegible. Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.

^^William Brockenbrough to William Wirt, February 10, 1817, Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C. 181

If we are to take the work as a piece of Historical Biography, it has certainly some serious defects. Viewed in this light, particularly, its facts are too few, and its narrative too long. It is besides quite too encomiastical, and wants that nice and curious development of character which is the chief merit of this species of writing.

The critic concedes, however, that Wirt intended not a complete life, but merely "detached sketches"; even so, more facts would have filled out the narrative with more foundation. To the extent that Wirt sought out all possible facts regarding each facet of Henry's life, Wirt was not "guilty" of an imbalance. The fact remains, however, that in too many instances information was simply unavailable; thus, the overall quality, if not the stance, of Wirt's biography was lessened.

Interests and Peculiarities of the Audience

At the outset of this chapter, we noted Wirt's purpose in writ­

ing the life of Henry. Given Wirt's predispositions to persuade readers of their potential greatness, it is not surprising that the audience played a critical role in Wirt's ordering of ideas. As a result, sev­

eral reviewers levied charges that might be categorized as intimations

of an advertiser's stance— undervaluing the subject and overvaluing

effect. First, Wirt was accused of overplaying Henry's "fine fancy

and resistless eloquence and his knowledge of the human passions" to

the complete disregard of Henry's deficient soundness of judgment.

H9"Reviews," Virginia Literary and Evangelical Magazine, I (1817), 27-28.

H. Girardin to William Wirt, January 27, 1815, Wirt Papers, Library of Congress, Washington, D. C.; William and Mary Quar­ terly, V (April, 1925), 105-106. 182

Second, Wirt was thought too liberal in bestowing praise:

He seemed. . . to feel that he elevated his own character, and the character of the state to which he belonged, in proportion as he raised the reputation of the subject of his biography. The duty which Tie thought he owed to posterity, was to present, a portrait of his countryman, drawn with all the favour and to the utmost advantage. . . ^

Third, in giving his character a crucial role in instigating the Revolu­ tion, Wirt had incorrectly argued that the resolutions of the I ouse of

Burgesses in Virginia in Hay of 1765 were the beginning point of the conflict. This was simply not true, according to John Adams. After a detailed refutation of this argument, the following conclusion is pre­ sented :

The mistake undoubtedly arises from a desire of conferring honour on his native state and on Patrick Henry, and from a want of minute attention to the history of the revolution before the time when 19 9 his hero became an actor.

In a previous edition of the same journal, a reviewer had mentioned this specific portion of Wirt*s study as being false and retorts but

"Mr. Wirt would persuade us" that it is true.^^ Sparks also criticizes

124 Wirt for over-eulogizing all the members of the House of Burgesses.

The obvious reason for making the entire body of the House great orators was to prepare for the presentation of Henry— superior to them all. In his British Spy, Wirt had argued that Henry was the only orator of whom

^2^North American Review, VII (July, 1818), 258.

199 John Adams, et al., "Beginning of the American Revolution," North American Review, IX (September, 1819), 380.

123 Jared Sparks, "Review of Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry," North American Review, VI (March, 1818), 302.

124Ibid., 301. 183 125 the Virginians "boast with much emphasis."

Thus, the biography is charged with having a "general strain of

complement and exaggeration" running throughout all of its pages. It

is overloaded with ornament and with indiscriminately and poorly devel­

oped figures that tend to hide faults rather than to promote positive

belief. These citations are by no means exhaustive, but they do

serve to illustrate the kinds of criticisms the biography received.

The audience that Wirt had so diligently sought to please responded by attacking him for exaggerating the influence of Henry.

Although critics pointed to Wirt’s exaggeration of the content

in attempts to please readers, Wirt's use of uncontested terms, the

enthymeme and a polite style was congruent with his contemporary milieu.

The most prominent term in the whole biography is "orator of nature."

We noted in the review of the Sketches that this phrase connoted an

almost inexplicable phenomenon for Wirt. Henry's oratorical powers

appear to have been derived from a gift of native genius because Wirt was able to verify the fact that Henry did not diligently labor to be

an orator. "Orator of Nature" would seem to invite refutation, but

Wirt's audience generally could cope with the simple but "spacious"

term. In the biography, as in the essays, Wirt sought to remind Vir­

ginians of what they already believed. Originally, Wirt became curious

about Henry because Virginians boasted so highly of him. Lacking per­

sonal knowledge, Wirt was hindered in developing a total conception of

IPS British S p y , p. 70.

1 *)f\ Reviews," Virginia Literary and Evangelical Magazine, I (1817), 28-30. 184

Henry's influence; but early nineteenth century Virginian society com­ monly granted Henry a place of distinction. As his biographer, Wirt saw his function to be an explanation of the situations and attributes which permitted Henry to excel. Delineation of such features served a higher function of convincing readers that Henry was a model whom they could emulate. It is instructive to note that Wirt's only explicit statement, in the biography, of his purpose to train Virginia youths appears in the dedication. To this extent, Wirt argues enthymatically.

In building a case that Henry was a moral, patriotic orator of nature and a person who shared their background, Wirt hoped to indirectly influence the youths to believe they too could rise to such heights.

Finally, Wirt's achievement of aesthetic distance, or polite style, was excellent. Speaking for corporate humanity, Wirt sought to bestow upon Henry the praise and honor he had long deserved. In addi­ tion, he appealed to the memories of his readers to recall the extent of Henry's popularity and to honor the worthies who had gone before.

It would have been a simple task for Wirt to have compared Henry with the readers' contemporaries, as had been his technique in the essays, but viewing Henry from afar seemed to be more inspiring. The youth of

Virginia were offered a model which surpassed any qualities which they could observe in their fellow-men.

Implied Character of the Speaker

Some of Wirt's critics attacked him personally, implying that he had adopted a biased, entertainer's stance. The most critical evalua­ tions of the way in which Wirt influenced the biography came from the 185

pens of Jefferson and Adams. The Irony is that Jefferson had made

127 significant factual and critical contributions to the work; a close

comparative reading of the Wirt biography and Jefferson's descriptions

of Henry indicate Wirt's strong reliance on Jefferson's letters. In

1824, Jefferson reportedly remarked to Daniel Webster concerning the

Wirt biography: "It is a poor book, written in bad taste, and gives an

imperfect idea of Patrick Henry. It seems written less to show Mr.

Henry than Mr. W i r t . " - ^ 8 Jefferson objected that Wirt made no qualifi­

cation at all in his appraisal of Henry's character.^-29 Similarly,

John Adams objected to Wirt's analysis but for a slightly different

reason: describing the Revolution as revolving around one man's life.

Furthermore, he was disgusted with Wirt's poor "narration of facts" which were unsupported by records, histories and testimonies. The

only lasting beauty for Adams was the elegance of composition. Critics

of the Port Folio, which was the first to publish an excerpt from the

131 biography as an advertisement prior to its actual publication, also

127 The Gribbel Collection.

•^®George Ticknor Curtis, Life of Daniel Webster (New York: P. Appleton and Company, 1872), I, 585; reprinted in William Robert Taylor, "Legend," 477-493. N. B.: On November 12, 1816, Jefferson sent Wirt the following description of the completed biography: "I have always very much despised the artificial canons of criticism. When I have read a work in prose or poetry, or seen a painting, a statue, etc., I have only asked myself whether it gives me pleasure, whether it is animating, interesting, attacking. . . . Those who take up your book will find they cannot lay it down, and this will be its best criticism." (The Gribbel Collection, p. 36).

1 2 9 -I n ,b i• ^ d .

^■^Kennedy, II, 43-44.

The "Liberty or Death" speech was published as an advertise­ ment for the entire biography in Port Folio, II (1815). 186 objected to the flowery style:

In his style there is too much of the artist; there is no concealment of the art; he always precedes Mr. Henry, instead of following him. There is too much paint, and ornament. . .132

As a critic faced with inadequate documents, with an audience which expected a eulogy of a great patriot and with a personal desire to "sell" his hero to the youth of Virginia and achieve fame, the achievement of balance was difficult. If Wirt chose to be historically accurate, he sacrificed the hero image desired for his audience. If he romanticized Henry, Wirt was likely to inherit personal ethical criticism. It seemed impossible for him to achieve a proper balance; to resolve the conflict, Wirt chose the role of persuader in the hope of preserving a legend rather than a man. Wirt's overall method is best explained in the following letter from Wirt to an interested student.

The curiosity which you express in relation to Mr. Henry is nat­ ural; and your anxiety that his memory should be rescued from oblivion by the pen of the biographer does honor to the generosity of your spirit. I wish it were in my power to satisfy your desire: but I have already told you that I had never the pleasure of seeing, much less of hearing this celebrated man; and therefore, all those strokes which discriminate the character and which can be collected by personal acquaintance and observation only, would be wanting in any picture that I could draw of him. The biographer in order to be interesting and instructive should have had the fire-side confidence of him whose life he writes. It is only with this advantage that he will be able to unfold the whole character; to unseal the fountain of every action; to mark every shade of virtue and vice that belongs to it; to charge the narrative with those private and domestic incidents which give to biography its deepest interest; in short to write the genuine life from the best and highest evidence instead of writing a general panegyric or a satire as he is in danger of doing who

132njj^terary intelligence," Port Folio, IV (1817). 187

derives his materials from the information of others." (p. 1 )

Yet so strong is the zeal which you express on this subject, and so perfectly do I concur with your wish "that the name of Henry may not perish under the ever rolling billows of time," that I have exerted myself to collect the best possible informa­ tion concerning his parentage, birth, education, temper, habits, professional and political progress and death. I have taken care to draw this information from the most pure and unquestionable sources. There are living in the countv which gave him birth, and in various other parts of the state, respectable gentlemen who knew him from his infancy to his death: there are living eminent men who bore a part with him in the great transaction of the revolution: all these have been consulted and have imparted what they knew with the most obliging frankness. On some occasions these gentlemen have differed in their statements; wherever they have done so, I have adopted the statement of him who had the best opportunity to be informed; where their opportunities were equal I have adopted the statement of the majority: sometimes public records have controverted the statements of the majority itself. The result of this investigation I am prepared to give you with the care and plainness of epistolary intercourse; in the hope that the same noble ardour with which your mind is now fired in behalf of our revolutionary patriots may prompt you, at some future day, to mould these rude materials into shape, and give to them those vivid and captivating colours which may ensure immortality

to your favorite H e n r y . -*-33

The culmination of all the problems that Wirt encountered in the writing of Henry's life was best summarized by him in a letter written a year after publication of the biography. He is advisirg a publisher friend not to emphasize biographies of living characters:

I doubt extremely the propriety of publishing biographies of living characters: for, inasmuch as no man has ever been fault­ less throughout his life, such a biography must either inflict unauthorized pain, or offend against historical veracity by sup­ pressing the truth. . . You can shew the bright side of the character. . . but you cannot shew the sombre strokes that shade it, without giving more pain than a kind spirit is disposed to inflict. And if you hold up a perfect model to your readers, you

-^•%illiam Wirt to an unknown student in Richmond, January 1, 1807, Wirt Papers, Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia. Compare with William and Mary Quarterly, XXII, 250-257. 188

will lose that confidence in your representations, without which an historian cannot live. You see what has been said of my Sketches of Henry. Some of the reviewers treat it as a romance— and yet I have introduced into it every charge, both against his public and private character, I have ever heard. Still it is censured, as attributing to him a perfection of character which is utterly incompatible with human frailty— and whether this impression although erroneous in point of fact, may not ultimately put an end to the circulation of the work, . . .

In his portrayal of Henry, Wirt primarily argued from simili­ tude. As an orator, politician and moral leader, Wirt depicted the characteristics which set him apart from his contemporaries. Virginia was the seat of political action; Patrick Henry was the revolutionary motivated by unselfish patriotic ideals. Virginia was the leader in oratorical models; Patrick Henry surpassed all his colleagues because of unlimited natural talent. In the Sketches, one sees the greatest emerging from a class of greats, not a degenerating society salvaged by a single expert.

Within the framework of similitude, Wirt posits individual arguments from definition. The best example illustrating definitional argument revolves around Wirt's discussion of Henry's oratory. Wirt captures the essence of Henry's eloquence in that it is natural genius which is responsible for his sublimity. The nature of eloquence makes

Henry's oratorical displays possible, not hard work or ambition. Cir­ cumstantial arguments do not appear in the biography.

Stylistically, Wirt's character is implied by the extensive use of god terms such as "patriot," "statesman," "orator of nature,"

l-'^William Wirt to Joseph Delaplaine, November 5, 1818, Wirt Papers, University of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Virginia. 189

"moral leader," and "revolutionary" to the almost complete exclusion of devil terms. The only terms of repulsion which Wirt uses to char­ acterize Henry is "indolence." Yet Wirt always hastens to add that in

the unique case of Henry his indolence did him no severe harm, but as a characteristic in anyone else, it is most undesirable. After all, few if any possess Henry's natural genius. "Envious rivals" is a term frequently employed by Wirt to characterize those who deign to criticize

Henry. Ample evidence has been offered to support Wirt's concern for glossing over the faults of his hero; obviously, those who dare to find fault with Henry do not receive Wirt's praise.

In evaluating Wirt's overall attitude toward his listeners, one would conclude that he had noble intentions in hoping to raise the quality of moral, oratorical life in Virginia. In a sense, he qualifies

for Weaver's estimation of a noble lover in that his message is revolu­

tionary with a practical end. Adherence to facts, we have noted, was a real problem for Wirt, but his reputation was also a major concern.

In Virginia society in 1817, there was no sanction for personal ambi­

tion. Men were expected to transcend the narrow confines of se]f-ad- vancement and opportunism to meet the challenge of preservation of a

TOC patriotic ideal. National destiny was dependent upon it. J In de­ picting the life of one of Virginia's great Revolutionary patriots and

orators, Wirt promoted the cause of the folklore tradition in Virginia.

Yet, the author was never successful in harmonizing his approach.

^^Taylor, William and Mary Quarterly, 491-492. 190

Instead of achieving interaction of source, audience, and author, Wirt let audience and author dominate his critical perspective. In attempt­ ing to please, Wirt sacrificed complete truth about his subject, dis­ appointed his immediate audience and raised some doubts about his own abilities. Despite the pervasive influence of his authorship, Wirt is today considered a romantic writer of fiction. But a biography which has undergone as many reprints as the Sketches, offers the definitive work on Henry's oratory— the trait which has kept his name alive, and has served as the foundation of every succeeding analysis of Henry's life, deserves more than an accolade as romantic fiction. Wirt was essentially eulogizing a whole society— not just a single man.

It was a utopia set in the past. It resembled in many ways the kind of writing about the past which would become characteristic of the later nineteenth century. It mattered less where in the past one located the Good Society than what values such a society was made to stand for. Wirt's Patrick Henry stands in the same relation to the Virginia past as Webster's Plymouth oration of 1820 does to the Puritan past of New England. Wirt wrote of Revolutionary times in Virginia as a golden age, an age of heroes. "Those were the times," he seemed to be repeating, "and those were the giants such times produced.

William R. Taylor, Cavalier and Yankee (New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1957). CHAPTER V

PUBLIC ADVOCATE

In 1815, Francis Walker Gilmer attributed the decay of American eloquence to lawyers and politicians. An inadequate general education and a superficial speciality training were the direct causes of the unsuccessful and commonplace exhibitions of these professional orators,

Gilmer argued.^ Since the orators of the period usually gained their reputation through the avenue of law and politics, it is not surprising that legislative oratory commanded a great deal of public attention and admiration. The style of this oratory might be characterized as florid, sonorous, rotund and sublime. In short, the language used was far removed from the language of common, everyday experience. Because of its uniqueness, auditors enjoyed the rhetoric of the public advocate it was not uncommon for courtrooms to fill to capacity with interested observers when a prominent advocate was scheduled to speak.

As a public advocate, William Wirt attracted a great deal of attention. His flowery, allusive oratory enticed the. ladies along with

^"Sketches of American Orators," MSS., Gilmer Papers, Uni­ versity of Virginia Library, Charlottesville, Virginia, p. 18. 2 Fred Lewis Pattee, The First Century of American Literature, 1770-1870 (New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1966), pp. 119-120. Also see Henry Hardwicke, History of Oratory and Orators (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1896), p. 318.

^Pattee,- p. 119. 192 street loiterers.^ Fame and popularity as a forensic champion— "a paladin of law"^— earned him opportunities to address occasional au­ diences as well. The education of youth was the recurring theme of these public speeches. In this chapter we will examine three aspects of Wirt's speaking career: his talents and abilities as an orator, his reputation as a lawyer-politician, and the rhetorical stance he typically adopted.

Talents and Abilities as an Orator

A critic writing in Blackwood1s Magazine in 1824 assessed Wirt as

. . . An eloquent man— a pox^erful reasoner, and a delightful rhetorician. . . . It is the fashion, to call Mr. Wirt a flox^ery speaker— but xje have heard him, x^hen he x^as anything but a flowery speaker— and read him when he was anything but a flow­ ery x^riter— heard and read him, in short, xMien he x^as a man of sense— a logician, a lax

If, in fact, Wirt possessed the talent to adopt a flox^ery or logical style as the occasion demanded, such skill was probably due to nature.

According to Francis Gilmer (Wirt's friend and father-in-laxtf), Wirt possessed more "qualities requisite for genuine eloquence" than anyone else, with the exception of Patrick Henry.^ Wirt exemplified oratorical

^Hardwicke, p . 342.

^Perry Miller, Life of the Mind in America (Nextf York: Har- court, Brace and World, Inc., 1965), p. 186.

^Blackxrood's Magazine, "Oratory," XVI (December, 1824), 644.

^Gilmer, "Sketches," p. 16. 193 perfection in Gilmer's estimation: melodious voice, excellent judg-

Q ment and imagination, active delivery and forceful, pure diction.

Even granting the likelihood of bias on Gilmer's part, other writers concurred with this evaluation. Wirt's intellectual gifts and natural talent was also stressed for instance by F. W. Thomas:

He possessed a fine person, remarkable amenity of manners, col­ loquial qualities of the first order, wit at will, and he abounded in anecdotes, which he related with remarkable pleasantness and tact. A stranger, on entering an assemblage where Mr. Wirt was, would immediately, on perceiving him, have supposed him to be a superior man.^

Wirt's forensic talent appears to have resided in his ready wit and cogent argument. According to Thomas, the greatest forensic skill Wirt possessed was that of ridiculing an opponent. His talent in this regard appears to have been surpassed only by his Roman model,

Cicero. Thomas describes Wirt's use of ridicule as follows:

After he had demonstrated the absurdity of his opponent's argu­ ments, with a clearness which the most critical logician would have admired; after he had illustrated his position with all the lights of law. . . after he had called up the truths of philosophy, the experience of history, and the beauties of poetry. . . after he had expatiated upon the cause. . . after he had done all this, Mr. Wirt would, if the opposite party deserved the infliction, pour forth upon him a lava-like ridicule, which flamed while it burned, and which was at once terrible and beautiful— terrible from its severity and truth, and beautiful from the chaste lan­ guage in which it was conveyed.

8 Ibid.

^F. W. Thomas, Southern Tales and Sketches (Philadelphia: T. K. and P. G. Collins, 1853), p. 36. A footnote at the beginning of this sketch indicates that it was written before Kennedy's bio­ graphy of Wirt was published.

•^I b i d . , pp. 39-40. 194

As a forensic reasoner, Wirt mingled wit with argument and elegance with strength. Argument, for Wirt, was a tool to move the passions;

formal, intellectual logic does not appear to have much interested him. A distinctive trait which Wirt exhibited in the courtroom was

the conjuring up of classical Latin quotations; his speeches clearly

reflect his high esteem for such phrases. Wirt states:

In the company of men of letters, there is no higher accomplish­ ment than that of readily making an apt quotation from the clas­ sics: and before such a body as the Supreme Court these quota­ tions are not only appropriate, but constitute a beautiful aid to argument. They mark the scholar,— which is always agreeable to a bench that is composed of scholars.^

This combination of bold, elegant style, coupled with rational argu­ ment appears to have been Wirt's trademark as an orator.

Wirt's gestures appear to have suffered greatly from overstudv; yet, "the art with which he concealed his art was consummate. It was

only by the closest observation that it could be detected.Gilmer

praised Wirt for his forceful action in regard to two oratorical tech­

niques. First, Wirt always placed himself in what he perceived to be

an oratorical position— opposite the jury so his every gesture could be clearly observed. Second, Wirt was a great user of snuff and as

13 such made graceful use of his snuffbox, "an oratorical weapon."

Wirt's preparation for speaking occasions was thorough in

^William Matthews, Oratory and Orators (Chicago: S. C. Griggs and Company, 1878), p. 62. 12 Thomas, p. 41.

13Ibid., p. 38. 195

argument and weak in language. He never wrote out a speech prior to

its delivery; the several texts we now have were each prepared after

delivery. According to Kennedy, Wirt had an aversion to extemporary

speaking (what is currently referred to as impromptu) and consequently

avoided such occasions whenever possible.

Reputation as a Lawyer-Politician

Wirt’s national debut as a lawyer was totally consistent with

the three elements he considered essential: a great cause, noble

1 5 issues and a large crowd. As one of three prosecutors of Aaron Burr

in 1807, Wirt was challenged with an alleged treasonous act, and request­

ed to act out his role in a courtroom arena for the nation and world

to observe. The situation called for rhetoric to condemn Burr in the hearts of men, if not in the legal court of law; Wirt’s function was to

effect such persuasion.

President Jefferson chose Wirt to assist Hay and MacRae in the

prosecution of Burr for several reasons. Believing Burr guilty, Jef­

ferson was equally concerned with the decision of the Court and the

public. Hay was, in Jefferson's estimation, capable of convincing the

court of Burr’s guilt; but only Wirt was capable of preserving the

prestige of the Administration and convicting Burr in the public eye.

14 John P. Kennedy, Memoirs of the Life of William Wirt, Attorney General of the United States (Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849), II, 442-444.

■^William Wirt to Francis Gilmer, July 13, 1814, July 23, 1815, MSS., Gilmer Papers, University of Virginia Library. 196

In addition, Jefferson hoped to bring about impeachment of John Mar­ shall (Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and a long-time enemy) if

Burr went free. The use of Burr as a pawn in the battle between Jef­ ferson and Marshall demanded a prosecutor of great tact and stamina; in Jefferson's estimation, Wirt was the ideal agent.^ In addition to these specific reasons, Wirt had already attained a reputation as a

17 popular forensic orator. This popular event offered Wirt the chance he had long awaited. The whole trial was popular with the public.

It was trial, carnival, and political rally rolled into one. Crowds filled the courtroom, and lawyers spoke as often to the audience as to the judge and jury. While their arguments held law enough to please the driest legal mind, their language suited the popular fancy.

Although Wirt sought to refute his opponents' arguments point by point, the aspect of his speech achieving most popularity was not logic but style. Wirt's comparison of Burr and Blennerhassett was ef­ fective in the estimation of both his admirers and opponents. This single section succeeded in branding Burr a traitor in the hearts and minds of the public; consequently, it is presented here in toto:

Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, April 20, 1807 as quoted in Ford (ed.), Writings of Jefferson, IX, 44-46. Kennedy, I, 15, 73-97. Also see, Jefferson to James Bowdoin, April 2, 1807, Ford, p . 41.

17Kennedy, I, 15, 73-97.

18 Joseph Charles Burke, "William Wirt: Attorney General and Constitutional Lawyer," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1965, p. 1. Compare: Virginia Argus, May 27, 1807; George Hay to Jefferson, June 14, 1807, ibid. Both The Richmond Enouirer and The Virginia Argus hired stenographers and printed the proceedings of the trial from May to September, 1807. 197

Who Aaron Burr is, we have seen in part already. I will add, that beginning his operations in New York, he associates with men whose wealth is to supply the necessary funds. Possessed of the main spring, his personal labor contrives all the machinery . . . . To youthful ardor he presents danger and glory; to am­ bition, rank and titles and honors; to avarice the mines of Mexi­ co. .. . Civil life is indeed quiet upon its surface, but in its bosom this man has contrived to deposit the materials which, with the slightest touch of his match, produce an explosion to shake the continent. All this his restless ambition has contrived. . . . Who is Blennerhassett? A native of Ireland, a man of letters, who fled from the storms of his own country to find quiet in ours. His history shows that war Is not the natural element of his mind. If it had been, he never would have exchanged Ireland for America. So far is an army from furnishing the society natural and proper to Mr. Blannerhassett's character, that on his arrival in America, he retired even from the population of the Atlantic States, and sought quiet and solitude in the bosom of our western forests. But he carried with him taste and science and wealth; and lo, the desert smiled. . . . An extensive library spreads itself before him. A philosophical apparatus offers to him all the secrets and mysteries of nature. Peace, tranquility and innocence shed their mingled delights around him. . . . In the midst of all this peace. . . the destroyer comes; he comes to change this para­ dise into a hell. Yet the flowers do not wither at his approach. No monitory shuddering through the bosom of their unfortunate possessor warns him of the ruin that is coming upon him. A stran­ ger presents himself. Introduced to their civilities, by the high rank which he had lately held in his country, he soon finds his way to their hearts by the dignity and elegance of his demean­ or, the light and beauty of his conversation, and the seductive and fascinating powers of his address. The conquest was not dif­ ficult. Innocence is ever simple and credulous. Conscious of no design itself, it suspects none in others. It wears no guard before its breast. Every door and portal and avenue of the heart is thrown open, and all who choose it enter. Such was the state of Eden, when the serpent entered its bowers. The prisoner, in a more engaging form, widing himself into the open and unpractised heart of the unfortunate Blennerhassett, found but little diffi­ culty in changing the native character of that heart and the objects of its affection. By degrees, he infuses into it the poison of his own ambition. He breathes into it the fire of his own courage . . . . In a short time the whole man is changed. . . . this unfortunate man, thus deluded from his interest and happiness, thus seduced from the paths of innocence and peace, thus con­ founded in the toils that were deliberately spread for him, and overwhelmed by the mastering spirit and genius of another— this man, thus ruined and undone, and made to play a subordinate part in this grand drama of guilt and treason, this man is to be called the principal offender, while he, by whom he was thus plunged in 198

misery, is comparatively innocent, a mere accessory! Is this reason? Is it law? Is it humanity? Sir, neither the human heart nor the human understanding will bear a perversion so monstrous and absurd! so shocking to the soul! so revolting to reason! Let Aaron Burr, then, not shrink from the high des­ tination which he has courted, and having already ruined Blan­ nerhassett in fortune, character and happiness, forever, let him not attempt to finish the tragedy by thrusting that ill- fated man between himself and punishment. ^

The New York Evening Post assessed this speech as one of the finest models of historical oration.^ Even Burr's followers reacted favor-

21 ably, and years later Burr frequently recalled sections of the speech.

Wirt succeeded in half of his mission by persuading the populace, but he lost the court decision.

Wirt's forensic endeavors in the Burr trial were largely respon­ sible for his appointment to the Attorney-Generalship of the United

States in 1817. During his twelve year term in office, Wirt argued one hundred and seventy-four cases, of which he won ninety-six, lost sixty-

22 eight and the Supreme Court rendered no decision in ten. Only thirty-nine of these were government cases, representing a sixty-nine percent victory record.22 A thorough analysis of Wirt's legal career

-^Richmond Enquirer, Septembe’r 16, 1807, p. 2-3; September 19, 1807, pp. 1-3; September 22, 1807, pp. 2-3; September 26, 1807, pp. 2-3; October 3, 1807, pp. 1-2. Also see David Robertson, Reports of the Trials of Colonel Aaron Burr (2 Vols.) (Philadelphia, 1808).

20October 3, 1807. 91 William H. Safford (ed.), The Blennerhassett Papers (Cin­ cinnati: Moore, Witsbach, Keys and Company, 1861), p. 366. James Parton, The Life and Times of Aaron Burr (New York: Mason Brothers, 1858), p. 507.

22Burke, p. 75.

22Burke, p. 76. Based on 374 volumes of The United States Supreme Court Reports, 1789-1962, the following list of Wirt's more 199 has been offered by Joseph Burke; his conclusions will serve as a

critical tool in examining Wirt's argumentation.

There are generally four areas which Burke delineates as the weaknesses of Wirt’s legal career. First, Wirt made no real impact

important cases has been compiled. (Note: before 1875, the Reports were issued under the names of the reporters— Dallas, Crench, Wheaton, Peters, Howard, Black, and Wallace.) I. International Law A. Cases involving neutrality and piracy. 1. The Atlanta (1818) 3 Wheaton 409. 2. The Amiable Isabella (1821) 6 Wheaton 1. 3. United States v. Kintock (1820) 5 Wheaton 144. Kent, Commentaries, I, 199-192. 4. United States v. The Pirates (1820) 5 Wheaton 184-206. 5. United States v. Smith (1820) 5 Wheaton 153. 6 . United States v. Holmes, et al. (1820) 5 Wheaton412. 7. La Amistad de Rues (1820) 5 Wheaton 387; 6 Wheaton 236. 8 . La Conception (1821) 6 Wheaton 237. 9. The Belle Corrunes (1821) (1821) 6 Wheaton 152. B. Cases involving African slave trade. 1. The Emily and The Caroline (1820) 9 Wheaton 382. 2. The Josefa Segunda (1820) 5 Wheaton 338. 3. The Merino, The Constitution, and The Louisa (1824) 9 Wheaton 391. 4. The Antelope (1825) 10 Wheaton 66-114. 5. United States v. Bevans (1818) 3 Wheaton 335. II. The Contract Clause: States Rights vs. Vested Rights A. Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819) 4 Wheaton 600. B. Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge (1831) 11 Peters 420-428; 536. C. United States v. Arrendondo (1832) 6 Peters 691. D. Ogden v. Saunders (1827) 12 Wheaton 213. III. Cases involving the Bank of the United States A. McCulloch y. Maryland (1819) 4 Wheaton 316. B. Ettlng v. The Bank of the United States (1826) 11 Wheaton 59. C. Bank of the United States v. Dandridge (1827) 12 Wbeaton 64. IV. Cases involving the Commerce Clause A. Gibbons v. Ogden (1824) 9 Wheaton 177. B. Brown v. Maryland (1827) 12 Wheaton 419. C. Willson v. The Black Bird Creek Marsh Company 2 Peters 245. V. Cases involving the Cherokee Nation A. The Cherokee Nation v. Cherokee (1831) 5 Peters 1. B. Worcester v. Georgia (1832) 6 Peters 515. upon constitutional history because he was too influenced by events

rather than creating them.2^ Second, Wirt was overwhelmingly influenced by John Marshall's decisions. He felt that "judges did not make law but discovered it." As a consequence, he viewed them as effective mouthpieces of the constitution.25 "Once the Supreme Court had spoken on an issue, or once he thought it had spoken, he regarded the question as settled." A.side from reverence for the law, Wirt esteemed Marshall' intellect and judgment as almost supreme. Not until extremely late in his career was Wirt willing to recognize the political influence

in Marshall's decision-making, even though Marshall was a Federalist and Wirt, a Jeffersonian Republican.22 Third, Wirt never succeeded in developing a systematic approach to issues; instead, "his clients rather ? ft than his principles seem to dictate his arguments." Fourth, Wirt appears to have been incapable of positing new and bold arguments based on principles; instead, he argued from precedent. By concentrating on every possible argument in a case, Wirt was prone to overlook the large point of view and tended to be unoriginal. This is the precise point of difference between Webster and Wirt, according to Burke. "Wirt

considered every possible argument; Webster concentrated on what he

considered important, Webster took pride in unleashing a new power;

2^Burke, p. 268.

25Ibid., p. 267.

26Ibid., p. 229.

22William Wirt to H. H. Miller, December 20, 1833 as quoted in Kennedy, II, 414.

^Burke, p. 239. 201

Wirt feared the exercise of power, especially a new one, Webster made

precedents, Wirt followed them."29

By the test of winning cases or number of clients, Wirt was a

on successful lawyer. But he was clearly more concerned with the glory

of "oratorical triumphs" than the adoption of new legal principles.3"*"

Public and client interests appear to have been his major concerns,

immediate success rather than lasting impact.

Largely as a result of his popularity as Attorney-General,

Wirt was nominated for the Presidency in 1832.32 This political blunder won him only the electoral votes of the state of Vermont. Since Wirt

neither campaigned for the office nor really aspired to election, it

is not surprising that he was so badly beaten by Jackson and Clay.

In writing to a friend, Wirt evaluated his role in this election.

. . . I hate politics. . . . I have not the nerves to bear the vulgar abuse, which is the politician's standing dish. . . . I have kept myself in comparative peace by avoiding politics, and in my old age I feel a most vehement repugnance to the turmoil

29Burke, p. 211-212.

30 Ibid., p. 239.

31 Ibid., p. 266.

32 Letters of Rush, Adams and Wirt (Boston: Leonard Kimball and John Marsh and Company, 1831), pp. 43-47, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore. National Intelligencer, November, 1832 and October 3, 1832; Philadelphia Sun, October 26, 1832; Boston Daily Advocate, December 6 , 1832. J. Frederick Essarv, Maryland in National Politics (Baltimore: John Mruphy Company, 1915), p. 134-ff. George Stimpson, American Politics (New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1952). Rhode Island American, November 22, 1832. Providence American, Novem­ ber 27, 1832. The Louisville Advertiser, December 13, 1832. Lorman Ratner, Antimasonry: The Crusade and the Partv (New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 1969), 1-52. 202

to which I am invited— but they ask me if I have no concern for my country, whether I am willing to see this degradation con­ tinued— and whether I have not children and sons, too, who are probably to survive me and suffer in the general disgrace. . , . Yet if I could see that public good would come of it I do not see that I could properly refuse. Do you suspect that there is lurking ambition under this? If there is, it is too deeply con­ cealed for my own discovery.^

For such noble motives, Wirt received a good deal of praise.

A reputation as a successful legal and political orator helped

to acquire for Wirt the admiration of youths aspiring to success in the

legal profession. Clear indicators of his popularity include his

’’school" for law students,^ and requests to deliver speeches on special

occasions.

Occasional Addresses

Wirt frequently made use of the public platform for espousing his views on education, patriotism and their importance to youth. In

this section, three addresses will be examined which directly relate

to this theme: "A discourse on the Lives and Characters of Thomas Jef­

ferson and John Adams," "Celebration in Baltimore of the Triumph of

Liberty in France," and "Address, Delivered Before the Peithessophian and Philoclean Societies of Rutgers College." Each of these will be

reviewed as to setting, general effect and content. Finally, they will be examined to determine Wirt's rhetorical stance.

■^William Wirt to Dabney Carr, March 22, 1831, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland; William Wirt to Dabney Carr, September 30, 1831, Carr Papers, Virginia State Library, Rich­ mond, Virginia.

•^Southern Literary Messenger, I, (October 15, 1834), 33-34. "Discourse on Jefferson and Adams"

On July 4, 1826, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams died. The irony of both these leaders— who were the subcommittee to prepare the

Declaration of Independence, members of the Continental Congress, former

Presidents, and leaders of the two political parties which had split the country— should die on the day of the celebration of fifty years of independence is a truly remarkable occurrence. It became an event for commemoration and celebration via public meetings and orations in

35 many cities. The city of Washington, D. C. decided to assemble the citizenry and government employees into the Hall of Representatives of the Capitol on October 19th, a Thursday. Wirt was selected to "pro­ nounce" the eulogy; the specific reasons for his selection are unknown.^6

At first Wirt determined to confine his discourse to Jefferson alone, because he had never met Adams and feared he would do him an

• • • 37 injustice. At the insistence of the selection committee, Wirt com­ plied and eulogized both patriots.

On the occasion of the address, "the Capitol was crowed [sic] to an overflow" by citizens and strangers.

It was near 12 o'clock when the solemn dirge, accompanied by the slow and intermitted beat of the muffled drum, announced the approach of the Procession, over which, in addition to the mili­ tary standards, floated a banner of white silk, edged with a deep border of black crepe, in the centre of which the Stars of the

35Kennedy, II, 215.

36t, . , Ibid.

37 William Wirt to William Pope, July 24, 1826, as quoted in Kennedy, II, 215. 204

Union were shrouded in dark clouds. About 10 minutes past 12, the large Hall of Representatives being entirely filled, and the galleries occupied by the different military companies, Mr. Wirt commenced the Eulogy. . . .33

The speech lasted two and one-half hours, according to the Enquirer;39 it took two hours and forty-five minutes, according to the National

Intelligencer. In any case, the reporter for the Intelligencer noted that the time really seemed "quite short.

Wirt's eulogy was not delivered in the ideal situation. His was the last in a great series of tributes to these remarkable leaders and as a consequence public interest had become satiated. The over­ whelming multitude was viewed by the Enquirer as indicating the excel­ lence of the oration itself. Kennedy makes a passing mention of the unfavorable comments about the speech including too much ornamentation at the sacrifice of simplicity and strength and an "indiscriminate" praise of the subjects.^ To explain away some of these charges,

Kennedy notes that Wirt was suffering from "an overflow of feeling" due to his personal knowledge of Jefferson and his admiration for both / o men. Wirt confirms this in a letter to Judge William H. Cabell,

qo The Richmond Enquirer, October 24, 1826.

3 9 Ibid.

^ O c t o b e r 21, 1826. See also, John Murray Allison, Adams and Jefferson (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966), p. 333.

^K e nnedy, II, 219. / O December 5, 1826, Cabell Papers, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Kennedy, II, 223-225. 205

In the publication of the text, which experienced several edi­ tions, the selection committee listed as one of five resolutions, the following:

[Resolved] That the Oration be particularly recommended to the youth of our country, as continuing a most chaste and classic model of eloquence, and at the same time furnishing the noblest examples of pure and disinterested patriotism, and an expanded philanthropy, embracing in its beneficience all mankind.

In discoursing on the lives of Jefferson and Adams, Wirt presents a thorough review of the structure of their character, causes of action and virtues, and services of their careers with the purpose of providing moral instruction to youths. The entirety of the speech consists of these two models; merely honoring their memories in a common eulogy seemed insufficient for Wirt. A,dams and Jefferson represented the ideal in "peaceful and aged patriots" who "had commanded the master springs of the nation, on which all its great political, as well as military movements depended.Wirt traces their birth, early childhood develop­ ment, education, legal, political and private character. Although born

in different parts of the country, these giant intellects arose to lead the nation. For example, in educational endeavors they were co- eiuals: "Education was not with them, as with minor characters, an attempt to plant new talents and new qualities in a strange and reluc­ tant soil. It was the development merely, of those which already existed.Devotion to the law profession was another commonality of

(Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1826), p. 4.

^ 11i d . , p. 6 .

^'~*Ibid . , p. 12. 206

character; Wirt traces the development of their legal minds from youth until their deaths. After establishing these general commonalities,

Wirt turns to an in-depth examination of Adams championing the colonial

cause of Massachusetts and Jefferson, Virginia. Specifically, Adams' roles as a member of the Provincial Legislature and First Continental

Congress are examined; Jefferson's roles as an elected representative

to the State Convention of Virginia and the Continental Congress are

traced. Through a series of intricate details, Wirt follows the his­

torical events leading to the Revolution, the Declaration of Indepen­ dence, building of the government afterwards and adoption of the Federal

Constitution; his focus is on Adam's and Jefferson's overriding influence in all of these events. A good example of Wirt's integration of fact and moral instruction is offered in his example.

The plot of the awful drama now began to thicken. The sword had been drawn. The battles of Lexington and Concord had been fought; and Warren, the rose of American chivalry, ahd been cut down, in his bloom, on that hill which his death has hallowed. The blood which had been shed in Massachusetts cried from the ground, in every quarter of the Union. Congress heard that cry, ar.d resolved on war. Troops were ordered to be raised. A Comman- der-in-Chief came to be appointed, and General Ward of Massachusetts was put in nomination. Here we have an incident in the life of Mr. Adams most strikingly characteristic of the man. Giving to the winds all local prepossessions, and looking only to the cause that filled his soul, the cause of his country, h£ prompted and sustained the nomination of that patriot hero whom the Almighty, in his goodness, had formed for the occasion. Washington was elected; the choice was ratified in Heaven. He accepted his com­ mission on the very day on which the soul of Warren winged its flight from Bunker Hill, and well did he avenge the death of that youthful hero.4^

In the conclusion of the address, Wirt notes the manner in which each

46Ibid. p. 34-35. 207 passed his last days and finally the coincidence of their simultaneous deaths. He closes the speech with an appeal to youths to emulate these great masters of virtue and morality.

"Address to Students of Rutgers College"

In July of 1830, Wirt delivered an oration to "a large audience" of the two literary societies of Rutgers College in New Jersey. ^ The address was delivered in the College, and was received "with a degree of favor that drew upon him. . . 'showers of compliments from every quarter1. T h i s speech developed Wirt's favorite theme: the educa­ tion of youth. Overall, Wirt was pleased with the result. Writing to

Carr, he noted:

I have sent you also a copy of my New Brunswick address to the young collegians. I think you will find it passable. Walsh "damns" it with faint "praise," but Southard thinks well of it. Read it and tell me what you think. 0 how I wished for you when I was preparing it, for there are occasions my friends & I were doubtful about some of the political passages and had Southard's approbation before I spoke. I was an hour and fifty minutes delivering it. It was exceedingly well received though it was one of the hottest evenings ever felt, the crowd very great, and the hour the usual one for my siesta. . . . ^

From his correspondence, we also know that the Rutgers committee was pleased with his performance.

I am much gratified to learn that the address has been so favorably received, and may possibly be of some use in promoting

^Kennedy, II, 306.

48t1 . , Ibid. AQ William Wirt to Dabney Carr, September 29, 1830, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland. 208

the cause of education, which I have strongly at heart. Every day adds some new confirmation to my conviction that the stability of our Republic depends on the success of this cause. Freedom, instead of being a blessing is a curse to the ignorant and the vicious, since it becomes, at once, a freedom to do ill and to hasten to their ruin.-^

According to Kennedy, professors of the College had told Wirt that they

expected his discourse to profit their students. Kennedy relates that

Dr. Green, former President of Princeton, commented to Wirt after the

speech: "I am an old man, sir, but I have brought one of my sons to hear you, and I hope he will derive much good from the noble sentiments

he has heard so well expressed.

In this address to the "Young Gentlemen of Rutgers College,"

Wirt espoused the theme that education is the power which directs the

human character. At the outset of the speech, Wirt explains to the

audience that his motive in this communication is too grave and impor­

tant to be lost in frivolity and entertainment; he is going to instruct

and enlighten instead. The purpose is "the hope of contributing, in

some small degree, towards making you happier in yourselves, and more

useful to your country.Wirt considered the cause of education to

be the cause of his country, and the learned men directing the studies

and forming the character of youths to be engaged in the noblest of all

tasks.33 Further, he advocated that it is the duty of every American

-^William Wirt to Frederick B. Thomson, President of the Peith- essophian Society, Rutgers College, New .Jersey, October 26, J830, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

51Kennedy, II, 306.

c o (New Jersey: Terhune and Letson, 1830), p. 5.

53Ibid., pp. 5-6. 209 citizen to furnish aid in this process of training. Turning to the classical age of Greece and Rome, Wirt explained how the "great moral level— Education" had molded a society. In this address Wirt chiefly concerns himself with the roles of moral and intellectual education.

Acquisition of moral and intellectual education is an individual quest. Men are the "architects of their own fortunes" to the extent that individual effort and hard work are determinants. The "dream of indolence must be dissipated, and you must be awakened to the important truth that, if you aspire to excellence, you must become active and vigorous co-operators with your teachers, and work out your own distinc­ tion with an ardor that cannot be quenched. . . ."54 in short, there is no excellence without labor. Development of self-discipline is the only solution to attaining excellence; "Genius, unexerted, is like the poor moth that flutters around a candle till it scorches itself to d e a t h . "^5 Through self-exertion, youths have the potential to make themselves whatever they please and serve in whatever capacity they choose.

Duties to be performed are both public and private. Public duties refer to those resulting from the political institutions under which one lives. After a lengthy explanation of the functions facili­ tated by state, local and federal governments, Wirt concludes that the success of such institutions is dependent entirely on "the illimination, the wisdom and virtue of the people. These it is the function of education

5AIbid., p. 7.

^^ibid., p. 8. 210

to impart. . . . Education is crucial in training the citizenry in

the most basic of public duties, such as the election of public officers.

"The excellence of a character consists in its fitness to the times and

the service to be performed.It is strong character, not a turbu­ lent spirit, which is essential to the execution of these duties. "The blusterer is seldom brave. True courage is always calm, and is never so captivating as when set off by courtesy."^8 An enlightened society with full understanding of its rights and enough firmness of character can resist the intrigues of the selfish and designing. "What I recom­ mend to you, therefore, is to endeavor to unite in your characters the quiet but determined heroism of the patriot soldier, with that love of peace which becomes the Philanthropist and the Christian.

In the execution of private duties, this "decision of character"

is equally vital. It is the man "who first consults wisely, then resolves firmly, and then executes his purpose with inflexible perseverance, undismayed by those petty difficulties which daunt a weaker spirit,

that can advance to eminence on any line."^ Decision of character

is the best guardian of one's virtues. In effect, self-discipline is

the master quality of man. The avenues for acquiring decisive character

5 6 Ibid., p. 1 1 .

~^Ibid. , p . 15.

58 Ibid., p . 15.

5 9 Ibid., p. 16.

6QIbid., p . 16. 211 are firm resolves to do always what is right and to acquire the intel­ lectual knowledge to direct such choices. To illustrate the embodiment of doing what is right, Wirt contrasts the lives of Washington and other Revolutionary dignitaries with "those little men, who, sometimes gain, by their cunning, a momentary ascendancy." Men who function on principle establish their moral virtue in their peers' hearts. Intel­ lectual knowledge is gleaned from books and observation of the sur­ rounding world. Only the man who can combine the teaching of books and a strong, close observation of life deserves the label of an informed man worthy of imitation. Certain elements of educational training, such as the application of the rules of syntax, study of Latin and mathe­ matics, and the writings of Locke, Bacon, Sidney and Hooker are especial­ ly useful in training one's reason and judgment.

In concluding his message, Wirt requests his hearers to recount the attributes of the models he had presented and challenged them to aspire to great service.

Your first step from the walls of the college, will usher you on the stage of the world, where you will have it in your pox^er to correct the theories of your books, by the close and constant inspection of actual life. It is on that theatre that we are to learn the use which you will have made of your time here. It will be in vain to shew us your diplomas. We shall require higher evidence. Shew us pure and steady habits: high-souled principles: and solid learning. Shew us strength of character, as displayed in firmness of decision, and vigor of action, under the constant guidance of virtue and of sound judgment. Give to your country great and bright examples of genuine patriots and honest men. Teach your children, and your children's children, how to live and how to die.

61Ibid., p. 33. Filmed as received without page(s) 212

UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS. 213

In praising the noble efforts of the Revolution, Wirt looks to the French people generally and then specifically to Lafayette as a model. The common body of citizens from mechanics to boys of the

Polytechnic schools— were lauded by Wirt for their leaderless, yet effective, movement. The mere fact that they were able to accomplish the operation in three days and then quietly return to their occupations leaving the details of their political arrangement to their more expe­ rienced friends, demonstrates the stability of French character.

It was for liberty they struck, and the blow was the bolt of heaven. The throne of the tyrant fell before it. . . . Well may we be proud to claim such a people as our friends and allies, and to unite in this public demonstration of joy at their triumph.

Although the common people were deserving of praise, Wirt lauds Lafayette

("the brave, the good, the friend of man1') for his efforts in tempering and guiding the results of the conflict. At long last this worthy leader saw peace in his own native land, "the object of his life" according to Wirt.

The major portion of Wirt’s address is concerned with an ex­ tended comparison of the two Revolutions in order to predict the sta­ bility and success of this revolution. Forecasts were difficult because the whole case was largely dependent upon the passions of men; funda­ mental points of difference deter reasoning from one to the other.

First, France was not prepared for the Revolution of 1789; nor was

Europe capable of understanding and utilizing it to best advantage.

The common people essentially had no idea of the meaning and implications

(Baltimore: John D. Toy, 1830), p. 11; copy in Peabody Institute Library. 214 of political liberty. In contrast, people of France and Europe are now willing and capable of enjoying temperate liberty; the 1789 Revo­ lution awakened much interest in the rights of man. Second, France had the benefit of her own past experience in the 1789 Revolution to guide her; in 1789, she had no such model. Third, the distinct differences in the morale of the citizenry is a point of contrast. A lengthy narration of the facts leading to the 1789 revolution led Wirt to con­ clude that the moral changes in the sentiments of the people produced ultimate defeat. The slow, lingering and frustrating course of the former Revolution, resulting in no government at all, led to develop­ ment of factions and the demoralization of the people. The quickness of the present revolution had not allowed time for demoralization or factional developments. In concluding this section, Wirt observes that each of these differences suggest the likelihood of the successful maintenance of peace, especially if France remains prudent in dealing with her people as well as other countries. Wirt believes this wisdom

In judgment will successfully counter all her distrust of counsels tending to disunion and disorganization.

In concluding the speech, Wirt appeals for youthful emulation of deserving French character. Their quiet, orderly, patriotic manner was, for Wirt, worthy of imitation. "They acted like honest and sensible workmen. They had a public job to do; they finish it, at once, with all possible moderation and humanity; and then peaceably resume their pri­ vate oursuits."^7 In short, these men proved themselves to be the

67Ibid., p. 30. 215

noblemen of nature as well as of France.

Their conduct throughout the whole movement was marked with the noblest lineaments, and their sudden transition from the shock of arms to the stillness of peace, was sublime. In this they proved their perfect title to liberty by their fitness to enjoy it, and, on a most trying occasion, have presented a model of prudence and wisdom worthy of the remembrance and imitation of us all.6^

To illustrate especially worthy characters, Wirt reads a communication

from the boys of the Polytechnic School to their Secretary of War in which the King requested them to designate among their number the twelve most distinguished in the conflict so that crosses of honor could be bestowed upon them. In the letter, the youths begged permission to decline the medals because they viewed the "recompence. . . above our

services" and "no one of us deeming himself more worthy than his com­

rades to receive it. . . ."69 instead they requested the King grant

two favors: one, to bestow a medal to the father of a deceased comrade

and tv’o, to grant restoration of one of their companions dismissed because of his opinions. This instance represented for the youth of

Baltimore a true example of dedication and commitment.

Rhetorical Stance

As a public advocate, Wirt's speeches reflect his methodical

organization, sound logic, flowery language, sentimentality and fondness

for literary allusion. Whether in the courtroom or on the "stump",

Wirt's style was essentially the same. With minimal exceptions, Wirt opted to please the general audience rather than individual listeners

^ Ibid. , p. 33.

69Ibid., p. 34. 216 such as judges. We have noted how large crowds frequented his legal

"performances." The trial of Aaron Burr, which launched his national career began his quest for persuasion of the public. Wirt attempted to influence public opinion; but, at the same time, his own ideas were being molded by influential friends and colleagues. Particularly,

John Marshall had a pervasive effect on Wirt's concept of constitutional law. Furthermore, Wirt allowed his clients, rather than his principles to dictate his strategies. Burke uses this as a strong criticism; it might also be interpreted as meaning that Wirt thought more of individ­ uals than issues. Wirt's forensic career is overshadowed by his lack of originality in positing new and bold arguments: an implicit char­ acteristic of one who would consistently argue from definition. Al­ though Wirt was a "winning" lawyer, he lacked the capacity of a Webster to combine success and principle. The courtroom brought Wirt into the public eye so significantly that he was asked to run for President in

1832. Overwhelming defeat, on that occasion, however, did not blight his reputation.

Achieving public recognition resulted in many requests for Wirt to deliver ceremonial orations. On such occasions, he took advantage of the opportunity to expound upon morals, education and patriotism in the training of youth. We have observed in preceding chapters how this theme dominated his essays and was the purpose for writing the life of

Henry. These speeches advocate the same ideas, but with different models for imitation. In order to assess Wirt's achievement of a balance among the subject, the audience and himself, an examination will be made of his use of language, argument, reactions from peers and 217

Wirt's own response.

In the eyes of his peers, Wirt does not appear to have been extreme in his arguments concerning the French Revolution, education or

Adams and Jefferson. The occasion determined the selection of Wirt, and audience response was overwhelmingly favorable. Although the speeches were lengthy, Wirt appears to have constructed a pleasing style. In­ terestingly, a comparison of the historical narration in the French

Revolution and the Adams and Jefferson eulogy reveal significant dif­ ferences: the latter deals with specific, minute details; the former, broad generalizations; the latter is thorough, the former somewhat superficial; the latter seeks to isolate every single cause, the former only one cause.

An examination of Wirt's language reveals the use of several uncontested terms, most of which are "god” terms: "patriots," "Apostles of human liberty," "education," "nature," "youth," "moral character,"

"discipline," "movement," and "common people." The only authentic uses of "devil" terms occurred in the French Revolution address: 'revolution' and "lords and barons." Jefferson and Adams are frequently referred to as "patriots" or "sainted Patriots" and "great Fathers of the Republic" because of their illustrious service during the Revolutionary period.

Active leadership also provided them the accolade "Apostles of human liberty." Although references are not as completely developed, George

Washington, Patrick Henry and James Otis also are recommended to youth for imitation because they loved country more than self. "Education" is the most extensively used god term in the speeches. It is the fountain of human character, the ruling force in society; both moral and 218

intellectual education are described in such a way as to promote favor­

able response. "Nature" is employed to demonstrate the qualities which

approach sublimity; Wirt uses it to promote the importance of self­

exertion and discipline. The targets of Wirt's moral instruction are

the youth— those on whom the burden of sustaining political institu­

tions, liberty and happiness of Americans will soon lie. Virtue and

"moral character" encompasses the youth's view of man and his individual

contributions of energy, effort, honesty and hard work. Achievement of

a strong moral character was directly dependent upon always doing what

is right, according to Wirt; "Discipline" is a self-motivated desire to

achieve this moral character. The use of "revolution" is designed to

portray the ill effects of the French Revolution in 1789; in contrast,

Wirt consistently uses "movement" to indicate the current success of

the revolutionists. Revolution represented all that was failure:

movement represented all that was both good and successful.

Adherence to a commonly accepted "polite style" x^as Wirt's major

advantage in language usage. His ability to "repeat without sounding

repetitious" was remarkable. The following excerpts will illustrate

this technique:

The man who is perpetually hesitating which of two things he will do first will do neither. The man who resolves, but suffers his resolution to be changed by the first counter suggestion of a friend, who fluctuates from opinion to opinion, from plan to plan, and veers, like a weather-cock, to every point of the compass, with every breeze of caprice that blows, can never accomplish any thing great or useful. Instead of being progressive in any thing, he will be at best stationary, and, more probably, retrograde in all. It is only the man who carries into his pursuits that great quality which Lucan ascribes to Caesar. . . who consults wisely, then resolves firmly, and then executes his purpose with inflexible perseverance, undismayed by those petty difficulties which daunt 219

a weaker spirit, that can advance to eminence on any line. Let us take, by \

The use of illustrations and allusions allowed Wirt to achieve this aesthetic distance. Stylistic techniques such as rhetorical questions, antithesis, hyperbole and metaphor were commonly employed.

Rhetorical questions, illustrated in the following example, indicate Wirt’s ability to arouse interest by involving the listener.

In this instance, Wirt uses rhetorical questions to justify a "skeptics" criticism of too much praise for Adams and Jefferson:

^"Rutgers Address," p. 16.

^"Adams and Jefferson," pp. 24-25. 220

The European, who should have heard the sound without appre­ hending the cause, would be apt to inquire, "What is the meaning of all this? what had these men done to elicit this unanimous and splendid acclamation? Why has the whole American nation risen up, as one man, to do honor, and offer to them this enthusiastic homage of the heart? Were they mighty warriors, and was the peal that we have heard the should of victory? Were they great commanders, returning from their distant conquests, surrounded with the spoils of war, and was this the sound of their triumDhal procession? Were they covered with martial glory in any form, and was this 'the noisy wave of the multitude rolling back at their approach?'7^

This technique is strikingly similar to his technique as an essayist in using the socratic dialogue. That is, Wirt makes a positional state­ ment to which he anticipates potentially "unfavorable" audience response.

It is essentially used as a rebuttal form in all his speeches. These questions are designed to do more than achieve the normal function of audience agreement.

Antithesis was a frequently employed means of achieving a con­ trast. The following example is a reference to the freeing of more than thirty million Frenchmen. It was achieved "Not by a great body of lords and barons, cased in armour of iron, and with well appointed hosts of vassals at their backs: but by the common body of the citizens of Paris......

Of all the stylistic techniques, Wirt's use of hyperbole or exaggeration predominates. Although he used it in all of the addresses, it is most apparent in sections on the eulogy on Adams and Jefferson.

7"-Ibid. , p. 6 .

7^"French Revolution," p. 9. 221

They were heaven-called avengers of degraded man. They came to lift him to the station for x

The metaphor is probably the most striking adaptation of language which Wirt uses. References to Jefferson and Adams as stars of the first magnitude "in that constellation of the great and the good," to

Otis as a "flame of fire," to George Wythe as "a man of Roman stamp" indicate his use of metaphorical imagery. In referring to the admir­ able models available to Adams, Wirt characterizes them as follows:

"From this proud eyry it was, that this young eagle first opened his eyes upon the sun and the ocean, and learned to plume his own wings for the daring flight."7^ Jefferson's strong, unsophisticated character is captured in the following image:

But, he was naturally ardent, and fond of action, and action too, on a great scale; and, so readily did he kindle in the feelings that were playing around him, that he could no more have stood still while his country was agitated, than the x

7^"Adams and Jefferson," p. 9.

7 ^Ibid., p. 42.

76Ibld., p. 16.

77lbid., pp. 26-27. 222

In the analysis of Wirt's legal career, we observed that he

generally argued from precedent. Offering proof in the form of similar

cases, which is the function of precedents, means essentially that

Wirt argued from similitude. While it may seem only reasonable that

lawyers would argue from similar cases and corresponding decisions, it

is important to recall that early nineteenth century law was subject

to great latitudes of interpretation. This was a time when eloquent

forensic masters set precedents, rather than following them, according

to Burke.

As an occasional speaker, Wirt's major premises could be cate­

gorized under three headings. First, the lives of A.dams and Jefferson are worthy of imitation: an argument from similitude. By coaxing youthful observers into examining the natural talents, and labors of

these patriots, Wirt hoped to instill moral virtue and patriotism.

Second, education directs the development of moral and intellectual

character: an argument from definition. The nature of the educational process of training the mind in morals and ideas is according to Wirt,

the foundation of American society. Third, the Revolution in France in 1789 was not comparable to the 1830 "movement": an argument from contrasts, or similitude. Precisely because there were few important similarities, Frenchmen could afford to be optimistic of a sustained

freedom. Although Wirt offered an important argument from definition, his overall strategy of reasoning was from similitude. It is important

to recall that similitude ran second in Weaver's hierarchy of premises;

this means that Wirt's argumentation was ethical, but not ideally so. 223

A great deal has already been said concerning Wirt's general

attitude toward his audience. Based on this evidence, it is appro­

priate to conclude that the practical implications of Wirt's speeches categorize him as a noble lover. Explicit statements in this regard

indicate that he was honestly concerned with educating youth. If he

possessed any devious motives in this regard, even his friends x^ere unaware; importantly, Wirt confided freely with his correspondents.

As early as 1818, Wirt recognized that his audiences were

capable of detecting a speaker's motives.

There is a manner xMiich shews the public the motive, xtfith more dignity and more effect, than a flashy speech made for pure dis- plav. . . This has been my course— and I find that I rise by it.78

The occasion referred to here was a case argued against William

Pinkney (generally acclaimed "the greatest orator in the U. S.," accord­

ing to W i r t ) during which Pinkney had made a belligerent attack upon

Wirt and consequently had lost much presige.8® Wirt believed that his

forebearance to respond in kind had significantly increased his repu­

tation. 8^-

^8William Wirt to Eliza Wirt, December 13, 1818, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

79 William Wirt to Laura Wirt, August 7, 1818, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

8^William Wirt to Mrs. Eliza Wirt, December 3, 1818, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society Library, Baltimore, Maryland.

8 ^Ibid., see also William Wirt to Mrs. Wirt, April 7, 1821, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland. 224

Wirt recognized his failings as a public, advocate. Frequently, he underestimated his efforts. He aspired to an oratorical excellence of the level of Patrick Henry: but primarily as a result of his lack of discipline and ecclectic interests, Wirt had to settle for above average oratory. This analysis coupled with his reputation and general expertise, strongly suggests a man of moral and intellectual character.

As a public advocate, more so than an essayist or biographer, Wirt's motives appear worthy.

Recognizing his comparative state, Wirt commented in a letter to his wife: "I am surprized to find how admirably even my little off­ hand dashes of argument take— it must be that we are in an age or a place of pigmies where a man of a full natural stature seems a giant

."82

That Wirt was, in reality, more highly admired than he suspected is indicated by the evaluations of one of his most eloquent forensic opponents, Daniel Webster. In a Congressional eulogy on Wirt, Webster referred to him as a "brother and friend" whose talents were "incom­ parable." Toward the close of his career, Webster commented that his most enjoyable forensic encounters were against Wirt;88 however, it should not be forgotten that Webster was usually the victor.

82William Wirt to Mrs. Elizabeth Wirt, May 9, 1822, Wirt Papers, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland.

83 Peter Harvey, Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Daniel Webster (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1877), pp. 126-142. See also Thomas H. Benton, Thirty Years View (2 Vols., New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1854), I, 476. CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS

Summary

Post-Revolutionary Virginia was self-centered and self-conscious.

The Virginians thought themselves to be the epitome of manners, litera­

ture, politics, education and patriotism. William Wirt capitalized on

these beliefs by reinforcing the desire to maintain "ideal" standards.

Revolutionary heroes such as Patrick Henry and Thomas Jefferson were

testaments to Virginia's glory, according to Wirt. But society had

lost sight of the importance of moral and intellectual education; con­

sequently, Wirt believed his generation's youth to be severely disad­ vantaged. In the hope of redeeming the glory of the past and safe­

guarding the future, Wirt viewed himself as an instructor to youth in morals, eloquence and patriotism. Wirt chose three media to promote his instruction: essays, biography and speeches.

Within the essay medium, Wirt employed four rhetorical strategies

to disseminate instruction to youth in the achievement of eloquence:

anonymity, models, Socratic monologue, dramatic dialogue. Eloquence, in

Wirt's estimation, signified the adaptation of all words, oral and written, to achieve a specified purpose or goal; it represented a "power­

ful engine" in a society. By labeling specific faults in contemporary

orators, Wirt hoped to raise the level of excellence in oratory; models

225 226 allowed Wirt to illustrate.

Two prerequisites to achieving excellence in communication in­ volved education and hard work. A general education, Wirt maintained, was insufficient for training orators; he recommended the more rigorous

Roman model of instruction. Too many Virginians believed that the orator was born and not made, but Wirt argues diligence is critical to maxi­ mizing natural talents.

In instructing youthful followers in the achievement of eloquence,

Wirt addresses himself to the character and skill of the speaker, argu­ ment, language, and the occasions for public communication. The commun­ icator ought to be a man of sincere character, judgment, self-discipline, intelligence and knowledge who is skilled in gestures and voice manage­ ment. Argument and language are largely situation-oriented; simplicity and forcefulness should characterize both. Recognition of the glory of the past and mourning the heroes of yore represented a special occasion worthy of oratorical commemoration.

Through the medium of biography, Wirt used Patrick Henry as a model embodying moral, patriotic and oratorical traits worthy of imita­ tion. Furthermore, he was kind, honest and gentle. Henry's encyclopedic knowledge of human nature dominated both his public and private life.

Wirt’s descriptions of Henry as the leader of the Revolution demonstrates

Henry's patriotic influence. More importantly, Henry was politically inclined by the purest motives.

In the role of orator, Henry had no competitor. Probably his single most effective trait was an animated speech delivery. "Orator 227 of nature" was the label Wirt gave to this backwoods genius of public speaking. To enlighten and interest his readers, Wirt laboriously endeavored to recapture the essence of Henry’s great rhetorical occasions.

Since no verbatim text of any of Henry's speeches exists, Wirt was com­ pelled to rely on the memory of eye witnesses. The "liberty or death" case study indicates the contradictory and incomplete accounts of Henry's oratory which Wirt encountered.

Finally, through his speeches, Wirt advocated the education of youth in the development of moral and intellectual character. Fame and reputation as a lawyer and politician facilitated Wirt's opportunities for addressing the public on ceremonial occasions; it was in these speeches that Wirt sought to educate youth. In actuality these speeches served two functions: to publicize Wirt's views on education, morals and patriotism and to exemplify "classic models of eloquence." Again rely­ ing on models, Wirt eulogized the lives of Jefferson and Adams by iso­ lating their similarities and individual virtues, morals and manners for youth to imitate. Speaking at Rutgers College,• Wirt seized the opportunity to address a group of students on the importance and means of achieving moral-intellectual education: doing what is right, self- discipline, and hard work. Addressing the citizens of Baltimore on the celebration of the Revolution in France, Wirt demonstrated that a patri­ otic and noble goal had been achieved by the "common man" willing to work and sacrifice for a higher cause— freedom and liberty.

Wirt's rhetorical efforts as essayist, biographer and public advocate were examined to evaluate his balancing of instruction to youth with the audience's peculiarities and interests and their perception of 228

his character. Rhetorical stance, balance, combined with the ethics of

argument reveals Wirt's motives in communicating. Specifically, Wirt's

adaptation to the interests of his audience through uncontested terms,

the enthymeme and a polite (aesthetic) style were examined. To evaluate

Wirt's motives and implied character, his arguments and use of god and

devil terms were analyzed within the structure of rhetorical stance.

As a rhetorical essayist, Wirt was overly concerned with ef­

fecting a pleasing image. The familiar essays were charged with over­

sentimentality, tritely developed characters in unrealistic environments,

exaggeration of political and social degeneration, and rhetorical exag­

geration aimed at pleasing the hearts of readers. Wirt's private corres­

pondence reflects his concern for achieving a reputation as a popular writer. An examination of his arguments on eloquence, morals and patri­

otism reveal six major premises. Arguing from definition, Wirt posited

two premises: (1) eloquence is important to Virginia's society and

(2) education is inherently capable of eradicating ineffective habits of

speech. Wirt's third premise is argued from cause to effect: Virginian

eloquence is declining because of indolence. Closely aligned to this

argument was the development of a causal relationship between noble self­

exertion and the elimination of indolence. Lastly, Wirt offers two

arguments from similitude: (1) revolutionary leaders are worthy of

emulation and (2) manners and morals in Virginia surpass those of Britain.

Although he argues from definition, cause and similitude, the character­

istic thrust of Wirt's premises appears to have been similitude. The

extensive use of models is incorporated to demonstrate a desirable

similarity between Virginia's youths and the "ideal"; essentially, these 229 models served as precedents and justification for all his argumentation.

These essays abound in the ethical use of "god" terms including: "moral,"

"patriots," "virtue," "eloquence" and "nature," all of which are de­ signed to elevate and inspire society. The only name-calling Wirt used was in regard to "indolent," "lazy" orators. Extensive use of "youth" was a charismatic term. Wirt appears to have developed rhetorical balance in his moral instruction to youth in the essays.

In authoring the rhetorical biography of the life of Patrick

Henry, Wirt's imbalances are more evident. The incomplete and contra­ dictory accounts of Henry’s life forced Wirt into a pedant's stance because of an overemphasis on the aspects of Henry's life. To the extent that Wirt endeavored to secure accurate data, his motives were good.

The clearest indication of an imbalanced approach resides in Wirt's adaptation to the interests and peculiarities of his audience; his portrait of Henry as an ideal model was overdrawn. The audience Wirt desired to persuade, responded with criticism. Charges consisted of the

following: (1) Henry's resistless eloquence and knowledge of the human passions were exaggerated; (2) Henry was falsely credited with insti­ gating the Revolution; (3) the House of Burgesses was hyperbolically pictured as a body of heavenly orators, and Henry was pictured as superior to all of them and (4) the biography was nothing more than romantic

fiction.

Wirt made extensive use of stylistically ethical terms such as

"orator of nature" and "patriot." Reasoning enthymematically, Wirt built a case for youths emulating the moral, patriotic and oratorical model of Henry. Wirt exemplified a polite, aesthetic style in speaking 230 for corporate humanity in praise of Henry and appealed to readers' memories to recall this orator of nature.

In addition to undergoing attacks on his writing, Wirt was charged with having a vested interest in achieving popularity. The biography, it was noted, seemed to have been written more to reveal Wirt than Henry.

Monetary gain and fame were goals for Wirt as revealed in his corres­ pondence with friends; exemplifying Henry as a model of eloquence, patriotism and morals was an equal (if not superior) aim. Examination of his argument and language lend insight into his implied character.

Essentially, Wirt argued from similitude: Patrick Henry surpassed all his contemporaries in attaining a virtuous, eloquent character. Within the framework of similitude, Wirt reasoned definitionally. For example,

Wirt captures the essence of Henry's eloquence by maintaining that only natural genius can result in sublimity. Circumstantial arguments do not appear in the biography. Arguments from similitude are stylistically supported by ethically emotion-arousing terms such as "patriot," "states­ man," and "orator of nature." The only term of repulsion Wirt uses is

that of "indolence." Although Henry was not ill-affected by indolence because of his natural genius, Wirt hastened to warn Virginia's youths of the potential danger.

In eulogizing a whole society as well as Henry, Wirt sacrificed

total accuracy regarding his subject. Consequently, rhetorical balance

does not appear in the biography. Importantly, evidence indicates that

Wirt's failure to achieve this harmony was directly correlated with his

desire to please the audience with his subject matter more than with his

own personality. The lasting impact of the biography has proved a testa­ ment to his popularity. 231

Wirt's public advocacy most clearly reflects his achievement of a rhetorical stance in educating youth. It is instructive to note pos­ sible reasons for this occurrence. The fact that Wirt's career was well established undoubtedly reduced his desire for public acclaim. More importantly, Wirt was asked to deliver public speeches to commemorate special occasions primarily because he was highly respected. Signifi­ cantly, Wirt was more apprehensive about public evaluations after the publication of the Henry biography.

Investigation of stylistic and argumentative elements of his advocacy reflects his motivations. Language usage in Wirt's speeches consisted primarily of uncontested terms of praise such as "patriots,"

"apostles of human liberty," "education," "nature," "youth," "moral character," "discipline," "movement" and "common people." The only terms of repulsion were "revolution" and "lords and barons." Prepon­ derance of "god" terms to the near exclusion of "devil" terms indicates ethically oriented messages. Rhetorical questions, imagery, antithesis and hyperbole were the major stylistic techniques enabling Wirt to achieve a polite style. Through the medium of oratory, Wirt primarily argued from similitude. As a forensic champion, Wirt consistently rea­ soned from precedent, or similar cases. Parallel arguments, e.g., the lives of Jefferson and Adams are worthy of imitation, or the French

Revolution of 1789 was not comparable to the 1830 movement, were designed to compare and contrast. The major premise in Wirt's occasional ad­ dresses— that education directs the development of moral and intellec­ tual character— is, however, a definitional argument.

Assessment of Wirt's overall effectiveness in achieving a 232 rhetorical stance among his subject, his audience and his implied char­ acter is favorable. In addressing his audiences, Wirt primarily argued from similitude, the second highest type of argument in Weaver’s hier­ archy. Occasionally, he reasoned definitionally; he never argued from circumstance. This reasoning posture was executed through Wirt's strategy of models. Language usage emphasized uncontested praiseworthy phrases to a near-exclusion of repulsive terms; in Weaver's framework, this means that Wirt's communication was motivated by ethical desires.

The notable exception to Wirt's achievement of rhetorical stance was the Henry biography. Within the structure of the biography, Wirt manifested contradictions, inadequate evidence and sentimental praise of his hero. In desiring to educate youth, Wirt sacrificed fact for a favorable audience response to Henry and himself. Perhaps more impor­ tantly, elements of Wirt's portrayal of Henry contradicted his life­ long arguments. For example, as an essayist, speaker, and instructor to youth, Wirt always maintained that intellectual education is critical in achieving eloquence. The single notable exception was his model of

Henry, vho possessed an encyclopedic understanding of human passions but little intellectual knowledge. Yet Henry was Wirt's "ideal" in eloquence. Similarly, Wirt maintained that hard work and self-discipline were critical prerequisites to oratorical success. Henry is character­ ized as indolent; yet, his superior natural talents compensate for his lazin e s s .

Throughout his career, Wirt assumed the role of an educator of youth. Morals, patriotism and eloque.nce were the recurrent themes of his writings and speeches. The ethical implications of his instruction prove 233 highly favorable; his rhetorical balance, generally effective. At the outset of this study, we noted that of all Wirt's communication, only the biography of Henry is associated with his name today. Undoubtedly,

Wirt's inability to achieve rhetorical balance in this instance has resulted in charges against his character. In the minds of some of his contemporaries, and many who came after him, Wirt x^as an opportunist, a lover of fame and money. While research supports Wirt's preference for fame and money, this study indicates that he was neither an oppor­ tunist nor a vainglorious communicator. Viewed in the perspective of his entire public life, the Henry study was consistent in purpose and method— if not in effect— x^ith his lifelong training of youth. This conclusion is compelling since every facet of Wirt's public life w a s mediated by communication. Perhaps Wirt's greatest fault in this regard was his insecurity. Instability of an adequate self-image continually led Wirt to rely on his friends' estimations of his abilities and effec­ tiveness. This insecurity also resulted in his imitation of "models."

In this respect, however, Wirt's public life mirrored his instruction to youth. Wirt's greatest asset as an instructor to youth was unques­ tionably his desire to serve as a model for future generations of Vir­ ginia's youths; as a word specialist, Wirt was capable of linking the glorious past with the enlightened future.

Every x^ord we say, every movement we make, every idea we have, and every feeling, is, in one way or another, an outcome of what our predecessors have said or done or thought or felt in past ages. There is an actual historical continuity from their life to ours, and we are constantly trying to trace this history, to see how things come about, in order that we may understand them better and may learn to bring to pass those things we regard as desirable.

^"Charles H. Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902), pp. 3-4. Conclusions

While this investigation has attempted to isolate major influ­ ences on William Wirt's communication, several avenues of further research seem worthwhile. In regard to the Henry biography, three areas suggest themselves: (1) an examination of British newspapers might be made to assess another perspective on Patrick Henry's role in the Revolution; (2) a textual comparison of Henry's 1775 speech with the

Parson's Cause and Convention of 1788 speeches could reveal patterns of

Henry's discourse and aid in judging the authenticity of the 1775 speech and (3) a comparison of Wirt's biography with that of Weems and Marshall could reveal some trends in early American biography.

In dealing with Wirt's communication generally, the potential areas of investigation are almost limitless. A comparison of Wirt's occasional and legal addresses would evidence specific stylistic tech­ niques and demonstrate how Wirt adapted to a particular audience.

Similarly, Wirt's theory of public discourse could serve as an analytic tool for determining the extent to which Wirt "practiced what he preach­ ed." Since Wirt's political communication— as evidenced in "The Sen­ tinel," "One of the People," "Missouri Compromise" and "Anti-Jackson

Writings"— has never been examined, a worthwhile study might pursue

Wirt as a political figure. For a clearer understanding of the nature of early nineteenth century rhetoric, Wirt's rhetorical techniques, strategies and content might profitably be compared with that of Webster

Clay Calhoun, Pinkney and Martin. Since all of these orator-lawyers operated in the courtroom of Chief Justice John Marshall, a study might investigate Marshall's influence on their ideas and careers. A final 235 suggestion for further research would concentrate on an evaluation of

Wirt's ethos as a public figure. Specific analysis of his methods and means of achieving a believable character would be made.

While a historical-rhetorical study of William Wirt reveals much about the man himself, the cultural milieu of early nineteenth century America and the role of communication in that milieu, it is necessary to attempt to isolate the timeless implications for rhetorical theory. This study suggests importance in at least the following areas: diffusion of ideas; the relationship of history, rhetoric and literature; the historical versus rhetorical biographer; ghostwriting; audience adaptation; speaker ethos and communication as a response to a rhetori­ cal situation.

Personal interaction, essays, biography and the public platform were all instruments for Wirt as a disseminator of ideas. The diffusion of ideas in colonial Virginia originated with one person who passed along his thoughts through the medium of letter writing. In Wirt’s case, he also passed his ideas through the press in the form of essays.

As a pul lie advocate, Wirt encouraged his readers to write to him and offer criticism. That is, Wirt encouraged a two step flow of communi­ cation in encouraging Virginians to re-evaluate their ideas on education

and eloquence. Although the response was not immediate, ideas were

largely diffused through the medium of the printed word.

This study reveals the close relationship of rhetoric, history

and literature. Wirt’s speeches, essays and biography per se are pieces

of literature, but they also reflect a historical accounting of early nineteenth century society. A speech such as Wirt’s eulogy on the deaths 236 of Jefferson and Adams was responsive to an important historical event.

The continuous recounting of the lives and deeds of historical figures

is used by Wirt, throughout the essays, to persuade Virginians that their standards of eloquence are declining. The essay and Henry bio­ graphy are Wirt's tools for achieving emulation of classical and contem­ porary nineteenth century models.

One of the most important implications for contemporary com­ munication is to be found in the Henry biography. Aside from its exem­ plification of the relationship of history, literature and rhetoric, the historical-rhetorical perspectives are important. In this portrayal of the life of a great Virginian, Wirt assumes two roles— historian and persuader— and consequently suffers the conflicts of opposing purposes.

As a historian, Wirt becomes disconcerted with the scanty materials, contradictory accounts of Henry's life and existence of no single speech text for Henry's acclaimed "great" orations. As a writer, Wirt had been accustomed to authoring only fiction and not being "trammeled by fact." But Wirt sees his purpose as more than a mere recital of facts in the life of Henry. He desires to use Henry's life as a model for

Virginian youths to emulate in achieving greatness. The art of bio­ graphy was a new one to Wirt as it was to other early nineteenth century writers. Since another biography of Henry did not appear for almost seventy-five years, Wirt's tasks in achieving two goals are more under­ standable. In assessing the Henry study, one is forced to conclude that as a historical biographer, Wirt's work is imperfect. The implication for contemporary theory centers on conflicting goals in the use of in­ formation and a recognition that rhetoric is not history per se. 237

Wirt's conflicts as a historical-rhetori.cal biographer are most apparent in the area of ghostwriting. In authenticating a text for

Henry's "liberty or Death" speech, Wirt solicited accounts of all Henry's living contemporaries, compared the often conflicting accounts and relied on verbatim statements as much as possible. Since he was unable to totally reconstruct the account from living witnesses, Wirt had to supply the missing links. The ethical implications of his action are history. Patrick Henry's reputation as an orator is grounded in a speech largely authored by his biographer. While historians and rhet­ oricians recognize Wirt's role in ghosting this speech, few discredit the speech on this basis. It appears that the fact that Henry said something important and eloquent on that occasion overrides the fact that the speech which has preserved his reputation for almost two centuries is not a verbatim account. In sum, it seems that Wirt is criticized because he was unable to "adequately" portray the greatness of Henry.

Wirt's communication points to differences in style and audience adaptation as responses to the nature of listeners, not the occasion.

Techniques and style differences are evidenced only when Wirt addressed different audiences: his ceremonial addresses and courtroom speeches are identical in style when an audience exists in the courtroom but when

Wirt addressed a judge alone, his style differed. Obviously the content of these kinds of messages differ, but the speaker's treatment of that content varied only as listeners varied.

In portraying himself as an ethical speaker, Wirt primarily relied on language. Specifically, the use of positive, reinforcing statements were used to the near exclusion of negative communication. 238

Wirt appears to have been offering Virginians views of themselves as

they ought to be. These better visions of themselves always incorporated

anti or negative charges but these arguments were always situated in the

middle of his communication; Wirt adhered to the idea that listeners

remember best those arguments which appear first and last and so his

first and last arguments were always designed to give listeners images

of what they ought to be.

As an essayist, a biographer and public speaker, Wirt's commun­

ication was responsive to a rhetorical situation. In assessing his

culture, Wirt determined that poor eloquence was an obstacle which his

audience could overcome if they could be persuaded that education could

, solve the problem. To that end, Wirt directed his efforts. The measure

of his personal and professional effectiveness was largely due to his

audience's belief that the issue being dealt with was important and

worthy of their response.

The problems to which William Wirt addressed himself were unique

to early nineteenth century America. The rhetorical strategies and

techniques which Wirt employed have implications for solving twentieth

century problems. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Articles

"Account of Virginia." The Monthly Ledger, or Literary Repository, III (1775), 113-24.

Adams, John. "Beginning of the American Revolution." North American Review, IX (September, 1819), 376-411.

Baskerville, Barnet. "The Place of Oratory in American Literature." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXIX (1958), 459-65.

Bigelow, Gordon. "Distinguishing Rhetoric from Poetic Discourse." Southern Speech Journal, XIX (December, 1953), 83-97.

Bohman, George V. "Political Oratory in Pre-Revolutionary America." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXIII (1937), 243-51.

Booth, Wayne C. "The Rhetorical Stance." College Composition and Com­ munication, XIV (October, 1963), 139-45.

Brigance, William N. "The Twenty-Eight Foremost American Orators." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXIV (February, 1938), 376-80.

Chambers, Stephen and Mohrmann, G. P. "Rhetoric in Some American Peri­ odicals, 1815-1850." Speech Monographs, XXXVII (June, 1970), 111- 20 .

"Chief Justice Marshall." Southern Literary Messenger, II (1836), 181-91.

Davis, Richard B. "Literary Tastes in Virginia Before Poe." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, XIX (January, 1939), 55-68.

"Diary of Col. William Winston Fontaine." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, XVI (January, 1908), 157-61.

Edinburgh Review, II (1803).

Fernandez, T. L. "Sir Robert Peel: Nineteenth-Century Parliamentary Orator." Quarterly Journal of Speech, LII (April, 1966), 249-54.

239 240

Fritz, Charles A. "A Brief Review of the Chief Periods in the History of Oratory." Quarterly Journal of Speech, VIII (February, 1922), 26-48.

Heilman, Hugo E. "The Influence of the Literary Society in the Making of American Orators." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXVIII (February, 1942), 12-15.

Hubbell, Jay B. "William Wirt and the Familiar Essay in Virginia." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, XXIII (1943), 136-52.

"Legislature of Virginia." Port Folio, II (1815), 460-68.

"Letter from Mr. Wirt to a Law Student." Southern Literary Messenger, I (October 15, 1834), 33-34.

"L. H. Girardin to William Wirt." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, V (April, 1925), 105-6.

"Literary Intelligence." Port Folio, IV (1817).

Magazine of History, III, 158-9.

Maxwell, William, ed. "Mr. Wirt's Impromptu." The Virginia Historical Register and Literary Advertiser, I (1849), 199-ff.

______. "Mr. Wirt's Impromptu Again." The Virginia Historical Regis­ ter and Literary Advertiser, II (1849), 58-ff.

Murray, Elwood. "An Historiometric Study of the Early Traits of Great Orators." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XIV (November, 1928), 502-9.

Neal, John. "American Writers, No. V." Blackwood's Magazine, XVII (1825), 2 0 4 - f f .

Park, Joseph H. "The Oratory of British Nineteenth-Century Statesmen." Quarterly Journal of Speech, XXXVII (December, 1951), 435-41.

"Patrick Henry's Paper Cutter." Tyler Quarterly Historical Genealogical Magazine, VIII (1927), 173-75.

"Remarks of R. Walton Moore in the Fairfax Court House, May 30th, 1921, Accepting for Fairfax County the Portrait of George Johnston." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, II (April, 1922), 75-81.

"P." American Monthly Magazine, II (April, 1818), 412-27.

"Reviews." The Analectic Magazine, X (December, 1817), 441-70. 241

'Reviews." North American Review, VII (July, 1818), 211-21.

'Reviews." Port Folio, III (December, 1816), 460-68.

'Reviews." Port Folio, IV (December, 1817), 520-23.

'Reviews." Virginia Literary and Evangelical Magazine, I (1817), 28-30.

'Reviews of Wirt's Henry Biography." Virginia Evangelical and Literary Magazine, I (January, 1818), 27-36; I (February, 1818), 74-80; and I (March, 1818), 124-28.

"Society in East Virginia." William and Mary College Quarterly His­ torical Magazine, XXII (April, 1914), 221-27.

Sparks, Jarred. "Review of Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry." North American Review, VI (March, 1818), 300-316.

Taylor, William R. "William Wirt and the Legend of the Old South." William and Mary College Quarterly Historical Magazine, XIV (1957)} 477-493.

"Thoughts on the Character of Our Revolutionary Patriots, Suggested by a Perusal of Wirt's Life of Henry." The Virginia Evangelical and Literary Magazine, I (February, 1818), 49-56.

[Walsh, Robert.] "The Old Bachelor." The Analectic Magazine, XII (October, 1818), 265-95.

Books

\dams, John Quincy. Lectures on Rhetoric and Oratory. Edited by J. Jeffrey Auer and Jerald L. Banninga. 2 Vols. Cambridge: Hilliard and Metcalf, 1810.

Ambler, Charles H. Thomas Ritchie: A Study in Virginia Politics. Richmond, Virginia: Bell Book and Stationery Company, 1913.

Arnold, S. G. The Life of Patrick Henry. New York: Miller, Orton and Mulligan, 1857.

Bacon, Francis. The Works of Francis Bacon. 3 Vols. Philadelphia: Carey and Hart, 1844.

Bailyn, Bernard. The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. 242

Beloff, Max, ed. The Debate on the American Revolution 1761-1783. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, i960.

Benton, Thomas H. Thirty Years' View; or, A History of the Working of the American Government for Thirty Years, From 1820 to 1850. 2 Vols. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1854.

Blair, Hugh. Lectures on Rhetoric and Belles Lettres. 10th ed. 3 Vols. Edinburgh: W. Creech, 1806.

Booth, Wayne C. Now Don’t Try to Reason With Me. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

______. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Bowers, Claude G. The Party Battles of the Jackson Period. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1922.

Brady, Joseph P. The Trial of Aaron Burr. New York: Neale Publish­ ing Company, 1913.

Brigance, William N., ed. A History and Criticism of American Public Address. 1st ed. 2 Vols. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1943.

Brigham, Clarence S. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society. Vol. XXXVII. Wooster, Massachusetts, 1927.

Brooks, Van Wyclc. The World of Washington Irving. New York: E. P. Dutton and Company, 1944.

Cappon, Lester J., ed. The Adams-Jefferson Letters. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1959.

Carman, Harry J. ; Syrett, Harold C.; and Wishy, Bernard C. A History of the American People. 3rd ed. 3 Vols. New York: Alfred A. Knoff, 1952.

Chamberlain, John. The Enterprising Americans. New York: Harper and Row, 1961.

Chappell, V. C., ed. The Philosophy of David Hume. New York: Modern Library, 1963.

Cicero. De Oratore. Translated by William Guthrie. Oxford: Henry Slatter, 1840.

Clark, Harry H., ed. Transitions in American Literary History. New York: Octagon Books, 1967. 243

Cook, Elizabeth C. Literary Influences in Colonial Newspapers 1764- 1850. New York: Kennicot Press, 1912.

Cooley, Charles H. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902.

______. Social Organization: A Study of the Larger Mind. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922.

Coombs, J. J., comp. The Trial of Aaron Burr For High Treason. Wash­ ington: W. H. and 0. H. Morrison, 1864.

Copeland, Lewis, ed. The World's Great Speeches. New York: Dover Publications, 1942.

Crocker, Lionel and Carmack, Paul A., eds. Readings in Rhetoric. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1965.

Curtis, George T. Life of Daniel Webster. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1870.

Daires, Samuel. Sermons on Important Subjects. 3 Vols. New York: J. and J. Harper, 1828.

Davis, Mathew L. Memoirs of Aaron Burr. 2 Vols. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1836.

Davis, Richard B. Francis Walker Gilmer: Life and Learning in Jefferson's Virginia. Richmond, Virginia: The Diety Press, 1939.

______. Intellectual Life in Jefferson's Virginia 179 0 - 1 8 3 0 . Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1964.

Depew, Chauncey M., ed. The Library of Oratory. 4 Vols. Chicago: E. R. DuMont, 1902.

Edwards, Ninian W. History of Illinois from 1778 to 1833; and Life and Times of Ninian Edwards. Springfield: Illinois Street Journal Company, 1870.

Elliot, Jonathan, ed. Debates on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution. 5 Vols. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1901.

Essary, J. Frederick. Maryland in National Politics. Baltimore: John Murphy Company, 1915.

Faulkner, Harold U. American Political and Social History. New York: F. S. Crofts and Company, 1947.

Ford, Paul L., ed. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson. 10 Vols. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1899-1905. 244

Gilmer, Francis W. Sketches, Essays and Translations. Baltimore: Fielding Lucas, 1828.

Hagan, Horace H. Eight Great American Lawyers. Oklahoma City: Harlow Publishing Company, 1923.

Hardwicke, Henry. History of Oratory and Orators. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1896.

Harsha, David A., ed. The Most Eminent Orators and Statesmen of Ancient and Modern Times. Philadelphia: Porter and Coates, 1854.

Harvey, Peter. Reminiscences and Anecdotes of Daniel Webster. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1877.

Henry, William W. Patrick Henry: Life, Correspondences and Speeches. 3 Vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891.

Holliday, Carl. A History of Southern Literature. New York: Neale Publishing Company, 1906.

Home, Henry (Lord Karnes). Elements of C r i t i c i s m . 3 Vols. New York: Mason Brothers, 1833.

Hubbell, Jay B. South and Southwest. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1965.

_ . The South in American Literature 1670-1900. Durham: Duke University Press, 1954.

Johannesen, Richard L.; Strickland, Renard; and Eubanks, Ralph T., eds. Language is Sermonic. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1970.

Johns Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science. 15 Vols. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1922.

Johnson, E. A. J. and Krooss, Herman E., eds. The American Economy. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1936.

Jones, Howard M. History and the Contemporary. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1964.

_ . Ideas in America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1945.

. 0 Strange New World. New York: The Viking Press, 1952.

The Theory of American Literature. New York: Cornell Uni­ versity Press, 1948. 245

Kennedy, John P. A Discourse on the Life and Character of William Wirt. Baltimore: William and Joseph Neal, 1834.

______. Memoirs of the Life of William Wirt, Attorney General of the United States. 2 Vols. Philadelphia: Lea and Blanchard, 1849.

Kent, James. Commentaries on American Law. Edited by Oliver W. Holmes. 4 Vols. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 1884.

Knollenberg, Bernhard. Origin of the American Revolution: 1759-1766. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1960.

Landon, Melville D. Kings of the Platform and Pulpit. Chicago: J. S. Ziegler and Company, 1894.

Link, Samuel A. Pioneers of Southern Literature. 2 Vols. Nashville, Tennessee: M. E. Church, 1900.

Lossing, Benson J. Eminent Americans. New York: John B. Alden, 1883.

Lovejoy, Arthur 0. Essays in the History of Ideas. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1948,

______. The Great' Chain of B e i n g . Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1936.

Lovell, John E. The United States Speaker. New Haven: S. Babcock, 1849.

Lumkin, Wilson R. The Removal of the Cherokee Indians from Georgia. 2 Vols. New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1907.

Main, Jackson T. The Social Structure of Revolutionary America. Prince­ ton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1965.

Marron, Henri I. The Meaning o.f History. Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1966.

Mathews, William. Oratory and Orators. Chicago: S. C. Griggs and Company, 1878.

Maury, Abbe. The Principles of Eloquence. Translated by John N. Lake. New York: B. Waugh and T. Mason, 1833.

McClure, Alexander K., ed. Famous American Statesmen and Orators. 2 Vols. New York: F. F. Lovell Publishing Company, 1902.

McGregor, James C. The Disruption of Virginia. New York: Macmillan Company, 1922. 246

Meade, Bishop. Old Churches, Ministers and Families of Virginia. 2 Vols. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Company, 1857.

Meade, Robert D. Patrick Henry Practical Revolutionary. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1969.

Mesick, Jane L. The English Traveler in America 1785-1835. New York: Columbia University Press, 1922.

Miller, John C. Origins of the American Revolution. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1943.

Miller, Perry. The Life of the Mind in America. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1965.

Moore, Frank, ed. American Eloquence: A Collection of Speeches and Addresses, By the Most Eminent Orators of America. 6 Vols. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1857.

Mordecai, Samuel. Richmond in By-Gone Days. Richmond, Virginia: G. M. West, 1856.

Morgan, Edmund S. The Birth of the Republic, 1763-89. Chicago: Uni­ versity of Chicago Press, 1956.

Morgan, George. Patrick Henry. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1929.

Mott, Frank L. American Magazines, 1865-1880. Iowa City: Midland Press, 1928.

Mumford, Lewis. The Golden Day. New York: Boni and Liveright, 1926.

Munn, Lewis C. The American Orator. Boston: Tappan and Whittemore, 1853.

Nadel, George H. Studies in the Philosophy of History. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1960.

Nye, Russel B. The Cultural Life of the New Nation 1776-1830. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1960.

O'Neill, James M. Models of Speech Composition. New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, 1921.

Page, Thomas N. The Old South. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1892.

Parrington, Vernon L. Main Currents in American Thought. 3 Vols. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1927. 247

Parton, James. The Life and Times of Aaron Burr. 10th ed. New York: Mason Brothers, 1858.

Pattee, Fred L. A History of American Literature. Chicago: Silver, Burdett and Company, 1896.

______• The First Century of American Literature 1770-1870. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1966.

Peterson, Houston, ed. A Treasury of the World's Great Speeches. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1954.

[Paulding, James P.]. Letters from the South By A Northern Man. 2 Vols. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1835.

Perry, B. F. Eminent American Statesmen. Philadelphia: The Ferree Press, 1887.

Petter, Henri. The Early American Novel. Columbus: Ohio State Uni­ versity Press, 1971.

Pilcher, George W. Samuel Davies, Apostle of Dissent in Colonial Vir­ ginia. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1971.

Proceedings of the Convention of Delegates for the Counties and Corpora­ tions in the Colony of Virginia. Richmond: Ritchie, Trueheart, and Du-Val Printers, 1816.

Quintilian, Institutes of Oratory. Translated by John S. Watson. 2 Vols. London: George Bell and Sons, 1907.

Randall, Henry S. Life of Thomas Jefferson. New York: Derby and Jack­ son, 1858.

Randolph, Edmund. History of Virginia. Edited by Arthur H. Shaffer. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, n.d.

Ratner, Lorman. Antimasonry: The Crusade and the Party. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969.

Reed, Thomas B., ed. Modern Eloquence. Philadelphia: John D. Morris and Company, 6 Vols., 1900.

Rippingham, John. The Art of Public Speaking, Ex-tempore. 3rd ed. London: Longman Publishers, 1819.

Safford, William H., ed. The Blennerhassett Papers, Embodying the Private Journal of Harman Blennerhassett. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke and Comp any, 1891. 248

Schneider, Herbert W., ed. Adam Smith's Moral and Political Philosophy. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1948.

Southard, Samuel L. A Discourse on the Professional Character and Virtue of the Late William Wirt. Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1834.

Spencer, Benjamin T. The Quest for Nationality. New York: Syracuse University Press, 1957.

Spiller, Robert E.; Thorp, Willard; Johnson, Thomas H.; and Canby, Henry S. Literary History of the United States. Vol. I. New York: Macmillan Company, 1948.

Stanard, Mary N. Richmond Its People and Its Story. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1923.

Stephen, Leslie. History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century. 2 Vols. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1876.

Stewart, John L., ed. The Essay. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1952.

Stimpson, George. A Book About American Politics. New York: Harper and Brothers, Publishers, 1952.

Swiss-American Historical Society. Prominent Americans of Swiss Origin. New York: James T. White and Company, 1932.

Taylor, William R. Cavalier and Yankee. New York: Harper and Row, Publishers, 1957.

Thomas, Frederick W. Southern Tales and Sketches. Philadelphia: A. Hart and Carry Hart, 1853.

Thomson, J. A. K. Classical Influences of English Prose. New York: Collier Books, 1956.

Thrall, William. A Handbook to Literature. New York: Odyssey Press, 1936.

Trent, W. P. A History of American Literature. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1903.

. English Culture in Virginia. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Uni­ versity, 1889.

______; Erskine, John; Sherman, Stuart S.; and Doren, Carl, eds. The Cambridge History of American Literature. 3 Vols. New York: Macmillan Company, 1933. 249

Tuthill, L. C. Success in Life, The Lawyer. New York: George P. Put­ nam, 1850.

Tyler, Lyon G. History o£ Virginia. Vol. II. New York: American Historical Society, 1924.

Tyler, Moses C. Patrick Henry. Cambridge: Riverside Press, 1888.

______. The Literary History of the American Revolution 1763-1783. 2 Vols. New York: Frederick Nugar Publishing Company, 1963.

Wallace, Karl A., ed. A History of Speech Education in America. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts, 1954.

Washburne, E. B., ed. The Edwards Papers. Chicago: Fergers Printing Company, 1884.

Nasserman, Earl R. , ed. Aspects of the Eighteenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1965.

Weaver, Richard M. Ideas Have Consequences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948.

______. The Ethics of Rhetoric. Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1953.

______. Visions of Order. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1964.

Weems, Mason L. The Life of Washington. Edited by Marcus Cunliffe. Cambridge: Belknop Press of Harvard University Press, 1962.

Welles, E. G. The Orator’s Guide. Philadelphia: G. L. Austin, 1822.

Wharton, Anne H. Social Life in the Early Republic. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1902.

Wheaton, Henry, reporter. The United States Supreme Court Reports. Vols. XIV-XXXIII (1816-1834).

White, Leonard D. The Jeffersonians: A Study in Administrative History. New York: Macmillan Company, 1956.

______. The Federalists: A Study in Administrative History. New York: Macmillan Company, 1956.

Willey, Basil. The Eighteenth Century Background. Boston: Beacon Press, 1940. 250

Willison, George. Patrick Henry and His World. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1969.

Wirt, William. An Address Delivered Before the Peithessophian and Philoclean Societies. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Terhune and Letson, 1830.

______. Argument in Support of the Claims of Joseph C. Cabell, St. George Tucker, Charles Carter and Others, under the Treaty of Ghent. Richmond, Virginia: Virginia State Library.

______. Discourse on the Lives and Characters of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1826.

______. Opinion on the Right of the State of Georgia to Exter.d Her Laws Over the Georgia Nation. New Echota: Wheeler, 1830.

______. Sketches of the Life and Character of Patrick Henry. Phila­ delphia: James Webster, 1818.

______. The Letters of the British Spy. 4th ed. and 10th ed. Bal­ timore: Fielding Lucas, 1809 and 1810.

[______]. The Letters of the British Spy. Edited by Richard B. Davis. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1970.

[______]. The Old Bachelor. Richmond, Virginia: Enquirer Press, 1814.

______. The Two Principal Arguments of William Wirt, Esquire, on the Trial of Aaron Burr for High Treason and on a Motion to Commit Aaron Burr and Others for Trial in Kentucky. Richmond, Virginia: Samuel Pleasants, 1808.

Wish, Harvey. Society and Thought in Early America. New York: Long­ mans , Green and Company, 1950.

Wood, Gordon S. The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1969.

Manuscripts

American Philosophical Society. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Archives, Wirt Letter File.

Chicago Historical Society. Archives, Ninian Edwards Papers.

______. Archives, Wirt Letter File. 251

College of William and Mary. Williamsburg, Virginia. Archives, Cabell Family Papers.

______. Archives. John Tyler Papers.

______. Archives. Tucker-Coleman Papers.

Cornell University. Ithaca, New York. Archives. "Patrick Henry— Corrections of Biographical Mistakes" by John Roane as quoted to Edward Fontaine, 1872.

Free Library of Philadelphia. Archives. Wirt Letter File.

Library of Congress. Archives, Henry Papers.

______. Archives. Jefferson Papers.

______. Archives. Monroe Papers.

______. Archives. Tyler Papers.

______. Archives. Wirt Papers.

Maryland Historical Society. Baltimore, Maryland. Archives. Kennedy Letter File.

•______. Archives. Wirt Papers.

New York Public Library. Archives. Wirt Letter File.

Peabody Institute. Baltimore, Maryland. Archives. Wirt Letter File.

University of Illinois. Urbana, Illinois. Illini Historical Survey Collection. Nathaniel Pope Papers.

University of North Carolina. Chapel Hill, North Carolina. Southern Historical Collection. Wirt Papers.

_ . Southern Historical Collection. Gilmer Papers.

_ . Southern Historical Collection. Carr Papers.

University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Archives. Wirt Letter File.

University of Virginia. Charlottesville, Virginia. Archives. Cabell P a p e r s . 252

Archives. Carr Papers.

Archives. Gilmer Papers.

Archives. Wirt Papers.

Virginia Historical Society. Richmond, Virginia. Archives. Wirt Letter File.

Virginia State Library. Richmond, Virginia. Archives. Carr Papers.

______• Archives. Dabney Family Papers.

______. Archives. Gilmer Papers.

______• Archives. Gribbel Collection of Jefferson-Wirt Correspondence.

______• Archives. Wirt Papers.

Newspapers

Boston Daily Advertiser. November 24, 1832.

Daily Advertiser (Boston). November 20-28, 1832.

Louisville Advertiser. December 12, 1832.

Evening Post (New York). October 3-December, 1807.

National Intelligencer (Washington, D. C.). July 3-5, 1826, October 18- 28, 1826, October-November, 1832.

New York Statesman. July, 1830, November, 1832.

Niles1 Weekly Register (Baltimore). July-September, 1807, October- November 15, 1830.

Philadelphia Sun. October, 1832.

Providence American. November 27, 1832.

Richmond Enquirer. October, 1804-April, 1806, August-December, 1807, December, 1810-May, 1813, July-September, 1817, October 18-28, 1826.

Rhode Island American. October-November, 1832.

The Virginia Argus. 1800-1803. 253

Unpublished Materials

Burke, Joseph C. "William Wirt: Attorney General and Constitutional Lawyer." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1965.

Cauble, Frank P. "William Wirt and His Friends: A Study in Southern Culture." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 1933.

Mallory, Louis A. "Patrick Henry: Orator of the American Revolution." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1938.

Pilcher, George W. "Preacher of the New Light, Samuel Davies, 1724- 1761." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1963.

"The Letters of Patrick Henry." Letters of the Governor of Virginia. Virginia State Library, Richmond, Virginia.

"To the Electors of Harrison County." Broadside Political 1832. Ohio Historical Society Library. Columbus, Ohio.