house had seldom, I believe he said, never heard its equal! Indeed
he called it divine; and some affirm he is one of the best judges of
elocution in the kingdom. But I am sure he is wrong. I know myself
better. I was not quite in the cue; had not absolutely the true feel,
as I may say, of my subject. Though I own I was once or twice a little
pleased with myself. There might perhaps be something like an approach
to good speaking; I dare not imagine it was great. It was not, I
believe, indeed I am sure, it was not every thing I could have wished.
I am not often satisfied with others, and with myself still seldomer.'

To all this self equity and abstinence, Mr. ***, to whom it was again
addressed, made no other answer than that he had not the pleasure to
hear his lordship. But the candid peer, in imitation of the poets of
the days of Louis XIV and Charles II continued to be the censurer and
eulogist of himself.

To change the dull theme, one of the company inquired, what is the
reason that many men, who are eloquent in the closet, should stammer
themselves into confusion and incapacity, when they attempt to
speak in public? To this Mr. *** returned the following acute and
philosophical reply.

'A happy choice of words, after we have obtained ideas, is one of the
most constant labours of the person who attempts to write, or speak,
with energy. This induces a habit in the writer or speaker to be
satisfied with difficulty. Desirous of giving the thought he has
conceived its full force, he never imagines the terms and epithets
he has selected to be sufficiently expressive. If, after having
accustomed himself to write, it be his wish to exert his powers as a
public speaker, he must counteract this habit; and, instead of being