CHAPTER XI.

OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE STYLE TO BE USED IN WRITING, AND THE STYLE TO BE USED IN PLEADING.

The _style_ that should be _read_, ought to be more exact and accurate. But the _style_ of a _pleader_, ought to be suited to action and pronunciation.

Orations of them that _plead_, pass away with the hearing. But those that are _written_, men carry about them, and are considered at leisure; and consequently must endure to be sifted and examined.

_Written_ orations appear flat in _pleading_. And orations made for the _bar_, when the action is away, appear in _reading_ insipid.

In _written_ orations repetition is justly condemned. But in _pleadings_, by the help of action, and by some change in the _pleader_, repetition becomes amplification.

In _written_ orations disjunctives do ill; as, _I came_, _I found him_, _I asked him_: for they seem superfluous, and but one thing, because they are not distinguished by action. But in _pleadings_ it is amplification; because that which is but one thing, is made to seem many.

Of _pleadings_, that which is _judicial_ ought to be more accurate than that which is _before the people_.

And an oration _to the people_ ought to be more accommodate to action, than a _judicial_.

And of _judicial_ orations, that ought to be more accurate, which is uttered to _few_ judges; and that ought to be more accommodate to action, which is uttered to _many_. As in a _picture_, the further he stands off that beholds it, the less need there is that the colours be fine; so in _orations_, the further the hearer stands off, the less need there is for his oration to be elegant.

Therefore _demonstrative_ orations are most proper for _writing_, the end whereof is to be _read_.

==========