self may test it for unity by seeing whether each of its parts tends to make others either see or feel the truth or falsity of

the proposition.

Tendencies in speech-making that destroy the unity of an entire speech are usually a desire on the part of the speaker to air his knowledge on other problems than the one specified in the proposition; to entertain his audience with irrelevant wit or flights of fancy; and to indulge in abuse of his opponents, praise of himself, or flattery of his audience. These tendencies, of course, betray a desire that is utterly foreign to the single, central purpose of creating or destroying belief in a definite proposition; and they must, therefore, be held in check; because they destroy the unity and the clearness of the speech as a whole.

Unity in the Main Divisions of the Speech. The unity of the main divisions of a speech, like the unity of the speech as a whole, consists in each division's having a single, central purpose that runs through every one of its parts.

The single, central purpose of the Introduction must always be to make others see and feel the exact nature of the proposition that they are asked to believe or disbelieve, in its relation to all facts and circumstances associated with the case.

The single, central purpose of the Discussion must always be to make others see and feel the truth or falsity of the proposition by means of proof that connects the proposition with facts already within the knowledge or experience of the hearers.

The single, central purpose of the Conclusion must always be to make others see and feel the truth or falsity of the proposition by recapitulating the main points of the proof and by associating these main points with strong motives for their acceptance.

Under these three main divisions of a speech, the debater himself may test his work for unity by seeing whether every subordinate part contributes to the single, central purpose of the whole.

Unity in the Paragraphs of the Speech. The unity of paragraphs within a speech is just as important as the unity of the speech as a whole and the unity of its main divisions; for the speech is nothing more than a series of paragraphs each of which develops or proves some subordinate proposition that helps the audience to see or feel the truth or falsity of the main proposition. If, therefore, the various paragraphs are not clear from lack of unity, the whole speech is likely to be confused.

To secure unity in the paragraphs of a speech, a debater should introduce or conclude each paragraph with a proposition that is developed or proved by the material within the paragraph itself.

Almost all such opening or closing sentences for paragraphs may be taken directly from the more important headings of the debater's brief.

Unity in the Sentences of the Speech. A speech is composed, not only of a series of paragraphs, but also of a much longer series of sentences. Every idea in the speech must be expressed by some sort of sentence; and, hence, it is important that the sentences of a speech, like every other one of its component parts, should possess unity for the sake of clearness.

No sentence possesses unity and clearness, however, if it consists of a series of unrelated ideas connected by such words as and and but. To make sure, therefore, that each sentence in a speech possesses unity, a debater should take

pains to see that it contains but one idea, or several related ideas so that together they really make only one central idea.

II. COHERENCE

Value of Coherence. The second quality of clearness that is necessary to conviction in a speech is the quality of coherence. This quality differs from unity, in that it has nothing to do with the singleness of purpose in the speech as a whole or in any of its parts; but has to do rather with the connections between its parts that make it cohere or hang together as a whole.

This quality is quite as important for clearness and conviction as is the quality of unity; for, no matter how admirable a speech may be from the standpoint of unity, if there is no apparent connection between its parts, it must fail in the end to make clear the truth or falsity of the proposition that serves as its subject.

General Requirements of Coherence. The quality of coherence in a speech is one that demands: First, a logical sequence in the arrangement of the various parts of the speech; and second, the use of proper transitions to indicate the connection between these parts.

Value of Sequence for Coherence. Unless all the different parts of a speech follow easily and naturally from what precedes, then the speech as a whole cannot hang together. Coherence in a speech demands, therefore, a logical sequence in the arrangement of all its parts.

Laws of Sequence for Coherence. This logical sequence may be established to a great extent by the order of points as they appear in a brief; but, since some deviation from

this order is often desirable, it is important that the student should know some of the general laws of logical sequence.

These laws may be considered under the following titles:

1. Sequence from More Familiar to Less Familiar;

2. Sequence of Time;

3. Sequence of Points from Definition; and

4. Sequence of Points from a Chain of Reasoning.

Sequence from the More Familiar to the Less Familiar. A sequence of points from the more familiar to the less familiar always characterizes a speech as a whole when it is arranged so that it has a distinct Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusion.

This sequence, also, always characterizes a good Introduction; and may under some circumstances characterize the Discussion.

According to this sequence, a speech arranged in the old classical fashion will contain the following main divisions and subdivisions:

I. Introduction

A. Appeal for Interest in the General Problem

B. Narration of Facts Giving Rise to the Problem
C. Statement of Proposition Alleged to Solve
Problem

D. Definition of Proposition as It Applies to the
Problem

E. Exclusion of Irrelevant, Admitted, and Waived
Matter from Consideration in Problem

F. Partition of Problem in Points Demanding Proof II. Discussion

A. Constructive Proof of Proposition for Solution of
Problem

B. Refutation Necessary for Solution of Problem

III. Conclusion

A. Summary of Proof for Solution of Problem

B. Appeal to Motives for Accepting Proof to Solve

Problem

In the outline of parts given above, the sequence of points in the Introduction is very obviously from the more familiar to the less familiar; and this same sequence may be followed in the Discussion, if evidence is presented before any conclusion is derived from it; but the more usual sequence for the Discussion is the reverse order in which a conclusion or main point is stated before the evidence applying to it.

A sequence from the more familiar to the less familiar within the Discussion, that is, from the evidence to the main points, is employed usually only when there is great hostility to the proposition in the audience, which makes necessary a gradual leading-up to the proposition throughout the whole speech.

Sequence of Time. — A second type of sequence that may be adopted for the arrangement of ideas in a speech is a sequence according to time; that is, a sequence that arranges facts in the order of their occurrence from past to present to future; or vice versa, from future to present to past.

This sequence is one that lends itself particularly to Narration, which must be used in the Introduction; but it is equally valuable in Description, which must be used, also, at times, not only in the Introduction, but in other parts of the speech as well.

The sequence of time in Description demands a presentation of ideas concerning objects according to the order in which the eye, or other senses, would discover them. This